Podcasts about Pioneer Square

In honor of May’s Hunger Awareness Month, we’re joined by Michelle Douglas, CEO of Emergency Food Network // Randy Brooks, founder and winemaker at Bacovino, tells us about their new waterfront tasting room in Pioneer Square // Spring Pasta Dishes // Liz Philpot, founder of Eat Seattle Tours, shares what’s new on their latest food tours and programs // Chef Rasyidah Rosli is going to transport us to the bustling streets of Thailand’s famous Chatuchak Night Market // Pastry Chef Brittany Bardeleben from Hot Cakes is here to talk springtime desserts // And of course, we’ll wrap up today’s show with Food for Thought: Tasty Trivia!

We're talking all things architecture, design, and tall buildings! Julia is responsible for shaping Seattle's skyline with her signature skyscrapers like Skyglass in SLU. We find out how she is able to push the boundaries of what's possible, her thoughts on sustainability, and her most impactful piece of architecture that changed the course of her life.Top Stories1. Belltown high-rise sells for over $100MPSBJ article2. Pioneer Square hotel to be carbon positivePSBJ article3. Developer to start Ballard mid-rise apartment projectPSBJ article4. Bill to end landmark abuse likely to passPSBJ articleAbout guest Julia Nagele - Senior Principal and Director of Design and Architecture at HEWITT:Julia brings more than 20 yrs experience shaping complex urban environments. She has won many awards for her skyscrapers in Seattle. She also serves as an Affiliate Assistant Professor at the UW's College of Built Environments. Prior to this, she ran her own interior design company.About host Rachel Horgan:Rachel is an independent event producer, emcee and entrepreneur. She worked for the Business Journal for 5 years as their Director of Events interviewing business leaders on stage before launching the weekly podcast. She earned her communication degree from the University of San Diego. Contact:Email: info@theweeklyseattle.comInstagram: @theweeklyseattleWebsite: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theweeklyseattle.com⁠⁠

Voters in Seattle are overwhelmingly supporting a tax on big businesses to fund a social housing developer. Now, that developer has to build housing or snap up an existing building. KUOW reporter Joshua McNichols tells us what comes next and how soon we can expect it. Watch Mayor Bruce Harrell's 2025 State of the City Address here. Watch Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal's community forum here. Learn more about Jazz Night in Pioneer Square here. We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. Tap here to make a gift and keep Seattle Now in your feed. Got questions about local news or story ideas to share? We want to hear from you! Email us at seattlenow@kuow.org, leave us a voicemail at (206) 616-6746 or leave us feedback online.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What’s Trending: The Washington State Supreme Court is a hearing a case about bans on high capacity magazines. The FBI has decided to disband its DEI office. A man was stabbed in the neck near Pioneer Square. // LongForm: GUEST: Fox News at Night Host Trace Gallagher breaks down the latest in LA fires and the political fall out. // Quick Hit: Trump’s pick for Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent got in an argument during his confirmation hearing with Bernie Sanders over Joe Biden’s claims about oligarchy in America.  

Soundside will be off the air on Tuesday and Wednesday this week. We will be back with some fresh new stories Jan. 2. For today, we’ve revisiting a mix of some of Soundside producer Alec Cowan's favorite segments from this past year, including his patrol with a pair Seattle's "real-life superheroes" and the musicians keeping jazz music alive in Seattle. We also have one new story for you, courtesy of producer Jason Megatron Burrows. 2024 was the 50th Anniversary of Dungeons & Dragons. Burrows explored how the game is staying up to date after 5 decades of gameplay, and its attempt to stay relevant in 2025. Hear and read the original stories below. Stories Featured: KUOW - A night on patrol with Seattle's 'real-life superheroes' KUOW - Jazz has a storied past in Seattle. But what about its future? KUOW - Soundside looks back at the 50th Anniversary of D&D Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Pacific Northwest's rise to cultural prominence in the 1990s—through movements like grunge and Riot Grrrl—was rooted in earlier artistic and social currents that fused homegrown creativity with global influences. Larry Reid, a pivotal figure in the region's cultural renaissance, joins us to share untold stories of how the Pacific Northwest transformed from relative isolation into a vibrant hub of innovation, with an impact felt worldwide. In this first episode of a two-part series, Larry takes us back to the transformative 1970s and '80s—a time when underground art, LGBTQ+ expression, punk rock and feminist voices converged in powerful ways. He reveals overlooked connections between these cultural forces and post-war fine art movements like pop art and post-modernism, showing how they laid the groundwork for the explosive creativity of the 1990s. According to Larry, this interplay of “high” and “low” art gave the Pacific Northwest a distinct cultural edge, setting it apart from other underground scenes across the country. From founding Rosco Louie, a groundbreaking art space in Seattle's Pioneer Square, to leading the Center on Contemporary Art (CoCA), Larry's visionary leadership united artists, writers and performers who redefined the region's identity. His vivid reflections bring this era to life, revealing how the Pacific Northwest's underground culture became the foundation of a global artistic movement. “Back then, Seattle was still relatively small and isolated. Our counterculture scene probably consisted of 200-300 people. There were very few spectators. Almost everyone involved was a participant. It was an exciting time to be in Seattle for that formative period of what later had a huge influence globally on pop culture.” ~Larry Reid

This Pioneer Square music and drinking establishment opened less than a year ago, but we're giving Baba Yaga a free pass because the building it occupies has so much Seattle dive bar history. Plus, Baba Yaga is just dripping with all the dive bar vibes we love. Join the crew as we explore dive bars past, present, and future in this historic 1890's Pioneer Square landmark. To keep it real, we're joined by the Prince of Pioneer Square himself, Lloyd Gregory. Recorded live at Baba Yaga on 10/17/2024.Learn more about the Pioneer Square Summer Fest, markets, and meetups at https://pioneersquaremarket.net/ Follow the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast on Facebook (DLandSD), Twitter (@divebarsseattle), YouTube, and Instagram (seattle_dive_bar_podcast). Share, like, follow, and subscribe!Check out the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast website (dimlightspodcast.com) for more details and additional episodes. And head over to our Patreon page (dim_lights_stiff_drinks) to help fund the shenanigans. Support Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks with PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/dim-lights-stiff-drinks. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

3pm: Tacoma police chief placed on leave, and city won’t say why // Councilmember Tanya Woo calls for action to protect community from late-night violence // Jake was jumped by a gang outside of a Pioneer Square nightclub // Man charged in murder of 80-year-old Seattle dog walker deemed incompetent to stand trial // Is the Birthday Paradox real?

6pm: Tacoma police chief placed on leave, and city won’t say why // Councilmember Tanya Woo calls for action to protect community from late-night violence // Jake was jumped by a gang outside of a Pioneer Square nightclub // Man charged in murder of 80-year-old Seattle dog walker deemed incompetent to stand trial // Is the Birthday Paradox real?

We know a few things about the woman known as Lou Graham, for sure:  She was a brothel madam in Seattle at the turn of the century. And she's immortalized in one of the city's popular ghost tours.  Maybe you've even felt her spiritual presence while passing through tunnels underneath Pioneer Square. Beyond that, facts are sparse. But plenty of legends about Graham's life and impact on Seattle are served up to tourists and YouTube viewers who care to search her name.   From Geographics: “Technically sex work was illegal, so Graham made sure to have the ladies registered as “seamstresses” on the books. From Women Being Podcast: “Graham was an advocate for women's rights and social justice, and supported the women's rights movement, including the Seattle chapter of the NAACP. She died in 1903 a feminist icon.” It turns out, most of that is TOTAL BUNK.But the truth behind those fables – and a journalist's search to find it – may be even more illuminating.   GUEST: Hanna Brooks Olson, author of “Notoriously Bad Character: The True Story of Lou Graham and the Immigrants and Sex Workers Who Built Seattle” RELATED LINKS: https://hannabrooksolsen.com/  The Many False Histories of Lou Graham | Medium See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Seattle Met described Marcus Lalario as Seattle's Kevin Bacon – you can connect him to a ton of ventures and a lot of people. Whether it's the Seattle music scene, nightlife, fashion or restaurants, Marcus Lalario has had a major impact in how we experience this city. Jon and Marcus talk about his fairly unusual start in the nighttime economy; his HOMETEAM and Darkalino's enterprise; the Pioneer Square neighborhood; how fatherhood has changed him and more. Join us for Seattle City Makers with Jon Scholes and guest Marcus Lalario.

AGREE TO DISAGREE: "COPS" coming back to Spokane // Famous cocktail bar coming to Pioneer Square // GUEST: James Lynch on the trial of Auburn officer Jeff Nelson // WE HEAR YOU! and WORDS TO LIVE BY

What do we learn when an anthropologist and a historian talk about food? Across endless eras, landscapes, and civilizations, humanity's relationship with food has played the part of one of the landmark features of culture and community. We feel this on both the micro and macro scale — from learning a recipe passed down through generations of one's own family to the excitement of exploring an unfamiliar local market in a city far from home. Culinary curiosity invites us all to the table, and through their new book, Ways of Eating, authors and storytellers Benjamin Wurgaft and Merry White are here to serve. Wurgaft and White aim to introduce readers to the interwoven worlds of global food history and food anthropology, exploring how we're not just what we eat, but where, why, and how we came to eat it in the first place. Throughout their collaborative work, Wurgaft and White embark on a world tour of anthropological accounts and vivid storytelling, paying visits to Panamanian coffee growers, Japanese knife forgers, and the medieval age of women brewing beer. Ways of Eating explores the influence of migration and politics in shaping both group identity and global culinary practices, from the Venetian spice trade to the Columbian Exchange to the parallels between ancient Roman garum and contemporary Vietnamese nớc chấm. There are as many dynamics at play across the world of food anthropology as spices in a well-stocked pantry, and Ways of Eating seeks to understand and follow them from the plate back to the kitchen, the farm, and the field. Co-authors Benjamin A. Wurgaft and Merry I. White are a son and mother duo with backgrounds in history, philosophy, anthropology, and the social study of food. Merry White is a Professor of Anthropology at Boston University, with a specialization in Japanese social and food culture. Their previous publications include White's Coffee Life in Japan and Wurgaft's Meat Planet: Artificial Flesh and the Future of Food. This is their first book written together. Born in New England, Peter Miller is a graduate of Williams College and Harvard Graduate School of Education. He moved to Seattle in November 1970, a time when one could rent a home from a nearby phone booth with the instructions, “the key is under the mat, I will come meet you this week.” In 1975, Miller opened a bookshop in Wallingford, with its first lecture series featuring Tom Robbins and Alan Furst. In 1980, he opened an architecture bookshop in Pioneer Square, relocating it to the market in 1983. Thirty years later, he moved again to Belltown, in association with George Suyama Architects. The shop is now situated in Pioneer Square between First Avenue and the water. Additionally, Miller served as a member of the Seattle Design Commission from 1998 to 2001. Peter has authored three books: Lunch at the Shop, Five Ways to Cook Asparagus, and How to Wash the Dishes, with a fourth book set to be released in May, titled Shopkeeping.   Buy the Book Ways of Eating: Exploring Food through History and Culture Third Place Books

Pacific Northwest comedy fans will know this Legend, and others will be happy for the introduction. Almost Live! is a relic from an age when a local tv station could afford to produce its own comedy show, often besting the network offerings in terms of laughs per minute. Originating on Seattle's KING TV in the 1980s, Almost Live! originated as a talk show with comedy bits, but soon morphed into a half hour sketch show aired just before Saturday Night Live. The cast and the writing were superb, and the local flavor given to the sketches led to "water cooler" recaps throughout the next week. Eventually the show fell victim to budget cuts imposed by new out-of-state station owners, but it's a measure of Almost Live's impact that several partial reboots have been tried (with some success), there's a big YouTube library of shows and sketches, and a fun podcast tracks down the cast today. As always find extra clips in the comments, thanks for sharing our shows, and if you are driving in Ballard, keep your speed to 7 MPH. Want more Almost Live! Part of Almost Live's charm is they could get all manner of local celebrities to get in on the fun. The Lame List featured top Seattle metal musicians proclaiming their opinion on current events. https://youtu.be/hGpBnB-jYa8?si=O9jxm7xo06IR4dPF John Keister presided over Almost Live and his monologues and news parodies dipped deep in the well of Northwest Lore -- as in the case when WSU became a dry campus. https://youtu.be/NkaYaxRF2Dc?si=gLnbvxpS6DHvBhtF Almost Live managed a tone of affectionate irreverence about all things Seattle -- especially the neighborhoods. Case in point -- The Ballard Driving Academy. https://youtu.be/nyz6mkvlEgA?si=8-_BQgHu8hDVU8v8 Like any good sketch troupe, Almost Live! cast members had their niches, and Pat Cashman excelled as a master of characters -- especially those commercial pitchman. Match that talent with the fact that an exotic rug store in Seattle's Pioneer Square was always "going out of business" and you get comedy gold. https://youtu.be/erCFOteg_t4?si=W2_HrYZQIEmrLxa9

Avery Barnes is the owner of Taswira, which is a African focused boutique turned art gallery. She was a Seattle Restored participant and was able to become a long term tenant in her space located in Pioneer Square. Avery Insta: @iknowavery @taswira.africa NAST Insta: @nastpodcast Recorded at NAST Studios www.naststudios.com

The Black Panther Party's Seattle chapter is drumming up new plans, more than 40 years after it disbanded.A group devoted to preserving Black Panther history plans to open a museum in Pioneer Square early next year, bringing attention to the ways the Panthers influenced Seattle then, and still do now.Seattle Times Race and Equity Reporter Alexandra Yoon-Hendricks is here to tell us about it, with some help from Elmer Dixon, a founding member of Seattle's Black Panther chapter.Read Alexandra's full piece: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/traces-of-seattles-black-panthers-are-all-around-if-you-know-where-to-look/We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. You have the power! Make the show happen by making a gift to KUOW: https://www.kuow.org/donate/seattlenowAnd we want to hear from you! Follow us on Instagram at SeattleNowPod, or leave us feedback online: https://www.kuow.org/feedback

Totem Star is a recording studio for Seattle area youth ages 14 to 25. The organization recently moved to a new 2,000 square foot space on the second floor of Seattle's King Street Station in Pioneer Square. That's where Totem Star will live rent free for the next 60 years, thanks to a lease from the city. KEXP's Emily Fox talks with Totem Star co-founder Daniel Pak about the impact of Totem star since it launched as a mobile recording studio that could fit in a suitcase 14 years ago.   (Pak shares how Totem Star was inspired after a mix tape project he did with youth who had just been released from juvenile detention. After the project wrapped up, a third of the youth had been readmitted to detention. The youth had said having access to youth recording studios might have kept them out of trouble.)Support the show: https://www.kexp.org/sound/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's Trending: the comedy club and bar Capitol Hill cancelled the gigs of four "politically incorrect" stand-up comedians after community backlash. GUEST: State senator Mark Mullet (D-Issaquah) explains how rent control was killed - and an update on unemployment for strikers.  // Seattle had an especially violent weekend, including a shooting in Pioneer Square overnight, a shooting on the light rail train at the University Street station, a stabbing in Cal Anderson park, a stabbing at the McDonald's on 3rd and Pine and a stolen SUV tried to hit several homeless people check location). // Former Seahawks player Richard Sherman is expected in court after being arrested for DUI over the weekend, and a nursing student in Georgia was murdered by an illegal immigrant with multiple previous arrests.   

Unacceptable: A homeless man who dug up a Seattle park has now built a cabin. KNOW IT ALL: 1) Richard Engel, in Kyiv, over-simplified World War II history. 2) Alexei Navalny's body was turned over to his mother. // Bryan says Gavin Newsom wants to be President but is busy playing games when it comes to his support of Biden. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham was booed at a Trump event. // Ryanair cuts flights due to lack of planes delivered by Boeing. Murder in Pioneer Square gave way to a memorable 'man on the street' interview. 

Join us for a conversation with landscape and urban designer Andrew tenBrink of NYC-based Field Operations as he reveals Seattle's new downtown Waterfront Park project, which he has managed since 2010. From the cobblestones of Pioneer Square to Belltown's crowded skyline, Andrew's block-by-block tour through the 20-acre park demonstrates how this new landscape reflects community priorities. Along the way, he spotlights contributions of local partners. These include architects and artists, tribes and Urban Natives, the City of Seattle and the Office of the Waterfront and Capitol Projects, as well as cultural consultants and garden designers. Indigenous food sovereignty advocate Valerie Segrest (Muckleshoot) drops by to share thoughts on placemaking and history. Valerie explains how the interpretive horticultural exhibit she designed for the new Overlook Walk invites visitors to gaze across the Salish Sea while learning about Native cultural ecosystems. These walkways, stairs and plazas connect the Seattle Aquarium's new Ocean Pavilion at the shoreline with Pike Place Market. Andrew's inspiring stories reveal how a brilliant framework can express the civic dreams of multitudes. They demonstrate how city dwellers are most grounded when connected with nature, with themselves and with one another. Listen and learn how these new public spaces reflect the varied histories and cultures that define a great city and that will shape its future. "Outdoor space has always been at its best when people use it as a part of their daily lives: You take a stroll in the park, you unwind, you de-stress, you take your kids to the playground. These are the indelible things that exist across the world across time.” ~Andrew tenBrink

In a controversial incident in Seattle's Pioneer Square, a fire, allegedly started by a homeless individual trying to stay warm, ravaged a renowned art gallery, destroying precious artworks including a Picasso and a Rembrandt. The fire, which erupted in the back alley of the Davidson Gallery, quickly engulfed the building, jeopardizing over 18,000 artworks collected over 50 years. Gallery manager Rebecca McDonald described the loss as painful, highlighting the wide historical range of the damaged art. The incident has sparked debate over the city's policies towards homelessness, with criticisms directed at the permissiveness towards makeshift shelters and fires in public spaces. This event underscores a broader societal issue where the negligence towards homeless populations can lead to unintended yet disastrous consequences, challenging cities like Seattle to rethink their approach to homelessness and public safety. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/darien-dunstan3/message

5pm - GUEST: KATE STONE - Today’s MLK marches co-opted by Pro-Palestine protesters // Experts warning against viral tiktok skin treatment that can be fatal… and, worse yet, it can turn you blue // Speaking of blue people… Everyone’s heard of the blue Fugates of Kentucky, right? // A homeless person trying to stay warm in Pioneer Square started a fire that resulted in an art gallery losing a Picasso AND a Rembrandt // Tech breakthroughs featured at CES 2024… Including a tongue-controlled mouse, and the first REAL AI robotic companion // John used to be a gameshow host at CES! // LETTERS

Mayor Frank Ivancie, Pioneer Courthouse Square's most intransigent opponent, gleefully declared the project “dead” in a 1982 speech. In doing so, he accidentally galvanized the citizen group that would prove him wrong. (Portland, Multnomah County; 1960s, 1970s) (For text and pictures, see https://offbeatoregon.com/1405c.pioneer-courthouse-square.html)

The RailSpur project in Pioneer Square is a remarkable transformation of nearly an entire block. Urban Villages President Jon Buerge joins the podcast to explain how RailSpur is elevating the concept of mixed-use properties; how his approach to development is guided by the firm's name; his views on the future of the office; the new tenants at RailSpur and more. Join us for Seattle City Makers with Jon Scholes and guest Jon Buerge.

Dani Cone got into the coffee business more than 30 years ago, “barista-ing” her way through high school and college. Three decades and three successful businesses later, Dani's Cone & Steiner general store is doing brisk business in multiple locations, including Pioneer Square. On each leg of her journey, Dani has been guided by her grandma Molly's advice: be good and do well. In this episode of Seattle City Makers, Jon and Dani dig into the challenges of steering her business through the pandemic, her current endeavors, advice for entrepreneurs and the impact of Taylor Swift's record-breaking crowds.

Learn about the latest in local public affairs in about the time it takes for a coffee break! Brian Callanan of Seattle Channel and David Kroman of the Seattle Times discuss a new police accountability report, a plan for more rooftop amenities in Pioneer Square, homeless sweeps during All-Star week, concerns for small businesses, and a major challenge for Metro Transit to handle desperately needed bus repairs. If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon! 

In this episode we learn the inspiring origin story of the Indigenous foods-focused ʔálʔal Café in Pioneer Square, from former manager Anthony Johnson who played a major role in bringing its vision and values to life.And check out Native American Food Sovereignty AllianceThanks to our sponsor of this episode:Eat Local Firsthttps://eatlocalfirst.orgFollow us on Facebook and Instagram @fieldtoforkpodcast

Pioneer Square-based defense attorney Shira J. Stefanik assists clients who may be facing criminal charges. Visit https://stefanikdefense.com for more details. Law Office of Shira J Stefanika 119 1st Ave S Suite 500, , Seattle, WA 98104, United States Website https://stefanikdefense.com/ Email prc.pressagency@gmail.com

It's been 50 years since Elliott Bay Book Company opened its doors and there are a lot of differences between June 1973 and June 2023: Amazon and Ebooks arrived, while Borders came and went, Elliot Bay moved from its original Pioneer Square to 10th Ave on Capitol Hill, and new owners took the helm. Through all the changes, the business remains a literary hub for the city.We can only make Soundside because listeners support us. Make the show happen by making a gift to KUOW:https://www.kuow.org/donate/soundside

Special episode! We record right in the heart of Pioneer Square's inaugural Summer Market and Music Festival. Across the street from the festival main stage in Occidental Park is The Meyer bar, owned and operated by our good friend Avout. Not only do we chat with Avout about the history of The Meyer, Lloyd Gregory the mastermind behind the Summer Market stops by to tell us about putting together downtown Seattle's funkiest music festival. Recorded live at The Meyer on 06/10/2023.Follow the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast on Facebook (DLandSD), Twitter (@divebarsseattle), YouTube, and Instagram (seattle_dive_bar_podcast). Share, like, follow, and subscribe!Check out the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast website (dimlightspodcast.com) for more details and additional episodes. Support Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks with PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/dim-lights-stiff-drinks. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What's Trending: A one-year-old in Mill Creek died due to fentanyl exposure, Pioneer Square is seeing businesses return to office and Gov. Inslee has repealed the state vaccine mandate. // Chaos is expected at the border after Title 42 expires. // West Virginia coach Bob Huggins used a slur on a radio show.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Alaskan Way Seawall, which stretches from just north of Broad Street south to Washington Street beneath Pioneer Square, is responsible for creating the flat ledge of land on Seattle's center waterfront. The shallower portion south of Madison Street was built in the 1910s and 1920s, while the more problematic and challenging northern halkf wouldn't be finished until 1936.. In order to create stable, level ground on which to construct streets, install railroad tracks, and manage passengers and freight travelling between land and sea, a quarter million cubic yards of fill were poured behind the wall. The central waterfront was redefined by the barrier, which also made room for a north-south transit corridor that would soon supplant the central waterfront's traditional nautical operations.Listen now to learn more about this fascinating and challenging project to tame the Seattle waterfront!A special thank you goes out to Al Hirsch for providing the music for the podcast, check him out on YouTube.Find merchandise for the podcast now available at:     https://washington-history-by-jon-c.creator-spring.comIf you enjoy the podcast and would like to contribute, please visit: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/EvergreenpodIf you have any questions, episode ideas you'd like to see explored, or just have a general comment, please reach out at Historyoftheevergreenstatepod@gmail.comTo keep up on news for the podcast and other related announcements, please like and follow:https://www.facebook.com/HistoryoftheevergreenstatepodcastFind the podcast over on Instagram as well: @HISTORY_EVERGREENSTATEPODCASTYou can also find the podcast over on YouTube:http://www.youtube.com/@historyoftheevergreenstatepodThank you for listening to another episode of the History of the Evergreen State Podcast!

3pm - Rantz: Seattle councilwoman a ‘hard pass' on punishing drug crime // Oregon tells a cautionary tale about drugs, but we're not listening // Open containers in Downtown? Mayor proposes 'Sip 'n Stroll' idea for monthly Pioneer Square event // McDonald's logo has sexy hidden meaning — and fans are shocked // Writers vote to strike in move that could bring Hollywood to a halt See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What about your intuition?Have you ever come across a decision that is logically right but deep inside you know it feels so wrong? Have you ever felt like doing something just because you feel like doing it and not because you are compelled to do so? Deirdre Wilcox says neural pathways shape our experiences and can either expand or limit them. Deirdre is interested in helping people see things from a different perspective, make friends with their shadows and inner critic, and name their superpowers. By doing so, they can optimize their experiences and live in a more soul-aligned way. Deirdre believes that we all have wisdom and clarity within us that we can tap into through our intuition. We use our intuition in mundane ways, such as choosing what to wear or what feels right to us. Deirdre encourages people to start honing this sense and use it with more confidence and greater application. By doing so, we can cut through a lot of stuff and be more accepting and compassionate towards ourselves, living with fewer apologies. In this episode you'll hear: - How Intuition or Gut-feel has shaped and changed her life. - Learn to understand the Inner feeling and how to use it properly. - The benefits of following your Intuition. - The difference between the Inner Critic and the Gut-feel. - Learn how to hone this skill and use it in everyday life situations. Deirdre Wilcox is a healer, a teacher, a therapist, and an artist. She helps women in her Soul School. She teaches Yoga and Wellness. She started as a Pre-Med student but her intuition and drive to Healing Arts led her to switch to Psychology and Sociology and got her degree in it. She also became a licensed massage therapist and registered yoga teacher. She loves painting and reading books in her free time. Her paintings are exhibited in Pioneer Square, Seattle. Where to reach her: www.deirdrewilcox.com

In another blow to downtown Portland real estate, the owner of Jackson Tower, a landmark building that overlooks Pioneer Square, has defaulted on a loan from JPMorgan Chase, court filings show.Jackson Tower Partners LLC, the owner of the 12-story beaux arts office building in the 800 block of Southwest Broadway, borrowed $11.5 million from JPMorgan Chase in 2018, and missed its first loan payment on Nov. 1, 2022, according to a complaint filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court on April 5.JPMorgan Chase asked the court to appoint a receiver—a neutral third party who manages an asset during a legal dispute and is often charged with selling an asset to repay a loan. The court granted JPMorgan Chase's request for a receiver on April 11, court records show.Asked why her client defaulted on the Jackson Tower loan, California-based attorney Sherry DuPont blamed “the deterioration of downtown Portland.”Support the showSign Up For Exclusive Episodes At: https://reasonabletv.com/LIKE & SUBSCRIBE for new videos every day. https://www.youtube.com/c/NewsForReasonablePeople

On today's Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Seattle political reporter and the editor of PubliCola, Erica Barnett! Crystal and Erica discuss the City of Seattle's first-in-the-nation legislation to provide paid sick and safe leave for gig workers, Mayor Bruce Harrell's $970 million housing levy proposal, a story about the lack of progress building tiny homes leads to a discussion about the difference in responsibilities between the city council and the mayor - who bears the responsibility to implement programs and policy that has been funded. Then they discuss the recently discovered $280,000 contract given to a Harrell associate to seemingly spin the narrative that his preferred Sound Transit station proposal is community led, and a political tactic used by monied interests that exploits language and concerns voiced by marginalized communities to influence policy. Erica and Crystal also cover the Department of Justice moving to end the consent decree with the Seattle Police Department and the Seattle City Council candidate facing accusations of non-payment from former staff and volunteers. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Erica Barnett, at @ericacbarnett.   Resources Megan Burbank and the State of Reproductive Healthcare in Washington from Hacks & Wonks    Seattle passes first-in-the-nation paid sick leave for gig workers by Josh Cohen from Crosscut    Mayor Harrell Unveils $970 Million Housing Levy Proposal by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist    Andrew Lewis announced a fundraising plan to double Seattle's tiny houses. So, where are they? by Anna Patrick from The Seattle Times    City Paid Consultant Tim Ceis $280,000 to "Encourage Agreement" and Build "Community Consensus" for Harrell's Light Rail Route by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola    Sound Transit Board Adopts Major Last-Minute Changes to 2016 Light Rail Plan, Skipping Chinatown and First Hill by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   Sound Transit Board Backs Last-Minute Proposal to Skip Chinatown and Midtown Stations by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist    City Asks Judge to End Consent Decree; Outstanding Issues Include Protest Response and Accountability by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   Matthew Mitnick's Campaign Meltdown by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to get the podcast - the full versions of our podcast - on our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, I welcomed reporter Megan Burbank to talk about the status of reproductive health care in our state after last year's Dobbs decision removed guarantees for abortion access on the national level. Today we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Seattle political reporter, editor of PubliCola, co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, and author of Quitter: A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery, Erica Barnett. Hello. [00:01:12] Erica Barnett: Hello - it's great to be here. [00:01:13] Crystal Fincher: Great to have you back. We have some good news this week, interesting news this week - we will start off for a big deal for gig workers - paid sick and safe leave is now available. What's going on here? [00:01:30] Erica Barnett: As you said, the gig workers for the bigger companies - DoorDash, Uber, et cetera - are going to have access to the same paid sick and safe leave benefits that full-time employees have, provided by their employers. So there's a new law that was signed into - a new local law - that was signed this week. And yeah, so this is part of the process of slowly acknowledging that gig workers are, in fact, workers and employees of the companies that employ them, and not just people doing this for a hobby or as a extra source of work. These are jobs, and they are jobs that require now the same benefits that every other kind of job requires. [00:02:14] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and this is taking place during a years-long debate, conversation, fight for gig workers rights from a lot of people who have recognized that - hey, the work that these people are doing looks a lot like the work of employees and not of independent contractors. They're being told where to go when, how to do things - fitting in a pretty specific box of behavior with a lot less latitude than a lot of people think of when they think of independent contractors or independent business owners. And the bottom line is because of this, whether or not it even meets the legal test of an employee - functionally, this is how it works. And so the impacts on people's families and in our society are the same as employees. So if someone gets sick, it can be incredibly economically disruptive to that family and to our community to not have any leave available. So this definitely seems like a positive thing for workers, and for the community, and just helping to make sure there's a solid safety net in place. This is a big bell - all of these safety net items that keep coming and unfortunately going in a lot of situations - but this was a gratifying thing to see that I think is going to help a number of people. [00:03:37] Erica Barnett: Yeah, and I think it's also part of the - just the reckoning from the pandemic that is, I think, slowly being whittled away at as people are being required to come back to offices, unnecessarily in a lot of cases. I think during the pandemic, we really started to wrestle with this idea of hustle culture - this idea that nobody needs any time off, and your work is your life, and it should be the only thing you care about. That is, I hope, over - at least for the time being. And we're trying in this state, at least, to figure out ways to put those kind of somewhat new values into practice by doing at least the minimum, which I think this particular law - it's great, but allowing people to have time off when they're sick should be a floor and not a ceiling. [00:04:30] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and your point about many of the pandemic-era protections and safety net enhancements being whittled away is absolutely true. We're about to head into a time next week where mask mandates, even for transit, health care situations - the few remaining situations where they were necessary - are no longer being mandated. Although we are getting some news about some local health care systems that are still looking as if they're going to be continuing those, so we will stay tuned. Certainly housing is top of mind for a lot of people now. City of Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell has proposed an enhancement to the Housing Levy. What is he proposing and what will this do? [00:05:18] Erica Barnett: Yeah, the new Housing Levy proposal would triple the size - and that's in real terms - the actual tax that people will be paying on their property. The previous Housing Levy - which passed in 2016 and is expiring now - that levy was $290 million. This would raise $970 million, which is obviously a significant bump. Interestingly, because the cost of everything has risen so much quicker than in the past and inflation has been so bad - and the cost of construction and the availability of labor and all the reasons that housing has become more expensive - well, building housing is also a lot more expensive. So as a result, one sort of dampening feature of this levy - or disappointing - is that it's not going to build that much more housing than the previous levy, despite it being tripled now. Now, that's not an argument not to do it. If we did levy the size of the previous levy, we would be building - we would be dramatically going back on reducing the amount of housing we were building. So it may be necessary to increase it this much, but it's not going to triple the size of housing or the amount of housing that's being built. [00:06:28] Crystal Fincher: So given that the money is tripling but the amount of housing isn't, what accounts for the difference - is it that housing costs have also experienced inflation, construction costs have experienced inflation? What accounts for so much of that extra money not providing housing? [00:06:48] Erica Barnett: Yeah, the main reason is that construction costs have simply increased, as has the cost of land. And that's everything from material, steel, concrete, to labor, to just - everything involved with building an apartment building now is more expensive. I think that raises a question that the Housing Levy does not attempt to answer - and we could go down a rabbit hole on who is supporting the Housing Levy and why - but the Housing Levy is not primarily an acquisition levy, and maybe it should shift more in that direction. It's much, much cheaper to - as the example of the Low Income Housing Institute during the pandemic has really shown - it's much cheaper to buy housing that already exists and convert it into low-income housing or start renting it to low-income people than it is to build new housing from the ground. And so I think this is a very - we're using the same old methods that we have always used and building housing instead of acquiring housing. And there are good reasons to want to build more affordable housing and add more density and all this stuff, but it also is quite expensive. And I think that there should be perhaps more creativity in play than just saying - Well, it's three times as expensive, so we're going to triple it. It doesn't necessarily solve the problem if, in seven years, we're coming back with a $3 billion levy. [00:08:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And I think that is part of the tension in all of our conversations about housing that we're having policy-wise at different levels - it's what will actually make enough of a dent in the problem in the medium-term to long-term? If we keep this incrementalist approach, it feels like we are just setting ourselves up for increased expenses, increased costs. And there needs to be a massive investment that will result in more affordable housing units, whether that's a combination of affordable on the market - which is not affordable for many people now - subsidized housing, public housing, whatever that is. We need more of it now, and I think a lot of people are concerned that what we're doing is going to do exactly what you say - kick the can down the road and set ourselves up for - are we going to need a tripling of the next levy? And I think sometimes we're a little bit hesitant on the left to have some conversations about - are we getting the value for our dollar that we need to here? Is this actually going to meaningfully address the problem? Again, absolutely not saying that we shouldn't pass this Housing Levy. We definitely need more housing. It needs to be a multifaceted, all-hands-on-deck approach. And this may be the best that can be done right now, but I think we do need to ask - is this the best that we can do, or how do we need to supplement this, and what's going on? In one of those things for - how do we supplement this, what other strategies can we use to help make housing more affordable for more people - Andrew Lewis, certainly in trying to address the homelessness problem has really launched into tiny homes as an option that can meaningfully address moving people off of the street, out of encampments into a place that could help them stabilize and launch into more permanent affordable housing. But we saw a story this week asking where those tiny homes are - what has happened and where are we at right now? [00:10:29] Erica Barnett: Andrew Lewis promised, I believe - and I'm not looking at the story right now, I'm just going from memory - I think it was 800 tiny homes over a certain period. And promise is - that's the word that The Seattle Times used. I think this was like a goal, and it's a goal that really depends on the - on both funding through the City budget, which has to be approved by both the City Council and the mayor, and it also depends on the mayor's willingness to actually invest those funds and actually direct funding toward that purpose. And I think this gets lost a lot of times when people are criticizing the City Council for inaction and blaming the City Council for things - it's up to the mayor. And under Mayor Jenny Durkan, there were a whole lot of things that didn't happen. She just decided that they weren't her priorities, and so the council would allocate money and the mayor would not spend it - and I think we're seeing that to a certain extent here. I also think the Regional Homelessness Authority has been quite hostile to the notion of spending money on tiny homes. Their five-year plan that came out recently, or at least the draft, had no money at all for tiny homes. Now, they've changed that a little bit in the plan that they're probably going to finally adopt next month - but there is a lot of pushback against tiny homes as a form of shelter. And it's the type of shelter that people who are being swept from encampments most often say that they want, and so I think it is certainly worth a short-term investment at least. But right now we're not quite living up to what the City Council and Andrew Lewis have proposed. [00:12:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And your point about just whose responsibility is this is well taken. And I think in a number of areas - and frankly, in some of the local media coverage that we see of this - it really doesn't come through who is responsible for what. What does a city council do? What does a mayor do? A city council is responsible for allocating funds and for developing the policy for an issue. The mayor is the person who makes it happen. They implement and execute - that's their job. All of the departments in the City report to the mayor - they oversee and direct what happens in that. So really, once the money is made available and they hand it over to the mayor's office - whether or not something happens is really up to the executive - right now, Mayor Bruce Harrell. So I am curious about where this stands, but similar to several other conversations that we're having - whether it's issues related to homelessness or issues related to public safety, like Bruce Harrell's promise to stand up alternative 911 responses so that people can have the most appropriate responder to whatever emergency they're having - which usually is not a armed police officer in a situation that isn't related to illegality, but maybe someone's having a behavioral health crisis or needs some other resources. We need to ask Bruce Harrell where that is - that is the mayor's responsibility. Once the money is allocated, once the city council says - Here is the money, here's what it's for - it's up to you, Bruce Harrell, to make it happen. And so I'm really curious to see if that question gets asked to him and to see what his answer would be, because I think that would be very informative. [00:13:48] Erica Barnett: Just real quickly, I want to correct myself. I said 800, it was 480 that Andrew Lewis proposed. And yeah, and it died because of Jenny Durkan - full stop. She just wouldn't spend the money. And so the length of this article in The Seattle Times is surprising when it could have been one line. [00:14:07] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now, Bruce Harrell did take some action that we learned about - related to the Chinatown International District station conversation, debate that we're having about the siting. We learned that there was an effort launched as - what a year ago, I think it was - to actually drum up support for the new Sound Transit station options that were characterized as - Hey, this is a last-minute effort that came from the community because we heard the concerns, and so this is why it's popping up now. Turns out that there's more to the story. What happened? [00:14:47] Erica Barnett: Last week, I'm sure folks are aware, Sound Transit Board adopted a new route through downtown that skips over Chinatown with new stations near the Stadium station and next to the existing Pioneer Square station, and then also eliminates a Midtown station that was going to serve First Hill. What I reported this week is that the mayor, about a year ago, hired consultant Tim Ceis, who has been around forever - since even before I was here in Seattle. He was Deputy Mayor for Greg Nickels, worked for Ron Sims, and has a long career as a political consultant and lobbyist. Now I would say we don't know exactly when or how this new proposal came about - I do not believe that it was last minute, but I also don't know that it was around a year ago. But in any case, Harrell hired this consultant at a cost of $280,000 for one year's worth of work, which is an absolutely astronomical amount for a consultant and lobbyist. And his job essentially was to - as you said, Crystal - to drum up support for the mayor's preferred alternative. And when this became the mayor's preferred alternative is something that I am still reporting on and trying to find out. But this was an option that the mayor, as well as King County Executive Dow Constantine, presented as an organically-arising proposal from the community, and that there was unanimity in the CID community around skipping the CID. And as we saw last week, five thousand some people who signed a petition that was presented to Sound Transit that was against that option, the head of Uwajimaya does not support it, the head of SCIPDA, the main public development authority down there, does not support it. And so there is not unanimity. And I think Tim Ceis' job was in part to present appearance of unanimity where there was none. [00:16:41] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and I think this is a situation - similar to the big homelessness complex conversation - that a lot of people have a hard time reporting on and wrapping their heads around. And I will call it out - especially when it involves communities of color, there seems to be this - whether it's a belief or desire that - coming from the belief that communities of color are a monolith. And we are not. There are various opinions, perspectives. We are as diverse within our communities as everyone else. And so what we're seeing from the community is - absolutely there are concerns, there are different opinions on what the best path forward is - I think they're all worthy of hearing, especially when they come from the community. And we should do that. And that is genuine and authentic. But what we see too often, especially politically - and this is a tactic that we see used often locally and nationally - is that people will piggyback off some of those rumblings in community to push their own agendas and to push their preferred options with the veneer of community support. So there's the term "astroturfed," which is the opposite of grassroots - we're going to try and make this look like it's a grassroots effort, we're going to try and make it look like the community has completely rallied around this new option or alternative. And that is a marketing ploy. That's spin. And I think there are both things going on here. So it is absolutely still important to listen to those concerns from the community, to seriously consider and to implement mitigation strategies - and that has not been done in too many prior projects and situations, and that's a legitimate concern and should be addressed. But I also think that we need to take a serious look at - okay, who are the people that stand to profit and benefit here who are pushing these alternatives that don't seem to fit the characterization that they're trying to sell. There is more to the story. And so it's just one of these situations that just makes me groan because it's messy and it's not straightforward. And it requires people to proceed with a bit of nuance and hold space for different opinions and perspectives while still being wary of people looking to exploit the situation. So it's a continuing thing that we see - is notable to me, as you noted, the size of that contract is gigantic. [00:19:19] Erica Barnett: $20,000/month. [00:19:21] Crystal Fincher: For 20 hours of work - please pay me a $1,000/hour. [00:19:24] Erica Barnett: And let's be real - we don't know, and I've also requested a lot of information about this - but we don't actually know how many hours of work Ceis was doing. The 20 hours was an estimate given to me by the mayor's office and it was a squishy - Oh, it's about 20 hours of work a week. The contract doesn't really stipulate anything and it doesn't have an hourly rate. And for all we know, it was 10 hours, it was five hours, it was - maybe it was 25. I don't know, but - [00:19:52] Crystal Fincher: It's definitely less than - I know the official thing, and you have high reporting standards that you adhere to and I appreciate that. It's one of the things that I appreciate most about your reporting - is that it is solid and backed up. But I know that they weren't spending 20 hours a week on this thing. But even if they were - Look, I would be willing to spend 20 hours a week doing something if you pay me $280,000 a year. I will put that out to anyone - for whatever 20 hours of work that involves, I'm down. But we'll just continue to see how this proceeds. [00:20:26] Erica Barnett: But yeah, and I'm still reporting on it. So I suspect there will be - I'll have follow ups in the midterm future. [00:20:33] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Also this week, we saw that the City of Seattle is pursuing an end to the Seattle Police Department's consent decree with the Department of Justice. What's going on here? [00:20:48] Erica Barnett: Yeah, this week the city attorney and mayor and - the City of Seattle officials - sent a request to Judge James Robart to effectively end the consent decree with a couple of exceptions. So basically, Robart would find the City in substantial compliance with this agreement that has been going on for more than a decade - or the City has been a party to for more than a decade - with the exception of crowd control and accountability. And those are two issues that Judge Robart has brought up in the past as - and finding the City not in complete compliance. But the agreement proposed says - But don't worry, we'll wrap all that up and we'll be done with it by various months in the future, but generally this summer. And be out from under the consent decree entirely by the end of the year. People are confused about the consent decree at all. I totally understand - it's a weird situation that the City has been in for the last 12 years. Essentially, the City was found to be in noncompliance with a whole bunch of things related to constitutional policing - including racially biased policing, including use of force - excessive use of force. And the City keeps coming back in recent years to try to get the judge to lift the decree. And they've gotten very close in the past, but then something always happens and - there's a scandal, there is an egregious instance of police brutality, there are protests involving thousands of people where the police brutalized protesters in response to protests against brutality, and tear gas in the entire neighborhood - this happened in 2020. And so it's been a long, slow process - the City now seems to believe and called themselves "a department completely transformed and unrecognizable from the way it was 10 years ago." [00:22:37] Crystal Fincher: That is a curious characterization, isn't it? [00:22:39] Erica Barnett: City Attorney Ann Davison's memo supporting this was effusive about it, and even more so than the actual memo saying we deserve to be let out from under this. It was - called the department dramatically transformed, a night-and-day contrast, and even described the protest response in 2020 as a temporary lapse and a single one from otherwise completely improved and transformed crowd control policies. I'll say that some of the reasoning they gave for this is there have been protests since then and the police didn't act that way. And the protests - notably - are things like the Women's March, protests against war in Ukraine, things that did not involve criticizing the police and also did not involve racial justice. So I think that's a little bit of an apples to orange because orange is comparison there. [00:23:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. This is an interesting effort because there are a lot of people who cheered the establishment of the consent decree because it's somewhat of an acknowledgment that - yes, there has been unconstitutional biased policing and the use of excessive force to the degree that the department is no longer trusted to oversee itself. To fix those problems, it needed federal oversight from the Department of Justice - hence the consent decree that we got into. And certainly this has been a long winding road, as you said. It has been interesting in that the brand of oversight has had both positive and negative elements - I think to all sides they find both positive and negative with that - certainly they are looking for status reports and some accountability attached to that. And the judge associated with this has called out events in protest and it looking like the issues that caused the consent decree to be necessary have not been solved. We've also seen sometimes the judge has had opinions and perspectives on how the City should address reforming the SPD, or reimagining SPD. And the judge made it clear he was not a fan of dramatically changing funding, reducing funding - a number of the things that some people who are more progressive and reform minded would have supported and opposed. And that shaped what's been possible with policy for fear that - hey, if the city council does pass some sweeping overhaul or substantive changes, that those are not going to be allowed and going to be overturned by the judge. So this has been an interesting situation that I think hasn't unfolded exactly as anyone predicted. But it is, I think, a victory lap that is trying to be ran that - I think, as you talked about - is, man, you should urge caution for declaring victory and a mission accomplished statement, because if something else happens, it just makes it look like you are completely out of touch with what is happening in the department and uninterested in taking substantive steps to address it. But we'll see. [00:25:50] Erica Barnett: Yeah, quickly - I think something else has happened, which is the death of Jaahnavi Kandula, who was a pedestrian - a student who was walking in a crosswalk and was hit by a police officer going allegedly to the scene of an overdose. But a lot of details have come out about that make one question that narrative from SPD. But SPD has been really untransparent and has refused to release any details about its investigation of this incident, which happened in January. It is now almost April and there's no body-worn video - there's just no information whatsoever - no video, no narrative, no explanation. And it is interesting that they have been so non-transparent at a time when they are asking for this consent decree to be lifted. So I think, of course, something else is going to happen - it's not a matter of if, but when. But this is an example of something that has been - I'm not going to go so far as to say it's been covered up, but it has certainly been slow walked. And a lot of people are asking a lot of questions about that incident, including myself. I've reported on it extensively and just gotten absolutely nothing from SPD. [00:26:56] Crystal Fincher: You have and your reporting has been critical to people finding out any information for this, so much appreciated. I do want to talk about an event that unfolded this week in the City of Seattle campaign land. One of the 30+ people now running for city council in the City of Seattle made news this week in their campaign - for not paying their workers. I, in this situation, just wanted to say a couple of things to set the record straight. Because there was a story written about this, which is great to bring light to it, but - [00:27:32] Erica Barnett: And we should say it's Matthew Mitnick running - [00:27:33] Crystal Fincher: It is Matthew Mitnick. [00:27:35] Erica Barnett: - running for District 4. [00:27:36] Crystal Fincher: Correct. In Seattle City Council District 4. So there were nine former volunteers or staffers, depending on who you - what version of events happens to be the truth. But who wrote an open letter accusing the campaign, or released a statement accusing the campaign of essentially wage theft, potentially youth labor violations because a number of the people involved were under 18. But there seems to be some conversation or disagreement with a lot of people where evidently a number of people were under the expectation that they were going to be paid, saying that Matthew Mitnick said that he would pay them. They wound up not being paid, and then there were some other accusations about his treatment of staff. But my takeaway from this was a little bit simpler. Even if you only believe what Matthew Mitnick said and you only go off of what there is written evidence for, there is a staffer who was hired - who was agreed to be paid a wage, who has not been paid all of their wages. They were paid once. They have not been paid again, despite continuing, despite doing work after being paid. There is unpaid work currently on the table. Matthew said - Hey, we're raising Democracy Voucher money. As soon as we raise enough, we'll pay you. That's not how things normally work in campaigns. [00:28:54] Erica Barnett: That's what I was going to ask you. So if you're running a - and we should say this is a guy who's running as a socialist. He's a 22-year old student. He moved here pretty recently from Wisconsin, where he also ran for office. And so he's, I would say, a pretty marginal candidate. That's my opinion - you may disagree, Crystal - I don't know. What is the common practice when you are a campaign that's running on a shoestring and you don't have a lot of money? Is it just to not hire people until you have that money? Because that would make sense to me. [00:29:24] Crystal Fincher: That is literally exactly what it is. That is literally exactly what happens in the majority of situations. Now, it's not like there's never been abuse before. But yes, you only hire and buy what you have the money to hire and buy. And that does mean a lot of things go - if you aren't able to raise much money, that means that you aren't able to afford a lot of the things that you probably hope to be able to afford with a campaign. One of the things that people do need to acknowledge is that running for office today requires raising and spending money. I wish it did not require as much money and think that Democracy Vouchers and other reforms that are on the table can help lower the cost of campaigns. I think that there's also a lot of spending on a lot of things, which is cool, but that's not everything. But they do require money. And if you're going to have staff, if you're going to have - if you're running a campaign in the City of Seattle, you need a campaign manager at minimum. You should also have people who are familiar with how to win campaigns - who have done that before, who can help guide through the process, because there are - that is an expertise. There are people who bring that to the table. I'm not going to suggest that someone go to court without a lawyer. I'm not going to suggest that someone run a campaign without other people who have been through that process before to help you through that process. But yeah, you just don't hire them until you have the money to hire them. And also, campaigns run out of money. And when that happens, then you have to wind things down - starting with paying the most vulnerable people first. The people who take haircuts in not getting paid, unfortunately, are - sometimes consultants agree to - hey, we can bill this on debt, you can pay me if you raise enough money and different things like that. But you have explicit overt conversations, you write stuff down, and you pay people who are reliant on that money to pay their rent. And what was cited in the story is that the person who wasn't paid does not have enough money for their rent at this point in time. So there's an impact. And so you do have - you are responsible for managing the people on your campaign, for managing your budget - that absolutely needs to happen. That's how that works. [00:31:38] Erica Barnett: Yeah, and I'm just looking at Mitnick's campaign filings. And again, as I said, I consider him an extremely marginal candidate who was hyped up by The Stranger in particular, in a way that I think was out of proportion to his viability. But at any rate, he has raised less than $5,000. Winning a council campaign is in the tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands for the primary. So yeah, not surprised he can't pay anybody - he hasn't raised any money. And so that is - it's unfortunate that he led campaign staffer on in that way or was overconfident in his own ability to raise money. [00:32:15] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, March 31st, 2023. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Maurice Jones, Jr. Our insightful co-host today was Seattle political reporter, editor of PubliCola, and co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, and author of Quitter: A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery, Erica Barnett. You can find Erica on Twitter @ericacbarnett and on PubliCola.com. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks and you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, with two i's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you prefer to get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave a review whenever you can. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, political consultant and host Crystal Fincher is joined by Guy Oron, Staff Reporter for Real Change! They start with a discussion of Friday's Washington Supreme Court ruling that the capital gains tax is constitutional and what that means for the state's residents. Then they discuss a tragic eviction in Seattle and a court ruling that landlords can ask about criminal records.  They chat about Howard Schultz stepping down early as the CEO of Starbucks, workers protesting before their annual shareholder meeting, and some shareholders' and white collar workers' desire for Starbucks to improve their behavior and relations with unionizing workers. They follow with the Seattle Chamber of Commerce's desire to gut JumpStart tax funds for downtown, despite the popularity of the tax and need for continued investment in other neighborhoods and small businesses.  They close with a discussion of where the Sound Transit CID station debate stands, as well as talk about the significance of Pierce County passing a local tax to fund housing services. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Guy Oron at @GuyOron.   Guy Oron Guy Oron is the Staff Reporter for Real Change, covering local news, labor, policing, the environment, criminal legal issues and politics. His writing has been featured in a number of publications including the South Seattle Emerald, The Nation and The Stranger. Raised in Seattle, Guy brings a community and student organizer perspective to their journalism, highlighting stories of equity and justice.   Resources Dahlia Bazzaz and What's Happening in Washington Education from Hacks & Wonks   WA Supreme Court upholds capital gains tax by David Gutman and Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times    Seattle landlords can ask about criminal records, court rules by Heidi Groover from The Seattle Times   Councilmember Invites Landlord Who's Suing City to Lead “Housing Provider” Panel from PubliCola   Seattle DSA Statement on the Death of Eucy Following the Attempt to Evict Her by King County Deputies | Seattle DSA   Will City Hall give downtown Seattle a tax break? by John O'Brien and Dyer Oxley from KUOW    Howard Schultz Will Step Down From Starbucks to Spend Less Time Getting Owned by Union Organizers by Tori Otten from The New Republic   Starbucks workers protest before annual shareholder meeting from The Associated Press   Starbucks shareholders to vote on proposals for labor probe, succession planning by Amelia Lucas from CNBC   Comptroller Lander and Coalition of Investors File Shareholder Proposal at Starbucks on the Rights of Workers to Organize | NYC Comptroller   Placement of future CID light rail station sparks heated debate, strains relations by Guy Oron from Real Change    What We Know About Sound Transit's Alternatives to a Chinatown Station by Doug Trumm and Stephen Fesler from The Urbanist   Sound Transit is Not Ready for Its Big Chinatown Station Decision from The Urbanist Editorial Board       Light Rail Board Members Seek Middle Ground as Plan to Skip Chinatown, Midtown Stations Moves Forward by Erica Barnett from PubliCola   From the Other Side of I-5: Little Saigon Weighs In On Sound Transit's Light Rail Expansion In the CID by Friends of Little Sài Gòn for PubliCola   Preserve Chinatown or Fuck Over Transit Riders Forever? by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   Pierce County just passed a new tax and funded a homeless village. That's a big deal by Matt Driscoll from The News Tribune   Pierce County Council votes on sales tax to address housing crisis. Here's the decision by Becca Most from The News Tribune   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, Seattle Times reporter Dahlia Bazzaz returned with a rundown of education issues across Washington state, including why budgets are a mess, how the Washington State Legislature is and isn't addressing it, the Wahkiakum Schools lawsuit addressing capital construction costs, and shifts in enrollment patterns in Washington schools. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome to the program for the first time, today's co-host: Staff Reporter for Real Change covering local news, labor, policing, the environment, criminal legal issues and politics, Guy Oron. Hey! [00:01:30] Guy Oron: Hi, thank you - I'm so glad to be here. [00:01:32] Crystal Fincher: I'm so excited to have you here - have been appreciating your coverage of all of those issues for a while now, so excited to be able to talk about the news this week. And we just got a big piece of breaking news this morning - finding out that the capital gains tax has been found, by our Washington State Supreme Court, to be constitutional. What did they say? [00:01:59] Guy Oron: Yeah, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that the capital gains tax is not a property tax and that it is legal, which is a huge win for the Washington Democrats and the governor, who signed the bill into law in 2021. [00:02:15] Crystal Fincher: Yes, absolutely. There was question about - okay, we have - our State Constitution prevents an income tax from being enacted, any graduated income tax is not considered constitutional at this time. This didn't address that issue - basically it accepted that the capital gains tax is an excise tax, so the Court didn't visit, revisit all the rulings that classify income as property and that being a way to clear the way for a graduated income tax. We will address that a different day at some point, I'm sure, but for now, the capital gains tax is found to be constitutional. And this is really big for a lot of funding going for schools, for daycare, for a lot of family support. And this is a tax that is going to only impact - what is it - the top 0.2% of Washingtonians, I think that was, while easing some of the burden or allowing people who are lower income, middle income to really get more bang for their buck in the types of services that are going to be provided here. [00:03:24] Guy Oron: Yeah, it's really a game changer because the state has operated for so many years on this austerity mindset where they have to decide between schools and other public services. And so this will give some breathing room for families, the vast majority of families in the state. [00:03:44] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. So looking forward to see this implementation continue - yeah, and so with only two-tenths of 1% of Washington taxpayers seeing enough profits on capital gains to pay this tax - which is a 7% tax on stock sales, extraordinary profits exceeding $250,000 annually - exempting real estate, retirement accounts like IRAs, family-owned small businesses and farms, among other things. It is just something that lots of people have been waiting to find out if this is going to go through, and that will enable about $500 million extra a year to be raised, just from this tax on two-tenths of a percent of Washington state residents. Also this week, we got news that a landlord court case - another one decided - that it is not legal for the legislation that Seattle passed - to try and help ease people back into the community, help people with access to housing who have been convicted or previously incarcerated - preventing landlords from being able to ask on an application if someone has been convicted of a crime before. That was ruled unconstitutional - landlords can do that, continue to do that. How do you think this is going to play out? [00:05:10] Guy Oron: Yeah, I was very surprised by the Ninth Circuit's reasoning - because on the one hand, they acknowledged the importance of remedying discrimination against people who have been incarcerated. But on the other hand, they ruled that it was too broad - banning landlords from finding out someone's criminal history. And so it does seem like there's still room for the City to challenge the ruling and try to still mitigate that, but it is a blow for renters and people who are fighting against the criminal legal system and trying to get folks reintegrated into society after experiencing the harms of mass incarceration. [00:05:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And that's so major, because so many people have had some kind of conviction or even just an arrest. Yes, especially with so many people who have convictions - because we have been in this era of mass incarceration, a significant percentage of our community has been arrested, has been convicted of some crime at some point in time. And we talk about the housing crisis, homelessness crisis - people not being able to afford homes - but also being able to qualify for an apartment, to be able to rent a place is challenging. And if we're serious about wanting to create a safer community, wanting to create a community where more people can have their needs met, where fewer people are victimized or harmed - certainly helping to make sure that people have access to housing is one of the most basic and fundamental things we can do. So there still - once again, is a significant percentage of people in Seattle, but obviously most other cities have not passed this legislation - and so lots of people across the state still facing challenges being able to access housing overall. So we'll see what the response to this is, but definitely a challenge. Also in the news this week is a really unfortunate - really, really tragic - story this week of a really fatal eviction where a young woman ended up taking her own life, where a deputy was shot, and just a tragedy that unfolded because of an eviction - an attempt to serve an eviction notice and forcefully evict this - which really seemed to throw this person into crisis. And the community overall has really largely reacted to this and I've actually been, through this tragedy, heartened to see the reporting from a variety of news outlets really talking about the root causes of this issue - in failing to take action to keep people in their homes, to prevent eviction - resulted in so many people getting harmed, and so many people being less safe, so many people being scarred after this, and a life being lost. How do you see this? [00:08:24] Guy Oron: Yeah, it's just such a tragic incident. I know Eucy was a member of the Seattle DSA community and of mutual aid and other community organizations in Seattle and so I just - my heart goes out to her and everyone who was touched by her presence in the community. I think this case really is the tip of the iceberg, and really shows the structural violence of evictions and our current housing crisis. And so many people have - it's so violent that people have to move every six months, every year or two, every time they get a rent increase. And you just think about children and having to switch schools every year. You have to think about the mental health impacts and stress that it takes to not only find a deposit and pay all the short-term rental fees on top of rent, but also just how difficult it is to exist in society when rents are so high. And so this case really shows how difficult and how much violence our current housing system inflicts on people. [00:09:42] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and we can do better. We have to do better, we need to do better. And that's the thing that gets me with so much of this. Some of the discourse I see or talk - What are you talking about? Why are you even, basically, caring about the humanity of this person? A law enforcement officer was shot, and we should note that we do not know by whom at this point in time. We do know that Eucy died by suicide. And just a really unfortunate situation. And if we get away from blame, if we get away from this kind of toxic discourse that talks about - if people deserve help, deserve a second chance, deserve grace, deserve housing, deserve basic needs met - when we don't focus on that and we allow things to get this far down the road, it is very expensive. As a community - beyond the life lost - this is destabilizing for a ton of people. This has endangered law enforcement lives - this is not good for them either - this is putting them in danger and in harm's way. It's hard to see who wins. Certainly a landlord now has a clear house, but at what cost? The cost is so high, it doesn't have to be that high. We can do better than this. And I think this underscores the real toll that is taken - we hear statistics a lot of times - and the eviction moratorium saved this many people from being evicted. But when you look at the cost of one person, the impact of one person - it really underscores how urgent it is to act to keep people in their homes, to get their basic needs met, and to find a different way that takes into consideration the health and safety of the community in a much better way than we do now. Also this week, we learned that the Chamber is interested in looting the JumpStart Tax and lowering the B&O Tax in an attempt to jumpstart and revitalize downtown. What's your take on this? [00:11:57] Guy Oron: I think it is very much out of step with much of the community right now that are suffering. We know that during the COVID-19 pandemic, small businesses, workers, even people who work in white collar jobs - right now with all the layoffs going on - are suffering. For example, with the interest rates, it's really hitting - we've seen with SVB's bank shutting down, it's really hitting the tech sector hard. And so most of the economy and most people are suffering. The one group that hasn't been suffering very much are people who own land, and property, and businesses. And to see the Chamber of Commerce, which represents organizations like Starbucks, like Amazon - all these companies which have reported record earnings in the last year - all of them now targeting this small tax, which is a couple million dollars for some of these businesses. In total, I think less than $300 million a year is raised through the JumpStart Tax, if I'm not mistaken. And so it seems like they're trying to take advantage of the economic downturn to redistribute more wealth from workers to the rich. And I think for folks who want to advocate for the whole community and not just a small segment, they should really be skeptical of the claims the Chamber's making. [00:13:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, this is part of the ongoing conversation of revitalizing the downtown core. Lots of concern is being heard from people who want to "get back to normal" - whatever that is - from pre-pandemic times, where people were going into the office five days a week. Because of the way that our downtown, many downtowns are designed - people commute in to the downtown core and they commute out of the downtown core. And so much of the businesses, services, structure of downtown, economic structure of downtown is based on just that - servicing commuters, so restaurants and services. But really it's a different downtown after 6-7 PM with so many people clearing out. Through the pandemic, certainly people reduced going to the office. Now patterns have changed where we're seeing less than half, about half of what pre-pandemic foot traffic from people who work downtown was - which is impacting many businesses, which is concerning a lot of people. I think the question really is - should we keep chasing the structure and economy of yesterday that just doesn't look like it is relevant or valid moving forward into the future? If we want to consider downtown just for commuters and focus on the revitalization efforts, return-to-work efforts, and everything going there - we miss the opportunity to make a downtown for today and tomorrow. To make a downtown that's a cultural destination, that's a community destination, and not just a business and commuting destination. I put that just there - businesses are absolutely vital - we need jobs, we need people hiring and thriving, and we certainly need a healthy economy. But again, at what cost? The reason why we have the JumpStart Tax is because most people recognize that businesses, especially the larger businesses, were not paying what most people considered to be their fair share. And this imposes a fee on every employee making over $150,000 for businesses of a certain size. So really it's about mitigating the impacts that their employees have, that their business has instead of solely reaping the benefits of all of the resources - human and otherwise, that this community provides - that they are able to use to drive up the record profits that you referenced. So it's a really interesting conversation. And the other interesting dimension is - certainly, downtown is an important, vital neighborhood. So are lots of other Seattle neighborhoods. And we're now in a situation - once again, in a situation where downtown is really asking for resources from other neighborhoods. And are other neighborhoods are gonna settle for that? Are residents of other areas gonna say - We have to address housing in our neighborhood. We have to address crime in our neighborhood. We need to make our streets safer, healthier. There's so much on the docket to do. Do we need to be taking money out and deprioritizing our needs to move more money over, redirect money to downtown and those purposes - which goes against the JumpStart Tax, which is very popular with Seattle residents and really bailed the City out of a really harmful budget shortfall. So it's gonna be interesting to see how this shapes up - seems like every election is, at the end of the day for the Seattle Chamber and many large corporations, a referendum on taxes for them and an attempt to reduce taxation for them. So we'll see how this all unfolds, but certainly interesting to follow. And once again, we're seeing what's behind a lot of the rhetoric and candidates that we're hearing from out there - and really another bullseye on the JumpStart Tax. In related big corporate news, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz is stepping down. What did we hear with this news? [00:17:49] Guy Oron: Yeah, it was a bit of a surprise just because he was slated to step down at the start of April, and he ended up stepping down two weeks early. This comes as he's been engulfed in a lot of controversy over retaliation against union organizers. At the same time, Starbucks has been making record profits alongside other corporations. And this kind of motivated the union to hold a big rally on Wednesday, and there were hundreds of union members and supporters who showed up in SoDo. At the same time, over a hundred stores across the country went on strike as well. And I think this is a turning point. I think we might see some change. It also happened, this also happened at the same time as a shareholder meeting, where there were multiple resolutions sponsored by different shareholders who are concerned about the impact that union busting might have on the reputation of the company. And so it'll be interesting to see if the pressure from workers from the bottom and pressure from some stakeholders and shareholders will together combine to make some change. And maybe we'll see a shift from Starbucks corporate to be a little more amenable to the union. [00:19:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's gonna be interesting. Like you said, they have their annual shareholders meeting. Starbucks is important - it's a big corporation - but it's a big corporation that seems as dedicated as any corporation to union busting in every single way that they possibly can. Howard Schultz was certainly the union buster-in-chief and union busted in ways that were not just distasteful and unethical, but also illegal. The National Labor Relations Board found many instances of illegal union busting activity. And so they seem to be on the tip of the spear of being willing to do whatever they feel it takes to battle unions, whether it's shutting down stores and trying to do the redirection by blaming crime - but the stores that they're shutting down seem to just predominantly be stores that are attempting to unionize, or just don't fit within their profit plans. But also just the amount of hostility towards workers - firing people who are organizing, wielding benefits as a weapon - there was coverage before of potentially even using gender affirming care, women's reproductive care as a wedge issue in attempts to unionize. It is just really unfortunate. And so there were some votes on whether to reassess their labor stance in the shareholder meeting. I don't know how much is gonna come from that - those are certainly non-binding. There is some shareholder sentiment to, at least in terms of rhetoric and outward appearance - from at least a marketing perspective - to not be so hostile to workers, as more and more people across the country definitely understand the plight that their workers are going through more than the plight of the CEO and the highly-paid executives fighting against people just being able to afford the basic necessities of life. So we'll see how Starbucks' new CEO, how their shareholders try and push the corporation - but they've got a long way to go. And certainly even if they were to change some rhetoric, lots of people would need to see changes in behavior - immediate good-faith negotiation with many stores that have opted to unionize that now need to negotiate their contracts and seeing them. But it seems also - as we talked about, I think last week or week before - white collar workers in Starbucks headquarters have also voiced concerns and are calling on Starbucks to do better for their workers. So we'll see how this continues to unfold, and how the new CEO stakes their claim and what path they set. Other really big news this week, in the Puget Sound area, is the Sound Transit CID conversation - CID station conversation about where to site stations and spines for the upcoming lines planned for Sound Transit. What is being talked about and what is this about? [00:22:41] Guy Oron: Yeah, this has been a huge issue across Seattle, the Seattle area, for the past couple of weeks. Sound Transit in 2016 passed a ballot measure called ST3, which authorized funding for a new line that would service both Ballard and West Seattle. And now is the process where the agency needs to find locations for a second tunnel and where those stations are gonna be located at. And so over the past couple of years, the Chinatown International District community has really pushed back against some of these plans. Initially the agency really disregarded completely the community perspective and just started drawing on a map. And they drew proposals for Fifth Avenue, which is right next to Uwajimaya and the gate kind of near Chinatown, and that really angered community. And after basically unanimous pushback, they shelved that proposal. And so now they have one proposal for a Fourth Avenue shallower, which would build a station in between Union and King Street Station. And more recently, a couple of months ago, local leaders - Constantine, Dow Constantine and Bruce Harrell - came up with a second proposal to put two stations right outside of the neighborhood, one in Pioneer Square and the other one kind of in the north end of SoDo. And so this proposal was seen as more a way to mitigate some of the direct impacts of construction on the neighborhood, but it's also caused a lot of controversy because it would make transferring from some lines more difficult. Someone who's coming from Ballard and wants to go take the Amtrak, for example - with the north-south proposal, they would have to get off in Pioneer Square and wait another 10 minutes. And similarly, someone coming from the south end, from Rainier Valley, they would also have to either - to get to the Amtrak, they might have to walk another 5-10 minutes. And certain areas of the CID will be farther than with the Fourth Avenue proposal. And so there's a lot of trade-offs in terms of prioritizing transit accessibility, especially if we think about the climate impacts of mitigating car use. And so those are some of the concerns that transit advocates have brought up. And also, some of the progressive organizations in the CID have really pointed to some of the issues with Fourth Avenue, including potentially 9+ years of construction closing down Fourth Avenue and where will all those cars that kind of use it as a mini-highway - where will they go? And they're very concerned that a lot of them will cut through the neighborhood and increase smog and congestion, and make it harder for people who are actually going to the CID to go there and really make the neighborhood much less livable. And so some of these concerns are really important to consider, especially given the history of the City screwing over the neighborhood time and time again - whether it's building I-5 through the neighborhood, the King Dome, and other kind of mega-construction projects that have really devastated communities there. [00:26:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, Sound Transit tunnel, deep-bore tunnel - several projects have caused a lot of harm and strain to the CID. And I think what a lot of people are saying, 'cause some people are just - Construction is construction. Everybody deals with it. You gotta, it's gonna inconvenience some people. But the issue is - man, the CID seems to be expected to absorb the inconvenience much more frequently, similarly to the way we see disinvestment in South Seattle. Some areas of the City - which have predominantly BIPOC, predominantly low income, much higher percentage of disabled residents who are there - and experiencing the harm from these impacts from construction. And they're saying - We're tired of being the people who have to absorb the brunt and the majority of the impact, or we're always on the chopping block when it comes to what we need. And over and over again, we see it happen where we're experiencing challenges that other areas of the City are not expected to deal with to the same degree. And they're sick of it, frankly. And a lot of people are saying - Okay, is there a path forward where we can mitigate some of these impacts while still looking at and studying these other stations? So there was a meeting yesterday where they agreed to move forward on what you were talking about - studying, building out these new options and what the impacts and the ramifications and the actual projected cost is. How do you see the conversation about mitigating the impacts of this station happening? What kinds of things are they talking about? [00:28:03] Guy Oron: Yeah, a big thing is transit, the traffic congestion, and how you would mitigate traffic congestion into the neighborhood, regardless of which proposal Sound Transit takes up. And I think that is something where the agency will have to be a little more robust than just promise. They will have to compensate the neighborhood in various ways, as well as also compensating the First Hill neighborhood, of course - because that neighborhood hasn't really been serviced by either of the proposals, especially areas like Harborview. I think the agency should look into maybe funding more frequent bus service to that neighborhood as well. Another issue is, of course, equitable transit-oriented development. And I think the agency has an opportunity to use some of its eminent domain powers to maybe help construct more affordable housing - because that's a huge concern that wherever you build a new light rail station, developers will buy up the land - and then the prices will go up - and build market-rate apartments and price out a lot of the existing residents. So those are some of the concerns that Sound Transit and local leaders will have to look to address. [00:29:19] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. I guess I gave my two cents before - which isn't really two cents - on the planned station alignments. I do think the community most impacted, most at risk for displacement and harm should be centered in this conversation. There certainly are people on all sides. There's a broad, diverse array of opinions, but we should hear all of those opinions from that community. We're hearing varied concerns from the community. I think my reflection is based on seeing a lot of people discussing this, a lot of people who are not from the community or tied to the community. And looking at transfer times, which is important - rider experience is absolutely important - but as they do that, to continue to focus and highlight and uplift and listen to the concerns of the residents there. So often when we're in these battles - in a lot of people's minds, it's just refute the argument, get them to vote, and move forward. Downplay the argument - No, that's ridiculous. We should move forward with that. That's a bad idea. And what we're hearing from the community is regardless of which option there is, no matter what option we choose, there are challenges that need to be addressed meaningfully. And I would say to those activists - no matter what option you're supporting - mitigation for the CID, mitigation for First Hill needs to be a part of that. And in so many of these proposals, when we wind up in this situation right here - where community is voicing concerns and people outside of the community are making decisions - so often there's rhetoric - We hear you, we'll totally take care of you. But the things they're asking for are not written into legislation. They're just winks and nods and promises and - Don't worry, we'll take care of it. And then when it's time to take care of it - invariably for a variety of reasons - it doesn't get taken care of, the ball gets dropped, promises get broken, things that they were told were possible are no longer possible. And they end up even more jaded than when they began because they voiced their concerns, they were told that they were heard, they were assured that they would be taken care of, and then they were left out to dry. And so I hope advocates for this really focus on listening to the community, amplifying their concerns, and bringing those concerns to electeds and demanding that mitigations be codified as strictly as everything else. And to not just rely on promises and hopes, and we should be able to do that, and if we get funding. If we are concerned about equity in moving forward, then we need to make sure that we're all moving forward together - and that means standing up for voices that are traditionally talked over, minimalized, overlooked, and making sure that they are actually taken care of. Not saying that everyone's gonna walk away from this happy at the end of the day, but we can ensure that fewer people walk away from this harmed at the end of the day. I think that's everybody's responsibility, and they should really reflect on if they are doing that, they should reflect on if they are talking over people, they should reflect on how to amplify voices, and move forward with that in mind. [00:32:48] Guy Oron: And something I really wish was that this conversation didn't get so polarized, and that communities would listen to each other a little more - be more cognizant of the privilege they are coming into these conversations with. And really direct their fire not at each other, but upwards towards the agencies, towards politicians. There's no shortage of places that Sound Transit needs to be held accountable for, and I think it is unfortunate to see some of that energy be directed between different progressive people who want to do right by their communities. And so I would encourage, like you said, hopefully more cognizant, thoughtful advocacy in the future. [00:33:27] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. The last thing we'll cover today is Pierce County passing a local tax to fund housing services. What will this do? The final thing we'll talk about today is the Pierce County Council passing a local tax - one-tenth of 1% sales tax increase - to fund affordable housing, as well as approving a pair of ordinances that set the stage for construction of a micro-housing village for people experiencing chronic homelessness, which is a big deal. It's really a big deal because, as I look at this - and I'm old, so I remember things from a long time ago, a lot of people may not - but this Pierce County Council, Pierce County being purple, the Pierce County Council being split - and being able to pass a tax with a majority is something that would not have happened 10, 15, 20 years ago. This is a council that had a strong Republican majority, and the recently retired Derek Young stepped down - he was term limited out actually from the Pierce County Council - was part of really starting to turn the Pierce County Council and Pierce County policy from red to purple and even blue in many circumstances. This passed with a veto-proof majority. A number of people that Derek Young helped to recruit were there, so now that he is no longer on the council, this is the last piece of legislation passed with him as a prime sponsor. It started while he was still on there, and it is continuing now. But I do think this is a testament to how important local organizing is, how important it is for our elected leaders to continue to build leaders in their community, to help give people opportunities for leadership, and to help shepherd people into positions that can make an impact like this in the community. This is not the first action that Pierce County has taken to address major structural issues - certainly within public health and public health centers, housing, the environment - many different issues that they have taken action on. And now with housing, seemingly still being ahead of our State Legislature and several other cities here. But I just think it is something that will absolutely do good and that is possible, was made possible by some real serious continued organizing and investment and leadership from people and leaders within that community. So excited to see that, excited to see another major city in the state take a significant step to try and address this housing affordability and homelessness crisis that we have, with significant investments and delivering on what voters basically have given people a mandate to do. Voters are expecting action to address this housing affordability crisis and homelessness crisis. And can talk about minor changes in policies and this and that, but until we actually make solid investments, have dedicated revenue streams to fund continual improvements, we're not gonna make the progress that we need to. And so kudos to the council Democrats on the Pierce County Council for passing this, despite some opposition from Republicans there - but definitely delivering for what the voters have asked for in Pierce County. [00:37:00] Guy Oron: Yeah, this new tax really shows that leaders across the state are starting to take this - the housing and homelessness issue - seriously, and really understand how dire the situation is. So it's great to see other counties, like Pierce County, start to take action and so I commend them. [00:37:20] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on today, Friday, March 24th, 2023. I can't believe it's so late in March, but I can believe my brackets are on fire - okay, I just had to throw that in. It's March Madness, my brackets are amazing at the moment - we'll see if that still holds by next week. But thank you for listening. This show is produced by Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today is Staff Reporter for Real Change covering local news, labor, policing, the environment, criminal legal issues and politics, Guy Oron. You can find Guy on Twitter @GuyOron, G-U-Y-O-R-O-N. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, it's two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. And if you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Sound Transit made a big decision about the future of light rail in Seattle this week, which Erica covered in Publicola.  "After five hours of public testimony and a lengthy, often contentious debate, the Sound Transit board voted Thursday to adopt as its “preferred option” for the light rail extension through downtown Seattle a last-minute, back-of-the-napkin alternative that eliminates two long-planned stations serving the Chinatown-International District (CID) and First Hill neighborhoods in favor of new stations at Pioneer Square and just north of the current Stadium Station. " Sandeep and Erica discuss and debate the board's decision.  This episode was brought to you by:You Know Me Now podcast DonateSupport — You Know Me NowMagic Consulting206-999-4071reachgabemagic@gmail.comhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/gabe-meyer/If you want to advertise, please contact us realseattlenice@gmail.com@realseattlenice on TwitterIf you want to help support the show, please donate!  Our Patreon link is here.Support the show

The proposals for Sound Transit's promised light rail expansion are coming in fast ahead of today's board vote.Late yesterday, Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell offered a substitute motion that would include stations North and South of the Chinatown International District that would serve the CID and Pioneer Square.Disruption is imminent with any expansion.But for the people who live in the C-ID it's more complicated.  Northwest Asian Weekly reporter, Mahlon Meyer is here to shed some light.We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. Make the show happen by making a gift to KUOW: https://www.kuow.org/donate/seattlenowAnd we want to hear from you! Follow us on Instagram at SeattleNowPod, or leave us feedback online: https://www.kuow.org/feedback

Meet Sara Upshaw, owner and team lead at OHSUN Banchan in Seattle's Pioneer Square neighborhood.    Her Korean deli & cafe has been getting quite the buzz, and all well deserved!   While Sara is known in the food industry for her Korean flavors ( see her blog Kimchi Halfie and her authored cookbook,"Korean Barbecue at Home"), she has recently overcome hurdle after hurdle from opening a restaurant in a city struggling to recover post pandemic style. Hear Sara share about how,  despite the delays and hurdles, she's managed to express her passion for people and food through the art of Korean banchan.    She brings forward so many incredible flavors and recipes, thanks to the inspiration of her culture and dear Halmoni (grandmother, Oh Sun Pak, whom the deli is named after).   Not only that, her food is 100% gluten free-a rarity gem find for any Korean food or plant based, gluten-free eater!  Score!Listen to her speak to her corporate turned restauranteur dream come true-and the community that came around her, fueling her to serve the same to them for as long as she can.Thanks to OHSUN for hosting Social Creative Workshops at one of our Culture Club dinners.  A stellar private event for hungry diners from over 14 neighborhoods all looking to celebrate Asian culture and food from a woman owned, local restaurant with tasty Banchan !  Go, visit and enjoy OHSUN!  Tell her Amy sent you :)OHSUN Banchan Deli & Cafe: www.ohsunbanchan.comInstagram: @ohsunbanchanKimchi Halfie: @kimchihalfieSocial Creative Workshops | Social Creative Conversations PodcastAmy Vallejo | founder, co-collaboratorwearesocialcreativeworkshops@gmail.comwww.wearesocialcreative.com@socialcreativeworkshops

On today's show a listener went down to Pioneer Square during rush hour and sang a Metallica Christmas carol for tickets to the show. We also heard some worthless knowledge about the Atlanta airport and Drew has a sketchy prowler in his neighborhood.

Today's episode is in collaboration with our partners at Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Discovery Center. You can find out more about our guests, Lois Martin and Shawn Thurman, in their online exhibit Facing Forward - Essential Workers, Essential Stories. Lois is the director of the Community Day Center for Children in the Central District and Shaw is a registered nurse at the Seattle Indian Health Board working out of the Chief Sealth Club in Pioneer Square. In this episode, our guests tell their stories and have a great discussion about essential workers, the pandemic, and belonging. Listen as Lois talks about how she went from a career at IBM to taking over her mother's early education center and as Shawn talks about growing up in the Sac & Fox nation in Oklahoma and how he and his wife sought out careers in the healthcare field. If you have little ones that need a vaccination, please check out the Community Day Center for Children's vaccination program. The next date will be on October 13th for children ages 6 months to 4 years old. Thanks again to Bobby Choy (aka Big Phony) for letting us use his music for our intros and outros!

Last week, a new clinic opened its doors in Pioneer Square. The Seattle Indian Health Board's newest center is located on the bottom floor of the new ?ál?al building, which means home in Lushootseed – at the Chief Seattle Club. And with it's creation, people will now be able to receive wraparound services at the club that are all managed and run by Indigenous people.

We kick off season 2 of Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks in one of Seattle's oldest bars, the Central Saloon in historic Pioneer Square. With drinking and debauchery roots going back to 1892, the Central lays claim to being Seattle's oldest saloon. But is it really? We get into the history, the booze, the tall tales, and especially the music. The Central also claims to be the birth place of Grunge music so of course we gotta unpack that. Our old favorite segments Where We At and Whatcha Drinkin' make their season debut, and we lay the groundwork for an epic 4-episode series of Seattle's oldest dive bars. Buckle up! Recorded live at the Central Saloon on 05/19/2022.Follow the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast on Facebook (DLandSD), Twitter (@divebarsseattle), and Instagram (seattle_dive_bar_podcast). Share, like, follow, and subscribe!Check out the Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks podcast website (/dim-lights-stiff-drinks) for more details and additional episodes. Support Dim Lights & Stiff Drinks with PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/dim-lights-stiff-drinks. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This episode of the Klyph Notes Live took place in the Welcome Dome in Pioneer Square in Portland Oregon. With support from my guy DJ Ambush and a part of The Numberz Black Podcast Fest, part 2 of this two part episode features Portland based artist Rasheed Jamal, a man no stranger to the listeners. One of the most thoughtful guests in the history of Klyph Notes, he shares personal stories of his journey and how challenges lead to growth and where he is in his current creative process. This episode is insightful, entertaining and therapeutic. Listen to episode 141 of Klyph Notes. Photo by: Jason Quigley Subscribe, like, share rate and review on your favorite podcast platform

This episode of the Klyph Notes Live took place in the Welcome Dome in Pioneer Square in Portland Oregon. With support from my guy DJ Ambush and a part of The Numberz Black Podcast Fest, part 1 of this two part episode features Portland based drummer, producer and event curator Tyrone Hendrix. We talk about his number of artists he's played with both locally and internationally, the events he's doing in the city and great story about his family connect. Such a great conversation getting to know more about a great musician and human being. Listen to this live interview, episode #140 of the Klyph Notes podcast.  Subscribe, like, share rate and review on your favorite podcast platform Instagram @tyronehendrix Klyph Notes is supported by Akepele Apparel  The Numberz FM and XRAY FM The theme for Klyph Notes was produced by Theory Hazit Support the movement and become a DJ Klyph patron

Originally from the Minneapolis area, Scott Ward studied commercial design and illustration at the University of Minnesota. Scott has worked as an artist and designer in advertising, clothing design, graphic design, theater design, landscape design, interior design, illustration and murals, and has shown his paintings in many galleries around the country. After his introduction to The Artist's Way by Julia Cameron, Scott found himself facilitating creativity groups and eventually becoming a community leader with a focus on community development and engagement. He presently serves as the Executive Director of the Fairhaven Association in Bellingham, WA. Scott still finds time to create art. Timestamp 2:22 Growing up as an artistic kid 3:03 Discovering The Artist's Way 4:26 Being a full time artist-entrepreneur 5:52 Getting into the world of community engagement 7:12 Fairhaven's initial organizational challenges and dealing with them 9:12 The importance of giving credit whenever it is due 12:15 Managing time as an active artist plus community leader 13:55 Drawing up the blueprint for Fairhaven's future 14:23 Working on the Space Needle mural project 18:27 Analyzing elements of Scott's artwork 20:04 Daily routines and rituals to power through the day 23:48 When rejection from priesthood brought clarity to life's purpose 25:30 Leaving a legacy and making a difference 27:15 Dealing with challenging decision making processes 29:16 Painting the big picture: keeping the whole community in frame 30:14 Thoughts about the future 32:56 Change is inevitable - taking small steps as a budding artist Social Media Website: scottwardart.com Instagram: instagram.com/scottwardart/ Facebook: facebook.com/scott.ward.18062 Enjoy Fairhaven: enjoyfairhaven.com Follow Patti Dobrowolski - Instagram https://www.instagram.com/upyourcreativegenius/ Follow Patti Dobrowolski - Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/patti-dobrowolski-532368/ Up Your Creative Genius - https://www.upyourcreativegenius.com/ Transcript Patti Dobrowolski 00:03 Hello, Superstars! Welcome to the Up Your Creative Genius Podcast, where you will gain insight and tips to stomp on the accelerator and blast off to transform your business and your life. I'm your host, Patti Dobrowolski. And if this is your first time tuning in, then strap in - because this is serious rocket fuel. Each week, I interview fellow creative geniuses to help you learn how easy it is to Up Your Creative Genius in any part of your life. Patti Dobrowolski 00:39 Hey, everybody, it's Patti Dobrowolski with Up Your Creative Genius. Oh my gosh, okay, I just want to say: my most favorite person in the world today is on the podcast - Scott Ward. And Scott Ward, if you don't know him, he's an amazing visual artist, who became an accidental Executive Director for the Fair Haven Business Association. It's not really the business association, but the Fair Haven, you know, Association for where he lives. But he is amazing. He's been an actor, he's created clothing. He's done everything possible - interior design, like if you look out in the world, at things, you'll see Scott Ward imprinted on most of them. And he has a beautiful collection of artwork that has really just kept its its beauty over time - I was gonna say it's just so iconic, the stuff that you draw, I have a number of them in my home, I will say - and one of them he gave to us for our wedding, which is just so incredible. So, I thank you, Scott, for being here. Hey, by the way, I didn't mention this, but he also is a musician and singer. Really incredible. Okay. Welcome to the show, Scott. Scott Ward 01:51 Hi, Patti. It's nice to see you. Patti Dobrowolski 01:53 Nice to see you too. And so we haven't seen each other in a long time. Because of COVID - It's kind of a drag. I know but just in another month, I'm going to be standing - hopefully, cross your fingers, you know - side by side with you, that will be so incredible. So, Scott, tell people about you. How did you become an artist? And then how did you end up working as the executive director in Fair Haven? So, get us in the trajectory of how you, from the beginning of time, bring us to the present moment? Scott Ward 02:22 Yeah, it's not the life I ever imagined. You know, I grew up as the artistic kid. That's what I was recognized as, everybody saw me as the artistic kid. And fortunately, I had a couple of really fantastic teachers in Junior High, in high school who globbed on to me and said, "We're going to nurture you as much as we can", and then, you know, after high school kind of pushed me on my way. And then, you know, I went to school and studied fine art, and realized I could never make it as a fine artist; I have to, you know, get jobs that pay me. And so I was doing all that design work that you mentioned: I was doing interior design, and clothing design and graphic design and, um... Patti Dobrowolski 03:00 You had a whole line of cards at one point. Yeah. Scott Ward 03:03 Yeah. I worked for a card company and was just drawing - making little goofy cards. And then in 1994, actually, Patti, you sent me "The Artist's Way" - the book by Julia Cameron. And it had just come out, and at the same time, another friend of mine in Seattle found the book and recommended it, and I thought: I should maybe pay attention to this. And so, you know, over the next few years, I not only studied that book and went through it, but started leading and facilitating groups to get other people to go through that book. And it's a fantastic process. You know, it's set up to be this and discover your creativity, really, it's a whole life purpose kind of process. And so in that I realized, wait a second, I'm being a little hypocritical in that I'm urging all these other people to be artists in the world, and I'm just avoiding it by being a designer, which was not a bad thing - it just wasn't completely who I was supposed to be. And so, you know, I jumped into being a full time artist, like right away. And within six months, I had my first show at this little restaurant in Seattle and sold a few pieces there. And then six months later, I had my very first one person show in this gallery in Pioneer Square in Seattle, where all the- Patti Dobrowolski 04:15 Really, really big deal. Scott Ward 04:17 Really big deal. And you know, the amazing thing that happened there was I sold every single piece in that show. Patti Dobrowolski 04:24 Oh my god. Scott Ward 04:26 Yeah. And so you know, it had to have started as an idea like a full time artist, and then a year later have a sellout show - it was a real fast trajectory. And it was a little overwhelming. I mean, it was stressful because I thought: how am I supposed to live up to that, right? It was like yeah, oh my god, this success is kind of unbelievable. What am I supposed to do with it? And so, I had a little bit of a dip or I thought, you know - can I really do this? But now it's saying that in the next 15 years I was a full time artist and you know, traveled around the country and did shows in a lot of different places and became the representative artist for several different nonprofit organizations and really was having this really fantastic artist's life where I was meeting fascinating, interesting people and going places that I never imagined being and doing a lot of commissioned work. So, creating artwork that never would have crossed my mind. And at the same time, I got to work with you, and this process of your unfolding and the graphic recording and change management stuff, and so learned a lot in that. So, fast forward to being a full time artist: we were living in Seattle, and moved into the Magnolia neighborhood, which is a nice affluent neighborhood that has a little village and my partner, husband owns a little shop there. And I thought, well, you know, I should probably connect with the business community, 'cause sometimes being an artist can be a solitary experience, right? Patti Dobrowolski 05:52 Yes, definitely. Scott Ward 05:52 It's a lot of time at the easel. And if you're at all extroverted, that can become a really challenging life. And so I thought I needed to connect with the community and got engaged with the Chamber of Commerce there. And the Chamber of Commerce, there was kind of a mess. And not kind of a mess, it was really- Patti Dobrowolski 06:12 It was really a mess. Scott Ward 06:13 It was really a mess. And I thought, I think I know a few things that might be able to help them move forward. And so I stepped in and you know, within just a short amount of time became president of that Chamber of Commerce. And I have to say, that really is a lot of the work that I was able to do with you allows me to say to these folks, you know, let's get some clarity in what we're doing here, right? You have a vision, but you're not really living into it. And so let's really revisit that and start to line up with who we're supposed to be in the world. And so I made some changes there, which meant basically a whole turnover in their board. And- Patti Dobrowolski 06:54 Oh, yeah, it was tricky. It was a tricky time. Scott Ward 06:58 It was a tricky time, but I- You know, usually I'm so diplomatic and level-headed, and there were a couple of times where I lost it with them. I'm like: You are like 14 year old kids! I was yelling at them- Patti Dobrowolski 07:12 Oh my gosh. Scott Ward 07:12 You know, it was kind of what needed to happen because they were just stuck in a rut. And so anyway, now we live in Bellingham. And because I had that experience in Seattle, when we came to Bellingham, the little village that we live in is a neighborhood within Bellingham- Patti Dobrowolski 07:29 -called Fairhaven. Scott Ward 07:30 Yeah, Fairhaven. And it's a historic district. It's really sweet. And it's had this community / business association in existence since the mid 70s. So it's been around for a long time. And it was a completely volunteer organization. Patti Dobrowolski 07:45 Yeah. Scott Ward 07:45 And, you know, saying that those volunteers were able to do some really fantastic things over the years, like they really preserved the historic character, they created some wonderful events and some programs. However, there was a lot of dysfunction in what was happening, because the volunteers, they turned to their friends and they'd say: Hey, I want to put a statue in the village green. And their friends would say: Hey, yeah, let's do it. And then they would do it. And then they'd go to the board and say, Hey, we need $45,000- Patti Dobrowolski 08:14 To put that statue up. Scott Ward 08:16 Yeah. And the board would say, okay, great. And they'd kind of rubber stamp it, but there was no accountability, or no- Patti Dobrowolski 08:21 No plan, right. Scott Ward 08:22 No plan and no alignment with everything else that was happening. So every time somebody got a little wind to do something, they would do it. And that caused a lot of rifts in the relationships of the folks that were doing things. You know, it's like this recycled volunteer group that just went through, people would get upset, they get their feelings hurt, you know? And- Patti Dobrowolski 08:44 Yeah, like every volunteer organization, you know, you're like a piece of coal when you go in and you're a diamond when you come out, because- or you're kicked out one or the other before you're a diamond. Scott Ward 08:54 Yeah. And so there was this core group of volunteers that really had been active since the 80s. You know, it's only a handful, like half a dozen of them. And they would, like you said - they'd split people up, they use them, split them out, and became really, really dysfunctional. And so we show up, and of course, they had- Patti Dobrowolski 09:11 And you set up Current and Furbish. Yeah, you have that beautiful little shop there in Fairhaven, and everybody should go see there because it's fantastic. Scott Ward 09:21 Yeah, it's a great little shop and a great little village. And, you know, I thought - maybe I just should be done with this community work because it takes a lot of energy to do that, working with people and all the different personalities - but they came to me and they said: Hey, what do you want to do with us? Because they had written an article about me. So it didn't take long for me to realize that there was a lot of potential here. It wasn't quite as messed up as the Magnolia chamber head. And I saw that there was great potential here. And I also recognize there were some really easy things that could kind of fix what was going on. And that was - you know, one of the things was, in their volunteer organization, they'd never did any kind of acknowledgement - private or public - for their volunteers. There was- Patti Dobrowolski 10:10 Oh my god, are you kidding? Scott Ward 10:11 They didn't send out thank you notes. They didn't really say thank you. They didn't have an end of year celebration and I thought: You know, that one thing would make a huge difference. Patti Dobrowolski 10:24 Yeah, people come back if you appreciate them. That's what it's all about. Scott Ward 10:25 That's exactly what it's about. And then, you know, even just the folks that show up, they want to volunteer for one thing, it's important to acknowledge them, right? It's- Patti Dobrowolski 10:34 Yeah, definitely. Scott Ward 10:35 And even the people that say: Oh, no, no, I don't need anything, do not thank me publicly - find a way to thank them. Patti Dobrowolski 10:42 Yeah, what I love about that is you acknowledge that they have their own way of liking to do that, because everybody's different. So some people, it's mortifying and frightening for them to be acknowledged publicly. So if you can find a way to do it, that gives them the spotlight in their own way. Scott Ward 11:00 That's right. You know, I think it's even as easy as, say, you're in a group, we have monthly meetings, right? And so make sure, like, let's say, John is over there. And John doesn't ever want to be publicly thanked or appreciated, right? Make sure that whoever you're talking to, you say: Hey, I just want you to know that John did most of the work so that John overhears it, right? Then it's this thing where it's private, he gets it, you know, that he's getting it in theory, right? Patti Dobrowolski 11:25 Yeah. Scott Ward 11:25 And that will carry him. Carry him to the next bit of whatever he's doing. Anyway, we come in over - you know, the first few years we were here, I had heard several times, we really have wanted an executive director for a long time. But we just haven't done anything about it. Is this the universe telling me what I'm supposed to be doing? Right? How many times do you have to hear it? Patti Dobrowolski 11:49 Yeah, that's right. That's cool. Scott Ward 11:51 So finally, I just, yeah, went to the board. And I said, okay, it feels like I'm supposed to throw my hat in, help this organization by creating this position. And that's what they did. So that's why I really became the accidental Executive Director. I never intended in doing community work, I thought I was going to be a full time artist. This kind of, you know, exciting life. But I still get to do a little bit of that. Patti Dobrowolski 12:15 Yeah. That's fantastic. So all right. Now you really run Fairhaven, but you're still like a full time artist. Right? So how do you balance all your time of all the things that you're doing, Scott? Cause you have a million things on your plate. How do you organize yourself? Scott Ward 12:32 That's a lot. This kind of counteracts that the artists lifestyle and mindset is that I'm very disciplined. So I know that Thursdays are my studio day, like I have tell everyone - I put on my email, you know, the message, it says, Hey, I'm in the studio today, I'm not going to take your calls. And I'm not going to answer your texts. And so I just really am clear that at least Thursdays, I know, I have a full day of being in the studio. Then, there are other days where I'm a little more flexible about it. But it's- Patti Dobrowolski 13:01 Yeah. Scott Ward 13:01 And then when I'm working for the Association, I'm just really clear like - these are the days I'm available for the Association. But it really is that discipline that makes it happen, otherwise, I don't know how I could do it. It really is a lot. Patti Dobrowolski 13:16 Yeah, I think when you have multiple things going on, it's important to - you have to schedule everything. And you know, people think, Oh, you've got, you know, you've worked for yourself, and so they have lots of free time. And yeah, that free time is filled up with a lot of things that are the behind the scenes part. And you have really finessed that over time, so that you're continuing to show your work, it's really well received, and - you've built Fairhaven into this consistent community engagement, which is awesome. Now you've got like a Draw your Future picture behind you, Scott - did you do that for your organization, for Fairhaven? Scott Ward 13:55 Yeah, for Fairhaven. So three years ago, when I first started the process, we created a strategic plan, because they had had one - we revisited the mission statement, and then created that plan. And so in that three years, we really accomplished everything we had set forth. And so this process now is, what do the next 3 to 5 years look like? So since we've accomplished this, yeah, let's look forward. And you know, this is a fantastic process. People love it. Patti Dobrowolski 14:23 Yeah, it's a little gap analysis, and then you're drawing real time and you're writing words, and you can see, here's this - it's very messy back there. So if you think to yourself: Oh, I can't draw and I can't do that - well, look, it's messy. That's the way we want it to be because you'll call out the things that are most important. And I just want to - for those of you listening, as Scott Ward really has been the behind the scenes studio artist for me for so many years - so these companies that I work with, I often will go in and and I'll do a rough illustration of their vision, but then I bring it home and I have Scott finesse it in the studio. Because I'm not a trained fine artist - you heard him say he was trained - but the stuff is incredible. But I wanted to share this one experience that we had doing a mural for the Seattle Space Needle because I thought this was- So, Scott, tell us a little bit about what happened. When we went in I got a commission to do a mural and the interior for the employees, right. So we ran some focus groups, and then we were going to do this. Now I knew I wasn't a muralist, so I immediately hired Scott to come in - I like wrote him right in the contract, so that I would have someone who actually knew how to do what I said I could do, right? And so, tell everybody what happened. Scott Ward 15:39 Well, we had a lot of things happen. Patti Dobrowolski 15:41 You mean, are you talking about meeting Five Seconds of Summer as they ran past us? (laughs) Scott Ward 15:47 (laughs) It's crazy. But, you know, it was a good process, because we met with all the different department heads and got their input into what this image should be. And it really was - how long was that wall? Patti Dobrowolski 16:01 It was 40 feet. Scott Ward 16:03 Yeah, 40 feet long, and it was just the top half of the wall. So it was this long, skinny- Patti Dobrowolski 16:09 4 feet high and 40 feet long. It was the mural that we did. Scott Ward 16:13 Yeah. And it was kind of basically tell the whole story - the Seattle Center, and the Space Needle. And you know, it was taking all those ideas and putting it into this image, and it really was alike an elaborate map that you would do in, you know, a brainstorming session. It was great. I mean, I loved it. Patti Dobrowolski 16:34 We had a little, a couple of SNAFUs in that though. So okay, so when you do a mural, like you pencil out the whole thing, and just want to say that it didn't totally match the drawing. I was in charge of moving the projector. So that was one of the things that Scott was able to fix. However, we go in to start to- We buy $1,000 worth of these paints, pens, no, paint, what were we- we've got pens- Scott Ward 17:01 We started with the markers. Patti Dobrowolski 17:01 We were going to use Copic markers. So we went in - I had tested it on the paint already, so I knew it would work and we go in on that day to do it. And the first pen stroke that we do, it pulls the paint off onto the pen. So if we spent $1,000 on markers, we were going to spend 5 or 6 thousand dollars to do the whole thing. So I go to Scott: Oh, no, what do we do? And of course, Scott knew the answer - you were like, let's go get some paint pens. Yeah, so we ran to the art store, and then we painted that whole thing together, which was so much fun. Scott Ward 17:38 My favorite was - what was the little misspelling that- Patti Dobrowolski 17:45 It was on the bus. I can't remember what it said, but it was- I missed a letter. Scott Ward 17:51 (laughs) Patti Dobrowolski 17:51 I did all the lettering. I had missed a letter in it. But it made sense. We've made sense, what I had written - but it was a funny in-joke, but they made us change it. I can't remember, I wish I had that here so we could show it off. I'll have to look at it, drop in the picture. (laughs) You know, do you prefer to- You did that that large format with me, but you spend many hours and days- you use some repeat images in your illustrations? What did they mean, and why do you use the same images? Tell me a little bit and give us some insight into your artwork? Scott Ward 18:27 Yeah, you know, I think like most of us, we have recurring themes just in our life in general, right. And I think for me, I grew up in Minnesota, in a Catholic German family, and you know, all those things are very restricted, right. And so, are restrictive. And, especially as a gay man it's really restrictive, or as a little gay boy. And so I think I often paint about feeling trapped or wanting greater freedom. So you know, I did a series of images based around cages, birds in cages, and the birds kind of represent the soul, the cages, the situations I find myself in and then there's- I do a lot about home and feeling, wanting to feel a place of home and, you know, connection. Yeah, a lot of that. And I use a lot of green, because green represents growth and life to me and wanting to really grow into fully who I am. So it's a lot about freedom and belonging. Patti Dobrowolski 19:26 Yeah, it's fantastic. And then you had a whole "Red Ball" series, which was really cool - really, so playful and fun. And all of his artwork has been described as very whimsical and it's really beautiful. It's just incredible. So kudos to you for all that sitting at that easel all that time. But now, tell us - I want to know, like what- and I bet you, other people want to know: what's your day look like? Like, give us the run of show for the whole day for you. So we know, like, how do you stay focused and in yourself and how do you, you know, complete your day, what kinds of things at the end? Scott Ward 20:04 You know - like you, I have a little routine that sets me up for the day. So, the first thing I do in the morning is: with my little pot of coffee, I sit down and I write. I journal every morning - I have journaled every morning, for the last, I'm gonna say 35 years. Patti Dobrowolski 20:22 Yeah. Scott Ward 20:23 And in that, there is this great centering that happens - it allows me to kind of get the menial, gritty stuff out and really focus on what's important. And I can't imagine what my life would be without doing that every single day. And in that, it's also this sense of meditation and contemplation that sets me up in a really kind of peaceful and calm way for the day. Then, I do some kind of exercise: I run about four to five days a week, and we live- Patti Dobrowolski 20:54 - About five miles, right? Five to something miles, like, you're crazy. Yeah, he's a crazy runner. I tried running with him, I just want to say: No, no, I can't really- Scott Ward 21:06 I don't really like running. I don't like running. I mean, I like being done running. And a good run is when I don't realize I'm running, right? Like, when the ideation part of me takes place, and I forget I'm running, that's a good run. (laughs) Patti Dobrowolski 21:20 (laughs) Oh, my god. Scott Ward 21:22 But it's important, because there is also something really valuable in putting your body into a rhythmic mode that brings up the clarity and ideas. So, problem solving and creative processing all takes place in that- Patti Dobrowolski 21:38 -In movement. Scott Ward 21:39 -uh, physical activity. And that takes place in walking, too, especially when you walk alone - if you're walking with somebody, you have a tendency to have a conversation with them- Patti Dobrowolski 21:48 Yeah. Scott Ward 21:49 -which is something different. And so- Patti Dobrowolski 21:51 -then yourself, talking to yourself in your head - or out loud! Sometimes I caught myself talking out loud - I'm like, don't talk out loud, it's no, not appropriate. Scott Ward 22:01 Yeah. And we live close enough to the village, it's a mile. And so we walk - and that walk also is a really important thing, as far as just staying centered. And so then my day, who knows what the rest of the day is going to be like - with the Fairhaven Association, I sit in a ton of meetings. Like I, you know, it's not unusual for me to have five or six meetings in a day. And, you know, that gets to be a long day. So taking breaks in between, getting outside, moving a little bit is important. Patti Dobrowolski 22:29 Getting coffee. Scott Ward 22:30 Getting coffee, yeah, exactly. Chocolate- Patti Dobrowolski 22:35 All the key things. Scott Ward 22:36 Yeah. And then on my studio days, I really just am so focused on being an artist that it really is basically closing the door to my studio, being in there drawing out new images, or - I do a lot of commission work now, like most of what I do is commission work. And so, really, that process is connecting with the client, and getting their thoughts on what they're looking for. And then, you know, it's all about the creative process on that day, and really is staying focused on being an artist and wearing my painted clothes and not caring what I look like or, you know, being seen. And so - but every day is different. And that's what you get when you are working with, you know, all kinds of different people, and creating all sorts of different programs and events. And, you know, there's something kind of exciting about that, I don't know if I could live a life where every day was the same, right? It just wouldn't be stimulating for me or at all fulfilling - I just think there's something really exciting in the uncertainty of what the day is going to play. Patti Dobrowolski 23:48 Well, and also to - I mean, yours is a life of service. Since I met you, you've always been serving someone - you know, in the community, or you served in your church - you served in all these different ways. And so, say a little bit about why you think service is important, or why is it important to you? Scott Ward 24:08 You know, I recognized early on - well, in my 20s, I wasn't that way - I was pretty self serving, and part of it was this sense of survival - just wanting to know how I was going to make it through this life, because I didn't have clarity and, really, what I was supposed to be doing. And once I realized, oh yes, this is what I'm called to do- Patti Dobrowolski 24:27 You were going to be a priest. I mean, that was gonna be true. That's part of your story, was you were going to be a priest. And then when they found out you were gay, that was it. You had to make a choice. Scott Ward 24:35 Yeah, they rejected me. I mean, they out and out rejected me. And so, that was a huge thing, because for me I felt like, you know, I really am called to the spiritual unfoldment. Patti Dobrowolski 24:49 Yeah. Scott Ward 24:50 To have that kind of thrown back at me was really difficult. I thought: Really? I had this understanding that I was supposed to be making a difference. Not in just my life but in other people's lives. And so, it took me a while to bounce back from that - it was one of the best things that ever happened because it really made me clarify what my role was supposed to be. And being a priest - now, when I look back, I think I would have been miserable. Patti Dobrowolski 25:17 Yeah, so I was gonna say that was a good choice. Definitely. How rigid could that have been, yeah. (laughs) Scott Ward 25:25 There's some things about being a priest that I just found out that like- Patti Dobrowolski 25:30 Yeah. Scott Ward 25:30 And so, you know, just this idea of - I want to leave a legacy. And I think when people become parents, I think that's an easy sense of: Oh, yes, I'm leaving something behind in the world that will make a difference, right? Patti Dobrowolski 25:45 That's right. Scott Ward 25:45 And I don't have kids, I won't ever have kids at this point. And I just thought, what can I leave in the world that will make a difference? Yes, I have my art and my mission with my artists to create inspired and inspiring uplifting images, right? And so, yes, I'll leave that. But I also want to feel like I'm leaving my little corner of the world better than the way I found it. And I think, you know, we say I live in service, but there's a sense of selfishness about living a life of service, right? It is about feeling good about what I'm doing in the world. And, and no, that's not ultimately the goal, it is kind of a byproduct of doing good in the world and lifting others up in the world, right there. There is some satisfaction from that. And that, yeah. And so it really is about the wanting to just leave a positive- Patti Dobrowolski 26:41 Also, you know, you're very good about knowing - like, you really have a sense of 'knowingness' about what you like or dislike - and this I admire in you, because I'm not, sometimes not as clear in some areas around this, so I would default to Scott, when I was choosing certain things: "What do you think of that?" But you have a really clear sense. So when you're in a situation where you feel challenged, and you need to make a decision, what do you do to help yourself understand what the right thing is to do? Scott Ward 27:15 I think it's different every time, right? If it involves somebody else, and there is some, maybe, misalignment in what's supposed to happen - I always remember that the other people or person involved has a whole story that has brought them to their perspective, right? And so to honor that, at the same time, you know, I have a whole story that's brought me to my perspective. And, you know, is there something that can happen that honors both of those stories, right? That's always the place I go to, there's got to be - anything's possible, right? So, is there this solution, is there this way forward that gives a nod to both or all sides of what's happening? So that's one way - if it's just me trying to figure out what's going on, it really is going for an extra run, or spending an extra page writing, or going for a walk - it really is putting myself back out into this place of: Okay, let's kind of ruminate. I also say, you know, before I go to bed, before I fall asleep - I will say: Let's find some clarity about this tonight, right? In the middle of the night, let's bring it into our dreams, let's bring it into our sleep, and let it to kind of figure itself out without my getting in the way. Patti Dobrowolski 28:31 Yeah. Scott Ward 28:32 Right? And so all those things are kind of me trying to get myself out of the way because we can be our own worst enemy. Patti Dobrowolski 28:38 Yeah. You know, we have an opinion about what should happen, we have a - you know, we're always trying to make ourselves look good, our ego gets in there, and then instead of trying to see it from a distant field - like I sometimes will put it on a playing field, because like a chess board, and I can see all the players in the field, and then understand what their position is within that chess game, and then help us move closer to alignment - so that eventually, checkmate, and one of us wins. I mean, not in that sense, but you know, there's a solution that's better than both of us. That's fantastic. Scott Ward 29:16 I actually, uh, as an artist, you know, I see people as different colors and shapes, right? And so, you know, I can say: Oh, yeah, that color and that shape will work next to this one, but this one here, it really needs to be moved over the other side of the painting, right? And so, I kind of see it that way, because I'm so visual, that it just is kind of - for me to create a community as an image. And there's care that has to be done in that, because it's not just saying: Hey, you don't get along with those folks. It's like, really - it's putting into this place that you would work really well over here. You'd be so valuable over here. We need you over here, right? And never, ever, put them- Patti Dobrowolski 29:55 - put them outside of the picture. Scott Ward 29:57 That's right. Patti Dobrowolski 29:57 You're out and you're not in the frame. Scott Ward 29:58 Yeah, that's exactly right. There's - Patti Dobrowolski 29:59 I love that - what a fantastic, but - what a fantastic way of envisioning that. Especially when we talk about community, are you thinking about teams? Are you thinking about whoever it is - family, you know, they all belong in the painting, somewhere. Scott Ward 30:13 That's right. Patti Dobrowolski 30:14 Now, when you think about your future, and you envision your future, what's your big thing that you see happening for you? What's the one thing that you think: Oh, this would be so cool. Like, if this thing happened, you know, that's what I do. Sometimes this thing happened, Scott Ward 30:32 If this thing happened...It's interesting, because I really love my life, like I love my life to be - I actually think it'd be greater if we've been closer to each other. Patti Dobrowolski 30:39 Yeah. Guess we need to change that. (laughs) Scott Ward 30:42 Yeah. But, you know, there's, I think, I don't really have any lofty goals anymore. I think it really is just to continue living, and growing a sense of integrity. Like, really being authentic. I remember growing up, and my parents were young, when they had, like, just basically out of high school. And I think they were still kids, right? When I was even six years old, they were in their mid 20s. And so I remember watching my dad, and he still had his high school friends; and when you hang out with them, he was one person; when he was at home with my mom, he was another person; when he was with us, he was another person; when he was with my grandparents, he was a completely different person, right? And I just watched how he kind of morphed into these different areas. And I realized, even then, that I wanted to be who I was, wherever I was - it didn't matter who I was with, I wanted to be me. And so, I've worked really hard to do that. And I wanted to continue to be able to do that, I still find myself, you know, being maybe a little defensive, or, you know, hold back or whatever. But I just want to be fully me, wherever I am. So I think that was kind of a lofty goal. But it's been an ongoing, lofty goal. Patti Dobrowolski 31:53 Yeah, I think, and it's not always easy. I think, you know, a lot of things push, push everybody, you know, our buttons, and then suddenly we're back in an old frame of mind, where we are seeing things from a very black and white perspective, and we're not embracing and we're not, you know, open to whatever's happening. And I just want to say, you're honestly incredible. I just felt - I as a friend, as an artist, as everything that I've seen that you've done - I just have so much love and admiration for you, that I feel fortunate that I got into your schedule to get you on the podcast, so thank you so much for that. But tell the listeners if you would, like, you know, this is all about making change. Like, we need to learn how to pivot easily and be flexible to it. So what would you say to somebody who's listening, you know, who needs to make a change and isn't quite sure how to do it or wants to become an artist and isn't sure how to step out - what would you say to them to help them bring more of their authenticity to the world? Scott Ward 32:56 First, I want to say that change is inevitable, right? You can sit there and say you don't want to change, fight against it - but think something's going to force you to change. And it's gonna be more painful than if you had made that choice yourself. Patti Dobrowolski 33:07 Yeah. Scott Ward 33:07 And then the other aspect of it is, you have nothing to lose by trying, right? Just try. And so, if you're not going to do anything, you're not going to get anywhere - you can sit and imagine things are gonna happen, but without action, nothing's gonna happen. My suggestion always, for folks that say: Hey, I really do want to be an artist - I say, every day, put yourself out there. And it can be the smallest thing - it's sending an email to a gallery or to an agent and just ask for feedback or, you know, find out what the process is. But everyday, one small thing - it could even be looking up another artist and seeing what their art was like, or talking to an artist and just finding out what they did, or what their day is like. But every single day, just do one small thing. And eventually, you'll start to find things that resonate with who you are, as an artist, and doors will start to open. It may not be what you think it's going to be - in fact, I can guarantee you, it's not ever going to be what you think it's going to be - but you have to be open to that, and trust. Trust is a huge thing. And you and I have talked about this many, many times over the years, because we knew each other when none of what we are now in existence or even what we had dreamed about. And so, you know, we, in the process, both recognize that once you put yourself into that - that journey, that you have to trust you're going to be taken care of. And you and I are living examples that that is true - that once you trust that everything you need is going to be there, it will be there. Patti Dobrowolski 34:43 And that - if it doesn't look the way you think it's going to, just keep going, because something better is on the other side - cause you can't vision from our current reality. So we have no idea what the future is really like. So, if you can get way out there - like I always say, put the most outrageous things on your map, the most incredible things - because believe it or not, those are the things that you're going to be sitting there 10 years later saying, I don't know how that happened, but it did. Look, I put it on that map. Scott Ward 35:15 Yeah, that's exactly right. And I think, because I know you, I give you a lot of credit for the life I have. Because it's been that, that idea that, don't be afraid to, you know, have - what's called the BHAG, right? The Big Hairy Audacious Goal, right? Don't be afraid of that, put it out there. Because if you don't ever put it out there, you're never going to get there, you have to be able to do that there. And, you know, this also reflects or goes back to what it's like to work with people - and a group of people is there are no bad ideas. Right? Every idea has validity, anything is possible. And once you step into that - and the other aspect of is: Yes, set those goals, but you have to take a step - there has to be action behind it. You can't just put the goal out there and then anticipate- Patti Dobrowolski 36:02 -and sit in the chair watching TV at home, you know, it's just not gonna happen. You got to keep putting one foot in front of the other. Scott Ward 36:08 That's right, you can do that drawing and put that goal out there. You can dream about it, but you have to start walking toward it. And you know, like we both have said, you start walking, but then the road is gonna turn left when you thought it was supposed to turn right. Well take go left, because that's going to be a more beautiful road than the right would happen. Patti Dobrowolski 36:29 Yeah, that you ever imagined it'll turn into something you never even imagined. Scott Ward 36:34 Yup. Patti Dobrowolski 36:34 Oh my gosh, God, this was so incredible. I got kind of all moved by just the conversation. It's just so- Scott Ward 36:41 Me too. I love you. Patti Dobrowolski 36:41 I love you too. And it's just so great to have you here. I can't wait to have you back, and we'll have to do some kind of annual thing - and we'll just see where it goes. But for everybody that's listening, I encourage you to follow ScottWardArt.com. You know, go there and see what he's doing. If you're in Fairhaven, go to Current and Furbish, say hi to Cameron, his partner, and also find Scott - because where Scott is, a lot of incredible things happen - and there will always be art and there will always be play and there will always be fun, and probably wine too. I'm guessing- Scott Ward 37:14 Well, I don't know- (laughs) Patti Dobrowolski 37:18 There you go. Anyway, I love you so much. Thank you so much for taking the time to be here today. And so, for everybody that's listening, you know the drill - if you liked the show, you know forward it to your friends or, you know, write Scott an email at scott@ScottWardArt.com - just acknowledge him and then in the way that he acknowledges others, and just go out today and you know what to do, just - if you can - Up Your Creative Genius. Thank you so much, everybody! Patti Dobrowolski 37:51 Thanks so much for listening today. Be sure to DM me on Instagram your feedback or takeaways from today's episode on Up Your Creative Genius - then join me next week for more rocket fuel. Remember, you are the superstar of your universe and the world needs what you have to bring - so get busy! Get out and Up Your Creative Genius. And no matter where you are in the universe, here's some big love from yours truly - Patti Dobrowolski, and the Up Your Creative Genius podcast. That's a wrap!

On this Hacks & Wonks week in review, Crystal talks with activist, community leader, former mayor of Seattle, and Executive Director of America Walks, Mike McGinn about labor news, the downsides of car-centric planning, and alternative 911 responders. They discuss the first worker victory at a Seattle Starbucks, the tulip farm workers strike, King County elected officials getting involved in the concrete worker lockout, and an initiative to raise the minimum wage in Tukwila. Then they dive into the surprise highway in Seattle Waterfront plans and why adding lanes doesn't reduce traffic. Finally, Crystal and Mike discuss pushback on alternate responses to policing and what moving those jobs out of SPD looks like. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Mike McGinn, at @mayormcginn. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Seattle Starbucks employees approve union, the first on the West Coast” by Paige Browning from KOUW: https://www.kuow.org/stories/seattle-starbucks-wins-union-vote-the-first-on-the-west-coast    “Tulip farm workers go on strike one week before popular Mount Vernon festival” by Angeli Kakade from King5: https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/farm-worker-strike-skagit-valley-tulip-festival/281-86d05687-6ab7-4d9d-9f94-8c9eb9c924b4    “County Proposes Concrete Co-Op as Private Companies Continue to Throttle Supply and Lock Out Workers” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/03/23/county-proposes-concrete-co-op-as-private-companies-continue-to-throttle-supply-and-lock-out-workers/    “Initiative aimed at Southcenter could raise minimum wage in Tukwila to match SeaTac, Seattle” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/initiative-aimed-at-southcenter-could-raise-minimum-wage-in-tukwila-to-match-seatac-seattle   “Surface Highway Undermines Seattle's Waterfront Park” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/03/20/surface-highway-undermines-seattles-waterfront-park/   “Alternate Response in Seattle Meets Another Hurdle” by Amy Sundberg from Notes from the Emerald City: https://www.getrevue.co/profile/amysundberg/issues/alternate-response-in-seattle-meets-another-hurdle-1090894?utm_campaign=Issue&utm_content=view_in_browser&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Notes+from+the+Emerald+City    “UW Can Keep Civilians Who Replaced Campus Cops, Choe Show Canceled, Dembowski Bows Out” by Paul Kiefer and Erica C. Barnett from Publicola: https://publicola.com/2022/03/21/uw-can-keep-civilians-who-replaced-campus-cops-choe-show-canceled-dembowski-bows-out/    “Third and Pine bus stop to temporarily close amid downtown Seattle safety concerns” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/third-and-pine-bus-stop-to-temporarily-close-amid-downtown-seattle-safety-concerns/    Downtown Seattle Association: https://downtownseattle.org   The State of Downtown from the Downtown Seattle Association: https://downtownseattle.org/events/state-of-downtown/    Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at OfficialHacksAndWonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: activist, community leader, former mayor of Seattle, and Executive Director of America Walks - and someone with a mean jump shot - the excellent Mike McGinn. Welcome back. [00:00:58] Mike McGinn: Thank you - although I don't think I have jumped on my shot for quite a long time. In fact, even - I played JV in college and they called me "Sunday Papers McGinn" - and the reason they called me that was they said that I didn't even jump as high as the Sunday papers. Now mind you - back then the Sunday papers were thicker than they are today, but even then it was still an insult about my jumping ability. [00:01:23] Crystal Fincher: All right - "Sunday Papers McGinn" - "Mayor McSchwinn" and "Sunday Papers McGinn" - there we are. [00:01:29] Mike McGinn: They also called me "Flash" because I lost every sprint, so it really is amazing that I could even hang at all on the court. I had to make it up with savvy and moxie - so there you go. [00:01:44] Crystal Fincher: But it worked. I wanted to start out just talking about some - one, seriously cool thing that happened this week - the Starbucks employees approved the first union on the West Coast here in Seattle, Starbucks's hometown, with the unanimous vote by the employees at the Broadway and Denny store on Capitol Hill to unionize. There is now a unionized Starbucks store on Capitol Hill in Seattle, and this is a really big deal. [00:02:14] Mike McGinn: I think that - I don't know how to put this in the great arc of the union story in America, but it does feel like we're starting to see - as we know, there was a real - unions saw a tremendous decline in post-World War II America. Immediately after the war, unionization was much stronger, there was a lot of shared wealth, the middle class grew stronger, broader, wealthier over that time and it really went together. Then we saw - you got to go back to the Reagan era - breaking the air traffic controller union was a highly visible sign, but there was a lot of other work that was done to weaken unions. And public opinions of unions declined as well. Unions were - oftentimes it was employee unions and public employee unions, excuse me - was really the strength of the union movement. And there were still, of course, craft unions and manufacturing unions and other service worker unions - but they really felt under siege. In the City of Seattle, for example, and it still goes on today - will a new hotel be a union hotel or a non-union hotel? And that's existential for the union workers because they don't want a non-union hotel to drive down wages so that they can't compete for wages, or their hotel that they work for can't compete. Same thing for grocery stores, so something like unionization in a Starbucks - coffee shops and more retail workers unionizing - that's a big deal, considering how many Starbucks there are across the country. It's also behind the push for the $15 an hour minimum wage - or really should be starting to get higher now - behind the push for paid sick leave, behind the push for childcare. Unions helped provide a floor for wages and working conditions, and we've now turned to the government to provide some of that floor - but with all the rising inequality across the country, we're seeing more people turn to unions, and it just feels like a change. So we'll have to see what happens moving forward, but it certainly feels like a change. [00:04:47] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, an absolute change and the link between the weakening of unions and income inequality is substantial. Certainly the pushback is happening - more than 150 other Starbucks locations are working to join the same union, including 6 in the Seattle area. So we're going to continue to see this with Starbucks, certainly with Amazon, another locally-based company that we're seeing a variety of unionization pushes across the country with that. And interesting because - trying to lead within the tech sector and the issue of unionization being important there - lots of times we're used to thinking about not just the lower wage jobs, but even the higher wage jobs is, "Oh, they make a good wage. They have no reason for a union," but my goodness, when you talk about all of the toxic workplace cultures that we've seen there, and actually even though someone may be making six figures and in not the lowest income bracket, the share of profit that is being absorbed by the company and kept from the workers, even in those higher paid jobs, is substantial. So it's just going to be really interesting to continue to follow these movements, and also looking at other local strike actions and labor actions. Another one this week, with the tulip farmers going on strike - tulip farm workers going on strike just before the Mount Vernon Tulip festival, which is really popular, but they have issues with worker conditions. They've been expected to work with lesions on their hands, their employers are not paying for PPE, and in very low wage jobs. The word there is that they continue to have a dialogue and they're working through it and both sides say that they're confident they can, but it is taking this collective action by workers to make this an issue that is pressing enough for employers to deal with. [00:06:53] Mike McGinn: Yeah, and we see an economy in which there's generally higher employment right now, so that's giving a little more bargaining power to workers, because the employment numbers are higher or the unemployment numbers are lower overall. It's a consequence of the inequality we've seen and grown - and in a period of growth - the pendulum swinging back a little bit. Will it be sustained? Probably will be determined by how government behaves ultimately in response to this. Do they support these movements? Or do we kind of go back to a time when the rules and procedures are set up to suppress it, and give more power to the companies in this discussion? [00:07:47] Crystal Fincher: Well, that's an excellent point regarding the response by government leaders and how that impacts the situation for workers. Because we see that with the concrete workers' strike action, which really has turned into a lockout by the concrete companies. The workers offered to go back to work, but the concrete companies have largely declined the workers' ability to do so. And not just that - the few workers who they have allowed to come back to work, they have not allowed them to drive trucks that are part of the company's fleets. They have actually acquired some old beat-down raggedy trucks that they've literally Sharpied the required information on the doors, and it just seems like a petty retaliatory action. And in response, we have seen throughout this process - some local leaders seem to put pressure on the workers by not forcing the companies to come back to the table or to respond in good faith. But Dow Constantine has basically said - hey, "Clearly the local concrete industry is failing the people of King County, and I won't let our region's infrastructure hang in the balance." And in response, he and members of the King County Council have proposed a local co-op, a publicly owned concrete co-op - to prevent situations like this from happening, to provide reliable, low-cost, on-time concrete to ensure that affordable housing projects, critical infrastructure gets completed on time. How do you see the leaders' responses in helping or hindering this whole process? Just how would you negotiate through this? [00:09:39] Mike McGinn: I just want to say I find this really fascinating - and I am an outsider - I have no particular insights on what's going on. But first of all, just the historical analogy - we have a public Port because the people that owned the docks on the Seattle waterfront could control how things worked. That affected - anybody who shipped through the public waterfront docks had to deal with the people who owned the docks - that was the reason we now have a public Port, because we didn't want to allow a few companies to control the flow of goods in and out of the state. And that was during the progressive era, same era in which we ended up with a publicly-owned electric utility and things like that - so to me, just the historical parallel is fascinating. I think the other piece of the parallel here is that - clearly, it's the issue of whether the workers are getting paid well, but this is also the rest of the business community saying we're hurting by the way you companies are acting. So what we see here is a split in the business community - so you have both Girmay Zahilay, a pretty progressive guy on the Council, and Dow Constantine - who's he's a progressive, but he's a more reliable partner to the business interest - let's remember, he came forward and he helped the Convention Center out with some short-term loans so they could keep going. And it's places like the Convention Center and the people who build massive infrastructure who really want to keep that concrete flowing. So it's just the politics of this here are fascinating, in which we're now seeing concrete production as a public good - or as a private good that must be handled by the public to ensure the smooth function of the economy. Now, if you look back at the Port - although it was hired to protect the small merchants using the Port - like any entity owned, run by the government, it can start leaning in on behalf of the big companies. So the Port itself is known for how it treats independent truckers, the Port itself is known for how it treats workers at its facilities. So I don't know - I'm just really struck by this - that we've come to this, where you have labor interests and other business interests saying the concrete companies need to get their act together, or we're going to take the business away from you. That's quite a moment here in Seattle. Let's see if it starts extending to other public goods as well - like maybe municipal broadband - maybe that's another place where only a few providers are managing to treat the rest of the community not so well, and we should look at public ownership. [00:12:37] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, another thing this week that was announced is an exciting initiative to raise the minimum wage in Tukwila, which includes Southcenter Mall - actually a really big employment hub for that city and that entire area, with a ton of retail and service workers - to raise the minimum wage there to $15 an hour. And it's next to SeaTac, it's next to other cities that have increased minimum wages - and so it's sitting there as an outlier and the Transit Riders Union is leading an initiative, a municipal initiative, to make that change. So this is a really interesting and exciting development - a test of worker-focused policy at the local level. And it's going to be really interesting to see how this unfolds. How do you see it? [00:13:35] Mike McGinn: The cities in this area - SeaTac, Tukwila, Burien, Kent, Auburn - are all places which have become much more diverse racially than they were 20, 30, 40 years ago. And it's due in large part towards communities of color and immigrant refugee communities being pushed out by costs in Seattle. These are workers who - we're talking a lot of low wage service workers - who have to commute distances into the City or find local work. I view this as very positive that they're pushing for this. We know that the SeaTac fight was over $15, which occurred before anywhere - led to that SeaTac City Council being in the crosshairs from both sides as to who would get elected, who would hold the majority - of one that was more supportive of these communities, one that was more diverse than in the past, or one that was more business friendly. And I don't know, I'll just say that the trend continues here where we're seeing more and more public demand from the communities in those places to get more respect as to how they're paid and how difficult it is to make a go of it in expensive Pugetopolis. [00:15:11] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely - and so this initiative would set Tukwila's minimum wage to approximately match SeaTac's, which started at $15 an hour with cost-of-living increases. Right now, it is about $17.50 an hour, just around there - and so it's going to be really exciting to see how workers organize, how the community responds to this. There's going to need to be some signature collection and a campaign put forward for this, but it - being led by the Transit Riders Union who has experience and the resources necessary to do this - I am eager to see how it unfolds. Well - [00:15:57] Mike McGinn: This is just fascinating - if you look at the demographics of Tukwila, which I'm doing on the Census - it's 20% Black, it is 26% Asian - that's Black alone or Asian alone, not looking at mixed. 6.6% mixed and 30% white - so it's really extremely diverse place, and a place where - we'll all be better off if the folks who have been pushed to the bottom of the economic ladder have a better wage. We really will all be better off if we can do this. [00:16:37] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and another notable thing about this is - in some of the other pieces of legislation that have raised minimum wages, it was limited to certain types of jobs, or sometimes accepted - there were allowances or exceptions made for certain classifications of jobs to not be included. And this is an across-the-board minimum wage - saying that we're setting a floor for workers, period, that needs to be competitive with the region. And Tukwila's sitting in between Seattle and SeaTac and other areas, and neighboring cities can have as much of a $3 an hour difference in what the minimum wages are. So hopefully this also helps to speak to the competitiveness of the region, and just helping the people who are working and serving us to be able to participate in our economy and enjoy the fruits of it just like everyone else. Also want to talk about - this week, a story that came out that I know you commented on - the Seattle Times Editorial Board was pushing back against people's surprised reactions to see just how car-centric the new Seattle Waterfront Park is. When this was sold - again, lots of conversations and history and context from the period leading up to when you became mayor and while you were, but - lots of talk about opening up the Waterfront, and this can be just a jewel of the City, and this is going to be a wonderful place for families to come and pedestrians and bicyclists, and like other waterfronts and their areas that are great pavilions for people to just enjoy and have fun, and a world-class park basically is how it was sold. And then you see it, and there's a highway that replaced the viaduct. How did a highway become part of this, and why are they trying to say that that is what they set people up to expect? [00:18:50] Mike McGinn: I think there's a few different factors in here. And one of the factors, there's a bunch of different things going on here. Maybe you want to edit this piece out - I have a little bit of background noise, so I'll start my answer again here. When you look at this, that was the debate initially - and the call from people was if we don't build the tunnel, if you try to just have a surface highway, you're going to end up with a big highway on the Waterfront. So that was a big part of the argument that was made by the tunnel advocates. And of course there were still some people that just wanted to rebuild the elevated - but if you had to rebuild it to modern standards, it would've been twice as wide, because wider lanes, full shoulder, et cetera, et cetera. So that was a big part of the argument. And for just - I would say the single largest reason why we ended up with the road we have there - is just a belief system that you actually can't remove roadway capacity. You just can't remove it. So that's why we ended up with the tunnel. People would say - well, if we don't have a tunnel, then all those cars will flood the City streets, or all of those cars will flood I-5, and the economy will ground to a halt. In fact, that wasn't just the public statement - I was lectured privately by Governor Gregoire, at the time, asking me if I wanted to destroy the City economy by snarling I-5. They just can't let go of this idea that we must have highway capacity to accommodate the cars. And that attitude then found its way to the surface, even after the tunnel was built. The fact is that - at its base, there's a four-lane road, two lanes each way, which is a big road - let's be really clear about it. A four-lane road, two lanes each way. Those are roads that we find very uncomfortable in lots of parts of Seattle, whether that's Lake City Way, whether that's Rainier Ave, whether it's MLK - throughout the City, they tend to produce very high speeds on them because you have the two lanes side-by-side. They don't have the attributes of a good downtown City street, which will be more narrow, and just naturally slows down vehicles when you do that. So you start there, then you add the ferry holding areas and then they say, "We need to put in a bus line," and this also was a controversial - actually, it wasn't really a controversial decision - it should have been more controversial, honestly. That was that the buses from West Seattle could have been sent through Pioneer Square - and if you took the streets on either side of the park down there, Occidental, you could have had one street dedicated to buses going in, another street dedicated to buses going out - and you wouldn't need a dedicated bus lane on the Waterfront. In fact, you could have kicked the cars off those streets and made those bus-only corridors at the time. And it would've functioned a lot like Pike and Pine function on the way up to Capitol Hill - would've been about the same amount of traffic, bus traffic, there. And it would've been delivering people to a place where there's a lot of businesses, a lot of residents, but it was rejected because the Pike/Pine neighborhood advocates and business advocates said, "We don't want the bus lines. Bus lines are bad, they'll hurt us." They said, "It'll be like Third Avenue through us." That's not true - it would've been more like Pike/Pine in terms of the number of vehicles, number of bus trips. So that was part of it too. So by the time you say we have to have room for all the cars, and we have to have room for all the ferries, and we need a dedicated bus lane - next thing you know, you got something that's eight to six lanes wide through big chunks of it, and that's a really big road. [00:22:57] Crystal Fincher: It's a huge road. [00:22:59] Mike McGinn: It's a huge road. [00:23:00] Crystal Fincher: The Urbanist did a great article about this. So just to - again, they tore down the viaduct and put just as many lanes on the ground as they did - and actually more south of Columbia street, where it turns into that queuing area for the ferries - plus the tunnel underneath, and bypass lanes, and the new Elliot Way also adds four more lanes - funneling more cars and trucks into Belltown and the Waterfront, directly adjacent to the new aquarium - that's supposed to be a centerpiece of this Waterfront Park. So there are very few parks that people think of, when you think of a park, that actually include a literal highway going in the middle of it. This is an area where I learned from you, where I was actually wrong. We talk a lot about, "Hey, Mike McGinn turned out to be right. A lot of people were wrong." The kind of roads and transit - surface roads and transit - option where - no, we actually don't need to replace the viaduct. We don't need the big stuff. If we actually add transit capacity and focus on just reasonable roads through here, we can actually do this without spending billions of dollars that are likely to create cost overruns in addition to this. We ended up just building a tunnel and a highway on top of it without sufficiently increasing transit capacity at all. My goodness. [00:24:32] Mike McGinn: It's one of the hardest things for people to really accept - is this idea that the amount of traffic we have is not a fixed amount that's driven by some set of external factors. There are clearly external factors driving the amount of traffic, but there's so much latent demand for driving, and so much of driving that could be replaced by other modes - that actually the amount of traffic you have in successful cities - if you're a city that's fading, the traffic will be driven by your economic activity, right? But in a successful city, the amount of traffic you have is driven by the amount of lanes you have coming in and out. If you reduce the lanes, the traffic reduces, and this is a very hard thing for people to understand. And the opposite is also true - when you expand the lanes, the traffic increases to fill the lanes. And it is because there are tons of alternatives - we do have buses running in and out of town, and some people take the bus because it's a pain in the butt to drive. And people are going to take light rail because it's better than driving, but it probably won't reduce traffic on I-5 that much. That line to Northgate will bring more people into downtown, and it'll bring them in a more pleasant way than if they had to be in stop-and-go traffic on I-5 all the way downtown. But we're still going to have about the same amount of traffic on I-5, because traffic is kind of like a gas - you remember your physics - it expands to fill the room available to it. It's one of the reasons - I'll get this in - it's one of the reason people love bollards. If you don't actually put up a bollard to protect a street or a place from cars going, or a curb stop to protect a place, the cars just expand to fill it. And it's a very hard thing for people to sometimes grasp. And that the opposite is true - that when you reduce the amount of lanes, when you reduce the amount of space available for cars, people will make different choices. And it might be a different choice about when they drive, it might be a choice about where they drive - maybe if you're in West Seattle, Green Lake Park doesn't look so good anymore. I don't know why it ever looked so good, if you're in West Seattle, to go to Green Lake - but there are enough discretionary trips in the system that we can conserve some trips without hurting our quality of life. In fact, there's an argument to be made it might improve your quality of life if people were looking to take shorter trips closer to their home and supporting local businesses and local efforts. Not everyone can do it, I'm not saying everyone can, but enough people can that you don't need that bigger highway on the Waterfront, and you don't need as many lanes coming into town. By the way, I'm going to toss one more thing into this mix - something that nobody talks about, it's been bugging me for a couple of decades now - is the 509 extension as part of the Puget Sound Gateway Program. Now, it's bad enough that we're building a highway that will cut through communities, add more pollution, et cetera, et cetera - but you know how everybody takes the back way to the airport from Seattle? Well, imagine if that road is extended to I-5 - people coming north on I-5 will have a back way into downtown. If you think the backups at the First Avenue South Bridge are bad now, wait 'til you see what it's like when you basically are mainlining cars from I-5 to the west of SeaTac Airport, straight to that First Avenue South Bridge. And who's going to breathe all the pollution of those idling cars? Residents of South Park and Georgetown and the Duwamish Valley. And then they'll cross that and then they'll hit that stretch of road heading into downtown - and where are they going to get off, if they're trying to go downtown? They're going to get off at that interchange just south of downtown. So that'll mean yet more cars in the industrial area, yet more cars in Pioneer Square. So this 509 extension, and it's incredibly against the interests of the Port as well. Port's one of the biggest proponents - they have this vision we'll build this and our trucks will just get on the road - and they'll just fly out to I-5 south by going down the 509 extension. But they're not thinking it through - because what is it going to mean to them to have 30,000-50,000 more cars a day clogging the industrial area because they've got a shortcut to downtown that enables them to skip the I-5 main line into Seattle. To me, this is a known impact of the 509 extension. I guess I'm telling this story, not just because I don't think we should build 509, but because it illustrates the absolute inability of the Port and business and engineering interests to tell the public the real impact of adding lanes. They believe it will reduce congestion - instead, it's going to send many more cars and much more pollution into the exact places where we say people should have cleaner air and should have fewer cars. [00:29:48] Crystal Fincher: Where it's currently creating shorter lifespans - it is literally taking years off of people's lives. [00:29:53] Mike McGinn: Literally killing people. Yes. [00:29:57] Crystal Fincher: And creating chronic illnesses - all of the cost and impacts associated with that. It's really counterintuitive, admittedly. [00:30:07] Mike McGinn: Yes. [00:30:07] Crystal Fincher: Because of our society, it's counterintuitive and people make the assumption - and feel confident in making the assumption - that if you add lanes then, "Hey, it's clear traffic." People think about when they're in a backup and they see a lane open up next to them and they can pull into it and speed up. And that's what they apply - they apply that logic to adding that lane is going to allow everybody to get in that lane and speed up. But that's actually the problem. And this is uncontroversial in planning circles. It's not like there is conflicting data and we don't know if adding lanes actually increases traffic. No, we've known conclusively for decades that adding lanes on highways increases traffic. The demand will always catch up - that's how it works. So there is no traffic congestion and especially on a route like that - people talk about the need to prioritize freight movement and that is absolutely a concern - you're actually making that tougher. You're putting more cars on the roads that right now are being heavily used by companies moving goods throughout our region. It just is so frustrating to continue to watch elected leaders, at all levels, continue to say things that are absolutely false. This is absolute misinformation that adding lanes reduces traffic and - [00:31:41] Mike McGinn: They know it's false. It's an iron law of congestion, it's an iron law of highway expansion. And again, it works in both directions and they know - but there is such a set of industries, and it kind of relates back to this concrete strike. There's a set of industries that - they need their multi-billion dollar cash infusion every few years to keep feeding them - and it's not just the construction companies, it's the companies that do the planning, it's the companies that provide the lawyers, it's the companies that help float the financial bonds to finance it all. Then you add in the trade unions that really want the union jobs associated with major infrastructure projects. And now you've got both sides of the aisle with support for this. So this last Transportation Bill was vastly better than prior ones in terms of the mix of spending, but it's got another multi-billion dollar fix for the companies addicted to the regular supply of money from the Feds and from the state for the work they do - same thing happened at the national level. They all have an interest in just not accepting something all the studies, all the professionals know to be true - because if they accepted it, they would turn off the money supply to people who really just - their entire businesses and their reason for being exists around that. So you can argue correctly that if you built - projects to build more sidewalks, build more transit, build more bike lanes - produce more jobs per dollar - but they wouldn't produce more jobs for the people that are currently getting the dollars. So they're not terribly interested in that - in changing the dollar flows - so that's what really drives this. Then they mislead the public that the new lanes will solve congestion, or they're just building out the system, or they're fixing bottlenecks, or they'll even tell you - this is one of my favorites - it'll reduce the number of cars stuck in traffic, so they won't be idling, contributing to global warming. They'll actually argue it'll reduce pollution, because it'll be more free flowing. And these are just all not truthful statements. And they're all too often made by professionals who know better, but they are in a system where the political leadership demands that they keep delivering the dollars to these companies. And that's just how it is. So we all got to keep doing our work to let people know that the costs of that are actually way too high to just keep some people in business. We need to take a look at a different approach. [00:34:38] Crystal Fincher: Well, this week there was also some very concerning events at the Seattle Police Department's presentation to the Public Safety and Human Services Committee of the Seattle City Council - a number of challenging things - and again, I highly encourage you to read, to subscribe, to Amy Sundberg's Notes from the Emerald City newsletter. She covers this frequently, comprehensively. But one thing I wanted to pull out was just - Brian Maxey, when making an SPD presentation regarding - I don't know if folks recall - the analysis that the City had done regarding SPD officers and how they were spending their time. So an independent analysis determined that 49% of the 911 calls that are currently handled by SPD were not emergencies, crimes - they could be handled by organizations other than SPD. This traditionally has been an uncontroversial thing where - before we saw that the 2020 protests - there are lots of departments around the country, several local ones and SPD also had chiefs who talked about this. They were saying, "Hey, we actually feel ill equipped to respond to calls where no law's being broken, but someone is unhappy that an unhoused person is around there," or "Someone's having a mental health crisis," or "There's just activity that doesn't quite rise to the level of criminal activity," or "Maybe just a car is parked in the wrong spot." And that could be handled just as sufficiently with a civil response and does not require an armed police response. And so the analysis was just about half of all of the calls, that could happen with - this presented an exciting opportunity, because my goodness, SPD has been complaining that they need resources to respond to these 911 calls, and we need to get police on the streets to be able to do this. And wow, you actually just got news that half of those calls are not sufficient enough or at the level where it needs an officer response. So it looks like the staffing crisis you've talked about actually has its own built-in solution - let's intelligently target what we respond to and what we don't, and where we use very expensive police resources that carry a high risk of escalation, and completely reduce that and reformat that. Unfortunately, SPD, instead of recognizing that opportunity immediately pushed back, and said, "Hey, we only identify 12% of the calls that we're confident that can be answered with an alternate response." I also want to note that 12% is not an insignificant number, so that should also be moved around. They basically said, "Well, we need more time to do more assessment and we need to do a study and create different protocols." And mire this in process to try and run out the clock and hope people lose the political will to do anything about this. They were reporting this week saying that - we actually did some revising and we actually don't think anything needs to be moved outside of the department. Anything that needs to be handled - we feel that we can do it within the police department, and maybe it'll look different and we'll try and make it seem like an alternate response, but it's still coming out of the police budget and using police resources - and just a challenge there. So this was one of the first times this issue has been revisited since they said they needed to do additional analysis - and they were light on details, but certainly indicated that they are not willing to offload anything further. And that anything that needs to happen within the City, they plan to use a police budget and armed or officer resources to respond to. What did you think of this? [00:38:56] Mike McGinn: Well, it is a great question, obviously. What do you really need police officers, and what do you not need police officers for? The police department may have a little bias there because they think they're pretty good. It's natural, it's human - I don't want to pick on the police department for doing that. We just need to recognize it - that things that they have historically done, they think it's appropriate for them to have done and for them to be involved in - that's just natural. So my first reaction to this would be that this is something that the police department needs to be having input into the decision, but you shouldn't be asking them to drive the process. It just may be too hard for them to do - to be able to separate those things. And when you add into that - there's an internal dynamic within the police department too, which is chiefs don't want to get sideways with the force, or leadership doesn't want to get sideways with the rank and file. And the rank and file - they're unionized under the Police Officer's Guild - and it's just really instinctive for public employee unions, period, to believe that only the union member can do this job, so if you're taking a scope of work away from us, that's just bad. That's just reducing - it's the other side of whether it's a union hotel or a non-union hotel. If you're a union hotel worker, it's like I don't want to - let's keep these jobs here - and again, it happens across all the unions. What makes this conversation harder is that police are still respected as having a word on safety - well, the police say we'll be unsafe if a police officer doesn't do this - they have a little more pull with the public. I believe I recall the firefighters were insisting that 911 calls for fire be handled by firefighters, because only firefighters themselves had the requisite expertise. And it's a good argument, but it is one that has to be tested and thought through. I think that's the type of thing that really has to be examined closely - is a good argument as to why this one requires a police officer as opposed to that one - but I don't think you can ask the police department to make that call. A mayor would have to set up a system where somebody else is doing the hard analysis and making the ultimate recommendations on how to do this, and it should have more stakeholders at the table as to how to do that. You can't ask an agency or department of government to reorganize itself into a reduced role or out of existence. It's like asking a cat not to be a cat - they just can't say I'm not going to be a cat anymore - they're cats. And it's awfully hard to tell a police department to redefine itself in a way that it isn't what it thinks it is. So that's my takeaway - is that this is a completely natural reaction, and somebody else better be in there digging and actually making the decisions - and ultimately will take hard choices from the mayor who will then face a loss of confidence from the union representing those folks, because you just reduced the potential future number of union jobs. And then there's the leadership, right? What's the potential size of my constituency - you just reduce the potential size of my constituency and the number of jobs I can hand out - therefore, you reduce my bargaining power for wages, and you reduce the promotion opportunities for people in the ranks, and all sorts of things. This is just - you got to separate the institutional imperatives of a union and a department from the actual facts of what does or does not take a police officer to handle - and that's a process that you can't put the police department in charge of. [00:43:20] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely and even in - and collective bargaining is bargaining with all sides at the table and one side not dictating what's going to happen. I also think it's important to highlight through this - the issue of having job security and protections is absolutely fair and legitimate and should be discussed. Moving these positions out of the police department does not mean that we have to move them to non-union positions. It may not be SPOG - it could be a different union, but that respond to the needs that the City actually has, that appropriately manage the resources that the City has, that enable the City to be as safe as it deserves to be. And so allowing responses to be laser focused on improving safety. If we have data that shows that something does increase safety, great. If we have data that shows the opposite, then that should be the signal to reallocate those resources to things that are more effective at doing that. I hope that we see that from the mayor, that there is direction saying it looks like we could more effectively use the people who are there in a role that better serves the public. And that seems like it would be crucial to building the trust that everyone acknowledges is lacking, or certainly not where people would like it to be. So I just hope that the mayor does lead this in the right direction, and doesn't just hand this off to the police department to drive this process. [00:45:09] Mike McGinn: I would add something else too - and a PubliCola article recently about the UW Campus police talked about this issue. There's also protections under labor law that you can't take a union job and give it somewhere else - potentially non-union job - it's called skimming. And so the argument that the police union can make, and it was an argument that was made by the UW Police Department rank and file, was that certain unarmed campus responders being hired by the University were skimming the union jobs of the SPD cops. And there was a ruling in the state - that no, that's not skimming - but that's a legal backdrop that also provides some power to the union, and you understand why that rule is there. If, let's say, a union has managed to unionize a portion of the workforce, you can't just reclassify them, give them a new title to do the same job and say but you're not union now. The skimming rule is there for a real reason, but that can also become an obstacle here towards changing things. I dealt with that some as mayor as well - when we were looking at how to reallocate responsibilities within City government, from one department to another, or from one set of workers to another - the skimming issue would come up. [00:46:47] Crystal Fincher: Just kudos to UW for having the will to set an example in placing safety of the people on the campus first and doing what all of the data showed would increase how safe people are and making that change. To your point, that was actually a really important ruling by Washington's Public Employee Relations Commission - to say, "Actually, this was done okay. Let's continue to prioritize worker safety, worker protections, making sure that we don't just hurt unions by doing this and make it harder for people to unionize - but balance the needs of the population there, the actual core focus of the organization, and aligning how those organizations are structured with protected workers within them." [00:47:45] Mike McGinn: And kudos to UW for taking the case all the way through and not simply saying, "Well, we can't do it because we might have to have a lawsuit, or we don't want to upset that union because of their role in the system." That can be harder for elected officials to do. Honestly, it keeps bringing up for me - the issue of public safety and the treatment of members of the public - the degree to which police officers have union protections, I think really is something that needs to be reevaluated. The idea, and I faced this as mayor - and every mayor faces it, every chief faces it - when they ask to do discipline, it's like, what is more important? The right of that police officer to keep their job, or the right of the public to be free of the conduct of a police officer that doesn't meet the standards that we believe the community's entitled to. And too often, the gist of it is - well, the right of the police officer to hold the job is higher under the law than the right of the people to be protected. Or - now, I shouldn't say under the law - but in practice, that's what happens. I don't think people appreciate - I was often asked, "Well, why don't you just fire the bad cops?" And it's like - we're trying, but it's a lot harder than you think. And quite often, the defense about why you can't fire a cop, and we've seen this since I was mayor too, was, "Well, nobody ever got fired for that before." And that itself is a defense for why you can't let go of someone. And as the force gets smaller, as it is right now, they're still not filling the empty spots. It's a lot harder to hide somebody in some department where they're not going to have to interact with the public in some way or another. This is a challenge. I think that that's a fundamental issue we have to start facing as a society as well - certainly, public employees should have the protections that any public employee has whether unionized or not, but have we gone too far - and for this particular set of workers - on the balance between the protection of someone to hold a job - a job that entails carrying a weapon, having the ability to arrest somebody, having the ability to stop someone for questioning and detain someone - all of these things just go to the fundamental rights, individual rights of members of the community. And on balance, whose rights are more important here? I think that calls for some reexamination of the union, of how we handle this. [00:50:42] Crystal Fincher: I will leave it there because that was well said - completely agree. [00:50:47] Mike McGinn: We'll call it good - thanks for having me, Crystal. [00:50:49] Crystal Fincher: And with that, I thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, March 25th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler and assistant producer is Dr. Shannon Cheng, with assistance from Emma Mudd. And our insightful co-host today was activist, community leader, former mayor of Seattle, and Executive Director of America Walks, Mike McGinn. You can find Mike on Twitter @mayormcginn, you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I, and now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts. Just type "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar, be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to resources referenced in the show at OfficialHacksAndWonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal's co-host is criminal defense attorney, abolitionist and activist Nicole Thomas-Kennedy. They discuss how a powerful lobbying group used a focus on local control to sink statewide housing reform, and how to overcome that in the next session, a rundown of candidates running for open seats, the disconnect of prioritizing the wants of downtown stakeholders over real solutions to homelessness, the Seattle City Attorney's repackaging of a failed initiative, and mixed results on the plan for some concrete workers to return to work while concrete companies continue to drag their feet on negotiating a fair contract. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy, at @NTKallday. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Here's What Happened in Olympia” by Rich Smith from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/03/15/68343035/the-strangers-rundown-of-2022s-huge-confused-legislative-session    “What Will It Take to Get Statewide Housing Reform?” by Matt Baume from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/03/16/68207458/what-will-it-take-to-get-statewide-housing-reform    “Surprise Sweep Displaces Fourth Avenue Encampment, Scattering Unsheltered People” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola: https://publicola.com/2022/03/09/surprise-sweep-displaces-fourth-avenue-encampment-scattering-unsheltered-people-throughout-downtown/    “Downtown Sweep Highlights Urgency of Resolving Seattle's Other “Top-Priority Encampment,” Woodland Park” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola: https://publicola.com/2022/03/16/downtown-sweep-highlights-urgency-of-resolving-seattles-other-top-priority-encampment-woodland-park/    “City Attorney's Office Introduces Latest Initiative to Target “High Utilizers” of the Criminal Justice System” by Paul Kiefer from PubliCola: https://publicola.com/2022/03/15/city-attorneys-office-introduces-latest-initiative-to-target-so-called-high-utilizers-of-the-criminal-justice-system/    “Harrell postpones Seattle police plan to crack down on ‘disorderly conduct' at Third Avenue bus stops” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/harrell-postpones-seattle-police-plan-to-crack-down-on-disorderly-conduct-at-third-avenue-bus-stops/    “Cigarettes and Fentanyl: All Aboard” by Nathan Vass from NathanVass.com: http://www.nathanvass.com/blog/cigarettes-and-fentanyl-all-aboard    “Some Seattle-area concrete drivers return to work, others await go-ahead from employer” by Nick Bowman from MyNorthwest: https://mynorthwest.com/3398180/seattle-concrete-drivers-return-others-await-employer/    “Concrete strike continues in King County as union workers who offered to return didn't show” by KING 5 Staff & Adel Toay from KING 5: https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/concrete-strike-king-county-union-workers-no-show/281-f14d167c-c88c-44db-91c8-591171124209    Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. For transcripts and resources referenced in this show, you can visit officialhacksandwonks.com and reference our episode notes. Today we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome to the program for the first time, today's co-host: criminal defense attorney, abolitionist, and activist Nicole Thomas-Kennedy. Hey. [00:00:55] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Hello. Thanks for having me - and this is the second time I've been on - must have been so memorable that first time. [00:01:01] Crystal Fincher: No, this is your first time as a co-host on the Week In Review. Yes, we did an interview last time, which was very good and incredible. And a number of people were like, well, we see who you want to win. And it's just like, look, if she happens to be making great and salient points, it's not my fault. But yes, just really, really excited to have you here on the Week In Review. [00:01:28] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I'm excited to be here. Thank you. [00:01:30] Crystal Fincher: Well, and so the first thing that we have coming out of the gate was one thing I wanted to talk about - coming out of the end of the legislative session - we talked last week and broke down a number of bills. The Stranger this week had a great article that we'll put in our episode notes that also further broke down what was great about the legislative session, what was disappointing, and how we can move forward. And then Matt Baume also had another article talking about the failure of bills that would have mandated more density, specifically near transit, that would've helped address the affordability crisis that we have here in the state. And I thought it was very good - it was focused on, hey, what needs to happen moving forward to actually succeed in passing bills that require more density statewide? In that, he talked about the AWC, Association of Washington Cities, being a vocal opponent. They are a powerful lobby in the State of Washington. Their purpose, they say, is to represent the over 200 cities in the state. And their position largely was - it's really important to have local control in these and the one-size-fits-all solution that would come from the state just may not be right for our communities, so therefore we need to do nothing. The challenge in that is that most cities have not moved forward on doing anything. As you look at this issue, Nicole, what do you see as being the barriers and, I guess, the opportunities for moving forward successfully? [00:03:16] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I think that when I look at this, first I think it's funny that there is a coalition of all these cities that are all saying the same thing - we want local control - that seems to be the only thing that they agree on. But I think that on a state level, there needs to be a floor created for affordable housing and density, and that's really all we were talking about for the most part with these bills. It wasn't any incredibly specific directions that each city has to take on a certain timeline on a certain budget - anything like that. It was about just creating a floor of affordable, dense housing that is needed in pretty much every community. And I think that what I heard a lot in the last year was that - the reverse of there needs to be local control - which was now we have municipalities competing against each other for who can do the least. Seattle is - Sara Nelson and other people are calling out other cities for not doing their part and spending their money on addressing the crisis. And it seems to be like a race to the bottom in terms of who can spend the least. And because the idea, I think, is that if you build services, if you build affordable housing, people will move into them. And why do that when you can concentrate a lot of the unsheltered population in one place that provides the minimum to keep people alive? And that's what I see going on. [00:04:59] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and definitely a resistance to people who are defined as others and outsiders from even being able to buy into communities. It was really interesting in this article - there were representatives from cities across the state, from Port Orchard to Tacoma to University Place, and a number of them were leaders within AWC and talked about - we need local control, we are all very different. But one very consistent thread in these is that the median home price in most of these areas has doubled. This housing crisis is not just a crisis in major municipalities. It is a crisis across the board in areas that were affordable - that people used to consider being affordable and that people could buy into and still work in a major area where jobs are concentrated. And still live, even with a commute unfortunately - that it was possible to buy a home there with a median income. It is no longer the case in many of these places. And sometimes, like one of these examples in Port Orchard, they touted - well, we built new homes. Well, yeah, those are half million dollar plus homes adjacent to a golf course. If we're concentrating on making sure cities are accessible to people across the board and that you don't have to be rich and that we aren't displacing people outside of cities and just gentrifying them, then we have to have a solution across the board. Also, interestingly, the National League of Cities, which the Association of Washington Cities is a member of, had a 2019 report that said, "While local control is often at the heart of policies that accelerate progress, there are examples, particularly in the affordable housing policy arena in which state policy is needed." To your point, there has to be a floor. We have to establish a minimum boundary. Cities can determine the right way that they're all going to get there, but what we can't do - what is not sustainable, we're already paying the price for - is continued inaction while just spouting excuses like, well, it's not local control, therefore it's nothing. I would love to see leaders within the legislature say, "Well, you say you want local control? This wasn't successful this session. You now have this coming year to address this within your own cities. If you do, we can find a way to create legislation that respects what you've done." And more than likely if you're taking meaningful action, the floor is going to be below where you set it. But it's not going to be an option to continue to not take action next session and further on in the future. I would love to hear that from legislative leadership and leaders across the state - it just should not be an option. We have to make cities and housing affordable and accessible for people to live in, or else we're going to make our homelessness problem worse, we're going to make our displacement problem worse, we're not going to have people available to fill jobs that are necessary within cities. This is a critical economic development issue just in addition to a housing and social issue. So I hope we address that. Go ahead. [00:08:31] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Oh, I was just going to say too that I really like how you talked about these are communities that used to be affordable. When we talk about Port Orchard - my in-laws live in Port Orchard, and so when they bought their home, it was very affordable and the amount of money it appreciated to was pretty astronomical. And so when we're resisting building affordable housing - and affordable really is - we're talking about homes that are less than half a million dollars, which is just a wild concept that that's where we are with the average home prices in an area. It wasn't always like that. So the idea that these - the people that are already there should be able to stay with this huge, expensive appreciation that they have in their home value, but then not let anybody else in that is going to be coming in at the same level that they came in at. And unfortunately they're not going to be able to afford - they're going to have to have less in terms of space and in terms of all of those things. And so it's interesting to me to want to keep out the same people that are essentially already there, I guess. [00:09:52] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Yeah, I mean, it absolutely is that issue. And then as I look at this, it's like the people who are in housing whose housing has appreciated and who are resistant to any kind of acceptance of other people in their communities - we're talking about their kids, we're talking about their employees, we're talking about their students. And again, people talk about, well, I can't find anyone to fill this position in my company. We can't find people. No one wants to work. But is it that no one wants to work? Or is it that you're now forcing people who can't live and work in the same community, and maybe the compensation doesn't work for someone who has to commute 45 minutes each way and drop off their kids beforehand and pick them up after? It just isn't tenable for so many reasons. I feel like we leave housing and affordability out of economic discussions and it's just so critical and a big part of those two. So I hope that we see significant action, and that candidates are talking about this on the campaign trail, and our leadership is making it clear in both the House and the Senate - that this is something that needs to be acted on and will be acted on next session, and that cities are on notice that they need to move in the right direction. [00:11:19] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yes, I agree. Yes. That needs to happen. And I think there needs to be some - maybe more clear calling out of what is actually happening. If municipalities are saying, oh, we want to sit down, we want to sit down, we want to talk, we want to talk - but then they're not asking for any more talks and they're not proposing anything of their own. I think it's maybe time to call a spade a spade and say, are you really interested in solving this problem, or are you really just kicking the can down the road? [00:11:47] Crystal Fincher: Exactly. Well, the legislative session did recently conclude, and that means that now we have a number of legislators who are kicking off their re-election campaigns and starting in earnest. One thing I don't know if everyone who listens is aware of is that - while our legislators are in office, they can't actually raise money, so they can't do a major element of campaigning. There is a prohibition against doing that, also for certain employees of the state. So once session concludes, they're all trying to catch up to people who have already been running and doing that. And so a lot of them are - people are receiving a lot more emails from their representatives and appeals for donations - that's happening now. And I just wanted to do a quick little rundown of where there are open seats. There are a number of representatives who are retiring or moving onto different positions, some in the House are running for Senate seats - but that is leaving some positions open that are now contested by several different people. The 22nd Legislative District in Thurston County - having Beth Doglio and Laurie Dolan who are Democrats, and Loretta Byrnes running for those - that's Position 1 there. 30th Legislative District in Federal Way, where Jesse Johnson has decided not to run for re-election - we have Kristine Reeves, who's filed to run, Leandra Craft, Lynn French, Ryan Odell and Ashli Raye Tagoai, I think it is, and Janis Clark. And then in the 36 District in Seattle, where Reuven Carlyle decided not to run and then Noel Frame decided to run for Reuven Carlyle Senate seat, leaving that House seat vacant - there's Julia Reed, Jeffrey Manson, Elizabeth Tyler Crone, Nicole Gomez, and Waylon Robert. And in the 46th District - and just a reminder, I am working with Melissa Taylor - there is Melissa Taylor, Lelach Rave, Nancy Connolly, Darya Farivar, and Nina Martinez who have filed for that seat. That's in north Seattle, northeast Seattle. 47th Legislative District, which is eastern Kent, Covington, Maple Valley area, where Pat Sullivan is no longer running, he's not going to be running for re-election - there's Carmen Goers, Kyle Lyebyedyev, Jessie Ramsey, and Satwinder Kaur, who is a Kent City Councilmember. And then King County Prosecuting Attorney is an open seat because Dan Satterberg is not running for re-election - and so there's Stephan Thomas, Leesa Manion, and Jim Ferrell who are running for that seat. So there is a lot to come - we're certainly going to be having conversations with several of these candidates, but running these campaigns are getting off in earnest now - and you'll be hearing lots and seeing lots, and the end of the legislative session is a big turning point in campaign season with another big milestone coming up. There are lots of people who can file to run and you can start your campaign committee in May - in mid-May is where people officially declare that they're running for a specific seat - and that will determine who actually appears on your ballot. And so that'll be the final say on who is running for what, so people in the interim can potentially switch positions they're running for, choose not to run - lots of choices and paths that this can go down. As you're looking at this crew, does anything just come to mind for you? Or you've run a campaign - a big campaign citywide before - what do see just ahead for these candidates and for voters who are evaluating them? [00:15:59] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I mean, I see some candidates that I think are exciting - I also love Melissa Taylor. I used to work on the other side of Leandra Craft - I think she's smart and knows what's going on. So I think I'm seeing some good candidates. Campaigning at that level is different because there just has to be so much fundraising done, whereas in the City, we're so lucky that we don't have to spend all of our time doing that. I just - I wish everyone the best because - oh yeah, oh, Nicole Gomez too. There's some people to be really excited about, I think, and so that's great. I just wish everyone the best. I hope everyone's taking good care of themselves - that's what I think when I see this list. [00:16:45] Crystal Fincher: Running for office is a very, very tough thing. It's not fun - you're putting yourself out there to be scrutinized - people do not always consider the human when they are communicating with or about candidates. And they are humans - even when we disagree with them, they're humans. I do think, as candidates are kicking off their campaigns, certainly fundraising is a big deal in the City of Seattle - with City races, there are Democracy Vouchers where every resident gets money from the City that they can donate to the candidate of their choice. That is not the case in these campaigns this year - they have to raise all the money they need. And campaigns do take money because unfortunately there is not broad media coverage, and getting your message out to most voters requires communicating directly with them. And so whether it's knocking on their door, giving them a call - which still takes resources - and usually also involves communicating with them via mail or online or on TV - just a lot of different mediums there. And then people are also focusing on endorsements - especially early on, people are trying to figure out - what do these candidates stand for, what have they been involved with, and how have they worked before in the past, what is their history? And sometimes endorsements can be revealing and highlight what that candidate prioritizes, who is in their corner, what kind of issues they'll be strong on and a leading a advocate for - not simply a vote. So lots of that happening right now, and certainly just hope for the best and hope they are successful in getting their messages out. It is an interesting time and campaigns are kicking off once again. I did want to pivot to a number of news items in the City of Seattle surrounding public safety - first being the issue of sweeps of a number of encampments. And so we had a 4th Avenue encampment sweep, which scattered a bunch of unsheltered folks. There's probably other sweeps to come soon, and the issue of another encampment that has been viewed as a top priority at Woodland Park. As you look at what's going on with these sweeps, what do you see as far as what's happening? [00:19:33] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: What I see is the huge amount of disconnect between what the public thinks is happening and what is actually happening - and that's just such a huge disservice to everyone. I know that there's a narrative out there that people are refusing services and they're refusing shelter. And I guess the idea is that some people are camping out in the cold and rain, because that's preferable somehow to be sheltered. And that's not what the case is - we don't have enough places for people to live that they can afford to live in. We don't have the services that are needed to stop this from continuing to happen. Also, the thing is - it really just moves the problem around. There's nothing really - it will clear one area of sidewalk for a certain period of time, but all it does is move things around. And the more people are destabilized, who are already barely, are clinging to stability and security in the most tenuous way possible - are then pushed around and have all the belongings they need to survive thrown away - because that's what we saw in the downtown sweep is - it was different than some of the other sweeps in that they didn't really offer services, they didn't offer anything. There's different timelines that they went by because they called the tents downtown an obstruction, a sidewalk obstruction, which means that they're - all of the things that they're supposed to do during the sweep, they didn't have to do any of that. And they didn't. And so we just see people's belongings being thrown away, tents thrown away. And I think what's also missing from the narrative around these sweeps is just how much stress that puts on service providers. I talk to a lot of people and they say, well, the Navigation Center is just up the street and I'm like, how much do you think that they can handle? Because as a public defender, something that I saw often was people being displaced by going to jail. That means when they get out, they have to get a new ID, a new EBT card, they have to go to DESC and see if they can get a tent and a sleeping bag - because there's things that people need in order to survive. And people don't just evaporate after a sweep, they are still existing. And also my partner has an office in Pioneer Square and he watched the 4th Avenue sweep, and he's seen a lot of sweeps around . That area. And he says, it's just really hard to watch people who are barely hanging on become so dysregulated by the horror of what is actually happening to them. And he said he would see people huddled together in alleyways trying to get away from the police - it's just a really horrifying scene that doesn't - it really truly does not solve any problem other than that one piece of sidewalk for a little bit of time. And so we're spending millions and millions of dollars to essentially make this problem worse. We move it around and make it worse. And so, I get that people don't want to see this anymore, but if that's what they want, then we're going to have to take some steps towards solutions and sweeps just aren't it at all. [00:23:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. You raised so many good points - it's absolutely correct. The bottom line is the actions that we're taking are not moving people into shelter and permanent housing. It is not an ideal solution to have people on sidewalks and have people living on streets. But when people don't have a home to go to and they don't have anywhere else to go, that is the option. That is the option. Unless we just expect people to die, we can't jail our way out of the problem. There certainly is a contingent of people who are just like, well, they shouldn't be on the sidewalk and that should be illegal and that's an obstruction and it's bad, and they should be arrested and they're probably criminals anyway and they're causing problems and creating crime. When the reality is people who are unsheltered are actually many times more likely to be victims of crime. They're a very vulnerable population and that's all just factless propaganda that we're hearing otherwise. But our services are not set up to meet the needs that actually exist, and time after time - when we listen and we hear things like they were offered shelter and they refused, we really do have to dig a little bit deeper and think about what were they offered? So many times what they were offered does not actually accommodate the needs that they have - if they have a partner, if they have a dog - those people that they have relied on that again, because they're in such a vulnerable position and because they are so exposed to the likelihood of having crime committed against them, having people that they can count on who help to look out for you, that help to protect your belongings - is essential to survival. And a lot of times we're asking them to give that up for a night in a shelter, for a week in a shelter. It's not even like they have the opportunity to transition in a permanent way and okay, maybe it's going to be okay. That stay in the shelter could be absolutely destabilizing for them and could tear apart the only thing that is keeping them safe and warm and alive. And so we just have to get really serious about this. I think Marc Dones has talked a lot about this issue and that we have to get real about - when we see such high "refusal rates", which can just be a service didn't fit. And when we see high rates of people being referred to services and then not showing up or following through, there's a reason for that. And if we want to get to the root cause of this issue and if we want to get people off of our sidewalks, which I think everybody wants, then we have to actually address the issues there and meet the needs that exist, not the ones that - they have to be solutions that meet the needs that they're identifying that they have, not what we think they should have, not what we think they deserve, not what we think is right or good or moral or all of that stuff. If we aren't addressing the things that they say will, hey, yes, that is something that I could do to move forward to get off the streets, then we're just moving people around to different areas. And again, a sweep is just moving people off of a block - the City and the County will acknowledge, have acknowledged - that no, it's not solving the issue of homelessness, it's moving them off of a block. I think another missing part of this conversation is that we seem to be prioritizing the needs and wants of downtown moneyed interests and not those of the rest of the community. We're perfectly fine spending tons of money - allocating tons of time and officer resources, City resources - to clear a block here and there at the behest of the Downtown Seattle Association, or the Chamber, or a business owner who's been loud and vocal, but we're actually not doing the same thing in other neighborhoods where just regular people are living. In fact, we're displacing the problems that existed in the downtown area to other communities - freely admitting it and saying, hey, we just spent the money that we could have spent to house people - which is the biggest problem of homelessness is people lacking houses - and we're treating this like a criminal solution and basically putting the problem into your lap now. And doing a victory lap because this one block downtown is clear for now. It just does not make much sense to me. And I just feel like so many people are just like, well, you don't care and you want all the sidewalks to be like this. No, no one does. We just want to actually not keep kicking the can down the road and waste the money that we could be using to actually solve this problem. [00:28:33] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Absolutely - and I also think that there's - I don't really understand why there is so much comfort in subsidizing downtown businesses using all the resources there to make sure that they can have what they want, but everybody else has to deal with the fallout and they just have to take it on. But like downtown - their sidewalks, everything - the City as a whole pays to subsidize clearing those blocks for them and for their businesses. And I don't understand why anyone is okay with that idea, especially because yes, we're not talking about solutions. And I think that if you're not talking about getting people housed, then you are just talking about moving the problem around. And there's a lot of reasons why - you were talking about people might refuse services, but there's also - and they're very real. Like you said, there's a community aspect that is the only thing that's keeping a lot of people truly alive, truly safe, truly alive - the modicum of safety and life that they have. And that's not considered. And I think that it's a very convenient - to say, well, they refused services - but it's just like, well, did you give them a three-night hotel voucher where they can't take any of their belongings? And so therefore they know if I do this, then I'm going to be out again in three days and I'm not going to have any of the things that I need to survive. There's a lot more that goes into decisions about what services to accept and not, rather than just personal preference. And I think that's how it gets sold - is like, oh, well, you maybe don't like this, but that's what there is. And it's just - first of all, I think people should have choices. But second, we're talking about the difference between life and death. And so the idea that, and this is what I would see in court all the time too, especially around issues like addiction or not having shelter is - well, if we just punish you harder, then you won't be like this anymore. I'm - this person lives under a bridge and is fighting for their life. I don't know how much lower we can take this - there's no point in making people who are suffering suffer more. I think there's this idea that they'll just suffer more and then they'll just stop - suffer more and then they'll magically have money to move into an apartment that costs twice as much as it did five years ago? That's this weird, magical thinking that is really, I guess, hypnotic on some level, but it's really pervasive. And we can see that it hasn't worked, so I don't really understand clinging to those notions. But yeah, that's where we are. And it's incredibly - I saw a picture the other day of some bike officers at a sweep and there was 12 of them just in the picture - and if you think about median income for a sworn police officer for SPD, I think it's $163,000. So even just looking - if we just rounded to $150k - 12 officers at $150k in this picture - that's almost $2,000 an hour. And I'm sure that was only a small number of the officers that were there. So in addition to parks, in addition to all of the other services that may or may not be provided - we're spending gigantic amounts of money to make the problem worse. And that just doesn't make any sense. If you want people off the sidewalk - I do too, this is horrible. Yeah, and I think there is this idea that if you say you don't like sweeps, then you must love people living in the street. And I think it's the complete opposite - you can be in favor of the sweeps, but you are not in favor of getting people off the street. You are in favor of getting people off your street temporarily. So it really - but I think it's really hard for people when the narrative is, oh, they're refusing services - as if people are being offered an apartment and they're saying, you know what - I really like it outside in the cold and rain. Yeah, it's hard, it's hard, there's - the media around this issue is really hard, making it really difficult for a lot of people. [00:33:30] Crystal Fincher: I agree with that. Another thing that we saw this week was the City Attorney Office pivoting back to a strategy - another strategy that we've seen unveiled many times before - an initiative to target "high utilizers" of the criminal justice system. And so Ann Davison has identified - I think it was 118 individuals who they say are responsible, 118 "high utilizers" who "create a disproportionate impact on public safety in Seattle." And so there have been similar initiatives launched in 2012 and 2019. And you may have heard other terms like high-impact offenders, prolific offenders - but this is the same strategy that they're using there. These clearly were not successful programs in the past, but we are returning to them. And certainly this is something that has been championed by more conservative folks, by the "law and order crowd". And we have varying opinions with this - there's a PubliCola article that goes over this - but King County Department of Public Defense Director, Anita Khandelwal, views the initiative as just repetition of a failed strategy, saying, "Over the last decade, the city has repeatedly announced similarly named initiatives that would focus more law enforcement resources on those already most policed as a strategy for addressing public safety. This is a tired strategy of arresting, prosecuting and jailing. It's expensive and clearly ineffective." Lisa Daugaard, the co-executive director of the Public Defender Association and co-founder of the LEAD diversion program, who we've talked about before - most recently supportive of the failed Compassion Seattle initiative - sees potential for success, saying the initiative is built on a solid foundation - addressing the needs of "high utilizers" on a case-by-case basis. She believes Davison could avoid the errors of past crackdowns by pushing her counterparts in city and county governments to expand programs like LEAD to accommodate a new surge in clients. Also, Lisa admits that if LEAD took on all 118 of those people's clients, they would not have any more capacity for additional clients in the future. And again, it's important to note that it does not appear that Ann Davison has expressed at all that she has any interest in diverting these programs to LEAD, or any other diversion program that is focused on treating more root causes to prevent this recidivism and reoffense that has been a hallmark of just arresting and jailing people. We have to do different things in order to get a different result. What do you think about this? [00:36:47] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I think it's funny - the repackaging every year - Ann really sold herself as this - someone so opposite of what Pete Holmes did, but now she's - this is the same exact thing. And it really is just window dressing in my opinion. And the idea that we can spend more on law enforcement and it's going to help is so ridiculous. The one thing that the 118 people that were identified have in common is none of them have shelter. [00:37:28] Crystal Fincher: Literally none? [00:37:30] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Right. Yeah. No, none of them do. They're all unsheltered. And so instead of spending this astronomical amount of money on more law enforcement, why don't we put money into housing? Because also when you look at the breakdown of the repeat crimes, it's usually low-level shoplifts and trespassing, which is just sleeping under an awning. And so how much of that could we just remove by getting people sheltered? And that seems to be the last solution. It's just - try everything else, except for providing shelter and services to people, which are so - it's so much less expensive to house someone and give them wraparound services - wraparound services like onsite case management, medication management, things like that - is so much less expensive than putting them in jail. And it's stable, right? Because no matter how much you hate that someone sleeps under an awning or steals a sandwich, no matter how much you dislike that, the criminal justice system will always fail to provide a solution because it's a temporary thing. The maximum sentence on almost every misdemeanor is - well, the maximum sentence is either 90 days or 364 days. And with the way jail time works, everyone's going to be back out on the street in 9 months - that's the max. We cannot just think of jail as this permanent housing solution and permanent incapacitation solution for low-level misdemeanors that could be so - I don't want to say easily, because it's not easy - it's not getting people into affordable housing, we don't have any first of all. And it's not an easy solution, but it's the only one that actually makes any sense. And I think that when we talk about LEAD or any of these other things, we're just putting more money where it doesn't belong. I don't think lawyers and cops should not be dealing with these situations. That's not where the money should go. The money should go to service providers, to housing, to professionals that deal with addiction or mental health issues - that's where the money needs to go and those are prioritized the least, and it's all about arrests and incarceration. And again, it's just like the sweeps - you're kicking the can - there's nothing about that that's going to solve the problem. And so no matter how many times someone gets arrested for these things, they're going to get out of jail. If it doesn't escalate into a felony and we're talking about the people that are these "high utilizers", or a couple years ago repeat offenders or prolific offenders, we're talking about a lot of misdemeanors. We're not talking about people with a bunch of murders or something like that. [00:40:24] Crystal Fincher: Committing violent crime, assaults - that type of thing. [00:40:27] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, so if we're talking about this low-level stuff, there's - it's a completely inadequate response that sucks up all of the resources needed to actually combat the problem. [00:40:39] Crystal Fincher: It does, and it is a real challenge. We have done this before, it has not worked. We keep spending resources on what has been proven to not work, while simultaneously demanding data that proves that doing anything else will completely solve this issue, and create a nirvana and just be the end-all and be-all, when that is actually not the standard that we're applying with our humongous expenditure of resources. And just another reminder that jail is really expensive. It costs a whole lot of money. The criminal, just our entire criminal legal system is a really, really costly system. So we do have a lot of resources available - we continue to make choices to spend them on lawyers, on jailing people, on all of the people and buildings and apparatus to support that. And when we actually have tons of data that that does not fix this problem - in fact, it is likely to make it worse. And so if we are focused on data-driven approaches, that is what is clearly being indicated - what we have a long track record locally that we can draw on that proves that, but certainly also looking nationally - so much data to back that up. We will have to see. The last thing I wanted to talk about was a story that came out this week - David Kroman wrote about it in the Times - with Harrell postponing Seattle Police Department's plan to crack down on disorderly conduct at Third Avenue bus stops. The police department was looking at using the City's criminal code regulating disorderly conduct on buses - things like smoking, playing loud music, littering, drinking alcohol, "loud raucous and harassing behavior" and other conduct that is inconsistent with the intended use and purpose of the transit facility, transit station or transit vehicle. These have often not been cited. We will put it in the episode notes - there's actually an article I need to track down by a bus driver that I thought was really thoughtful. And it does seem like it is a fact that there is more disruptive activity happening on buses than there was before. This bus driver was thoughtful and like, yeah, this is happening - and also there are lots of reasons why it's happening, and there are lots of reasons why taking a criminalizing approach may not be helpful, why taking a different kind of the law and order thing or just kicking people off buses may not be helpful. It's a complicated thing to solve. We do need to acknowledge that driver safety is important, that rider safety is important, but also have the lens that if we want to address this problem - again, like the conversation we just had - simply arresting and jailing someone actually doesn't fix and solve the problem. A lot of times this is a result and a symptom of failures in so many other places of people not having access to mental health treatment that they need, of substance use disorder treatment that they need, public health problems that we actually don't have those facilities for. What is your view on this, and on Mayor Harrell's decision to actually step in and postpone it? [00:44:34] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I think it's interesting because again, like as we already talked about, it's not a solution. There's lots of reasons for why these things are happening and it's not because there's lax enforcement. First of all, there is enforcement on buses - I've had many bus cases myself and there is some degree of enforcement. Is that something that's going to - or has that been working? Is it going to continue to work? Is the scope of the problem in a lack of enforcement? And it doesn't really seem to be. Like you said, there's lots of reasons that these things are happening. And when we're talking about mental health, addiction, housing - all of these things - addressing these things are going to help with those issues, but that's not what we put money towards. We just keep throwing it at this system that is not working. It's interesting to me that it was walked back - they're putting that on pause. And I wonder is that because they realize - oh, that's actually not going to make that much of a difference - but there's also the fact that buses and bus shelters are not under the City's jurisdiction. Those are county issues, so maybe that was not known - I don't know - beforehand. But when the City talks about cracking down on things going on on the buses, they don't have the jurisdiction to do that. So that could be one reason why it got walked back as well. [00:46:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. That's really interesting because - very clearly talking about enforcing things on buses - which yes, there is a jurisdiction issue there - but it also looks like they were planning to take action within 25 feet of transit stops. Is that defined as - technically the stop facility - or is there, I guess that's a really technical and wonky question, but I could totally imagine, to your point, that there are jurisdictional questions. [00:46:49] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, I don't know what that - I have not looked that up. No, I think that's under City jurisdiction - that would be under City jurisdiction. Yeah. Just not anything on a bus - I don't think would be. But yeah, I would have to look that up, but I do think that would be the City still. It just depends - there's different parts of the City, like when - I won't go into jurisdictional issues, because no one wants to talk about those things for long periods of time - but they don't have as much control. Let me just say - they don't have as much control over things going on on a bus as they think they do. If someone's committing a felony on the bus, then SPD could potentially get involved, but it's still - it's going to be prosecuted by the county. And if it's misdemeanors, the misdemeanors on a bus are also going to be prosecuted by the county, because of county - see, I could go on, it could be a really long time. [00:47:47] Crystal Fincher: Well, I just learned something because I did not know that misdemeanors committed on a bus would be prosecuted by the county and not city. Very interesting - these discussions are very interesting. But I think overall we'll just keep our eyes peeled on it and continue to update on it. Just another quick update in terms of the concrete workers strike - there was talk this week about some of them potentially returning to some job sites as a show of good faith and an attempt to lessen the impact on the greater community. That seems to have had mixed results and a mixed outcome where some talked about returning, others didn't. One particular company looked like workers were willing to return and the company was unwilling to let them work again. But again, we've seen city and county leaders say that they want a quick resolution and that this is impacting various projects around the county, but also workers need fair conditions. And the workers are saying, hey, they're asking us - when you consider inflation - to take a hit to our salary, to healthcare benefits, and to our pension - it's across the board. And companies saying, but we're technically offering more money than we did before and so it should all be good. And still not doing much to come to the table and participating in this activity - hoping that public pressure just forces the workers back and they can just ride out the storm and do nothing, and hope that public pressure does some negotiating on their behalf. So we will continue to follow it - the county, we had talked about before, had tried to issue an RFP to other companies to try and work around this and have greater protections for unionization and worker conditions. And that - no one responded to that RFP actually, so we seem to just be in this position - and unless there is some specific call or pressure, it seems like - on the companies to negotiate in better faith and to move closer to the workers, it looks like we're going to be stuck in this position for quite some time. So we will continue to see how that unfolds. And again, I thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on today, Friday, March 18th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler, assistant producer Shannon Cheng, with assistance from Emma Mudd. And our wonderful co-host today is criminal defense attorney, abolitionist and activist, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy. You can find Nicole on Twitter @ntkallday, and you should be following Nicole. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcast - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave us a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced on the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

Pianist Kenny Barron is no stranger to Seattle stages. He first appeared here in 1963 as a nineteen-year-old pianist with the Dizzy Gillespie Quintet at The Penthouse in Pioneer Square. Now an NEA Jazz Master, Kenny Barron brings his trio to play Jazz Alley next Tuesday and Wednesday and we'll hear the trio on today's episode.