This week the pod talks about the new Seattle Police contract, Mayor Bruce Harrell's proposed $1.35 billion transportation levy, and the politics of the migrant crisis in the region.
Our editor is Quinn Waller
Send us a text! Note that we can only respond directly to emails realseattlenice@gmail.com
Your support on Patreon helps pay for editing, production, live events and the unique, hard-hitting local journalism and commentary you hear weekly on Seattle Nice.
[00:00:00] Hello and welcome to another edition of Seattle Nice. I'm David Hyde here with
[00:00:14] Erica C Barnett of Publicola and political consultant Sandeep Kaushik
[00:00:19] with three topics. For one thing the new proposed transportation levy is out.
[00:00:25] How big is it? What would it do? Also the politics of the migrant crisis in the
[00:00:31] greater Seattle area. We've seen this explode in a big way in other cities
[00:00:36] around the country so we're gonna be looking at what's happening here but
[00:00:39] first the new police contract and of course this is a huge issue for folks
[00:00:45] concerned about police accountability. Erica had the scoop earlier this week on
[00:00:49] Publicola. We also had a podcast looking at that but now Erica's got the
[00:00:53] contract itself so let's get straight to this breaking news. Erica there are
[00:00:59] certainly a lot of words here but from your perspective what's the big news in
[00:01:03] this new contract? Well there's two elements that are interesting. One we
[00:01:07] discussed earlier this week which is the 23% pay increase which comes in
[00:01:11] three chunks up through 2023 so Seattle police officers are gonna get
[00:01:16] retroactive pay in the form of some pretty substantial checks being written
[00:01:21] by the city this year amid a budget deficit that's currently around 240
[00:01:25] million dollars so that's number one. Number two is that in exchange for all
[00:01:30] that money the public is not really getting any additional accountability
[00:01:35] measures in this contract to speak of. There's a couple of minor changes that
[00:01:40] I'm seeing so far and I have not had a chance to read the entire thing.
[00:01:43] There's some very minor changes around notifying officers when they are
[00:01:49] being investigated for misconduct, a little bit of nibbling around the
[00:01:52] edges but some of the really big stuff that accountability advocates have been
[00:01:57] wanting since you know well before 2017 when the city adopted an
[00:02:02] accountability ordinance that then was sort of subsumed or reversed by the
[00:02:06] 2018 contract most of that stuff is still not in here. Police can still go to
[00:02:11] arbitration when they disagree with a disciplined decision. There are still
[00:02:18] lots of issues with this 180-day deadline for decisions to be made on
[00:02:22] discipline. Most of the stuff that was considered a baseline in 2017 is still
[00:02:27] not in here so that is going to be disappointing to a lot of accountability
[00:02:31] advocates.
[00:02:32] So, Antip what are you hearing? What are you seeing in this new contract?
[00:02:35] I don't disagree of anything Erica says my understanding is this
[00:02:38] contract right it's retroactive for the last three years right they're
[00:02:43] still negotiating right there was supposed to be a four-year contract
[00:02:46] so now they're continuing to negotiate for the last year of it but they've
[00:02:50] decided let's just retroactively pass this interim contract that covers the
[00:02:56] last three years. So, it was really I think the reason they're doing that
[00:03:00] is they really wanted to get the pay raises in place right as Erica says
[00:03:05] there are significant pay increases starting salaries for SPD police
[00:03:09] officers is now gonna slightly top $100,000 a year and the reason they
[00:03:14] really wanted to get that into place is I can tell you team Harrell is very
[00:03:18] optimistic that this contract along with some of the other things they've been
[00:03:22] doing in terms of trying to streamline the pipeline for police
[00:03:25] recruiting are gonna pay dividends on their efforts to kind of increase the
[00:03:30] pace of bringing in new officers and they saw getting these raises in
[00:03:35] place as a key piece of that puzzle for them so they decided even though
[00:03:39] we can you know we've got all these sort of contentious issues that
[00:03:44] are still out there and are still very contentious around accountability and
[00:03:48] reform let's get the retroactive funding in place because we're so delayed so we
[00:03:53] can we'll see whether whether it's true but but but they believe get moving on
[00:03:58] the recruitment. Erica, we touched on that in sort of a speculative way on
[00:04:02] Tuesday but as I remember you had some skepticism about that methodology.
[00:04:05] Well, I mean I think that the I mean the methodology being the pay increases
[00:04:10] you know if so I think that yeah it's it remains to be seen whether giving
[00:04:15] officers a huge boost in pay without doing anything to change the culture of
[00:04:18] the department and you know for example to address the you know the
[00:04:23] well-known misogyny in the department the fact that women are leaving in
[00:04:27] droves and not signing up to be officers. Yeah, I don't think that pay
[00:04:31] increases are going to address that and you know and I think too I mean
[00:04:35] Sandeep is talking about you know oh there's been so much delay so much
[00:04:38] this is a tactic I mean we act as though you know every time Spock you know starts
[00:04:43] talking about how they've been out of contract for three years they've been
[00:04:46] out of contract for two years that that is a tactic and it obviously works
[00:04:51] because you know here we have Sandeep saying they've been so delayed that
[00:04:54] they just had to at least pass this pay increase I mean they're going to
[00:04:57] put all these contentious issues off till the next time well that's
[00:05:00] exactly what happened in 2018 and it's what's going to continue to
[00:05:04] happen with this contract now being a baseline once again you know with
[00:05:08] with very minimal accountability reforms if any and then that'll become the
[00:05:13] baseline for the next contract and that'll get delayed and then we'll
[00:05:17] have the same argument again in a couple years you know oh they're so
[00:05:20] delayed we got to at least give them the pay increases and then we can work
[00:05:23] on accountability later and I will I will just know real quickly I mean in
[00:05:27] the 2018 contract there's tons of stuff in there that says you know we
[00:05:31] couldn't agree on this right now but we're gonna you know leave it out
[00:05:34] there is something that could be a re-opener for the contract and none of
[00:05:38] those things ever happen so putting that in there is pretty meaningless as
[00:05:41] far as actual reform is concerned yeah look on the reform front my sense
[00:05:46] from what I can glean as being a total outsider all of this stuff is that
[00:05:51] Spock continues to be dug in on all of the sort of big issues and I'm
[00:05:57] not getting any sense that there's been some kind of significant movement
[00:06:00] or breakthrough or anything like that on that front and so it's gonna be
[00:06:06] interesting to see then going forward into this like I said they're still
[00:06:11] negotiating for the kind of remainder of the contract to see what comes out
[00:06:16] next and secondly to see how the federal judge who's overseeing the
[00:06:23] Seattle Consent Decree is gonna react to this new contract and to what
[00:06:29] Erica just said you know that that that they really haven't made
[00:06:32] progress on the reform piece of this or not and I do think there's some
[00:06:36] concern with when the last contract came down and it got negotiated by the
[00:06:40] Durkin administration and then ratified by the city council the
[00:06:42] judge stepped in and said hell no you guys are rolling back about you
[00:06:47] know a bunch of necessary reform so how's the judge gonna react to
[00:06:51] this one I think I'm ready to be seen so I just I want to go back to
[00:06:54] something that you've said a couple times I think maybe just once on
[00:06:57] the podcast about Jenny Durkin saying that reform is a continual
[00:07:00] process not a destination yeah I think you find that inspiring I am
[00:07:05] maybe a little more cynical about it and I think that it is you
[00:07:09] could also interpret that as meaning look we did what we could in
[00:07:13] the 2018 contract and you know we'll get to the rest of it later
[00:07:17] well now it is 2024 six years later and we are still dealing with
[00:07:23] the baseline contract that does not address those 2017 reforms and
[00:07:27] I think that's a real problem if your actual goal is to improve the
[00:07:32] police department improve its culture and deal with stuff like
[00:07:36] police misconduct you know there is there is just very little in
[00:07:39] this contract that addresses misconduct in any meaningful way
[00:07:43] and so I think that that's a pretty that's a pretty big blank
[00:07:47] space that people should be concerned about in this contract
[00:07:50] going forward whether or not you know the rest is still being
[00:07:52] negotiated I just don't think we have to be purposefully naive
[00:07:56] about the political environment right now and the fact that the
[00:08:00] mayor and city council are sort of all lined up willing to I
[00:08:04] think give Spock a lot of leeway because they are desperate to
[00:08:08] hire officers and you know and again I think if you have a
[00:08:11] contract that doesn't have a lot of accountability in it that
[00:08:13] affects the kind of officers that apply because people can
[00:08:16] look at Seattle and they have an impression of Seattle as
[00:08:19] being a place where maybe they would rather work somewhere
[00:08:23] than the city council.
[00:08:24] I think that's one of the big challenges that you have to
[00:08:27] have in a place where people don't have to be responsible for
[00:08:30] their own health.
[00:08:31] I look I definitely think there's there's ongoing work
[00:08:35] that needs to happen on the accountability and reform front
[00:08:38] I think I mentioned before I think there are still big
[00:08:40] outstanding questions about related to changes that
[00:08:44] would help to kind of reform the procedures and culture
[00:08:47] and structure of the department and sort of its purview
[00:08:50] on dispatch or what have you.
[00:08:52] So all of that stuff I do think is still out there and it
[00:08:56] should be a topic of concern.
[00:08:58] I think there's very broad support for those sorts of
[00:09:02] changes right creating a stronger non police or
[00:09:05] non armed response for instance.
[00:09:08] But I will say I was talking with someone on team
[00:09:11] Harold recently and was asking about the kind of state
[00:09:14] of these reform efforts and they were saying well one
[00:09:16] thing you should look at is look at current chief
[00:09:20] DOS and if you look at the disciplinary record that
[00:09:23] the chief has created for kind of holding officers who
[00:09:28] engage in misconduct accountable that this chief has
[00:09:31] taken a lot of actions on that front and they're not
[00:09:33] you know kind of sitting by when sort of some of these
[00:09:36] cultural issues Erica that you've mentioned surface
[00:09:39] they haven't been static on it.
[00:09:40] That's the argument I've gotten from from the mayor's
[00:09:43] office but none of that precludes the fact that
[00:09:45] there's still big structural work that needs to happen
[00:09:47] here.
[00:09:48] Well I mean talking to folks you know maybe not the
[00:09:51] high up folks at the mayor's office that you have
[00:09:53] access to but talking to folks you know more in the
[00:09:56] department you know I think there is a real sense
[00:09:59] that that is not true.
[00:10:02] The Diaz has been part of the culture I mean very
[00:10:05] much so I mean you know they're being sued
[00:10:08] right now by a former assistant chief over
[00:10:12] discrimination.
[00:10:13] So I think that this rest intended version of
[00:10:16] culture change that you were describing is not
[00:10:19] what people are perceiving sort of at the ground
[00:10:21] level I'm sure the mayor obviously likes chief Diaz
[00:10:25] but the culture problems are real they're not
[00:10:27] something I'm making up because you know I have it
[00:10:30] in for the police I mean it's something that
[00:10:32] cops complain about and ex-cops complain about.
[00:10:35] I think if you sort of keep putting reform off
[00:10:38] as something that can be done in the future
[00:10:40] then you know you're never going to address
[00:10:42] that that culture issue.
[00:10:44] Can't both things be true? Can't Diaz have a
[00:10:47] relatively good record in holding people accountable
[00:10:50] when certain kinds of issues surface but you know
[00:10:53] on the other hand be sued and and not be
[00:10:56] taking action in other cases. Couldn't both
[00:10:58] things be true?
[00:10:59] I mean I don't think that's really the
[00:11:01] relevant question to be honest.
[00:11:03] What's the answer to it though?
[00:11:04] It's my question.
[00:11:05] What's the answer can both things? Sure Diaz
[00:11:08] can yeah you know you can point to
[00:11:10] examples where Diaz has you know suspended
[00:11:13] somebody for example but you can also
[00:11:15] point to examples where for example you
[00:11:17] know Daniel Otterer the officer who laughed
[00:11:20] at the death of Jenawee Kandula is still
[00:11:23] being paid and is still serving on the
[00:11:25] force as is Kevin Dave the person who
[00:11:27] killed her so the reason I don't think
[00:11:29] that's the relevant question is because I
[00:11:31] think you have to look at the
[00:11:32] department holistically and say is this
[00:11:33] apartment the department that is
[00:11:34] committed to reform and committed to
[00:11:36] culture change and I think the answer
[00:11:39] you know is by and large no.
[00:11:41] Complexity is sometimes hard to grapple
[00:11:43] with I guess it seems like two things
[00:11:45] can be true at the same time and I
[00:11:47] guess it's hard to report on in some ways
[00:11:49] but let me just let me just get to the
[00:11:52] other question I had which was
[00:11:54] Democrats have had a super majority in
[00:11:56] Olympia and haven't done squat when it
[00:11:59] comes to this issue.
[00:12:00] I can't remember the name of the Senate
[00:12:02] bill but basically there there have been
[00:12:04] bills sort of year after year about
[00:12:08] collective bargaining and police
[00:12:09] accountability and those things fail to
[00:12:11] pass I know we we focus on the city but
[00:12:14] I don't know if either of you have any
[00:12:15] insight into why Democrats with a super
[00:12:17] majority can't get that done or
[00:12:19] haven't gotten that done and how that
[00:12:21] relates to what we're talking about
[00:12:22] here.
[00:12:22] Well look I actually think you're
[00:12:24] putting out your finger on something
[00:12:25] interesting there and I can envision a
[00:12:28] scenario here where the bargaining
[00:12:31] over over these sort of accountability
[00:12:33] measures that the city is trying to
[00:12:35] you know get out of spog don't
[00:12:38] you know do reach an impasse right and
[00:12:40] when they do they go to binding
[00:12:42] arbitration on those issues right and
[00:12:45] typically the way the arbitration
[00:12:46] process is set up the city you know
[00:12:48] spog will probably win that that
[00:12:50] debate and I could see something like
[00:12:52] that happening and the city then go
[00:12:54] into the state and saying we need your
[00:12:56] help to reform some of the some of the
[00:12:58] issues around collective bargaining
[00:13:01] for police contracts because we can't
[00:13:03] get to reforms we can't get past the
[00:13:05] union or the guild on these reform
[00:13:08] issues so I think there's a
[00:13:10] potentially there's very much
[00:13:12] potentially a role that the state
[00:13:13] could be playing here and you're right
[00:13:14] there hasn't been a whole lot of
[00:13:16] attention paid specifically to that
[00:13:18] kind of stuff you know the state
[00:13:20] level as opposed to some other stuff
[00:13:22] like police chases and all that stuff
[00:13:23] they got it
[00:13:25] restricting police stations they got
[00:13:26] a huge amount of
[00:13:27] attention over the last few
[00:13:29] sessions but it could become more of
[00:13:30] an olympia play as this goes
[00:13:32] forward.
[00:13:32] It has been there's been legislation
[00:13:34] in the past to remove
[00:13:35] accountability
[00:13:36] from bargaining entirely you know
[00:13:38] just sort of arguing why are we
[00:13:40] bargaining over whether you know
[00:13:42] police are accountable to the public
[00:13:43] this should this should be
[00:13:45] you know a baseline and just a
[00:13:47] requirement as opposed to something
[00:13:48] that the police union can just
[00:13:50] bargain away
[00:13:51] but you know that legislation has
[00:13:53] not moved very far so far in the
[00:13:55] legislature in part because
[00:13:57] I think organized labor is opposed
[00:13:59] to it and sort of thinks that this
[00:14:01] will chip away at their own
[00:14:02] bargaining rights outside of police
[00:14:04] unions
[00:14:05] but but there have been efforts to do
[00:14:07] this and
[00:14:08] and I think that that is going to be
[00:14:10] you know you're going to hear calls
[00:14:11] for that again in response to this
[00:14:14] this collective bargaining agreement
[00:14:15] which just does not provide a
[00:14:17] significant accountability at all.
[00:14:19] Transportation levy this is
[00:14:22] another one of these long
[00:14:23] anticipated things
[00:14:25] but i'm not sure that what we are
[00:14:26] anticipating really delivered
[00:14:28] Sandeep Kashak what do you think?
[00:14:29] Transportation levy it's out
[00:14:31] I think my top line takeaway
[00:14:33] was that I was surprised at the number
[00:14:36] 1.35 billion which I thought was
[00:14:39] I expected it to be a little bigger than
[00:14:41] that
[00:14:41] but I did the last levy campaign
[00:14:43] back in 2015 I think we did it
[00:14:46] the move Seattle levy it was
[00:14:48] nine hundred and seventy million
[00:14:49] dollars and at that time that was a
[00:14:50] huge increase
[00:14:52] and I will tell you that was a epic
[00:14:54] battle
[00:14:55] it was probably the last Seattle levy
[00:14:56] campaign where there was
[00:14:58] actual real doubt about whether it
[00:14:59] was going to pass
[00:15:00] there was paid opposition against it
[00:15:02] Faye Garno the late Faye Garno was a
[00:15:05] North Seattle kind of Aurora Avenue
[00:15:07] area kind of landowner
[00:15:09] put in three hundred thirty thousand
[00:15:10] dollars of her own money to oppose it
[00:15:12] there was a huge press pile on about
[00:15:14] levy fatigue that year
[00:15:16] and how we were asking for too much
[00:15:18] and there was real expectation that
[00:15:20] levy was going to fail it didn't it
[00:15:21] ended up passing pretty
[00:15:22] comfortably in the end
[00:15:23] but it was a real battle and
[00:15:26] I kind of thought we were over
[00:15:27] that
[00:15:28] and we're in an era where we tend
[00:15:29] to sort of go big rather than
[00:15:31] small but this levy is definitely more
[00:15:34] a kind of status quo levy
[00:15:36] back in December they were polling
[00:15:38] and I think getting favorable results
[00:15:39] on polling
[00:15:40] for a levy as big as 1.7 billion
[00:15:43] and so to be at 1.35 I was a little
[00:15:45] surprised by that
[00:15:46] I mean I'm not surprised that they're
[00:15:47] doing a status quo levy at this point
[00:15:49] the housing levy was also
[00:15:51] much less ambitious than it could
[00:15:52] have been
[00:15:53] you know I think this is kind of
[00:15:55] Harold's way is
[00:15:57] you know let's do the
[00:15:58] let's do the careful thing
[00:15:59] and not go for anything too ambitious
[00:16:01] I don't think transportation is
[00:16:03] particularly Bruce Harold's issue
[00:16:05] and so a I think that he's not
[00:16:08] particularly ambitious about
[00:16:09] transportation in general
[00:16:11] and and b you know particularly
[00:16:12] when it comes to
[00:16:13] you know so-called alternative
[00:16:15] transportation
[00:16:16] biking walking taking the bus
[00:16:18] it's just not top priority for him
[00:16:21] so you know I think
[00:16:23] Harold is you know by and large
[00:16:24] motivated by sort of a desire
[00:16:26] for winds
[00:16:28] and is kind of risk averse
[00:16:30] and this is this is pretty risk averse
[00:16:31] levy and you know and I'm curious
[00:16:33] I mean I would love to know what the
[00:16:34] discussions were like
[00:16:36] in the Department of Transportation
[00:16:38] about this
[00:16:39] because Greg spots the director of the
[00:16:42] department I think is
[00:16:43] is more ambitious and did kind of come
[00:16:46] in you know feeling like he had a
[00:16:47] mandate to really get stuff done
[00:16:49] on transportation safety
[00:16:52] and that's that's not what we see
[00:16:53] in this levy and
[00:16:54] you know we have a Vision Zero plan
[00:16:56] in the city of Seattle to end
[00:16:59] basically traffic deaths
[00:17:00] but particularly
[00:17:01] deaths of vulnerable users
[00:17:03] like people walking
[00:17:04] and biking and in wheelchairs
[00:17:06] and we're going backwards on that
[00:17:08] and you know continue to
[00:17:10] see an increase
[00:17:12] in in those deaths
[00:17:12] and serious injuries
[00:17:13] and this levy I don't think will
[00:17:15] significantly make a dent in that
[00:17:18] because it is just kind of
[00:17:19] continuing to do
[00:17:20] more of what we're already doing
[00:17:22] can you just
[00:17:22] Sandeep give us the big picture
[00:17:24] here in response to Erica
[00:17:25] so I get a sense of just how much
[00:17:27] are we spending as a city
[00:17:28] overall on transportation
[00:17:29] this is a status quo
[00:17:31] proposal here this levy
[00:17:32] but if you can I mean
[00:17:34] how do we compare to other cities
[00:17:35] like I have no clue
[00:17:36] I don't know that off the top of my head
[00:17:39] but this levy accounts for about
[00:17:41] 30% of the S-stop budget
[00:17:43] that's what the transportation levy
[00:17:46] accounts for
[00:17:46] so we're spending about three times
[00:17:48] right its size overall
[00:17:50] on transportation
[00:17:51] so it's a major chunk
[00:17:53] obviously of the
[00:17:55] entire transportation budget in the city
[00:17:57] about a third of it
[00:17:58] and it's not wrong for the mayor's office
[00:18:00] having been in those discussions
[00:18:02] about how to size a levy
[00:18:03] and how big to go
[00:18:04] or how vicious
[00:18:06] on any number of Seattle levies
[00:18:08] when back when I was doing them
[00:18:10] you know it's not
[00:18:11] I don't think out of line
[00:18:12] to be concerned about the sort of
[00:18:15] fear of you know
[00:18:16] the catastrophic consequences
[00:18:18] or fearing the catastrophic
[00:18:19] consequences of a levy failure
[00:18:21] but that said
[00:18:23] I did expect that they might go
[00:18:24] a little bit bigger
[00:18:25] I mean on the housing levy
[00:18:26] maybe it was pretty status quo
[00:18:28] but it was still triple
[00:18:29] the size of the old levy
[00:18:30] this is a kind of incremental increase
[00:18:32] over the last
[00:18:33] move Seattle levy
[00:18:34] and the other thing I would point out
[00:18:35] is not just the size of it
[00:18:36] but I do think
[00:18:38] some of the urbanist
[00:18:39] and transportation
[00:18:40] and transit advocates
[00:18:42] have felt like the
[00:18:43] priorities in this levy
[00:18:45] are off as well
[00:18:46] in that it's much more focused
[00:18:48] on sort of
[00:18:49] basic maintenance
[00:18:50] right one of the
[00:18:51] one of the goals of this levy
[00:18:52] is to make sure every pothole
[00:18:54] gets filled within 72 hours
[00:18:55] after it gets reported
[00:18:56] and sort of going back
[00:18:58] some of that back to basics
[00:18:59] except there's a lot of money in here
[00:19:00] for bridge maintenance
[00:19:01] more than $200 million
[00:19:03] right and less money
[00:19:04] for things that
[00:19:05] some of the advocates wanted
[00:19:07] like
[00:19:08] a big increase
[00:19:09] in the rate at which we build
[00:19:10] sidewalks
[00:19:11] or more investments
[00:19:12] in bike lanes
[00:19:13] and stuff like that
[00:19:14] so
[00:19:14] so I do think all of those questions
[00:19:16] are going to be in play
[00:19:17] as this levy goes through
[00:19:18] its sort of council process
[00:19:20] and it's going to be interesting
[00:19:21] to see how it plays out
[00:19:22] and whether
[00:19:24] this council
[00:19:25] might actually increase it a little bit
[00:19:27] which
[00:19:27] you know wouldn't be that surprising
[00:19:28] I actually think that the old levy was
[00:19:31] 930 not 970 million
[00:19:32] I remember what happened was
[00:19:34] the mayor proposed back then
[00:19:35] a $900 million levy
[00:19:36] and the council ended up adding
[00:19:37] 30 million in 2015
[00:19:39] I wonder if we'll see something
[00:19:40] like that happen here
[00:19:41] 30 40 50 million dollars gets added
[00:19:43] to this levy we'll see
[00:19:44] perhaps we will see
[00:19:45] those increases Sunday
[00:19:47] I'm not hearing a lot of
[00:19:48] sort of indication from the council
[00:19:50] right now that they have
[00:19:51] big specific transportation priorities
[00:19:53] the only thing that has happened
[00:19:55] so far with regard to the levy
[00:19:56] is that Bob Kettle
[00:19:58] new city council member
[00:19:59] has introduced a bill
[00:20:02] that would basically say
[00:20:03] that the levy cannot pay
[00:20:05] for improvements to pedestrian safety
[00:20:07] and pedestrian
[00:20:09] street closures at Pike Place Market
[00:20:11] so
[00:20:12] something that you know
[00:20:13] the public has said over
[00:20:14] and over and over again
[00:20:15] that they want
[00:20:15] which is the pedestrianization
[00:20:18] of that
[00:20:18] you know
[00:20:19] sort of terrible street
[00:20:20] down by Pike Place Market
[00:20:21] where tourists
[00:20:23] kind of bundle into the roadway
[00:20:24] and then get stuck there
[00:20:26] nobody goes down there on purpose
[00:20:28] you know it's
[00:20:29] it's just kind of a
[00:20:30] kind of a clogged nightmare
[00:20:32] but
[00:20:32] Kettle has said that
[00:20:34] keeping that street open to cars
[00:20:36] is a top priority
[00:20:38] and important for its function
[00:20:39] as a market street
[00:20:41] so
[00:20:41] that's that's the priority
[00:20:42] they've expressed so far
[00:20:44] perhaps they'll have other
[00:20:45] spending priorities
[00:20:46] and more positive priorities
[00:20:48] but just haven't heard anything
[00:20:49] along those lines yet
[00:20:50] but one other thing I want to add
[00:20:52] what's interesting to note is
[00:20:53] what's not in this levy too
[00:20:55] and I don't see
[00:20:56] there's no money
[00:20:58] for the streetcar
[00:20:59] right I mean
[00:20:59] I think this levy
[00:21:01] and the exclusion
[00:21:03] of the
[00:21:04] Center City connector
[00:21:05] right that
[00:21:05] that First Avenue link on the streetcar
[00:21:09] means that
[00:21:11] that streetcar ideas
[00:21:13] dying a quiet death here
[00:21:14] right
[00:21:15] nobody's really kind of raising it
[00:21:17] but
[00:21:17] they're not funding it
[00:21:18] I mean this is the thing like
[00:21:20] I
[00:21:20] you know
[00:21:21] I have the unpopular opinion
[00:21:23] that I think Seattle will
[00:21:24] continue to function
[00:21:25] just fine without a streetcar
[00:21:27] on the waterfront
[00:21:28] this has been a project
[00:21:30] that you know
[00:21:30] various mayors have sort of inherited
[00:21:32] over the years
[00:21:33] and there hasn't been a lot of enthusiasm
[00:21:35] for it
[00:21:36] you know
[00:21:36] from any mayor
[00:21:38] and the mayor
[00:21:38] writes the budget
[00:21:39] so that is doomed the streetcar so far
[00:21:42] but you know
[00:21:43] I think that
[00:21:44] a more
[00:21:46] a more functional approach
[00:21:48] might be
[00:21:49] to bring back the
[00:21:51] ride free area
[00:21:52] while I'm throwing out unpopular ideas
[00:21:54] and
[00:21:55] and you know
[00:21:56] maybe let's bring some buses back
[00:21:58] to First Avenue
[00:21:59] like there used to be
[00:22:01] because it is
[00:22:02] it's just not the same
[00:22:05] you know
[00:22:05] you're not you're not attracting
[00:22:07] the the exact same number of people
[00:22:08] when you have buses up on Third Avenue
[00:22:10] some people aren't going to want to
[00:22:11] walk up there
[00:22:12] and I think having buses
[00:22:13] on first
[00:22:14] you know
[00:22:14] or streetcar
[00:22:15] but if the streetcar is off the table
[00:22:17] buses that you know
[00:22:18] ideally are free
[00:22:20] in the downtown area
[00:22:21] I think that would actually stimulate
[00:22:23] a lot of bus traffic
[00:22:24] and be good for tourism
[00:22:26] and all that
[00:22:27] so bring back the ride free area
[00:22:28] I just want to say
[00:22:29] this conversation reminds me of
[00:22:30] when I first moved to Seattle in 2004
[00:22:33] and I think Sondip said
[00:22:34] something like welcome to Disneyland
[00:22:36] and the city was talking about the
[00:22:37] monorail
[00:22:38] you know
[00:22:39] and since then we've had visions of
[00:22:40] like hot air balloons
[00:22:41] and all this kind of
[00:22:42] rosy enthusiasm
[00:22:43] a gondola
[00:22:44] for all kinds of
[00:22:47] transportation solutions
[00:22:48] for this to be
[00:22:49] sort of
[00:22:49] Disney's city the future
[00:22:51] but
[00:22:51] but really seriously
[00:22:52] kind of urbanist agenda
[00:22:53] and it is
[00:22:53] it does seem a little bit like
[00:22:55] wow
[00:22:56] this is the city of Amazon
[00:22:57] and big tech
[00:22:58] and high tech
[00:22:59] and everything else
[00:22:59] and what we're talking about is
[00:23:00] filling potholes
[00:23:01] it's a little
[00:23:03] it's a little underwhelming
[00:23:04] it's also like
[00:23:06] you know
[00:23:06] we have a track record of like
[00:23:09] half-assing
[00:23:10] and making decisions
[00:23:11] and then
[00:23:12] revisiting
[00:23:13] and reversing them
[00:23:13] right the monorail
[00:23:14] right we decided we were going to
[00:23:15] build a monorail
[00:23:16] and we
[00:23:17] spent a bunch of money
[00:23:18] and then we decided
[00:23:19] we weren't going to build a
[00:23:20] monorail
[00:23:20] like because
[00:23:22] the cost went up
[00:23:23] or
[00:23:23] you know
[00:23:24] we built
[00:23:24] two streetcar lines
[00:23:26] we built the
[00:23:27] slot right
[00:23:27] the South Lake Union line
[00:23:28] and then we built the one
[00:23:30] the Capitol Hill from Pioneer
[00:23:31] Square
[00:23:31] and then
[00:23:32] allegedly where we're going to
[00:23:33] connect them up on
[00:23:34] First Avenue
[00:23:35] and now
[00:23:36] seems like we're not going to
[00:23:36] do that
[00:23:37] so it just seems like these long
[00:23:38] drawn out
[00:23:39] transportation projects
[00:23:40] that go
[00:23:41] over periods of years
[00:23:43] get caught up in the sort of
[00:23:44] yo-yoing
[00:23:45] and the vicissitudes of
[00:23:46] Seattle politics
[00:23:47] and then they end up
[00:23:48] kind of turning into mush
[00:23:50] they get ground down into mush
[00:23:51] and nothing ends up
[00:23:52] happening or like
[00:23:54] incomplete shit happens that
[00:23:56] you know
[00:23:57] doesn't really work right
[00:23:58] like and so we can't seem to
[00:24:00] really make a decision
[00:24:01] and stick to it
[00:24:01] when it comes to
[00:24:02] transportation projects
[00:24:03] okay
[00:24:04] Venezuelan migrants
[00:24:06] fleeing to the United States
[00:24:07] hundreds are coming to this area
[00:24:10] and
[00:24:10] Sandit
[00:24:11] this is something that you've
[00:24:12] been
[00:24:12] tracking along with Erica
[00:24:15] you're concerned that
[00:24:17] the city
[00:24:18] isn't going to be able to handle
[00:24:18] this crisis
[00:24:20] well right
[00:24:20] I mean just to tee this up
[00:24:21] right there was a situation
[00:24:24] we're recording this on
[00:24:24] Friday morning
[00:24:25] but there was a situation
[00:24:26] a couple of days ago
[00:24:27] where 300 migrants
[00:24:28] took over the tennis courts
[00:24:30] at Garfield
[00:24:31] right and pitched a bunch of
[00:24:32] tents because
[00:24:32] they were saying
[00:24:33] we have no place else to go
[00:24:35] and
[00:24:35] this provoked a whole lot of
[00:24:37] freak out right at the city
[00:24:40] in with the mayors folks
[00:24:42] and at the council
[00:24:43] and what are we going to do
[00:24:44] and
[00:24:44] and
[00:24:45] this
[00:24:46] got resolved in a matter of hours
[00:24:47] because at the
[00:24:49] last minute
[00:24:50] a benefactor came in
[00:24:51] and put up $50,000
[00:24:52] which will pay for these migrants
[00:24:54] to
[00:24:55] go back to Kent
[00:24:56] where they came from
[00:24:57] and get
[00:24:58] sounds like about
[00:24:59] 10 more days
[00:25:00] of a hotel stay
[00:25:01] but that's just a 10 day
[00:25:03] reprieve right
[00:25:04] and
[00:25:04] David you teach this up
[00:25:05] as a sort of
[00:25:06] what's the city going to do
[00:25:07] but
[00:25:07] it's not even clear
[00:25:08] who's responsible for this
[00:25:09] right
[00:25:10] like is this a city issue
[00:25:11] is it a county issue
[00:25:13] is it a state issue
[00:25:14] is it a
[00:25:15] federal government issue
[00:25:16] nobody's
[00:25:17] everybody's passing this around
[00:25:18] like a hot potato saying
[00:25:20] well we don't have the resources
[00:25:22] to like
[00:25:23] you know
[00:25:23] house and
[00:25:24] clothes and feed
[00:25:25] you know indefinitely
[00:25:27] some indefinite number of
[00:25:29] destitute migrants
[00:25:30] who are showing up
[00:25:31] here in our region
[00:25:32] or in the state
[00:25:32] and so
[00:25:33] and right now
[00:25:34] it looks like a
[00:25:34] complete freaking
[00:25:35] shit show
[00:25:36] what happens in 10 days
[00:25:37] when the money runs out again
[00:25:38] and they
[00:25:39] come back to
[00:25:39] whether it's the
[00:25:40] Garfield tennis courts
[00:25:41] or somewhere else
[00:25:42] what's going to happen then
[00:25:43] and I don't think anybody has an
[00:25:45] answer right now
[00:25:45] yeah I mean I think that this
[00:25:47] clearly is not
[00:25:48] merely a city or a county
[00:25:50] or a state responsibility
[00:25:52] but you know
[00:25:52] I think that
[00:25:54] there's a federal
[00:25:55] you know crisis
[00:25:56] that's happening
[00:25:56] people are coming here
[00:25:57] not just in the hundreds
[00:25:59] David but in the thousands
[00:26:00] I mean
[00:26:01] there was a in December
[00:26:02] I was talking to
[00:26:03] King County Councilmember
[00:26:04] Jorge Barone
[00:26:05] and he said that
[00:26:06] you know there are 3000
[00:26:07] migrants
[00:26:08] in December alone
[00:26:09] and that number
[00:26:10] has gone down a little bit
[00:26:11] but continues to be high
[00:26:12] and we have ultimately
[00:26:14] you know no idea
[00:26:16] how many people are going to come
[00:26:17] here because this isn't like
[00:26:18] a refugee resettlement program
[00:26:19] this is
[00:26:20] you know
[00:26:21] buses coming in
[00:26:22] full of people who
[00:26:23] you know believe that they
[00:26:24] are going to have access to jobs
[00:26:26] but who are prohibited from having jobs
[00:26:28] essentially for the first six months
[00:26:29] they're here
[00:26:30] which is a huge reason
[00:26:31] for this crisis
[00:26:32] and so
[00:26:34] you know
[00:26:34] there's state money
[00:26:35] that's going to become available
[00:26:36] in July
[00:26:37] I think it's something like
[00:26:38] 52 million
[00:26:39] don't quote me on that
[00:26:41] I think it's 30 million
[00:26:42] is the number
[00:26:43] that I heard
[00:26:43] okay so there's
[00:26:44] there's state money that's coming in July
[00:26:46] that will
[00:26:47] you know alleviate this problem
[00:26:48] for the time being
[00:26:49] but you know
[00:26:50] ultimately this is
[00:26:51] a federal responsibility
[00:26:53] as well as a state responsibility
[00:26:55] the city doesn't
[00:26:56] you know obviously have money
[00:26:57] nor does the county to keep
[00:26:59] sort of housing folks
[00:27:00] or even providing
[00:27:02] transitional housing indefinitely
[00:27:04] so there needs to be a system
[00:27:06] that is set up to actually
[00:27:07] receive these folks
[00:27:08] and to
[00:27:09] you know route them into
[00:27:11] transitional housing
[00:27:12] and ultimately
[00:27:13] you know jobs and stability
[00:27:14] because the issue isn't that
[00:27:16] you know I mean for the most part
[00:27:18] the issue isn't that people don't
[00:27:19] want them here
[00:27:20] it's that
[00:27:21] you know
[00:27:22] we've got to figure out
[00:27:22] how to
[00:27:23] stabilize folks and
[00:27:25] get them
[00:27:25] you know
[00:27:25] participating in the economy
[00:27:27] and
[00:27:28] and all that stuff
[00:27:29] so yeah it's
[00:27:30] for now it's a
[00:27:31] it's a big
[00:27:31] unpredictable mess
[00:27:33] you know I will say too
[00:27:34] they showed up at the
[00:27:35] at the county council
[00:27:36] as well
[00:27:37] earlier this week
[00:27:39] and
[00:27:40] and we're
[00:27:41] sort of unable to talk to anybody
[00:27:42] because the county council
[00:27:43] went into a
[00:27:44] virtual session
[00:27:45] for its meeting
[00:27:46] you know this
[00:27:47] this is not
[00:27:48] going to go away
[00:27:49] and it's something that
[00:27:50] you know is going to keep
[00:27:51] coming up in
[00:27:52] in local government as well
[00:27:54] so it's
[00:27:54] it's kind of everybody's
[00:27:55] responsibility
[00:27:56] yeah and
[00:27:57] just whether it's
[00:27:58] the 300 migrants
[00:27:59] that were sort of at the
[00:28:00] Garfield tennis courts
[00:28:01] or 3000 total here
[00:28:02] I mean New York City
[00:28:04] there have been more than
[00:28:05] 100,000 migrants
[00:28:06] that went to New York City
[00:28:07] tens of thousands
[00:28:08] Chicago I think Denver
[00:28:09] someone was telling me
[00:28:10] 40,000 migrants already
[00:28:12] in Denver right
[00:28:13] and
[00:28:14] that surge of migrants
[00:28:16] into those cities
[00:28:17] is
[00:28:18] breaking the politics
[00:28:19] of those communities
[00:28:20] right because
[00:28:21] it's
[00:28:22] cost an enormous amount
[00:28:23] of money to
[00:28:24] house clothe
[00:28:25] feed people who are
[00:28:26] essentially destitute
[00:28:27] and showing up
[00:28:28] in large numbers
[00:28:29] and
[00:28:30] as Erica saying
[00:28:31] where's that money
[00:28:32] gonna come from
[00:28:33] right now
[00:28:33] nobody really knows
[00:28:35] I mean it's not like
[00:28:36] their big piles
[00:28:36] of money lying around
[00:28:37] I mean yeah maybe there's
[00:28:38] 30 million dollars
[00:28:39] coming from the state
[00:28:40] in July
[00:28:40] but how long is that gonna last
[00:28:42] right
[00:28:42] especially if the numbers
[00:28:43] start to creep up
[00:28:45] towards you know
[00:28:46] kind of Denver levels
[00:28:47] right
[00:28:48] you know so
[00:28:49] what you've seen is
[00:28:50] in particularly
[00:28:51] in working class
[00:28:53] in blue collar
[00:28:53] and sort of poor neighborhoods
[00:28:55] in some of those other cities
[00:28:57] some backlash
[00:28:58] developing
[00:28:59] around this stuff
[00:29:00] and I think you're
[00:29:00] already seeing
[00:29:01] some of that here
[00:29:02] just in the last
[00:29:02] couple of days
[00:29:03] around the Garfield thing
[00:29:04] you started to see
[00:29:05] a whole lot of people
[00:29:07] saying
[00:29:08] you know
[00:29:09] this isn't our problem
[00:29:10] why the hell are we
[00:29:11] you know
[00:29:11] why is it our problem
[00:29:12] why are we paying for it
[00:29:13] and how come
[00:29:14] you know
[00:29:15] we live in this
[00:29:15] poor underprivileged community
[00:29:17] and
[00:29:17] you know
[00:29:17] how come we don't get
[00:29:18] treated with the red card
[00:29:19] you know
[00:29:19] there's that kind of
[00:29:20] dynamics that come into play
[00:29:23] around the politics
[00:29:23] and stuff
[00:29:24] which is pretty toxic
[00:29:25] and I don't know
[00:29:26] what the answer here is
[00:29:27] I mean it just seems
[00:29:27] like a big freaking mess
[00:29:29] right
[00:29:30] it's been another
[00:29:31] edition of Seattle Nice
[00:29:32] with Erica C Barnett
[00:29:33] Zandib Kashik
[00:29:34] I'm David Hyde
[00:29:35] our editor is
[00:29:36] Quinn Waller
[00:29:37] and you the listener
[00:29:38] are often
[00:29:39] our supporters
[00:29:40] on Patreon
[00:29:41] just go to patreon.com
[00:29:43] Seattle Nice
[00:29:44] and thanks to everybody
[00:29:45] for listening