Comments on: Can’t Hurt

By: The Office of Sustainable Urbanism | hugeasscity

The Office of Sustainable Urbanism | hugeasscity — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:11:09 +0000

[...] of a new City of Seattle department: The Office of Sustainable Urbanism. The kind of department a visionary new Mayor of Seattle might be inclined to [...]

By: Paul de Manuel

Paul de Manuel — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 01:53:36 +0000

Yeah, I’m actually getting bored with Mcginn’s only talking point. This guy’s a sham. There are other aspects to being green than just things colored carbon.

By: sir bike a lot

sir bike a lot — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:29:02 +0000

pencil neck,

no one really cares. the guy rides a bike to all the meetings, gatherings, etc. and hates the thought of a tunnel. That’s his platform, that’s all he’s got. Don’t vote for this poser.

By: Pencil Neck

Pencil Neck — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:05:47 +0000

Hi everyone,

I’d like to be more informed on this guy Mcginn. All I can find him commenting on it lightrail and the dang tunnel. Does this guy have positions on anything other than his bike seat? How does he feel about nicklesville? What’s his take on bring basketball back? What’s his record on standing up to strong interest groups?

Thanks!

By: Cook

Cook — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:32:06 +0000

@15, changing your mind is a good thing, but we shouldn’t have a process where voters get to decide and change their minds so often. voters are fickle, and public works projects take a while, and often cost more than expected. i change my mind all the time, but don’t think our political process should be reliant on my constant approval. stability has value as well.

By: Zelbinian

Zelbinian — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:55:34 +0000

@ 14

I just looked up the history and yeah, you’re right, we voted for it in 1996. I didn’t move here until 2002, which was right around when everyone was against it. I should’ve read the history first, my bad.

On a side note, though, can we stop the whole lambasting people for changing their minds thing? Being able to change one’s opinion based on new information is a *good* thing, and we don’t want to discourage that.

By: David in Burien

David in Burien — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:07:32 +0000

@13 You mean you were against it after you were for it? Because I seem to remember WE voted for it. And then in typical Seattle fashion, the anti’s got a second bite at the apple by overplaying the ‘agency’s got issues’ gambit. Thankfully, they didn’t get their act perfected until the monorail.

best,

David

By: Zelbinian

Zelbinian — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 07:53:58 +0000

andy @ 5 – “And he did work tirelessly for light rail when it was politically unpopular.”

You know why it was politically unpopular? WE VOTED AGAINST IT. [/Jon Stewart impression]

By: old timer

old timer — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 17:55:26 +0000

That tunnel, if built, will be a drag on Seattle and it’s economy for a generation.
There is no need for it.
FWIW-
All my local votes will be cast based on this stupid tunnel.
Council members as well as mayor.

By: Joshua Daniel Franklin

Joshua Daniel Franklin — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:56:33 +0000

You all need to be reading Publicola. McGinn has a great answer to the transit question, from ECB's PubliQ&A on Aug 2:

There’s a huge amount of potential local funding. Parking tax revenue is completely flexible. Parking meter revenue goes straight to the general fund. It can be used for anything. You could use a [Local Improvement District, or special tax on property owners in the area that benefits from extra transit] to fund a host of things.

Publicola also did the same with Nickels who also had some good points such as the Mayors’ Climate Initiative that andy mentioned.