Seattle Transit Tax Showdown, "Lewd" Nude Beach Ruling & Mayoral Travel

[00:00:09] Hello and welcome to the latest edition of Seattle Nice, the only podcast for now that tells you what's really happening in Seattle politics. I'm David Hyde with Erica C. Barnett of Publicola. Hi, Erica. For now, are you threatening to start another podcast, David? I just don't know. You never know. He needs a third podcast. Yeah, right? No, no. And political consultant and inside dopester Sandeep Kaushik.

[00:00:36] Uh-oh. Inside dopester? Is that a reference to my addiction history, David? Are you making – No, it's – We're both right, Mel. No, it's not. Disparaging references like how dare you make fun of the addicted. David Reifman. It's that guy who wrote about the other directed self in the 50s. Anyway, today we're talking about the Seattle transit measure renewal. That's one of our topics.

[00:01:02] That's going to go to the voters in November. But what is going to be on the ballot or what is going to get watered down, as transit activists might have put it? The city council was taking that up this week on Thursday. Erica was covering it. And I wanted to start just by asking about this one controversial amendment from city council member Bob Kettle who basically said, hey, ridership is down since 2019. We don't really need to add more bus service. So let's – I don't know how to put this.

[00:01:32] Did he say – actually, he said we should lower the transit tax with renewal, right? Well, not exactly. He said that we should reduce it from what Katie Wilson has proposed, which is a 0.3 percent sales tax. Right now it's a 0.15 percent. So the proposal is to double it. And Bob Kettle's amendment would have changed that initially to 0.2 percent when it was pointed out to him that that would actually result in reductions from current service levels.

[00:02:01] He said, OK, fine, 0.225. And that would get us up to 97 percent of what we had in 2019 by 2028. So essentially keeping service exactly the same as it was in 2019 while paying a little bit more in taxes. And that amendment did fail. But there is – whew, there's a lot of discussion about it and about everything today as we're recording on Thursday in this three-hour meeting that they had. More than three hours.

[00:02:30] How did the vote turn out? Did he have any support for that? He got support from Maritza Rivera and then the rest of the council voted no. So not a lot of support. Sandeep, were you surprised by that lack of support for Bob Kettle's amendment? No. Yeah.

[00:02:51] No. I mean the dynamic at council for – I mean really it feels like since time immemorial, like – but certainly for the last decade or so has been if anything to take mayoral proposals for levies and other funding measures, ballot measures and make them bigger.

[00:03:16] Right? I mean the pressure from advocates is always go big or go bigger. The mayor already, as Erica mentioned, was doubling the size of the previous transit measure, which I actually did the campaign for a few years ago. Doubling the tax, not the size of the service.

[00:03:33] Yeah, doubling the size of the tax, right, from 0.15 to 0.3 percent of sales tax, which is not a large – I mean as these things go, it's not like – in terms of the per household price or what people are paying. It's not, you know, one of the bigger ones. It's not like up there with like what people pay for like the transportation levy or the school's levies or stuff like that.

[00:03:57] But nonetheless, it was doubling the rate from 0.15 to 0.3 and yeah, that's what's going to go forward. And the mayor made that increase not only because there was an increase to maintain that same level of service. That's what Kettle's amendment was, 0.225, which would kind of maintain current levels of service or – but to add on some new stuff as well.

[00:04:23] So council hasn't gone along with the Bob Kettle effort to reduce for time immemorial or since like 2009 or something like that. Erica, what surprised you today in this vote? Well, I wish I could say the length of the meeting surprised me, but it didn't because it was being run by Rob Saka, who I've – sometimes will keep track of how much he's talking. And a lot of times it will be like half the meeting is just him talking.

[00:04:51] But what did surprise me is at one point Saka was kind of doing one of his extended speeches about an amendment that was going to pass. So you could argue that a really long speech to try to convince everybody was not necessary. And Dan Strauss suddenly jumped in and just kind of very quietly mid-sentence of Saka's speech called the question. And I don't think I've ever seen that happen before. So what that basically means is he said, I call the question. And Saka looked kind of shocked.

[00:05:21] And they explained what that means is he's calling for a vote. And I called it the Saka shut up amendment because, I mean, it was very clear that people were getting exasperated as morning rolled into afternoon and lunchtime passed. And so that amendment, when you call the question, it requires a two-thirds vote. And Strauss just barely got it. Bob Kettle and Marissa Rivera voted to let Saka keep talking.

[00:05:51] But he lost. And so they had to go straight to the vote. And, I mean, I got pretty excited at that point because nothing very interesting had been happening for a while. And so that kind of moved the meeting forward and I think may have made some of Saka's subsequent speeches a little bit shorter. But, yeah, I was kind of on the edge of my seat for somebody else to call the question during one of those speeches because, man, I mean, I don't know if you've ever seen Rob Saka when he gets wound up. But he can go.

[00:06:21] You know what this reminds me of is when Deborah Juarez became council president. Do you remember this? She, like, pushed through a rule of some kind of – I forget what it was – some kind of, like, actual official rule that none of them could talk for more than 10 minutes. And it was – I think that was originally – that was at the time directed at Sawant, these long, you know, rants and, you know, denunciations.

[00:06:49] And they were all sick of, like, having to sit there and listen to Sawant go off on her stuff. So they passed this rule, like, limiting any single speech. I think it was 10 minutes, right? Do you remember, Erica, what the – Yeah, it was 10 minutes. I don't know what the circumstances were or if it's, like, different in your own committee or what the deal is. But I mean, many has been the time that Saka has gone on for, you know, 10, 15, approaching 20 minutes at a time. So if that rule is still in effect, it's not affecting him.

[00:07:19] I actually covered this way back when – I think it was Dan Strauss maybe who was irritated with some of the long speechifying. It was a welcome. But, Erica, what else can you tell us about the amendments and kind of what's headed to the ballot? Well, there's a Rob Saka amendment that failed that would have reduced the term to seven years.

[00:07:41] Originally, he proposed 6.75, which there was a lot of sort of grumbling that that would have pushed this to a special election, which is, you know, it's harder to pass the next time it comes up. But he said, OK, we're doing seven years. That's more than six, and it's less than 10. And his council colleagues did not find that argument compelling. I'm sure he also – he did also make a lengthy argument for it. But that didn't happen.

[00:08:08] There was some legislation or an amendment, rather, that says that they can use this funding, any money that's sort of left over and underspend on security. And so transit security is, once again, a highlight of a transit funding measure. I think that's a pretty far-fetched use of this money, considering 10 percent of every transit dollar approximately already goes to security.

[00:08:36] So we are paying for that with this measure. And the transportation levy also includes something like $9 million a year, something like that, for transit security. So anyway, they want security. Bob Kettle said it would be terrible if people just completely stopped riding the buses because they're so dangerous. And adding more cops in cars on the streets to serve as transit security is somehow going to help that. So whatever. That happened.

[00:09:05] And then there's lots and lots of studies that they are asking for or rather reporting. And all of these requests for reporting on various things that they're concerned about, like bus stop safe spacing and should we use vans or essentially glorified vans for low ridership routes. All those things are supposed to be reported on. The problem with all of them is that they say that Metro shall participate.

[00:09:32] And Metro is not a function of the city. So it shall or shall not based on whether they feel like doing it. So there's just like a lot of kind of performative, quote unquote, accountability stuff, as I called it on Blue Sky Today. So, you know, overall, though, it's it's a pretty solid package. It's not that much changed from what the mayor proposed, despite there being 30 different amendments that they considered.

[00:10:01] And it's going to go to the ballot in November. Yeah. Where it will, of course, pass overwhelmingly, which is and I will say this. Like, even though I don't I thought it was not at all surprising that Bob Kettle's amendment to try to bring it down to, you know, to just do essentially a straight renewal to keep it at the same size in terms of service levels failed. I think there's there's an argument for that. Right.

[00:10:30] I mean, the argument here is that this is a kind of death by a thousand cuts. Every levy or every, you know, sales tax increase like this gets doubled or tripled or whatever. And over time, the accumulation of all of that stuff is making life in the city of Seattle, you know, more expensive. Right. And and we saw that debate with the with with with the library levy. Right. Where the mayor proposed a significant increase and then the council made it significantly bigger.

[00:11:00] And that's a property tax levy. And as we've talked about before, they're coming up against their statutory limit on how much they can raise the property tax. So that adds an additional barrier to them. But that doesn't seem to be stopping them from jacking up these levies or making them bigger. Transit advocates, of course, argue that increasing bus service makes it easier for folks not to take their cars. And that would be cheaper than than driving, especially if you've got a pass.

[00:11:27] Erica, bus faster bus service to Ballard. I wanted to ask about that. Yeah. Dan Strauss says that you can't get from downtown to Ballard or Ballard to downtown in less than an hour. Sometimes he says 45 minutes to an hour. You know, so one of these amendments basically says this this this tax can be spent on serving regional transit centers like Ballard. I think he's making the point that light rail to Ballard got cut by Sound Transit.

[00:11:57] And so they're not going to get light rail to this incredibly dense regional center, which is, you know, around downtown Ballard market and 15th area. But he's also making the point that it's very slow, I think, for him to get to the city to City Hall from his house, which is not in the regional center. And I think that is because, you know, he's mentioned the specific routes that get cut.

[00:12:20] And today he was kind of conventing, oh, you know, I everybody says, you know, you should just take the 40, which is this milk run that runs through all these neighborhoods or, oh, I should just take the the rapid ride. Well, that's really far away. And so he's almost kind of doxing himself a little bit there. But but I but I but yeah, I mean, basically, you know, it can be used on that. I mean, again, like this is this is like performative stuff. Did his amendments pass? Yeah, that passed. OK, you were going to say something else.

[00:12:47] Oh, I was just going to say, I mean, just speaking of performative, I mean, a lot of people on the council talked about how much they love transit. And, you know, Marissa Rivera voted for some amendments that were sort of could be perceived as, you know, as anti transit or wanting to cut transit or rein it in or whatever. And she just kind of said over and over like how she loves transit. And she spent the first 30 years of her life riding transit. And then, you know, they were all kind of, as usual, one upping each other about their childhoods.

[00:13:13] But, you know, I'm not sure how many of them currently ride transit. I know Rob Saka does. I know Alexis Mercedes Rink does. You know, I'm sure a lot of them do. But it's just I get so tired of these meetings. Honestly, I get very exasperated because it's like I don't care that you rode transit when you were 15. Like I care whether you're actually sort of in touch with what working people like want now.

[00:13:40] And to Sandeep's point about like let's just keep it stable and there's an argument for that. But there's also an argument that, you know, if we I mean, first of all, if we don't expand transit and we increase a tax, like are people going to vote for that? Maybe. But also, yeah, I mean, we should be expanding transit. That is the point of this levy and or not levy rather sales tax. And so, I mean, if you increase the sales tax on, you know, a working class or low income person, you know, they're going to pay less than the average person.

[00:14:10] And they're going to get arguably a lot more benefit out of increased bus service. Now, that's not going to be true of every person, but just across the board, that's the argument. Aren't you a big anti sales tax person? I hate sales tax, passing income tax, but we don't have that option right now. So, yeah, I mean, I am. Obviously, I mean, sales tax is very regressive and I'd rather have a progressive tax. Can I state here, by the way, for the record that I took the bus last week? What? Can I get a go start? Yes.

[00:14:39] No wonder that thunderstorm happened, that horrible thunderstorm happened today. There must have been some kind of divine intervention. No, I'm getting back in touch with the people. I know during a during the World Cup stuff, you know, I was I took the five a few times from my neighborhood. It's been a while. Yes, I was riding the five, riding the five. You had no choice. No, there's choices. I could have I could have, you know, Ubered. You could have Ubered. Yeah, yeah.

[00:15:07] I could have taken a Lyft or what have you. But I took the bus. I'm very proud of myself. Oh, my God. I'm not giving you a gold star for taking the fucking bus that goes right by your house. I like to I like to ride the line bikes in the summer, especially. And I've been doing that. But those fuckers are more expensive than an Uber half the time. But, you know, if you've got like a group of people, it's insane how expensive they are. But that's a topic for another day. OK, a couple more topics.

[00:15:34] Number one, no such thing as a free lunch except for if Katie Wilson's gets her way. I haven't set that up very clearly, but tell us what's going on. So in the families and education levy spending proposal. So we've already passed the families, education, preschool and promise levy. And now there's a spending plan that needs to be passed for how it's going to be spent over over the time. It's in effect.

[00:16:03] And so Katie Wilson proposed, among lots of other things, funding universal free school lunches for two years of the levy. And then the theory is that that is going to go to that's going to be funded by the millionaires tax starting in twenty twenty nine. That's the that's the Democrat state plan. But, you know, that depends on the tax referendum just qualified for the ballot. And so we're going to be voting on that across the state in November.

[00:16:31] So if the millionaires tax is upheld and if there are no further legal hiccups, that money is going to be available then. But Joy Hollingsworth and Deion Foster proposed a separate amendment that would take that money, at least for the first year, and instead spend it on vouchers or gift cards.

[00:16:51] They've called different things, but basically to give money to income qualified, low income families so that they can buy food over the weekend and during breaks from school. And so, you know, the argument for that is that, you know, you can't necessarily assume that the millionaires tax is going to come through and that these are the kids that kind of need it the most.

[00:17:16] And, you know, as opposed to providing universal meals to kids who may not, you know, actually be going hungry because universal pays for everybody to have school meals if they want them. And there's arguments on the other side like that, you know, you're sort of stigmatizing low income kids if they're the only ones getting this program. I mean, you could means test everything. You mean test public school and make wealthier families go to private school or something like that. So, you know, I don't know how much it costs. So maybe it comes down to sort of practicalities.

[00:17:46] But it's three million dollars. Yeah. I mean, like so in the grand scheme of things, not that much. Yeah. I mean, I would say like just just to clarify, these are not the same program. So it's like, you know, so it's what it would be is giving, you know, I'm imagining like gift cards or, you know, they're calling it vouchers, but like gift cards to QFC or something to like handing those out to poor kids to take home to their parents versus like everybody can just get lunch.

[00:18:16] And so I think those I think there actually is like quite a bit of stigma that's going to be associated with that if it goes through the, you know, handing out these vouchers. Maybe it'll be done sort of under the table. I don't know. But but yeah, I mean, like it should a basic need be provided to everyone regardless of, you know, what we decide, you know, is their ability to pay for it. I don't know that there's data showing that mostly middle class kids are eating school lunches as opposed to bringing in their lunches.

[00:18:43] But I do know that, you know, cutting stuff off at an arbitrary or a specific income level. I mean, I think you are going to have kids who have, you know, silent hunger and, you know, who may not be have a lot of access to food at home. We're going to get cut out and won't be able to have lunch. I mean, I think that's what happens now. Yeah. Look, I mean, I'm not against, you know, universal free public school lunches. Right. I mean, it's self-evidently that that's a good thing. I just think there's an opportunity cost question.

[00:19:11] And I think that's really the question that Joy Hollingsworth is calling with her proposal to say, yeah, let's spend this money on food for kids. But let's spend it on, again, when school is not in session for poor kids, like on weekends, on, you know, in times when they're not in school, let's direct that money so that they have food. And what's interesting, one of the things that's interesting about this fight is obviously this is a top mayoral priority. She wants to get this. But Joy Hollingsworth herself, right, her background is in food insecurity, right?

[00:19:41] She worked at Food Lifeline prior to getting elected to the council. So some of these issues around, you know, food security issues for lower income folks is also a kind of passion of hers. And so you're seeing them kind of – and so this is, I think, a political – her way of doing this is, I think, not just something she's doing to stick a finger in the mayor's eye, but it's something she actually cares about and thinks is the right way to do it.

[00:20:10] And you're seeing the two of them butt heads over it. Yeah, I've seen a lot of pushback. I've heard a little bit of pushback, I should say, to this concept that this is means tested because that is like a Reagan-era term that is very loaded. But, I mean, it is means testing. It's saying, you know, if you reach the poverty level that we decide is poor enough to need food, we are going to give you these vouchers that are basically money to buy groceries. And if you don't, we're not.

[00:20:38] And, you know, and I think that is – that's a big philosophical debate. And whether you have experience working for a food security group or not, I mean, there are differences of opinion about that. I think everybody has been very respectful of Hollingsworth's expertise on this and, you know, and her sincerity. And same thing with Dionne Foster. But, you know, I mean, you either – I mean, and obviously, like, I fall in the more socialist, I guess. I mean, I don't think it's that socialist.

[00:21:08] The Democrats in the state legislature passed it and they're not socialists, you know, as part of the millionaire's tax. I don't think Jamie Peterson is a socialist. But, you know, I take more of that kind of – that view that food is a need for everybody and we shouldn't be means testing it. But, you know, it's a debate that's happening on the council. And I think it's – I think both sides have valid points. I just fall on one more than the other. Yeah, I agree.

[00:21:35] But let's get to a topic that, based on clicks and popularity of stories, is clearly the only thing people in Seattle care about, which is nudity in parks. I'm referring, of course, to the Denny Blaine decision. I apologize, Erica, for setting it up that way because I know you're disappointed in me. But what was the judge's ruling? I'm not mad. It's like – I've said lately, like, I don't have road rage. I have road disappointment. I'm just – I'm just – I'm just mostly saddened by it all, David.

[00:22:06] The way you're making light of this incredibly important issue. By the way, it gets talked about on Week in Review on KUW. Like every week? Yeah. I wouldn't know, Sandy. They have you on. They don't really have me on. You were just on. I heard you on. Every single week. I heard you on there. I know. I know. They know how to get people listening. They know how to get people listening. Call Radke. So nudity in public parks.

[00:22:36] No, we're talking about the Denny Blaine decision. Yeah. Denny Blaine ruling decision. Yeah. What did the judge decide? Hey, Seattle nice listeners. Seattle politics got you low. Well, get high with Uncle Ike's. Pissed at the mayor? Relax with a dollar joint. Pop a tire in a pothole. Eat a $2 gummy.

[00:23:06] And chill. Whether you need something to pump you up for Saturday's protest. Or a mellow strain for your next sit-in. Ike's is your best friend. Now is the time to roll up, Seattle. Download the Ike's app today. Or head on over to Ikes.com. That's Ike's.com.

[00:23:32] Well, the judge, you know, big picture, the nude beach can remain nude. And so people were celebrating that yesterday. People on the who, you know, partake of the nude beach and have advocated for it. But the ruling did find that some of the behavior, the nude behavior, as the judge put it 35 times in this very short ruling, that some of that needs to be abated because it's a public nuisance.

[00:24:02] The advocates for the park say that, you know, that has been abated. But, yeah, I mean, the ruling itself, if you read it, like, first of all, it's very badly written. And I'm sorry. Apologies to the judge. You know, judges are not necessarily writers. But it just makes a lot of kind of factual assertions that I think are kind of like quasi-legal assertions that are not true. Like it, you know, says that, you know, people are basically driving their nude.

[00:24:30] You know, it implies that in some of the writing, which I don't think was intentional. But it also says that, like, you know, it conflates nudity with lewd behavior in and of itself. And it also suggests that nudity might be illegal in Seattle, which I thought was a settled matter of law, that nudity is legal, you know, with some contextual limits on it. You know, I mean, anyway, so the ruling itself just is very pearl-clutching and shocked.

[00:24:59] But the upshot is that the nude beach can remain the nude beach. And not the lewd beach. Not the lewd beach. I made the mistake of looking this up. It turns out lewd originally just meant somebody who wasn't well-educated, like a layperson as opposed to somebody in the clergy. And then the late 14th century gained the connotation of being coarse due to the association between a lack of formal education and perceived vulgarity. So I don't know, Sandeep, if the judge had that in mind in this ruling. Oh, my God. College boys.

[00:25:29] You know, it's a weird decision, right? Because the judge's decision was basically like, yeah, the neighbors are right. There's too much of this, you know, people are having sex in the park and there's this lewd activity going on. And he sort of wags his finger at the city and says, you got to like have a plan and clean this up. Like this is, in fact, you know, what was the term, Erica? Public nuisance. Yeah. Yeah. And so he kind of sides with the neighbors.

[00:25:57] But then the decision is, well, you know, park stays open essentially as it is now, though he did – the city is supposed to, you know, fix the problem. Do some unspecified stuff. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It was like – like I said, it was a badly written – I mean at one point he's like – and they're parking in front of people's houses when they go to the park. It's like where the fuck are they supposed to park? Like you don't own that street in front of your house. Yeah. Yeah. Sandeep does, but Sandeep puts out –

[00:26:27] That's right. Puts out like lawn chairs so no one can take his parking spot, but in general – Oh, like in Boston. There's no such thing as free parking. Please, on the same week I rode the number five bus. I forgot about your sacrifice. Yeah. Erica, just to close it out, we've got a little bit more time. You have been digging into the travel of our previous mayor and our current mayor and found quite a difference. Oh, my God.

[00:26:56] Well, you were saying that Denny Blaine was the only story that was hot this week. I posted this on Blue Sky on my public goal account, which I promptly forgot about. And it has like 3,000 likes and a shit ton of people arguing with me that I was just totally unaware of until today. But, yeah, I posted about how I'm still getting all these records trickling in from the previous mayor, Bruce Harrell's lavish first-class travel, which he did pay for himself.

[00:27:25] But, you know, the mayor, the previous mayor traveled a lot. He was gone like – I don't know. I want to say like 50 days out of his first, you know, few months. I mean he was gone a lot, like a quarter of the time in the period that I looked at. And, you know, would spend – would do stuff like spend $10,000 on a plane ticket, one plane ticket for himself to, you know, go to Tokyo. And it was just constantly flying all over the place and, you know, and staying in, you know, the Ritz-Carlton or whatever, the equivalent.

[00:27:53] Excellent. Katie Wilson, it will probably not surprise you, does not fly in this fashion, does not travel in this fashion. She flies in Economy Coach, and she has only taken two trips, one of which was paid for by the city and the other was funded by Stanford, which she went to speak at. And she went to the U.S. Conference of Mayors in January, and she spent, I believe, $600 on that ticket.

[00:28:21] And people are getting really mad at me or mad at her or something that I said in the headline that you'll find her in 23F. I did not mean literally every single time the mayor flies. She is in that specific seat. People are losing their fucking minds about this, and I just don't know what to do with people. Oh, no, I've got strong feelings about 23F. It was so goddamn literal. They're like, oh, my God, that's the seat where, you know, you'll get sucked out if there's like, you know, if the exit row comes off or whatever. I'm like, I didn't.

[00:28:52] And people are also really mad at me for just writing about it in general because why can't I cover the real stories? So. Wait, are there all these Bruce Harrell defenders on Blue Sky? No, not even Bruce. Yeah, well, there are. They're like, what? I bet he paid for that himself. And I'm like, yes, I said that. I said that. And I said that in the story I did about this last year.

[00:29:13] It's in the headline, in fact, but, you know, people people people like to yell and that means they can't actually read things because they would it would be hard to sustain that level of incandescent anger. Look, I you know, I think it does mitigate things a lot that the that the previous mayor paid for his travel upgrade. So, OK, he likes a more luxe life and been paid for it. OK, that's on him.

[00:29:39] I will say, though, the bigger point to me is that Bruce Harrell did travel a lot and he often traveled with a sizable entourage of city folks. Right. And that's what, Erica, some of your reporting has pointed out as well. I think it's getting lost in the kind of like was it first class? It's just like, man, you know, the mayor was was all over the place. Right. And along with half his office sometimes. Yeah.

[00:30:09] Tokyo, Korea, Norway. I mean, just like all. But also like spending. I mean, I'm sorry. Like, yeah, it's fine. He travels in style, whatever, and pays for it. But I mean, first of all, should we have mayors that are like independently wealthy to the extent that they can buy? I think there was like a fifty two hundred dollar first class domestic flight to somewhere. And another one was thirty five hundred. One of those was to go to Columbus, Ohio. I can't remember which one. But like, you know, is a mayor in touch with the people?

[00:30:37] That's a lot of money to pay to go to Columbus. Is a mayor in touch with the people if he's paying, you know, five thousand dollars to get on a two hour flight to some other city instead of being in the city? You know, I mean, I actually do think that is, you know, that is a legitimate question. And also there were city staffers arranging all this travel. And so I have a million emails that are like, dear first lady. And, you know, that is the first time I've ever seen. And maybe it happened under Jenny Durkin. I don't know.

[00:31:05] But that's the first time I've ever seen a huge amount of city time being expended to try to arrange the first lady's travel for her. So I don't know. There's real resources at play here. Yeah. It seems like mayors have to travel sometime or should travel sometimes. Sure. If it's to further city interests. So I don't really know, like, why he was going to all these different places or why she isn't.

[00:31:33] I mean, maybe Wilson should be traveling more and Harold should have been traveling less. I don't really know the answer to that. And on the part of like him paying for his like upgrades, like I just don't give a shit about that. I don't mean it's it since it doesn't. I mean, it would be a scandal if he was somehow charging the public for that. But since he's not like, I don't know if that really matters. But I do think it's scandalous, as you're both saying, like if he's traveling too much. But do we know if it was unnecessary travel?

[00:31:56] I mean, Harold was famous for traveling like like just a ridiculous amount and not being in the city of Seattle. I mean, I can't quantify it compared to every previous mayor, but other previous mayors were not famous for that. He was. And the fact that the fact that he was gone like a quarter of the time, I think that's too much for a mayor to be gone. Like because you're the mayor of this. You're the mayor of Seattle, not the mayor of, you know, Bergen, Norway. Yeah.

[00:32:22] If you're doing extensive traveling as an elected official, that is potentially quite politically fraught. And I'll just quick anecdote. The meanest press release I ever wrote in my political career was my first mayor's race back in 2009. I was doing the comms for Greg Nichols in his ill-fated attempt to get reelected to a third term. And we thought early in that race that Jan Drago, the city council member, was going to be our main competition in that race.

[00:32:51] And so when she entered that race, I did a six-page press release, which was my oppo dump on Jan Drago. Much of it being like all of the jaunts and like junkets that she had gone on, you know, on the public dime. And this, you know, in her last year before she ran for mayor, she was gliding towards retirement.

[00:33:13] And I think availed herself of all sorts of goodies and travel and all kinds of stuff in the anticipation that she was going to be leaving office and then kind of decided to run for mayor. And so we took all that stuff and put it out there. And I remember I called her Seattle's self-appointed ambassador to the world, which I still think is the meanest thing I've ever said about a public opinion. But I will say that press release worked.

[00:33:38] Like her announcement press conference, she was just peppered by the reporters with questions about, well, the mayor's office says you traveled here and here and here. You know, anyway. It just goes to show that this stuff can be quite fraught for public officials. And so it's not super surprising to me that Erica's Blue Sky post about it has 3,000, you know, likes and comments and whatever. People generally like having a mayor that travels in coach, I would say. Yeah. I go along with that. Yeah.

[00:34:08] Taking the bus. And doesn't travel too much. Look, another really quick example more serious, the mayor of L.A., Karen Bass. Her political career like may have just ended because she was in Ghana when those huge fires happened in Los Angeles, right? And she had pledged before she left – when she was running for office that she wouldn't leave the city except, you know, on a needs basis. And she went off to go on this trip to Ghana and this massive Palisades fire happened.

[00:34:36] 6,000 structures burned down. And she's, you know, off on another continent when it happened. Huge political problem for her. Yeah. Although she didn't cause the fires or was unfortunate. It was a bit like the snowstorm that took down Greg Nichols. It wasn't her fault that the fire started while she was on a trip. But she might well lose. All right. That's it for another edition of Seattle Nice. He's Sandeep Kaushik. She's Erica C. Barnett. I'm David Hyde. Thanks, everybody, so much for listening and for contributing.

[00:35:05] The last time we were here, I think, Erica, I said, hey, just please donate to this podcast because it'll help us go to video. And a lot of people actually, like, heard that and decided to donate. So I was pretty excited about that. I know you get a lot of support at Publicola for people who just appreciate your journalism. But we also have bills to pay. We're all doing this as a public service, essentially. We're not drawing salaries from Seattle Nice.

[00:35:33] And it's literally to pay our expenses, which have gone up because we want to go to video. So I'm hoping folks can contribute. Make me get into hair and makeup. Oh, yes. Exactly. When is Publicola going all video? Oh, Jesus. I do want us to be able to go video, though. I think that's how a lot of people access podcasts now. They do. Your support can help us do that. The Youngs. They might be wrong, but we can't question them. All right. Thanks, everybody, so much for listening.