Speaking of transparency, we really need a link to Davison's email to reconcile Rich's seasoning of extrapolations and innuendos in this post.
How about it Rich? You may be right, just sayin'.
@1 Agreed. The Stranger seems oddly reluctant to reproduce copies of the e-mails discussed in SLOG posts lately. I raised the same complaint in response to a piece about internal e-mails from the Port of Seattle discussed in this piece: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2021/10/28/62364002/sources-allege-port-commissioner-created-hostile-work-environment
How exactly is this dissimilar from when your beloved Sawant responds to any criticism by implying it is racist?
Agree with 1 and 2. It would be appropriate to see the email, especially in an article about transparency.
Also Alex Pedersen needs to fuck off. This guy is useless and serves as nothing but a banal hand-wringer. Hopefully those who worked on Sawants ground game can help out in the next D5 election.
Ann Davison can go fuck herself, just another Republican dumbshit. However, unfortunately, my first reaction upon reading this article was to wonder how much of it is true, and how much is it just Rich (or someone else) stirring shit up.
Looks like we're going to have an unproductive City Attorney for a while.
Until we recall her.
Every time you type the words "Rich Smith", not only does an angel get its wings, but they get what Dan Savage would describe as "a good halo polishing"...
Anytime someone types "COMTE", an angel farts.
Seattle is in dire straits for rejecting an activist progressive intellectual like Nichole Thomas-Kennedy in favor of Ann Davison, a simplistic, reactionary tree-dwelling Trump supporter.
Why the adherence to medievalism and political retrograde in an erstwhile technologically advanced, socially-evolved and sensitive city?
Are latte swilling Scandinavian yuppies so terrified of displaced street campers, the indigenous people of the post-industrial age, that they run to the right and over the edge?
Do materialism and sloth breed reactionaryism?
We see echoes of this asinine conventionalism in the preposterous Sawant recall, which was an unsettling aftershock from the big, hairy orange howler-monkey Trumpzoid movement, and fitfully rejected.
City Attorney-elect Ann Davison may be the next elected official to be recalled, and rightfully so, once the denizens of Seattle, the new Amazon jungle, realize they have fallen for an ineffective, rearward-looking troglodyte and Republican Trump-Chump variant.
This aversion to bureaucratic-political transparency is a harbinger of further conservative mummery and callous disregard for human rights, as we saw with the fat-assed, bushy-beavered socio-political regressivism of the Durkan Administration, and her reluctance to address police brutality and rampant social unrest.
The only thing social progressives have in common with former Mayor Durkan is that we both like to eat pussy.
I can't wait for the first knock-down, drag-out Davison-Sawant catfight.
This is rich (all puns intended): Rich Smith writes an 1,180 word article on new City Atty. fighting transparency while he assiduously avoids the transparency & accountability scandal surrounding the entire City of Seattle police accountability system (the Seattle Office of Inspector General, the Seattle Office of Police Accountability, and the Seattle Community Police Commission), see: http://tinyurl.com/HerboldBad Way to go! Focus on the weeds & ignore the whole fucking forest!
Scandal has been continuously documented over the last 11 months & continuously ignored by Rich & The Stranger.
For more on the scandal see:
So, the lame-duck loser of the November mayoral election sponsors a bill that will add to the city code new reporting requirements for the City Attorney's office, just as the candidate for City Attorney (whom she had opposed) is about to take office. What a coincidence! Said incoming City Attorney responds by noting she has a lot of actual work to do, mostly involving the day-to-day safety of Seattle's citizens. She gives an example of citizens who need her office's help. So the lame-duck loser proposes yet another onerous reporting requirement upon the City Attorney's office:
"The City Attorney’s Office shall notify the Council at least 90 days before it implements any material changes to the pre-filing diversion program .. to the extent such information is not protected by attorney work-product."
So, the lame-duck loser demands any real change at all be sent to the Council, which will increase the workload of the City Attorney's office. What benefit will this bring, and why was this not needed until now? The Stranger could not possibly care less; it has other priorities:
'Though Davison claimed no one consulted her on the bill, over the phone Lewis said he had shared the legislation with her on Thursday, Dec 2. The two then met in person on Tuesday Dec 7 and discussed "a variety of things, including this bill.'
The above-quoted amendment was introduced in a document dated 7 December, so it's unclear if the Davison and Lewis were talking about the exact same bill. But the Stranger has no problem saying Davison's version of events was false.
'Davison's claim that the bill imposes "restrictions on operations" is also false. As González said during the committee hearing, nothing in the bill impinges on Davison's discretion.'
Actually, the amendment proposed by González imposes onerous reporting requirements upon the City Attorney's office, which act as a check upon that office's proposed changes to procedures. But again, the Stranger already knows the correct answer.
@1 and @2: There's a very good reason the Stranger is not quoting Davison in full, and I think we can discern exactly what that reason just might be.
Ann Davison sounds lazy AF. The modern GOP is lazy AF. It’s so obvious that Ann Davison is ready to ineffectually blame her incompetence on everyone but herself. It’s a classic lazy person’s strategy. You can practically guarantee Seattle will be begging to be rid of Ann Davison within 6 months. She’ll be lazy AF
"bushy-beavered"?! Anything you'd care to share on this? Real classy.
NTK an "intellectual "? I literally cannot breathe for laughing so hard.
Kshama wants workers and her constituents to be treated decently and the right wing cannot take it. Davison is a far right creep imported from Texas because the right got panic stricken by BLM. She has nothing to do with the feminist movement that fought for equal rights which she is opposed to. She is throwing around the word sexism to try to confuse. That is what fascists do and that is what she is.The votes for her showed the deep seated racism and classism thriving in this city and fear than any true equity can take place. The ugly face of Seattle now. Davison does not even understand the office she is in.
How dare BLM fight for justice right??? Compassion is not a strong point in this new regime.
Same old blame games. We have heard it all before. Blame the vulnerable. The right never tires of that tack. How dare any one challenge Amazon and their murderous record of workers dying on and off the job and anyone challenging this system of greed no matter who suffers,
We can't wait for the progressive people in Seattle to kick Davison's fascist ass straight out of here too. Thank you armchair and good people.
Sure looks like the pouty and vengeful Lorena Gonzalez just wants annoy Davison with redundant bureaucracy which Pete Holmes would have never been asked to do.
Aww, we hear your persecuted Republican pain, @20, it is so sad ... not.
As the story itself explains, the headline's claim of this being a "pretty standard transparency bill" are hard to square with what departing CM González actually proposed:
"At the meeting, Councilmember Alex Pedersen expressed discomfort with the idea of codifying these reporting requirements into the city's municipal code..."
Why is a legal requirement now necessary? Has City Attorney Holmes been withholding information the City Council requested? Why does the Council (or departing CM González, anyway) suddenly feel the need for such intensive oversight of the City Attorney's Office?
@18: "Kshama wants workers and her constituents to be treated decently..."
So, that's why she exposed workers at City Hall to an elevated risk of COVID. Thank you for making that clear. Now we see it wasn't abuse of her office, but instead her kind concern for the working class.
@19: "We can't wait for the progressive people in Seattle to kick Davison's fascist ass straight out of here too."
You'll have to wait for her to take office first. (Or were you advocating for a mob to run her out of town?)
@21 - So you really think this additional layer of reporting would have been asked of NTK?
@23 urinalysis, I mean ‘yer analysis’ assumes NTK was going to be coddled by the City Council and the rest of the city. That analysis is lazy AF. After all, some of us were alive two months ago and could see that if NTK had won, the entire Seattle establishment and their supporters like you, would’ve lost their minds. Every instance of human feces on a sidewalk was going to be blamed on the lunacy of NTK. Every shop that went out of business was going to be blamed on NTK. Now you want us to believe NTK was going to have a free ride? Please
@25: I didn't say a free ride. Please
South Seattle Emerald enters the chat
Also rumor has it at the City Attorney’s Office there is now no serious bandwidth dedicated in pursuit of the Jan 6 coup SPD participants and the law suits filed by police against the city over the vaccine mandates have been unofficially “back burner-ed.”
I’d like to see the Stranger dig up more on this to see if it is true. Though time will tell regardless.
@25: The question @23 did not mention a "free ride," but whether lame-duck CM Gonzalez would even have sponsored this legislation had NTK been elected City Attorney. You didn't even attempt to answer it; you just abused the questioner. (That's called a "tell.")
It’s a counterfactual, unless someone has the “let’s audit AD into oblivion,” email. Let’s see how AD does. If she’s hardworking and ethical, it might not be bad. The burden of proof is on AD, because there’s so much laziness and grifting coming out of the GOP
@31 I think the laziness and grifting was coming from Pete Holmes, as evidenced by the massive backlog for Anne Davison to deal with and the fact that over the past couple years Holmes was gifting deferral programs with all kinds of offenders rather than doing his job of prosecuting people. More youths went to deferrals than were prosecuted. Coulda fooled me judging by all the youths around here who act like real life is grand theft auto.
You'd think that during a time when you are sending so many cases to deferral programs like Choose 180, that's when you implement metrics to see if they are effective or not. And yet...
@29: It's been investigated, resulting in the firing of two SPD officers. Move on.
The council has proven itself immune to accountability over and over again. The moderate elements need to start playing dirty, as the council has no problem doing it.
Even NTK would prosecute Dr. Nelson.
@31: It's not contrafactual, it's speculation based upon fact. The question remains: why is this huge expansion of reporting requirements suddenly needed? Is it because of the identity of the person elected to the office?
"The burden of proof is on AD, because there’s so much laziness and grifting coming out of the GOP."
Thank you for confirming this legislation was indeed proposed because of the identity of the person elected to the office.
(Oh, and the burden of proof for whether legislation is necessary or not is entirely upon the legislators. You're welcome.)
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.