hugeasscity

A little bird told me that Arthur Murray is going to officially announce the launch of his write-in campaign for Mayor of Seattle on Monday.   Cause everyone knows we mustn’t leave the mayorship up for grabs between two candidates who are not beholden to the insider Democrat machine that has gotten all too comfortably used to running the show in Seattle.  As an example of just how scary the prospect of an unknown outsider Mayor is to the uber-establishment, even Joni Balter and her anti-union Seattle Times editorial board are willing to overlook the fact that the unions are a major driving force behind the movement to draft Edward Murrow.

So don’t forget, write in Eddie Murphy for Mayor of Seattle!

>>>

Disclaimer:  This post is almost entirely stolen from some overactive minds out on the facebooks (you know who you are).

URL redirects from noisetank.com/hugeasscity to hugeasscity.com should happen automatically.  That is, assuming I don’t do anything to anger the Technology Gods.  But it’s probably not a bad idea to update your links anyway.  And please leave a comment if you experience any weirdness with the URL redirects.

I have been so wrong about cars.  They’re great!

It was most unfair of me to post a picture of the new Trader Joe’s addition at 17th and Olive on Capitol Hill in such an unflattering, drab, gray light.  Behold its chromatic magnificence in the pristine summer evening sun.

Do pardon my French, but have you heard the latest on climate change and methane?

It’s been predicted for years, and now it’s happening. Deep in the Arctic Ocean, water warmed by climate change is forcing the release of methane from beneath the sea floor.

Or perhaps you didn’t catch this bit of news from MIT back in May?

The most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth’s climate will get in this century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago – and could be even worse than that.

Think geoengineering will save us?  Think again:

Even without global warming, reducing CO2 emissions is needed to do the best we can to save the ocean. The costs of this continuing damage to the planet, which geoengineering will do nothing to address, are ignored…

What has already been accurately called the gravest environmental threat ever faced by humanity becomes understood to be an even bigger threat on an almost daily basis.

This is why some people think the deep-bore tunnel is a spectacularly bad idea.  And this is also why those who are concerned about the threat of climate change should immediately get 100 percent behind Mike McGinn for Mayor of Seattle.

McGinn’s challenger Joe Mallahan gives all the expected generic lip service to climate change, but as far as I know has no record of being directly engaged in any of the relevant issues.  In contrast, McGinn has already demonstrated bold vision on climate change, not least with his consistent opposition to a 2-mile long greenhouse gas generator known as the deep-bore tunnel.

In 2007 McGinn helped lead the Seattle Chapter of the Sierra Club to oppose the “Roads and Transit” package because it funded massive road expansion that would have led to increased greenhouse gas emissions from cars, and also would have catalyzed the development of more car-dependent sprawl.   (The Sierra Club has a long history of research on the environmental impact of land-use patterns—check out their excellent Healthy Growth Calculator.)

Given the tough challenge from Mallahan that McGinn likely faces, I have a humble request for all of you out there who understand the critical importance of creating sustainable cities in order to combat climate change:  It’s time to stop all the typical liberal-style nit-picking and equivocating and get solidly united behind McGinn.  Now.  And all you enviros and alternative transportation advocates who endorsed Nickels, assuming you’re not down with Mallahan, it’s time to show your unqualified support for McGinn.  Now.  Please?

The City of Seattle—not to mention the entire country—desperately needs strong, visionary leadership on climate change.   Yes, McGinn is an unproven politician, but on my estimation, he has unmatched potential to emerge as powerful change agent, and to give Seattle the kick in the butt it needs to become better than just pretty good on climate change—to elevate Seattle to the position of international leader, rather than one of many among the pack of national leaders.   Bold political leadership on climate change is not coming from anywhere else in the State of Washington these days.  The Mayor may not have direct control over State highways or the Metro bus system, but change has to start somewhere.

And if McGinn is going to be accused of being a one-issue candidate, well, if that one issue is climate change we all should be grateful for it.

To read more about how sustainable development is the “root of all our problems” check out this entertaining article in the Deweese Report, a free (not surprising) publication put out by the American Policy Center.  The article is off-base in so many ways, I wouldn’t even know where to begin a rebuttal. The conspiratoriall tone is enjoyable- as if the author believes he has written an expose’ on the heretofore secretive planning process. I try to comfort myself by thinking the circulation of such drivel is maybe a few hundred paranoid, anti-U.N. old-schoolers (one of which is a family member who likes to mail me this stuff). If this is not the case, and there are a substantial number of people that subscribe to such irrational thought, then I suppose we have more to worry about than whether or not we should tax plastic bags (as if we didn’t already know that).

What comes next?*

As Mallahan and McGinn now turn their attention to the general I thought I would post my $0.02 about what could happen next. I could be totally wrong about my sense of this but, from a political perspective, I think this is how to win.

Stick with the tunnel!

Detractors have whined (sorry, detractors) about McGinn raising the whole tunnel thing again. “Its Seattle process run amok,” they say. “Let’s just get on with it please” and “that’s all he talks about.”

Well I hope he continues. Stopping the tunnel is not about Seattle process but about the most serious act of malpractice of government in a generation, perhaps ever in our city. There are two reasons to keep hammering on the tunnel.

First, everyone will incessantly ask about it. “Why are you so focused on the tunnel?” The answer is “I have to. If this City commits $900 million dollars (which is sure to become $1 billion) we won’t have money to do any of the other critical things this city needs done. We are essentially committing to a decade of our resources into essentially will be a Viet Nam like quagmire. How can we focus on crime, sidewalks, transportation—all things our City is supposed to do—when a years worth of City budget dollars are going to be pumped down a hole for less than two miles of tunnel, with no exits in or out of downtown, not enough capacity and no ability to accommodate transit.”

The second and more practical reason is that it focuses attention on McGinn and keeps it there. McGinn will win because everyone will be talking about McGinn and the tunnel. Malahan will kind of just disappear. And the more we talk about the tunnel and the more people realize what a horrible boondoggle the thing is the more people are going to think it’s a bad idea.

I am so convinced of this that if Mallahan was my friend I would advise him to abandon his pro-tunnel stand, maybe even just say he’d be willing to rethink his position. The basis of McGinn’s candidacy would effectively be threatened because the issue that animated his resurgence would be gone. All that would be left is a fundraising knife fight which he would be almost certain to lose. But it is highly doubtful that the interests arrayed against reconsidering the tunnel option will allow Mallahan to double back on his position.

*I know there are a lot of issues with viaduct-replacement-tunnel financing that are completely not part of this message. But this is about politics. The fact is that the City will have to spend some money to fix the sea wall and dismantle the viaduct, even if  money that has been dedicated by the state goes away. Here is one recent rundown of all the different sources of money that are in play on any scenario and here is McGinn’s response to the “we’re gonna have to pay anyway” charge. It is a complicated and nuanced issue and it is good to know McGinn is on top of it.

In the last few weeks before the August 18 primary election a meme sprouted that Nickels supporters should consider voting for McGinn because a Nickels/McGinn race would lead to a more progressive debate in the general election.  There was also talk among some Nickels supporters that voting for McGinn could be a good strategic move because it would be easier for Nickels to beat McGinn than Mallahan in the general election.  Of course in both cases, the operative assumption was that Nickels would make it through the primary easily.

Is it possible that there were enough of these strategic votes cast to tip the election away from Nickels to McGinn?

There are 379,721 registered voters in Seattle. Turnout projections are 33 percent, which means about 125,000 ballots were cast.  Assuming Nickels ends up at 26 percent, that’s 33,000 votes.   Nickels is currently behind McGinn by about 1200 votes, but lets make a guess that he finishes down 1500.   That 1500 is equivalent to four and a half percent of the estimated 33,000 votes he received.  But then we also must factor in that every Nickels supporter who switched to McGinn increased the split by two votes.  Which means 750 strategic voters would generate a 1500 vote split between McGinn and Nickels.  And that 750 is only about two percent of the estimated 33,000 Nickels voters.

By this back-of-the-envelope calculation, if one out of 43 Nickels supporters made a strategic vote for McGinn, it cost Nickels the election.   Possible?

My intial gut reaction is no.  On the other hand, I heard several politically sophisticated Nickels supporters talk about how they were seriously contemplating voting for McGinn.

There is no way to quantitatively verify this one way or the other, but perhaps we could learn something anecdotally.  What about it people?  Anyone out there willing to admit they did it?  Anyone know others who did it (no need to name names)?  Anyone care to venture a guess at how many may have done it?

[ McGinn addresses the crowd tonight at Havana on Capitol Hill ]

Whooda thunk?  Half the votes counted.  Is there any good reason to believe this trend will change when the other half is counted?

[  The 11 o’clock news is on it, out in the parking lot on the 1000 block of Pike Street ]

(aside from a reprimand from dan bertolet, this is the other notice I received yesterday)

 

Last Tuesday Crosscut published a piece by Kent Kammerer that is premised with a blatant fabrication.   Kammerer writes:

Not long ago a representative from Futurewise and a realtor said that Seattle’s population will double by 2040.

The first clue that the above statement is not on the up and up is that there are no specifics provided about exactly who said this or when they said it.   But the fact is, anyone who knows Futurewise knows that no person from that organization would ever make such a patently silly claim.  Futurewise is widely recognized as one of the region’s leading experts on growth management issues—their roots stretch back through 1000 Friends of Washington to the origins of the Growth Management Act.  One can only assume that Kammerer is making shit up about the others he accuses too.

The piece is entitled “Why Seattle won’t grow as fast as planners say,” but nowhere in the article is a single planner—or anyone, for that matter—actually quoted saying that Seattle’s population will double by 2040. Of course, that’s because no planner with an ounce of competence would say such a thing.  The only place any “religious mantra” exists is inside Kammerer’s little head.

Given that the set up for Kammerer’s entire argument is such glaring bullshit, the question then becomes:  Why would the editors of Crosscut compromise their own credibility by publishing such hackery?  Two possibilities:  (1) an oversight, or (2) intentional disregard for journalistic integrity to further an ideological agenda, with the added bonus of manufacturing controversy to drive up the hit rate.

If it’s (1), well, we all make mistakes.  But given that it’s all but certain Kammerer has no evidence to back up his allegations—and in particular the libelous claim about Futurewise—the piece should be corrected or taken down.

If it’s (2), well, that’s pretty sad.  But unfortunately it’s worse than just sad.  These matters are massively important, and willfully abetting the injection of mendacious noise into the public conversation is irresponsible citizenship.

>>>

P.S.  I would be remiss if I didn’t also pipe up about how Kammerer’s whopper attracts similarly truth-challenged commenters, e.g. “bubbleator” lied when he asserted that this very blog has been making the “Seattle’s population will double” claim.

bobbysherman-seattle12

(Bobby Sherman…you sarcastic S.O.B.)

I haven’t voted yet.  And the fact is, my one vote will make no difference to the outcome of the election.  But damn the torpedoes, vote I shall, which will put me in the minority—we’re told to expect something like 35 percent turnout for the August 18 primary election.

Though Google knows everything about all of us, their analytics package won’t give me a demographic profile of hugeasscity readers.  I suspect that on the whole, y’all are more likely to vote than the average Seattleite.  On the other hand, I also suspect that y’all are on the younger end of the age spectrum, what with the potty-mouthed blog name and all.  And supposedly you younguns don’t vote.

To help get a better picture of the ~500 unique visitors who hit this blog every day, a humble request:  Would you be willing to leave a comment with a few key bits of info about yourself (anonymously or not), such as age, gender, race, household size, education level, where you live, what type of housing you live in, commute travel mode, and whether or not you will vote?  C’mon, it will only take a minute.  And if enough people do, methinks it will be quite revealing.

Based on a highly scientific sample of one—me—I’ll jump to the conclusion that many others have not yet voted, and make a few last plugs on this perfect late summer Seattle Sunday evening.   No time for  essays—in short, these are the candidates I believe are most aligned with the hugeasscity worldview.

Mayor = Mike McGinn. Hopefully you’ll vote for him because of his qualifications and beliefs, as I am.   If not, hopefully you’ll consider voting for him because a McGinn/Nichokels runoff would make for the most progressive debate in the general election, or because you’re a fiscal conservative and oppose the deep-bore tunnel, or heck, even because you think he’ll be easier than Mallahan for Nichokels to defeat.  So many reasons.  Do it.

City Council Position No. 4 = Dorsol Plants. My most difficult choice.  But this bit from the Stranger’s endorsement hit me right where I live:

He has dozens of smart ideas, including rewriting neighborhood plans to accommodate more density, especially around light-rail stations…

City Council Position No. 6 = Jesse Israel. Alan Durning’s endorsement captures it for me:

Normally, I’d be voting for [Licata].  But this year, I’ve endorsed Jessie Israel, whose views more closely match my own on transportation and urbanism. Jessie would be an even stronger force for my values on the city council than Nick.  And even if Nick wins the race, I expect a strong challenge from someone who embraces compact growth might pull him in that direction.

City Council Position No. 8 = Mike O’Brien. Summed up well by the endorsements from both Publicola and The Stranger:

O’Brien supports removing parking requirements from housing developments, allowing developers to build small apartments and condos to reduce housing costs…  He believes Seattle must build much more housing within city limits to combat suburban sprawl—to reduce the region’s carbon footprint and bring down housing prices…

King County Executive = Dow Constantine. A great candidate and also our best hope for not getting stuck with closet Republican Ms. KIRO.

VANDALISM = deep bore tunnels, poorly designed, cheap condos, more roads, short-sighted zoning laws, glenn beck, an unregulated banking system, unlimited credit, tim eyman…………………………………etc.

Oh yeah...we deserve it.

I want to be alive when the Earth reclaims itself
When eager headwaters conspire to rush reservoirs at once
Leaving concrete-strewn playgrounds for spawning salmon.

I want to watch the final neon flicker and fade
In ghost-cities, asphalt graveyards of cars on empty
And long-dry fountain beds, sanctuaries for circling sand.

I want to see the seas undo us, our own undoing
Rising up to flood our tunnels, skylines, beachfront villas
Making new homes for krill and coral colonies.

Come, my friend, and lay with me
On this tree-lined sidewalk
In our compact urban village.
And when a lilac pushes through the cracks
Devouring us with saturated blooms
Glimpse with me at once the strength
Only nature knows, and our end.

>>>

[ Thanks to A.A. and JoeG. ]