Podcasts about Seattle City Light

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 the Seattle City Council's concerns over how cuts to federal programs will impact the city's most vulnerable residents, what a relatively car-free Pike Place could look like, the ongoing investigation over workplace dysfunction at Seattle City Light, a new education levy with a major price tag, and a city plan to help developers with water main linkup costs. If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon!

It's Tuesday! We are here and ready to jam. Well kinda, Migs throat is half better. And we chat about some crazy stuff happening with Seattle City Light.

Will Trump save Washington from Climate Commitment Act gas tax? The Washington State Senate voted to cap rent increases at 10%. Scandalous allegations at Seattle City Light. REI issued an apology for endorsing Doug Burgum. // Brian Heywood announces two new initiatives, and details next week’s big protest against property tax increase. // MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough was very disappointed to hear that SCOTUS’s immigration ruling actually favored Donald Trump. ‘Shark Tank’ host Kevin O’Leary said he’s willing to live with the economic consequences of putting pressure on China.

URSULA'S TOP STORIES: WA votes to cap rental increases @ 10%, Evictions have more than doubled in KC // LUKE DUECEY: Be careful with your racist rant. . . it could get you fired // Amazon CEO wants to eviscerate middle management // Are landlords or tenants hurting more? // WE NEED TO TALK. . . Seattle City Light crews drunk on the job

Leland VIttert with the news of the day and his new book about growing up with autism // Dima Voytovych on running an ultra-marathon to raise money for relief efforts in Ukraine // Libbey Dean on the global impact of the Trump tariffs // The Rick Rizzs Show: Rick breaks down the big Mariners comeback on Wednesday and a weekend series against the Texas Rangers // Herb Weisbaum on the pervasive Good to Go scam texts being sent to Washington drivers // Gee Scott on the investigation into Seattle City Light workplace // Paul Holden with a weekend roundup

A trip to the Skagit River Hydroelectric Project to talk about power system inertia with Seattle City Light operators, plus a discussion of popular fallacies and unpopular opinions with the hosts.To experience the visceral sounds and sights of big synchronous generation, an interview with Mike Haynes, Will Andersen, and Brandt March was recorded in-person at Seattle City Light's Skagit River Hydroelectric Project. To start the episode Ahlmahz, Paul, Farhad, and Conleigh discuss popular fallacies of the energy system and share some of their own unpopular opinions.You can find the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Share with friends that are energy enthusiasts, like us!03:17 - Popular Fallacies & Unpopular Opions52:08 - Big Synchronous Generation - Seattle City Light's Skagit River Hydroelectric ProjectPublic Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, it's work to watch!

Ben Serrurier returns to Public Power Underground to share some maybe-good-maybe-bad-but-definitely-not-thought-out ideas with Ahlmahz Negash, Paul Dockery, and Farhad Billimoria in a returning segment, Half-Baked Ideas. Then Irina Rasputnis, Madeline Kostic, and Eric Strandberg from the Seattle City Light's Lighting Design Lab sit down to talk with Paul Dockery about innovation in building electrification. 13:19 - Half-Baked IdeasInspiration for the segment comes from the Bill Simmons PodcastBen's prior appearances on the podcast52:51 - The Lighting Design Lab1:30:25 - Invitation to the Eleventy-First and Final episode of Public Power UndergroundPublic Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, it's work to watch!

Send us a Text Message.Scott Thomsen has served on the board of the NAGC for eight years, including previous roles as president-elect and communications director. He is the director of communications and public affairs for the Ventura County (California) Fire Department, overseeing the public information officers, community education, and community engagement. Previously, he served in various communications roles, including director, for Seattle City Light, a municipally owned electric utility, after a 20-year career in journalism as a reporter and editor for multiple news organizations, including The Orange County Register and The Associated Press.Lawrence J. Parnell, M.B.A., is an award-winning Public Relations professional and academic who is an Associate Professor and Director of the George Washington University Master's in Strategic Public Relations program. He has served in this role for 14 years, and the GWU Master's is now one of the best-known and most admired programs in the US.He holds a BS in Journalism from Boston University and an MBA from the University of New Haven. He is pursuing an advanced Strategic Management and Public Policy degree from the GW School of Business. He also operates Parnell Communications, a strategic communications and leadership training firm. He advises government, corporate, and non-profit organizations on executive development and strategic communications.  Prior to coming to GW, he had a 32-year career in the private and public sectors. He has worked in corporate, agency, and government settings globally and in national and statewide political campaigns. PR Week recognized him as PR Professional of the Year (2003) and named him to the PR News Hall of Fame in 2009. He is a frequent author and speaker on communications strategy, crisis and issues management, and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) at industry conferences and universities worldwide. He is the co-author of a top-selling public relations textbook, Introduction to Public Relations, published by Sage Publishing. The text, now in its second edition, is used by over 35 undergraduate Mass Communications and Public Relations programs in North America.He is a member of the Page Society and serves on the Board of the National Capital Chapter of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA). Parnell is active on Twitter (@gwprmasters) and LinkedIn, posting commentary and sharing research and his insights on current issues in communications and politics.To read the study (Click HerThis Is PropagandaChallenging marketers' delusions about the cultural impact of our work. A WEBBY winner!Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify The Brandon T. Adams Audio ExperienceWelcome to The Brandon T. Adams Audio Experience, hosted by entrepreneur, investor,...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the Show.This episode is sponsored by John Guilfoil Public Relations. From crisis communications to website development; visit our website JGPR.net or call 617.993.0003

Seattle increases penalties for street racing, climate protestors call out Amazon on Prime Day, and Seattle City Light wants to hike utility rates. It's our daily roundup of top stories from the KUOW newsroom, with host Gustavo Sagrero. We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. You have the power! Make the show happen by making a gift to KUOW. We want to hear from you! Follow us on Instagram at SeattleNowPod, or leave us feedback.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

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 the continuing delay on passing new app-based delivery driver legislation, an update on equitable development projects, concerns about light rail expansion in West Seattle, a drop in the overall crime rate, and the story behind impending rate hikes for Seattle City Light. If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon!

In the latest episode of Public Power Now, Dawn Lindell, the new General Manager and CEO of public power utility Seattle City Light, details how the utility has been proactive when it comes to planning for the growth of transportation electrification and discusses what her immediate priorities have been as the new General Manager and CEO of the utility.

Homelessness policy has become a lightning rod in Burien, as the city's approach toward people sleeping outside has drawn scrutiny and lawsuits. The latest; the city council agreed to build a pallet shelter on land owned by Seattle City Light. King County agreed to give the city a million dollars for the project, but now the city council is considering zoning restrictions that may kill the shelter plans. 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

exploration of approaches to distribution systems from microcontrollers and software to MOAR HARDWAREDistribution infrastructure, microcontrollers in everything, hardware vs software solutions, and prices-to-devices get covered in a distribution systems episode with Ahlmahz Negash, Conleigh Byers, Farhad Billimoria, and Paul Dockery featuring an interview with the enthusiastic Francis Sammy! A discussion that manages to navigate the nuances of MOAR HARDWARE as an actionable energy transition strategy while articulating the benefit of deploying smart, controllable, and price-responsive devices.You can find the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Share with friends that are energy enthusiasts, like us!01:18 - 30 second theorySchweppe, Fred C., et al. Spot pricing of electricity. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.Schweppe, Fred C. "Power systems2000': hierarchical control strategies." IEEE spectrum 15.7 (1978): 42-47.08:59 - Short-to-Ground; a segment where we blow a fuse covering the newsThe Major Drivers of Long-term Distribution Transformer DemandCybersecurity baselines for both electric distribution systems and distributed energy resources (DER)Portland-based GridStor announced its acquisition of a planned 450-MW/900-MWh lithium-ion battery storage installationThe National Renewable Energy Lab recently released a report studying the economics of building long-distance, high-voltage transmission linesSpot market power in the U.S.Wholesale spot prices for the National Electricity Market (NEM)Energy Information Administration's Natural Gas Weekly Update23:21 - Francis Sammy provides a practitioner perspective on distribution systems and the energy transitionFrancis Sammy is a licensed professional engineer that works as the supervisor of the Systems Distribution Engineering workgroup for Seattle City Light. He was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York, studied electrical engineering at Howard University, and works on distribution systems for Seattle. Francis lives in Beacon Hill with his family of 3 and says you can find him riding around town on his bike, vibing out at a concert, laboring up the basketball court, or sliding down a mountain face first.54:06 - Francis Sammy's analogy; the grid is like an old, reliable car56:38 - Updating our priors1:17:55 - ESA (Energy System Analogies) World Cup StandingsPublic Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, it's work to watch!

In an interview with the Hacks & Wonks podcast, King County Executive Dow Constantine outlined the county's approach to addressing the region's homelessness crisis - a crisis he says fundamentally stems from a lack of affordable housing. "The reason people don't have housing is because they can't afford housing," Constantine said. "It's a tremendously bad, unfortunate side effect of the economic story that we've seen unfold here over the last 20 years." Constantine stressed that the root cause of homelessness is people not being able to afford a place to live amid soaring housing costs. Other factors, like addiction, have been shown to be made worse by homelessness, but are not the root cause of it. "If you say they're not housed because they're addicted, that is simply saying that we're not providing the appropriate service," he stated. The county has taken a regional approach by partnering with cities through initiatives like the King County Regional Homelessness Authority to fund services and shelters. A key effort is the Health Through Housing program, which has acquired over 1,200 units by purchasing and converting former hotels and motels. "We had the University of Washington come in and study [this approach]...what we were anecdotally observing was absolutely true - that this made an enormous difference in people's lives," Constantine said. "About 95% of people who come into this permanent supportive housing are successful, meaning that they don't end up back in homelessness." However, the county has faced challenges getting some cities like Burien to site shelters and affordable housing projects amid pushback from opposed residents. Constantine urged residents and elected officials to see this as a shared crisis requiring regional cooperation. "For elected officials: you have to develop a spine...your jurisdiction has to do its part of the solution," he stated. "For residents: everything will work better when we're all participating and accommodating folks in your community." Looking ahead, Constantine said state legislative action is needed to reform Washington's "woefully inadequate" tax system that leaves cities and counties underfunded for affordable housing and services. "We have to adopt a mentality that we're all in this together, and that this is a shared challenge, and the solutions have to be shared," he concluded.   Resources King County Regional Homelessness Authority   Health Through Housing: A Regional Approach to Address Chronic Homelessness   “Kenmore's canceled affordable housing project draws sharp criticism” by Anna Patrick from The Seattle Times   “Redmond Swoops In To Save Kenmore's Cancelled Low-Income Housing Project” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist   “A Seattle suburb known for affordability becomes example of U.S. debate on homelessness” by Anna Patrick from The Seattle Times   “King County will have to close health clinics without state help, Constantine says” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times   “King County allocates $3 million to fund 100 hotel rooms for asylum-seekers” by Alexandra Yoon-Hendricks from The Seattle Times   “King County Announces $1 Million in Additional Support for Asylees and Refugees in Tukwila” by Lauryn Bray from South Seattle Emerald   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 week-in-review show and our Tuesday topical 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. Well, today I'm very thrilled to be welcoming King County Executive Dow Constantine to the program. Welcome. [00:01:00] Executive Dow Constantine: Thanks for having me. [00:01:01] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for coming. And thank you for having a conversation that I think is very important - one that is on the forefront of many people's minds, that we see as we go about our daily lives, and unfortunately some of us have to experience - and that is dealing with homelessness, and the role that the county is playing in addressing homelessness in our region. Just starting out, what has been your approach to addressing our homelessness crisis, and why is it so important for the county to be involved? [00:01:33] Executive Dow Constantine: So a brief but really complex question. It is important to us because the reason our government exists is to seek to make this a welcoming community where every person has the opportunity to thrive. And it is tremendously difficult to thrive if you don't have a safe, secure place to call home. The county has a wildly complex system of governance, including local governance - so, there is one county government, there are 39 city governments, there are myriad special districts. And of course, there's the state and much more. And it is often difficult to figure out who's on first - who is in charge of which aspect of this complicated picture of housing and homelessness. So we have taken on the role of trying to create partnerships to bring together all of these jurisdictions, regardless of their formal responsibilities or authorities to stitch together a complete approach to helping our shared constituency - those folks who are unable to secure housing. The county is Public Health - the county has some considerable region-wide human services programs that we have constructed, notwithstanding the fact that we're only technically responsible for those programs in the unincorporated area of 250,000 people. The county has a lot of capacity that some of the smaller cities don't have. And so in many cases, sort of by default, we've stepped in to try to bring together all of the parties. Seattle has its own capacity - Seattle's a big city with an appropriately sized government that has experts, it has the capacity to go out and seek funding, to go out and hire experts and do the work. So we work in partnership with them, but we also try to help the smaller cities that don't have that capacity be able to step up and do the work for their constituents. And we can't do it alone. And all of that is to say that the county is not the be-all and end-all in this arena, so we sought to create a regional authority where we could unite, bring together all of the contracting that governments were doing for outside entities to provide services to the people. And that was really the motivation for starting the effort on the Regional Homeless Authority. [00:03:54] Crystal Fincher: And I wanted to talk about that a bit because I think people wonder - we've heard a number of officials from cities around the area, including Seattle, talk about how important this is to address regionally - that it's hard to address within each silo of each jurisdiction, and so a regional solution is needed. The King County Regional Homelessness Authority seemed to be an answer to that. But it's unclear sometimes what is within the scope of the authority, and what the county is doing, what cities are doing. So speaking from the county - where do you overlap, or where do you work with the KCRHA, and where do you operate independently? [00:04:34] Executive Dow Constantine: So I'm going to oversimplify in order to hopefully make it clear. But we had a lot of places where we're entering into contracts with nonprofits to go out on the streets and provide services. And then the City of Seattle had a lot of contracts, often with the same nonprofits. And those contracts were on different schedules, and had different requirements, and required a lot of paperwork by those nonprofits - things that were not contributing to actually getting people off the street. And so we decided to try to take all of that and put it into a single entity with a single set of processes - and the city and the county contributed staff who had been doing that work in our respective governments. The homeless authority is in charge of helping people who are on the streets - not through homeless authority employees providing direct services, but by contracting with those folks who can help people on the streets - getting people into shelter, getting people into housing, getting people into the services they need to be able to stabilize their lives and exercise the kind of control over their lives they want to have and that they used to have. The authority is not in charge of housing - of building housing, of creating housing stock. And that has been a source of considerable confusion over time - is to come back to the obvious basic issue that people are homeless because they don't have housing, they can't afford housing. And therefore, the authority should be building housing - no, that is not their job. That is our job, the city's, various cities' jobs. It is the housing authorities' jobs, it is the state's job. And keeping clarity about that and keeping the authority focused on the mission of contracting for direct services to folks on the street is important in order for all of us to be more effective. [00:06:14] Crystal Fincher: Got it. So as we get into talking more about what's happening in specific areas, I want to talk a little bit about what you just brought up - that homelessness is primarily a problem of housing, people not having housing. However, we hear people around the region - some saying, This is really an issue of addiction, this is an issue of criminality. It's not a housing issue. These are people who sometimes want to be out on the streets and don't want to have housing and don't want to have jobs - that kind of narrative. What do you think of that, and what is your approach to the issue of homelessness and what it's comprised of? [00:06:58] Executive Dow Constantine: So the reason people don't have housing is because they can't afford housing. They may have been evicted from housing for the inability to pay rent or lost their home because they couldn't pay their mortgage. They may have lost their housing because of domestic violence or because they were acting out in some way because they have an untreated or undertreated behavioral health challenge. But fundamentally, it's because people can't afford housing. There is too much money chasing too little housing in our region. And that is a tremendously bad, unfortunate side effect of the economic story that we've seen unfold here over the last 20 years - where there's just so much more money being paid to so many more people and then a bunch of people being left behind. So if you say - Well, they're not housed because they're addicted or they're not housed because they have an untreated mental health problem - that is simply saying that we're not providing the appropriate service in order for them to be able to exercise that authority over their own lives, to be able to earn money, and be able to get the housing they need. It also means that we have an affirmative responsibility to deal with the housing imbalance so that there is housing for people to rent at wages you can afford. It is a dodge simply to try to blame the victim all the time here. People want to say - Well, that would never happen to me because I'm a responsible person. I would never have a drug addiction. I would never get into a bad relationship. I would never lose my job - all those sorts of things. But that can happen to anybody, and we have to view every single person on the streets as though they are our brother or sister, or our daughter or son. And if we do that, then we will see our obligation to help them - not by simply being paternalistic toward them, but rather offering them the help they need to exercise agency - to be able to do what it is they want to do, which is live with the dignity and security. And to reconnect with their families and friends and peers. You go talk with folks who are living in homeless encampments - they are mostly from around here and they mostly really long to be able to simply be accepted in their community again, to be able to see their kids, to be able to be seen in the community as a person who is worthy of respect, and to carry themselves with dignity. And depriving them of that is just utterly unacceptable and inconsistent with who we want to be. [00:09:29] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now, one of the things that we've learned over the past several years - and that the county has actually helped to operationalize - is the type of shelter, the type of housing that is most helpful. We've seen a move away from congregate housing to individual rooms where people can feel secure, can lock a door, and can really start to stabilize. Why has that been so important and how has the county been able to implement that? [00:09:58] Executive Dow Constantine: Well, sometimes congregate shelter - just an emergency shelter overnight - is essential. You're out on the street - it's unsafe either because of the weather or some other factor and you need to get inside. But being brought inside, given a mat on the floor, and then being kicked out with all your stuff at 7 in the morning is not a prescription for long-term progress. You just keep cycling through, you can never get your feet under you, you can never get stabilized, you can never get on track to deal with whatever underlying challenges you might have, or the simple act of getting cleaned up and applying for a job and starting to make money again. So when COVID started, we started moving people from congregate shelters into individual hotel rooms we had rented - it became clear that those people, in addition to avoiding getting COVID, were getting better in a whole lot of other ways. That having a door on the room with a lock on it, the ability to have their stuff be safe, the ability to get a full night's sleep, to have a bathroom to use when you wanted to started to get people calmed down to reduce the trauma and increase their ability to accept the other help that was available. And that help might be behavioral health treatment, that help might be job counseling, that help might be a whole range of things that could offer people a path back to the lives that they lived and that they want to live. And we had the University of Washington come in and study the hotel that we had in Renton, where we had moved many, many people who had been in congregate shelters, cycling in and out every day. And the university quickly identified that what we were anecdotally observing was absolutely true - that this made an enormous difference in people's lives. It was not their permanent home. It was not what they ultimately wanted for themselves. But the step up to a room of your own made a huge difference in their ability to start taking stock of the rest of their lives and being open to accepting the other help that was available. And so we really pursued that, and we've now purchased 1,200+ units through our Health Through Housing Initiative. We just opened a facility in Auburn - it's great, it's an old hotel, not that old - that folks are now moving into with supports on-site. And we're soon opening one in Redmond. And just as we found in the original Renton hotel, about 95% of people who come into this permanent supportive housing are successful, meaning that they don't end up back in homelessness. Some of them spend a lot of time in permanent supportive housing - some of them ultimately move into a place that was purpose-built for that - but a lot of folks move on to a job and subsidized, affordable housing, and ultimately to reclaiming their lives. And that is what we want. We want to prevent people from coming into homelessness, and we want to offer them the supports they need to exit homelessness. [00:12:55] Crystal Fincher: I want to talk about the Health Through Housing initiative a little bit more because it does seem to be a model that is working. And one of the things that seems to be tough, that a lot of areas are having challenges with, is how to work between jurisdictions - how a county can work with a city, its elected officials and leaders, be responsive to the local needs and residents and their concerns, and the need to house people there locally, and balancing sometimes differing perspectives and needs there. How have you worked through that process with cities, and what advice would you give to other counties in the same position and cities when it comes to working with the county? [00:13:41] Executive Dow Constantine: Well - how have we worked through it? Usually with great patience. We don't have land use authority inside of cities. We don't have permitting authority inside of cities. Even if we're bringing the resources, we have to work with those cities to get a place sited. What we offer to do is work with them to choose the operator so that the nonprofit operating it is one that the city's comfortable with and to have some percentage of the folks moving in be people who've been homeless in the local community - and I think those are all reasonable accommodations. And some cities have been quite successful - their leaders have stood up and worked with skeptics in their community in order to get sites up and running. Other cities have been less successful where the opponents of doing anything have ultimately kept them from taking action and moving forward. We're getting more and more success as people see that when these facilities open, they are not a blight, but a blessing - that they are able to get people off their streets locally and to help folks from around the region get their lives back. And I will say that the system we have where every local community essentially gets to approve or veto the housing that we collectively need is an awfully tough environment in which to solve a problem of this scale. The legislature keeps taking measured actions to require more of local jurisdictions, to say - No, you really do need to site these places. You really do need to include more affordable housing. You really need to include more housing generally. And in general, those measures have been successful. But there are still some communities that are being tugged back and forth by folks who just don't want to be part of the solution. We had a big challenge - permanent supportive housing issue in Kenmore, where Plymouth Housing had been working on a project in cooperation with the city for years, and there was an election and then the council majority changed - and suddenly they disapproved the permit. That building now, I'm pleased to say, is going to be sited instead in Redmond. And the city of Redmond stepped up and said - This is not okay. We want to help those who are in need in our region of the county. And they've voted to proceed, and they're moving forward pretty quickly on identifying a site and getting the funding to help Plymouth Housing build that building. [00:16:04] Crystal Fincher: Now, you did mention the legislature taking some actions to help make it easier to address this housing affordability, housing quantity, homelessness crisis. Is there any legislation that you're tracking right now that you think would be very helpful moving forward? [00:16:23] Executive Dow Constantine: I can't speak to any specific legislation this year. There was a bill introduced quite late, as I understand it, that would require cities to accommodate facilities like the Plymouth Housing facility we just discussed. But in general, the legislature and the county have multiple approaches - there's subsidy and then there's leverage, where they have essentially regulation that says in order to receive our funding for other things, you have to accommodate a certain amount of housing. And I do think that our cities more and more are getting with the program - that they are each having growing pains - they're each having a struggle between those who don't want anything to change and those who realize that the future is coming, whether you prepare for it or not. And as they see success in their neighboring cities, they realize that maybe a little bit of change is not the end of the world. So I'm encouraged about it. If I could double back to the Regional Homeless Authority, the idea there was to bring together King County and Seattle - where the big player is issuing contracts locally - and our other 38 cities, and the people with lived experience to inform the work we're doing. And that has been a difficult beginning - trying to get everybody to work in sync. It's getting better - we've got a new interim executive director who I think is going to be able to continue to build those relationships. We do definitely need all of the formerly known as suburban cities, all of the non-Seattle cities - many of them are not very suburban at all anymore - to participate at the appropriate scale for their city and participate in funding, participate in programming, participate in siting buildings - both affordable housing and supportive housing. And as we do that, we have the capacity in a county of 2.3 million people - one of the economic centers of the country - to give everybody a safe place to live and the supports they need to get moving again. But it needs to be an all-hands effort. It can't just be a few governments and our nonprofit partners. [00:18:28] Crystal Fincher: When you talk about it needing to be an all-hands effort, one thing that I think a number of people noticed - I certainly noticed - was King County playing an active role in saying, The solution in different cities may look different in each individual city. And there are multiple ways to address this, individual ways may be right or not right for each city. But cities have to act affirmatively - you need to do something to be part of the solution. And it seems like you, with the county and different departments in the county, stepped up when it came to the city of Burien, which has been toiling with this for quite a while - in not just how to address this, but even whether to address this. And stepping up and saying - Hey, you are using county resources, whether it be the sheriff, whether it be other things, and you're not going to be able to use these in ways that are consistent with the law and in ways that aren't working towards a solution. What was your approach to Burien and how did you work through that issue? [00:19:32] Executive Dow Constantine: First off, the Burien saga clearly illustrates a point that I'm always trying to make, which is that homelessness is not a downtown Seattle problem. Homelessness is an everywhere problem. It manifests differently, it's more visible in different places. You see it in Seattle in part because there aren't a lot of woods for people to camp in. And in part because this is where all the TV stations are, so whenever they want to film some salacious story about homelessness, they go out in the streets of Seattle. It's just easier than driving to Kent or Shoreline. I will say that Burien started out, I think, with pretty good expressed intentions around helping people who were showing up, sleeping on their streets. They got a lot of pushback when they started trying to figure out how to site a facility. And it became, as in Kenmore, an election issue where an organized group of naysayers was essentially saying - These people don't belong here. - and blaming the victim and refusing to acknowledge the basic obligation to provide people an alternative if you need them to go somewhere. You don't have to construct the perfect solution. You don't have to construct their forever home. But you can't go to somebody who's sleeping in the park or on the street and say, Leave. - without saying - To go over here, which is a place that's at least as good and safe, right? Because if you're just chasing people back and forth across the street, you're being cruel to them and you're achieving nothing. And Burien could not really get past that. We put a million dollars on the table and a whole bunch of new Pallet shelters - tiny homes that are manufactured here in the Puget Sound region. And just kind of an organized group of citizens kept the city council stymied for a long time and unable to identify a piece of city property to move people to. They had previously approved Downtown Emergency Service Center building with 95 units in Burien - and that is in fact opening this summer - so that preceded this whole controversy. And that's going to be a great thing because again, people are going to be inside and be getting the help they need. They're going to be countering the narrative that all of those folks on NextDoor have about their community. But ultimately, Burien came to terms with the need to do something real to fix this issue, and they are now fixing it. They've applied for some of the funding that King County's put on the table. They are working with others - I think the City of Seattle and Seattle City Light - on a site. And so they went through a lot of agony and I think probably a lot of electoral challenges, but ultimately they're going to get to a solution that's going to work for some of the folks who are homeless there. [00:22:08] Crystal Fincher: I also want to talk about how things look at this point in time and moving forward. Many cities, including the City of Seattle, including the county are looking forward and dealing with significant budget deficits. The City of Seattle has a $200 million-plus deficit coming up. A lot of cities are saying they're going to need to scale back on efforts in many areas. Some of the market forces, perhaps, that made it particularly advantageous a couple years ago to purchase hotels when costs were more attractive than they are now made it possible to do more. Looking forward, is it going to be harder to purchase these hotel sites or housing sites to build and to work with cities? How do you think this looks moving forward? [00:22:58] Executive Dow Constantine: The strategies change from time to time with market conditions, right? There was a moment when hotels were depressed because no one was traveling - it was a good time to go buy hotels. There will be opportunities now with, for example, the opening of many, many new light rail stations and light rail lines to paint on a broader canvas - to work to include affordable housing and even supportive housing and other facilities targeted to those who have been homeless in different station areas where everyone can have inexpensive access to all the opportunities the region offers. It's a different situation than we had four years ago, but it is still an opportunity. I will say that the reason that the City of Seattle, King County, and others are facing deficits is not because the economy is in the tank - it's going great. We're, again, one of the economic centers of the country. It's because the state has among the worst tax systems in the nation. And so the tax system is utterly misaligned with the economy and people are not paying based on their ability to pay. Some people pay a much higher percentage of their means - both income and wealth. Those are folks who have very little money who end up paying a lot more in sales tax as a percentage. Those are folks who own homes as their primary or only asset, where they're paying property taxes - if you have 100 times as much money, you don't have a home that's worth 100 times more. So if our measure of wealth is real property, it is a very inadequate and inaccurate measure of your ability to pay. So you probably can afford more than a person who is living on government assistance or living at poverty wages, but you're paying a heck of a lot more than someone who is legitimately wealthy. And there are a lot of folks who are legitimately wealthy in our community. The legislature needs to create a tax system where you're taxed based on what you earn, and what you have, and whatever proxies there are to allow us to understand the right mix of those two things - they need to adopt them. And then we will have adequate money to do what needs to be done so that every person can be successful and can contribute back to the community. Then we will all be better off when we have that kind of a community. In the meantime, we are making do with the woefully inadequate tools we have. And we're asking the legislature for help - they're in part failing and in part keeping hope alive - so we'll see how the session turns out. [00:25:29] Crystal Fincher: We will see how the session turns out. I completely am aligned with your assessment of why we are in the challenging position that we are financially as a region and hope that in November 2024, when some of these issues are on our ballot, people remember this and pay attention. Also, the biggest city in the county, Seattle, is facing a major budget deficit and does have some progressive funding options that have been recommended. Do you think the City should take action on some of those options? [00:26:02] Executive Dow Constantine: Yeah. I wouldn't presume to tell the mayor or the City what to do because that's just bad for business, but I - and by business, I mean our business working with the City. But I do think that the City of Seattle has a lot more options than we have. The counties do not have business occupation tax, counties do not have utility tax, counties do not have the authority to levy the kind of head tax or employee tax that the City has - although we did go to Olympia and ask for that with the cooperation of the major employers in the county, remember. And it was killed, not by the Republicans - though none of them were going to vote for it - but by the Democrats. So we would have had a relatively low but countywide employer tax, essentially, to pay for homelessness and housing services - and we did not get that. So cities have that organic authority, the county does not have the ability to do that. So the state of Washington is in charge of all local tax authority, and they have failed - under Republican and Democratic control - to come to terms with the fact that we have this terrible tax system and that it's particularly terrible for cities and counties, and particularly for counties. [00:27:13] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now, I want to talk about another area where the county is unique - and that is public health. The county is responsible for delivering so many healthcare services to communities, and it seems like this is a really important element of addressing our homelessness and housing crisis also. How have you been able to leverage that at the county? And looking forward, why is it so important to make sure that we are adequately funding and supporting healthcare at the county level? [00:27:48] Executive Dow Constantine: So public health is a county responsibility. We have had the City of Seattle sort of participating - they contribute about $15 million of our many hundreds of millions of dollars a year. But it's basically a county department, a county function. It is many things. It is epidemiology. And it is about, for example, pregnancy care and birth control. It is about so-called lifestyle issues, like trying to reduce diabetes population-wide, trying to reduce smoking population-wide, trying to deal with these population health issues that affect a lot of individuals and very much inequitably. And it's also about direct service to people. So it is about 70,000 people who get their healthcare at King County Public Health clinics. And maybe half of those people would not qualify for Medicaid because they may be here without documentation - they're not eligible for federal assistance, but we as a county provide that assistance because we don't think that a kid ought to not get healthcare because their parents happen not yet to be documented. Right now, our general fund has been subject to this 1% lid on the increase in aggregate property taxes for, I think, like 17 years now. And with inflation at 6%, 7%, whatever percent over the last few years, we have a huge problem in our general fund. And the one thing that is not mandatory - one major thing that is not required by the state - is providing that healthcare directly to residents. So we're looking at potentially having to close all of our public health clinics after this year if the legislature doesn't take action, which is absurd in one of the wealthiest regions in the country. But that is the grim reality. And so I've been in Olympia pushing them to recognize that reality and to provide us the local funding authority to be able to keep our healthcare going. Now, the way in which direct services are provided has evolved over the years - there are many community-based clinics, nonprofits, et cetera, providing healthcare. There are also an awful lot of people who are getting them directly from county-run clinics and that will continue to evolve. But the thing that's not going to change is there are going to be folks who need help from their local government in order to be able to get basic healthcare, and we desperately need to be able to continue to provide it. [00:30:15] Crystal Fincher: One issue that we've been seeing recently has been that of some refugees, who are fleeing unimaginable conditions elsewhere, arriving here not having housing and landing at one of a couple shelters - those shelters basically operating beyond their capacity now because of the demand - and the need to help house those people in some ways. We saw some of them being moved to hotels, and then questions about the funding for the hotels. Where does that situation stand? And how can help be provided moving forward? [00:30:55] Executive Dow Constantine: This is a problem that's manifesting in different ways all over the country. But the real focus there right now is a church in South King County that started off with a few people arriving, and then the word started to spread, and they continued to throw their doors open to folks arriving, and soon were overwhelmed. The county stepped in - this is like homelessness - nobody is specifically in charge of this except the federal government, right? So the county stepped in - we pulled some money that we had set aside for other purposes, I think for homelessness. And we got 300 people into a hotel with ongoing permanent funding so they would not become unhoused. And there was a community group that put a whole bunch of people in a different hotel and then didn't have any money to follow up and pay to keep them there, so then that was the precipitating crisis. We have been working with the state of Washington to see what the state can do. We've been talking with our federal partners, but of course they have 50 states and who knows who else talking with them about the crises that are happening in their communities. We as a nation have to come to terms with what is going to be the future reality, which is that a lot of people are going to be migrating to the United States from places that are war-torn, that are famine-ridden, and a lot of it is because of the changes in the global climate. And we're going to have to have an orderly, humane, and funded way to welcome those who are seeking asylum - and not just asylum, but a new life contributing to their new country. It is agonizing. During the Syrian crisis - when people were trying to bar refugees from our country, we went out and welcomed Syrian refugees here and made accommodation for them. During the Ukraine war - when that started, we opened up a hotel to accommodate refugees. Then when Afghanistan suddenly fell, we opened another hotel to accommodate Afghan refugees. And that is who we are as a community, and we do not have the capacity - we don't have the financial capacity - to be able to deal with this on our own. The United States government must act, and the refusal of Congress to step up to anything that is going to deprive them of a campaign issue in November is pretty exasperating. [00:33:13] Crystal Fincher: That it is. Finally, I'm wondering, from your perspective as someone who has helmed successful initiatives to get people housed, who's working with a lot of different localities - what are your top recommendations for elected officials who are trying to figure out how to navigate through this in a proactive way, and for residents of cities who aren't sure what to do, but know that something needs to happen? What would you recommend to both of those groups? [00:33:45] Executive Dow Constantine: Well, for all of us, we have to adopt a mentality that we're all in this together, and that this is a shared challenge, and the solutions have to be shared. For elected officials - You have to develop a spine. This is not about you going out and being a hero and solving the whole problem yourself, but your jurisdiction has to do its part of the solution. And that has to do with homelessness and accommodating those who've been on the streets. And it has to do with housing and providing housing for people of all incomes, including folks at the low end of the economic spectrum. And for residents - Everything will work better when we're all participating and accommodating folks in your community is not a negative thing. It's not a burden - it's an opportunity. Your children, the children of this community are the folks who are ending up homeless on the streets. Your children are the ones who are struggling to be able to afford to live in the neighborhood in which they grew up. So you making your community into a place that accommodates people of all economic circumstances is really preserving the ties that bind us together, preserving the social capital that makes us a better community. I would say that we have a lot of really good funded programs right now to be able to build that kind of affordable housing. We have a lot of really good programs to be able to build that supportive housing for those who've been homeless or who may be struggling. But we also have to get to the point where the actual market is working again and that people can make money building housing for other than the top of the market. And as long as it is the case that you can't afford to build workforce housing, then people at the workforce level are going to be pushing out the people who have less money than that, right? And I cannot emphasize enough that government is never going to be able to solve all of this simply by building public housing. It is going to have to be that, and incentives, and the market working, and much more. And then we will be able to get back to some equilibrium where every person is able to afford a safe, decent home - and in doing so, to be able to thrive and give back to their community. [00:36:06] Crystal Fincher: Okay, one small additional question - talking about that, I was just reminded that social housing has been voted on and passed by the residents of Seattle. There's going to be an initiative collecting signatures to fund that - do you think that's part of the solution when it comes to housing and homelessness? [00:36:25] Executive Dow Constantine: Yeah, I don't know for a fact. I'm intrigued by it and I want to better understand how that's going to work in the City of Seattle. But I do think that you just got to recognize that housing is - despite aspirations of some folks over the years - housing is mostly about a market like everything else. And the market's not working - the market is broken. And when the market's broken, it is the responsibility of the government to step in and fix it and to make the market work. And that means adding stock that would not be built by the market, that means providing either incentives or requirements for people to build for a broader range of incomes. And this is not rocket science - although rocket science is not actually that complicated - but this is not rocket science. We know how to do all of this and it is just a matter of putting one foot in front of the other until we get it done. [00:37:19] Crystal Fincher: Well, thank you so much, King County Executive Dow Constantine, for helping us to understand the lay of the land here in King County and for helping to just blaze the path on getting people housed and on actual solutions here. Thank you so much. [00:37:36] Executive Dow Constantine: Thank you. [00:37:37] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks, which is produced by Shannon Cheng. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on every podcast service and app - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. 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 podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

The next season of Public Power Underground is coming soon with a new format and new regular hosts. Subscribe to make sure you don't miss the season premiere!After a short break, Public Power Underground is coming back for its sixth season of energy enthusiasm! This season Paul Dockery and Ahlmahz Negash will be joined by world-renowned energy researchers Conleigh Byers and Farhad Billimoria to investigate energy industry and energy-industry-adjacent topics by bringing together expert insights with practitioner perspectives. The episode format for Public Power Underground has evolved for Season 6, which will include a new, season-spanning energy-inspired game. Tune in for the season premiere for more.Season 6 ContributorsPaul Dockery is a Senior Manager of Energy Resource Strategy & Planning for Seattle City Light and the Creative Director of Public Power Underground. Ahlmahz Negash is a Principal Data Analyst for Tacoma Power, an energy system researcher, and Executive Producer of Public Power Underground.Conleigh Byers is an Environmental Fellow at the Harvard University Center for the Environment based at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. She uses tools from operations research, electrical engineering, and economics to design decarbonized energy systems, with a focus on power systems operations and planning. Her current research focuses on achieving resource adequacy under deep decarbonization, hosted by Professor William Hogan. She holds a doctorate in Electrical Engineering from ETH Zürich and a dual masters in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science and Technology & Policy from MIT.Farhad Billimoria is the Director, Electricity Markets for S&P Global and a Visiting Research Fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. He has previously served as a Principal in Market Design at the Australian Energy Market Operator and has a background in international infrastructure and energy finance, investment and capital markets.The Sisterhood of the Traveling ElectronDuring the Season 5 Finale, friend-of-the-underground Jordan White referenced the buildout of transmission infrastructure as a “Sisterhood of the Traveling Electron”. As an enthusiast of both romantic comedies and electric utilities, the cross-over merch idea was too perfect to pass up. After-all, just like the magical pants from the early-aughts classic The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, transmission keeps us connected across distances during tough transitions.Public Power Underground doesn't have a storefront to sell merch anymore, but there is a feature where I can share a design for others to order from Printful. There's no revenue coming to Public Power Underground from the sale and I provide no warranty or guaranty for the merch. But I did promise that if I ever translated concept to merch, I'd send it to subscribers of the newsletter. For links to Sisterhood of the Traveling Electron merchandise subscribe on substack at publicpowerunderground.substack.com.

This episode features Antronette Simmons, an HR Business Partner at Seattle City Light. Antronette shares her career journey and discusses the impactful work she is doing to support employees.During the episode, Antronette talks about how her passion for helping people led her to a career in human resources. She shares her experience working in research administration at the University of Washington and how she transitioned to her current role, where she is focused on the well-being of Seattle City Light's workforce.Antronette explains how she created the innovative Peer Support Program, which proactively addresses employee distress by empowering coworkers to support one another. She emphasizes the importance of being trauma-informed and how they are training HR professionals and leadership to have compassionate conversations.Antronette also details her efforts to promote psychological safety within teams by defining the concept and providing employees with a safe space to raise concerns. The hosts engage in a thoughtful discussion around building empathy and reducing stigma in the workplace.Overall, listeners will be inspired by Antronette's compassionate leadership and strategic initiatives to foster wellness and community among employees.To stay connected and continue the conversation, be sure to follow us on LinkedIn.And don't forget to check out our previous episodes for more tips and strategies to boost your workplace happiness. You can find them on your favorite podcast platform or on our website.If you have any questions, comments, or topic suggestions for future episodes, please reach out to us. We'd love to hear from you!Stay inspired, stay motivated, and stay happy at work!

Please enjoy this re-air of our listeners' favorite topical show of 2023! On this topical show re-air, Crystal chats with former Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and his former Senior Communications Advisor Robert Cruickshank about the missed opportunity for generational impact through how decisions were made about Seattle's waterfront and the SR99 tunnel. Mike and Robert review how the vision of the scrappy People's Waterfront Coalition, centered around making a prized public space accessible for all while taking the climate crisis on by transforming our transportation system, nearly won the fight against those who prioritized maintaining highway capacity and those who prioritized increasing Downtown property values.  The conversation then highlights how those with power and money used their outsized influence to make backroom decisions - despite flawed arguments and little public enthusiasm for their proposal - leaving Seattle with an underutilized deep bore tunnel and a car-centric waterfront. Some of the decision makers are still active in local politics - including current Mayor Bruce Harrell and his current advisor Tim Burgess. With important elections ahead, Crystal, Mike and Robert discuss how political decisions tend to conflict with campaign promises rather than donor rolls, how proven action is a better indicator than value statements, and how today's dense ecosystem of progressive leaders and organizations can take inspiration and win the next fight. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii, Mike McGinn at @mayormcginn, and Robert Cruickshank at @cruickshank.   Mike McGinn Mike is the Executive Director of national nonprofit America Walks.  He got his start in local politics as a neighborhood activist pushing for walkability. From there he founded a non-profit focused on sustainable and equitable growth, and then became mayor of Seattle. Just before joining America Walks, Mike worked to help Feet First, Washington State's walking advocacy organization, expand their sphere of influence across Washington state. He has worked on numerous public education, legislative, ballot measure and election campaigns – which has given him an abiding faith in the power of organizing and volunteers to create change.   Robert Cruickshank Robert is the Director of Digital Strategy at California YIMBY and Chair of Sierra Club Seattle. A long time communications and political strategist, he was Senior Communications Advisor to Mike McGinn from 2011-2013.   Resources “Seattle Waterfront History Interviews: Cary Moon, Waterfront Coalition” by Dominic Black from HistoryLink   “State Route 99 tunnel - Options and political debate" from Wikipedia   “Remembering broken promises about Bertha” by Josh Cohen from Curbed Seattle   “Fewer drivers in Seattle's Highway 99 tunnel could create need for bailout” by Mike Lindblom from The Seattle Times   “Surface Highway Undermines Seattle's Waterfront Park” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Seattle Prepares to Open Brand New Elliott Way Highway Connector” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist   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. Today, I am very excited to be welcoming Robert Cruickshank and former Mayor Mike McGinn to the show to talk about something that a lot of people have been thinking about, talking about recently - and that is Seattle's new waterfront. We feel like we've spent a decade under construction - from a deep bore tunnel to the tunnel machine getting stuck - that's not even covering all the debate before that, but all of the kind of follies and foibles and challenges that have beset the process of arriving at the waterfront that we have now. And now that we are getting the big reveal, a lot of people have feelings about it. So I thought we would talk about it with one of the people who was at the forefront of criticisms of the tunnel and calling out some red flags that turned out to be a very wise warning - several wise warnings that have come to pass, unfortunately - for not listening to them. But I want to start early on in the beginning, both of you - and I had a short stint in the mayor's office - worked on this, talked about this on the campaign, really got it. But when did you first hear that we needed to replace the viaduct and there were some different opinions about how to make that happen? [00:02:06] Mike McGinn: Okay, so I'm sure I can't pin down a date, but the really important date was, of course, the Nisqually earthquake in 2001. And so it gave the Alaska Way Viaduct a good shake - the decks weren't tied into the columns, the columns were on fill, which could liquefy - and everybody understood that if that quake had been a little stronger and harder, the elevated would come down. Now you might think that that would call for immediately closing the roadway for safety reasons, but what it did call for was for reconstructing it. And you have to remember that highway was really one of the very first limited access highways - it was built long ago and it was just at the end of its useful life anyway. Certainly not built to modern seismic standards or modern engineering standards. So the conversation immediately started and I don't know when everything started to settle into different roles, but the Mayor of Seattle Greg Nickels, was immediately a proponent for a tunnel - and a much larger and more expensive tunnel than what was ultimately built. And it would have been a cut-and-cover tunnel along the waterfront that included a new seawall. So they thought they were solving two things at one time - because the seawall too was rotting away, very old, very unstable. But it would have gone all the way under South Lake Union and emerged onto Aurora Avenue further north, it would have had entrances and exits to Western and Elliott. And I seem to remember the quoted price was like $11 billion. And the state - governor at the time was Christine Gregoire - they were - No, we're replacing the highway. We don't have $11 billion for Seattle. And of course had the support of a lot of lawmakers for obvious reasons - we're not going to give Seattle all that money, we want all that highway money for our districts. And those were immediately presented as the alternatives. And so much of the credit has to go to Cary Moon, who lived on the waterfront and started something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. I think Grant Cogswell, a former City Council candidate - now runs a bookstore down in Mexico City, but wrote a book about the Monorail, worked on the different Monorail campaigns before that - they launched something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. And the basic proposition was - We don't need a highway. This is a great opportunity to get rid of the highway and have a surface street, but if you amp up the transit service - if we invest in transit instead - we can accommodate everyone. And so that was really - as it started - and actually I remember being outside City Hall one day, going to some stakeholder meeting - I went to so many different stakeholder meetings. And I remember Tim Ceis saying to me - he was the Deputy Mayor at the time - You're not supporting that Cary Moon idea - I mean, that's just crazy. I was - Well, actually, Tim. So the Sierra Club was - I was a volunteer leader in the Sierra Club - and the Sierra Club was one of the first organizations - I'm sure there were others, I shouldn't overstate it - but the Sierra Club was persuaded by the wisdom of Cary's idea and supported it in that day. And so that was really how the three different options got launched - no public process, no analysis, no description of what our needs were. The mayor went to a solution, the governor went to a solution - and it was up to members of the public to try to ask them to slow down, stop, and look at something different. [00:05:42] Crystal Fincher: And Robert, how did you first engage with this issue? [00:05:47] Robert Cruickshank: For me, I had just moved to Seattle the first time in the fall of 2001 - so it was about six months after the Nisqually quake - and I came from the Bay Area. And that was where another earthquake had damaged another waterfront highway, the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco. And that was where San Francisco had voted - after that quake had damaged their viaduct beyond repair - they voted to tear it down and replace it with the Embarcadero Waterfront, which is a six-lane arterial but they built a lot more transit there. So they did the - what we might call the surface transit option - and it worked really well. It was beautiful. It still is. And so when I came up here and started to learn a little bit about the place I was living and the legacy of the Nisqually quake, I thought - Oh, why don't you just do the same thing here? It worked so well in San Francisco. Let's just tear down this unsightly monstrosity on the waterfront and replace it with a surface boulevard and put in a bunch of transit - San Francisco's made it work successfully. And the more I learned about Seattle, I realized there's a legacy of that here, too. This is a city where we had a freeway revolt, where activists came together and killed the RH Thomson freeway, which would have destroyed the Arboretum. They killed the Bay Freeway, which would have destroyed Pike Place Market. And so I naturally assumed - as being a relatively new resident - that Seattle would stay in that tradition and welcome the opportunity to tear this down and build a great waterfront for people, not cars. But as we'll talk about in a moment, we have a lot of business interests and freight interests and others who had a different vision - who didn't share that community-rooted vision. And I think at numerous points along the way, though, you see people of Seattle saying - No, this is not what we want for our waterfront. We have an opportunity now with the fact that this viaduct nearly collapsed, as Mike mentioned, in the Nisqually quake - we have an opportunity for something really wonderful here. And so I think Cary Moon and then Mike McGinn and others tapped into that - tapped into a really strong community desire to have a better waterfront. I wasn't that politically engaged at the time in the 2000s - I was just a grad student at UW - but just talking to folks who I knew, anytime this came up - God, wouldn't it be wonderful down there if this was oriented towards people and not cars, and we took that thing down? So I think one of the things you're going to see is this contest between the vision that many of us in Seattle had and still have - this beautiful location, beautiful vista on Elliott Bay, that should be for the people of the city - and those in power who have a very different vision and don't really want to share power or ultimately the right-of-way with We the People. [00:08:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. And I was involved in some things at the time - some curious coalitions - but definitely I was around a lot of people who favored either rebuilding the viaduct or the tunnel. Definitely not this roads and transit option - there's no way that's workable. That's pie-in-the-sky talk from those loony greenies over there. What are you talking about? But as this went on - I think no matter what camp people were in - there was always a clear vision articulated and people really focused on the opportunity that this represented, and I think correctly characterized it as - this is one of these generational decisions that we get to make that is going to impact the next generation or two and beyond. And there's an opportunity - the waterfront felt very disconnected with the way things were constructed - it was not easy just to go from downtown to the waterfront. It wasn't friendly for pedestrians. It wasn't friendly for tourists. It just did not feel like a world-class waterfront in a world-class city, and how we see that in so many other cities. You talk about the decision with the Embarcadero, Robert, and looking at - that definitely seemed like a definitive step forward. This was sold as - yeah, we can absolutely take a step forward and finally fix this waterfront and make it what it should have been the whole time. As you thought about the opportunity that this represented, what was the opportunity to you and what did you hear other people saying that they wanted this to be? [00:09:38] Mike McGinn: Yeah, so I think there are - I think that's really important, because I don't think there was a real discussion of what the vision was. People will say there was, but there really wasn't. Because what was baked in and what you're referring to is - well, of course you have to build automobile capacity to replace the existing automobile capacity, right? In fact, this state is still building more highways across the state in the misguided belief that more highway capacity will somehow or another do some good. So this idea that you have to replace and expand highway capacity is extremely powerful in Washington state and across the country. And there were very few examples of highway removal, so that was just a real challenge in the first place - that somehow or other the first priority has to be moving automobiles. For me, at that time I had become - the issue of climate had really penetrated me at that point. And in fact, when Greg Nickels took office and the Sierra Club endorsed him over Paul Schell - I was a local leader in the Sierra Club and a state leader in the Sierra Club - and my goal was that Mayor Nickels would do more than Paul Schell. And Paul Schell, the prior mayor, had done some good things. He had made Seattle City Light climate neutral - we'd gotten out of coal plants and we didn't purchase power from coal plants. He was really progressive on a number of environmental issues and we wanted Mayor Nickels to do more - and Mayor Nickels had stepped up. So we put on a campaign to urge him to do more. And he had stepped up to start something called the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative - which was the City of Seattle was going to meet the standards of the Kyoto Protocol, which was like the Paris Agreement of its day. And that was - it set an emissions reduction target by a date in the future. And that was really great - in fact, over a thousand cities around the country signed up to the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative. And I was appointed to a stakeholder group with other leaders - Denis Hayes from the Bullitt Foundation and others - to develop the first climate action plan for a city. Al Gore showed up at the press conference for it - it was a big - it was a BFD and a lot of excitement. And one of the things that was abundantly clear through that process of cataloging the emissions in the City of Seattle and coming up with a plan to reduce them was that our single largest source of emissions at that time was the transportation sector. We'd already gotten off of coal power under Mayor Schell - we received almost all of our electricity from hydroelectric dams. We had good conservation programs. Unlike other parts of the country, transportation was the biggest. Now what's fascinating is now - I don't know if I want to do the math - almost 20 years later, now what we see is that the whole country is in the same place. We're replacing coal and natural gas power plants. And now nationally, the single largest source of emissions is transportation. So how do you fix that? If we're serious about climate - and I thought we should be - because the scientists were telling us about heat waves. They were telling us about forest fires that would blanket the region in smoke. They were telling us about storms that would be bigger than we'd ever seen before. And flooding like we'd never seen and declining snowpack. And it was all going to happen in our futures. Honestly, I remember those predictions from the scientists because they're in the headlines today, every day. So what do we do to stop that? So I was - I had little kids, man - I had little kids, I had three kids. How are we going to stop this? Well, it's Seattle needs to lead - that's what has to happen. We're the progressive city. We're the first one out with a plan. We're going to show how we're going to do it. And if our biggest source is transportation, we should fix that. Well, it should seem obvious that the first thing you should do is stop building and expanding highways, and maybe even change some of the real estate used for cars and make it real estate for walking, biking, and transit. That's pretty straightforward. You also have to work on more housing. And this all led me to starting a nonprofit around all of these things and led to the Sierra Club - I think at a national level - our chapter was much further forward than any other chapter on upzones and backyard cottages and making the transition. So to me, this was the big - that was the vision. That was the opportunity. We're going to tear this down. We're going to make a massive investment in changing the system, and this in fact could be a really transformative piece. That's what motivated me. That climate argument wasn't landing with a whole bunch of other interests. There was certainly a vision from the Downtown and Downtown property owners and residents that - boy, wouldn't it be great to get rid of that elevated highway because that's terrible. There was also a vision from the people who still believed in highway capacity and that includes some of our major employers at the time and today - Boeing and Microsoft, they have facilities in the suburbs around Seattle - they think we need highway capacity. As well as all of the Port businesses, as well as all the maritime unions - thought that this highway connection here was somehow critical to their survival, the industrial areas. And then they wanted the capacity. So there were very strong competing visions. And I think it's fair to say that highway capacity is a vision - we've seen that one is now fulfilled. The second priority was an enhanced physical environment to enhance the property values of Downtown property owners. And they cut the deal with the highway capacity people - okay, we're here for your highway capacity, but we have to get some amenities. And the climate folks, I'm not seeing it - never a priority of any of the leaders - just wasn't a priority. [00:15:44] Crystal Fincher: How did you see those factions come into play and break down, Robert? [00:15:48] Robert Cruickshank: It was interesting. This all comes to a head in the late 2000s. And remembering back to that time, this is where Seattle is leading the fight to take on the climate and the fight against George W. Bush, who was seen as this avatar of and deeply connected to the oil industry. Someone who - one of his first things when he took office - he did was withdraw the U.S. from the Kyoto Protocol, which is the earlier version of what's now known as the Paris Agreement - global agreement to try to lower emissions. And so Seattle, in resisting Bush - that's where Greg Nickels became a national figure by leading the Mayors' Climate Action Group - not just say we're going to take on climate, we're going to do something about really de facto fighting back against Bush. And then Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore comes out with An Inconvenient Truth. And by 2007, people in Seattle are talking a lot about climate and how we need to do something about climate. But then what you see happening is the limits of that - what are people really actually willing to do and willing to support? The other piece that comes together, I think - in the 2000s - is a revival of the City itself. Seattle spends the late 20th century after the Boeing bust - since the 70s "Will the last person out of Seattle turn out the lights," recovering in the 80s somewhat, recovering in the 90s, and then the tech boom. And by the 2000s, Seattle is a destination city for young people coming to live here and living in apartments and working in the tech industry. I think that unsettles a lot of people. One thing that really stood out to me about the discussion about what to do on the waterfront was this vision from old school folks - like Joel Connelly and others - we've got to preserve that working waterfront. And it's very much the sense that blue collar working class labor is under threat - not from corporate power, but from a 20-something millennial with a laptop working at Amazon who comes to Seattle and thinks - Gosh, why is this ugly viaduct here? It's unsafe. Why don't we just tear it down and have a wonderful waterfront view? And those who are offended by this idea - who are so wedded to the 20th century model that we're going to drive everywhere, cars, freedom - this is where you see the limits of willingness to actually do something on climate. People don't actually want to give up their cars. They're afraid they're going to sacrifice their way of life. And you start to see this weird but powerful constellation come together where rather than having a discussion about transportation planning or even a discussion about climate action, we're having this weird discussion about culture. And it becomes a culture war. And the thing about a culture war is people pushing change are never actually trying to fight a war. They're just - This is a good idea. Why don't we do this? We all say these - we care about these values. And the people who don't want it just dig in and get really nasty and fight back. And so you start to see Cary Moon, People's Waterfront Coalition, Mike McGinn, and others get attacked as not wanting working class jobs, not wanting a working waterfront, not caring about how people are going to get to work, not caring about how the freight trucks are going to get around even though you're proposing a tunnel from the Port to Wallingford where - it's not exactly an industrial hub - there are some businesses there. But dumping all these cars out or in South Lake Union, it's like, what is going on here? It doesn't add up. But it became this powerful moment where a competing vision of the City - which those of us who saw a better future for Seattle didn't see any competition as necessary at all - those who are wedded to that model where we're going to drive everywhere, we're going to have trucks everywhere, really saw that under threat for other reasons. And they decided this is where they're going to make their stand. This is where they're going to make that fight. And that turned out to be pretty useful for the Port, the freight groups, the establishment democratic leaders who had already decided for their own reasons this is what they wanted too. [00:19:11] Mike McGinn: It's important to recognize too, in this, is to follow the money. And I think that this is true for highway construction generally. You have a big section of the economy - there's a section of the economy that believes in it, as Robert was saying, right? And I do think the culture war stuff is fully there - that somehow or another a bike lane in an industrial area will cause the failure of business. Although if you went to the bike - outside the industrial building - you'll find a bunch of the workers' bike there, right? Because it's affordable and efficient. So there's this weird belief that just isn't true - that you can't accommodate industry and transit and walking and biking. Of course you can. And in fact, adding all the cars is bad for freight movement because of all the traffic jams. So there's that belief, but there's also a whole bunch of people - I mentioned Downtown property owners - that gets you to your Downtown Seattle Association. The value of their property is going to be dramatically enhanced by burying, by eliminating the waterfront highway. But then you also have all of the people who build highways and all of the people who support the people who build highways. Who's going to float $4 billion in bonds? It's going to be a Downtown law firm. And by the way, the person who worked for that Downtown law firm and did the bond work was the head of the greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time. So you have the engineering firms, you have the material providers, and then you have the union jobs that go with it. So really at this point - and this isn't just about the waterfront highway, this could be any highway expansion - you've captured the business community because a big chunk of the business community will get direct dollars from the government to them. And you've actually captured a significant chunk of the labor community as well, because labor fights for labor jobs. In the big picture, service workers are taking transit, service workers need housing in town, and you can start to see a split - like in my ultimate run for mayor, I won some service worker unions, never won any construction trades. In fact, they held a rally my first year in office to denounce me, right? Because I was standing in the way of jobs. So that's a really powerful coalition. And I think what you see today in the country as a whole - as you know, I'm the ED of America Walks, so I get to see a lot more - this is a pattern. Highways aren't really supported by the public. They don't go to the public for public votes on highways anymore - the public wouldn't support it. And in fact, the data suggests the public gets that building more highway lanes won't solve everything. But you've got a big, big chunk of the economy that's gotten extremely used to billions and billions of dollars flowing into their pockets. And they need to protect that in every year. So you get that level of intensity around - Look, we're talking about $4 billion on the waterfront and a bunch of that money's coming to us. Better believe it's a good idea, and what are you talking about, climate? [00:22:03] Robert Cruickshank: You talk about public votes, and I think there are three crucial public votes we got to talk about. One is 2007, when these advisory votes are on the ballot - and they're not binding, but they're advisory. Do you want to rebuild the viaduct or build a tunnel? They both get rejected. And then the next big vote is 2009, the mayoral election, where Mike McGinn becomes mayor - in part by channeling public frustration at this giant boondoggle. And then ultimately, the last public vote on this, 2011 - in June, I believe it was, it was in August - about whether we go forward or not and the public by this point, fatigued and beaten down by The Seattle Times, decides let's just move on from this. [00:22:43] Mike McGinn: There's no other alternative. And it is worth returning to that early vote, because it was such a fascinating moment, because - I think the mayor's office didn't want to put his expansive tunnel option in a direct vote against the new elevated, fearing it would lose. So they engineered an agreement with the governor that each one would get a separate up or down vote. And by the way, Tim Ceis, the Deputy Mayor at the time, called in the Sierra Club, briefed us on it, and one of our members said - What would happen if they both got voted down? And Deputy Mayor Ceis said - by the way, Tim Ceis has got a big contract right now from Mayor Harrell, longtime tunnel supporter. Tim Ceis is the consultant for most of the business side candidates. Tim Burgess, another big supporter of the tunnel, now works for Mayor Harrell. Oh, and Christine Gregoire has been hired by the biggest corporations in the region to do their work for them as well. So there's a pretty good payoff if you stick around and support the right side of this stuff. But anyway, Mayor Ceis, Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis, when said, What happens if they're both voted down? He goes - Well, that would be chaos. You don't want that, do you? And I remember all of us just kind of looked at each other - and we all went out on the sidewalk, there were like six of us. And we went - We want that, right? And so we joined in and supported the No and No campaign. And The Stranger came in really hard. And I think Erica Barnett wrote the articles. And Cary Moon was in on it. And the defeat of that, for the first time, opened up the possibility - Well, let's think about something else. And so a stakeholder group was formed. Cary Moon was appointed. Mike O'Brien was appointed. The waterfront guys were appointed. And the Downtown folks were appointed. And the labor folks were appointed. And I think a really important part of the story here is that it was advisory - they weren't making the decisions, it was advisory. But they got to a point at which the head of the State DOT, the head of the Seattle DOT, and the head of the King County DOT all expressed to their respective executives that surface transit worked and was worth it. And this was extremely distressing to the business community. So they mounted a big lobbying push and went straight to Gregoire. And Gregoire, for the first time, became a tunnel supporter. And they were promised that this new tunneling technology - the deep bore tunnel - would solve the cost issues of the deep bore tunnel. And not only that, the state's commitment, which to date was $2.4 billion - they had committed $2.4 billion to a rebuild - the state wouldn't have to pay anymore, because the Port would put in $300 million and they would raise $400 million from tolling. And coincidentally, the amount they thought they could raise from tolling was the exact amount needed to meet the projected cost of using the deep bore tunnel boring machine. So the deal was cut and announced. And the whole stakeholder group and the recommendations from the DOT heads were abandoned. And that occurred, basically, late 2008, early 2009 - the deal was made. And that was about the time that I was contemplating - well, I think I'd already decided to run, but I had not yet announced. [00:26:14] Crystal Fincher: And this was an interesting time, especially during that vote. Because at that time, I had an eye into what the business community was doing and thinking, and it was clear that their numbers didn't add up. [00:26:26] Mike McGinn: Oh my God - no. [00:26:28] Crystal Fincher: But they just did not want to face that. And what they knew is they had enough money and resources to throw at this issue and to throw at a marketing effort to obfuscate that, that they wouldn't have to worry about it. And there was this sense of offense, of indignation that - Who are these people trying to come up and tell us that we don't need freight capacity, that we don't need - that this extra highway capacity, don't they understand how important these freeways are? Who are these people who just don't understand how our economy works? [00:27:02] Mike McGinn: They were the grownups who really understood how things worked. And we were the upstarts who didn't understand anything. But there's a great line from Willie Brown talking about - I think the Transbay Bridge, and Robert can correct the name, in California, which was way over budget. And people were lamenting that the early estimates had been made up. And he goes - Look, this is how it works. You just need to dig a hole in the ground so deep that the only way to fill it up is with money. I think that's pretty much the quote. So that's the strategy. You get it started. Of course you have rosy estimates. And then you just have that commitment, and it's the job of legislators to come up with the cost overruns, dollars later. [00:27:43] Robert Cruickshank: And I think it's so key to understand this moment here in the late 2000s, where the public had already weighed in. I remember voting - it was the last thing I voted on before I moved to California for four years. I'm like no - I was No and No. And that's where the Seattle voters were. They rejected both options. And then you start to hear, coming out of the stakeholder group - Okay, we can make the surface transit option work. And I left town thinking - Alright, that's what's going to happen, just like the Embarcadero in San Francisco and done. And the next thing I hear in late 2008, early 2009, there's this deal that's been cut and all of a sudden a deep bore tunnel is on the table. And this is Seattle politics in a nutshell. I think people look back and think that because we are this smart, progressive technocratic city - those people who live here are - we think that our government works the same way. And it doesn't. This is - time and time again, the public will make its expression felt. They'll weigh in with opinion poll or protest or vote. And the powers that be will say - Well, actually, we want to do this thing instead. We'll cook it up in a backroom. We're going to jam it on all of you, and you're going to like it. And if you don't like it, then we're going to start marshaling resources. We're gonna throw a bunch of money at it. We'll get The Seattle Times to weigh in and pound away at the enemy. And that's how politics works here - that's how so much of our transportation system is built and managed. And so people today, in 2023, looking at this monstrosity on the waterfront that we have now think - How did we get here? Who planned this? It was planned in a backroom without public involvement. And I think that's a thing that has to be understood because that, as we just heard, was baked in from the very start. [00:29:11] Mike McGinn: Well, Robert, the idea of a deep bore tunnel was brought forward by a representative of the Discovery Institute, who you may know as the folks that believe in creationism. [00:29:21] Robert Cruickshank: Well, and not only that, the Discovery Institute is responsible for turning Christopher Rufo from a failed Seattle City Council candidate in 2019 into a national figure. [00:29:31] Mike McGinn: The Discovery Institute, with money from local donors - major, very wealthy local folks - they actually had a long-term plan to turn all of 99 into a limited access freeway. It's like - we need to get rid of that First Avenue South and Highway 99 and Aurora Avenue stuff - all of that should be a freeway. So they were the architects of the idea of - Hey, this deep bore tunnel is the solution. But Robert's point is just right on - transportation policy was driven by power and money, not by transportation needs, or climate needs, or equity needs, or even local economy needs really. When you get right down to it, our city runs on transit - that's what really matters. Our city runs on the fact that it's a city where people can walk from place to place. The idea that our economic future was tied to a highway that would skip Downtown - the most valuable place in the Pacific Northwest, Downtown Seattle. No, that's not really what powers our economy. But it certainly worked for the people that were going to get the dollars that flowed from folks and for the people who own Downtown property. [00:30:42] Crystal Fincher: And I want to talk about money and power with this. Who were the people in power? What was the Council at that time? Who made these decisions? [00:30:50] Mike McGinn: The Council at the time was elected citywide. And I think some people have concerns about district representation, but one of the things that citywide elections meant at the time was that you had to run a citywide campaign, and that's expensive. There's no way to knock on enough doors citywide. I did not have a lot of money when I ran for mayor, but at least I had the media attention that would go to a mayoral candidate. A City Council candidate would kind of flow under the radar. So you had people come from different places, right? They might come from the business side, they might come from the labor side. But ultimately, they would tend to make peace with the other major players - because only business and only labor could finance a campaign. They were the only ones with the resources to do that. So the other interests - the environmentalists, the social service folks, neighborhood advocates of whatever stripe - we chose from amongst the candidates that were elevated by, they would unify - in some cases, the business and labor folks would unify around a candidate. In fact, that's what we saw in the last two mayoral elections as well, where they pick a candidate. And so this doesn't leave much room. So when I was mayor, almost the entire council was aligned with the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time, either endorsed by them or had made their peace with them so the challenger was not being financed. So Robert said something about those outsiders - I went under the radar screen as a candidate at the beginning of my campaign. When I entered the race, nobody was running because everybody thought that Greg Nickels had the institutional support locked down. [00:32:33] Crystal Fincher: But then a snowstorm happened. [00:32:35] Mike McGinn: Well, it was even before that - honestly, everybody thought that he could win. And long before the snowstorm, I was like - We're getting a new mayor. And I was actually looking around to try to figure out who it was going to be - because I wanted a mayor who actually believed in climate, who had my values. But nobody - I was looking through who the people were that might run, and it dawned on me - Well, nobody's going to run. But we're going to get a new mayor and I have my values - and I've actually run ballot measure campaigns and had a very modest base of support. So I was really the first one in the race that got any attention. So I got some great media attention off that. Then my opponent in the general, Joe Mallahan - whatever else you may think about Joe Mallahan - he actually saw it too. He saw that there was an opening. And then we were joined by a long-time City Councilmember, Jan Drago. And I remember the headline from The Seattle Times or the comments at the time was - Okay, now it's a real race. But it just really wasn't. So I was really under the radar screen in that race because they were disregarding me. But there was in fact a lot of anger about the tunnel. There was a lot of just - Greg, for whatever his positives or negatives that history will deal with - and by the way, I actually think Greg did a lot of good. I just was disappointed in his highway policies and his climate policies at the end of the day - I have a lot of respect for Greg Nickels, but he wasn't going to win that race. And I came out of the primary against Joe Mallahan. And all of a sudden we had these two outsiders and the business community's freaking out. All of it - I remember watching it - all of the support, the business support shifted to Joe. It took about a month, it took a few weeks. But all of a sudden - there was actually one week where I think I raised more money than he did, that was pretty unusual - and then all of a sudden all the money was pouring in. And boy, did Joe believe in that tunnel. And did Joe believe in what the Chamber of Commerce wanted to do. In fact, he believed in it so much that he believed that Seattle should pay cost overruns if there were cost overruns on the tunnel - an admission I got from him during the televised debate, I was shocked he admitted to it. [00:34:41] Crystal Fincher: I remember that debate. [00:34:43] Mike McGinn: Yeah. So you were kind of asking about how politics worked. It was really something. Yeah - here's another memory. About two weeks before the election, the City Council took - three weeks before the, two, three weeks, four weeks - they took a vote to say that the tunnel was their choice. Even though there's a mayoral election in which the tunnel is on the ballot, so to speak - in terms of the issues of the candidates - they took a vote for no reason to say it was a done deal. And then WSDOT released a video of the elevated collapsing in a highway, which is the first time a public disclosure request from a third party was ever given straight to a TV station, I think, in my experience in Seattle. I had Gregoire and the DOT folks down there working on that campaign too - their tunnel was threatened. So it really was something how - I indeed was kind of shocked at - it was such a learning experience for me - how much the ranks closed around this. I didn't appreciate it. I had my own nonprofit, I had been on stakeholder committees, I'd worked with a lot of people that weren't just Sierra Club members and neighborhood types. I'd worked with a lot of business people, many of whom had supported my nonprofit because they liked its vision. But they were very clear with me that as long as I supported the surface transit option, there was no way they could be associated with my run for mayor in any way, shape, or form - even if they liked me. It was a complete lockdown - right after the primary where Greg lost the primary and it was me and Joe, I was - Okay, open field running. I can now reach out to these people. There's no incumbent - maybe some of them can support me now. And they were abundantly clear on all of those phone calls that - Nope, can't do it. Until you change your position on the tunnel, we just can't do it. We have business in this town, Mike. We have relationships in this town. We cannot do that. So it was a real lockdown - politically. [00:36:38] Crystal Fincher: That was also a big learning experience for me - watching that consolidation, watching how not only were they fighting for the tunnel against you and making the fight against you a fight about the tunnel, but the enforcement to those third parties that you were talking about that - Hey, if you play ball with him, you're cut off. And those kinds of threats and that kind of dealing - watching that happen was very formative for me. I'm like - Okay, I see how this works, and this is kind of insidious. And if you are branded as an outsider, if you don't play ball, if you don't kiss the ring of the adults in the room - which is definitely what they considered themselves - then you're on the outs and they're at war. And it was really a war footing against you and the campaign. Who was on the Council at that time? [00:37:30] Mike McGinn: Oh my God. Let me see if I can go through the list. No, and it really, it was - your point about it was a war footing was not something that I fully, that I did not appreciate until actually going through that experience - how unified that would be. Excuse me. The City Council chair was Tim Burgess at the time. Bruce Harrell was on the Council. Sally Clark, Richard Conlin, Nick Licata. Mike O'Brien was running on the same platform as me with regard to the tunnel and he'd just been elected. Jean Godden, Sally Bagshaw. I hope I'm not leaving anything out - because - [00:38:04] Robert Cruickshank: Tom Rasmussen will forgive you. [00:38:06] Mike McGinn: Tom Rasmussen. Yeah - because City Councilmembers would get really offended if you didn't thank them publicly - that was another thing I had to learn. You have to publicly thank any other politician on stage with you or they held a grudge. Yeah. So I had - I didn't know all the politicians' rules when I started. [00:38:25] Crystal Fincher: There are so many rules. [00:38:27] Mike McGinn: There are so many, there's so many rules. But really what you saw then was that the Council tended to move in lockstep on many issues - because if they all voted together and they all worked citywide, there was protection. None of them could be singled out. So it was very - and it's not to say that some of them didn't take principled votes and would find themselves on an 8-1 position sometimes, but for the most part, it was much, much safer to be - it was much, much safer to vote as a group. And they tended to do that. And they had coalesced around the tunnel, except for O'Brien. And that could not be shaken by anything we brought to bear. [00:39:04] Robert Cruickshank: And this is wrapped up in not just the electoral politics, but the power politics. Because Mike McGinn comes in - mayor leading the 7th floor of City Hall, the head of City government - and smart guy, nice guy, willing to talk to anybody. But is not from their crew, is not from that group. And as Crystal and Mike said, the ranks were closed from the start. This is - again, 2009, 2010 - when nationally Mitch McConnell is quoted as saying, It's his ambition to make Obama a one-term president. I don't know if he's ever caught on record, but I would be quite certain that Tim Burgess would have said the exact same thing - that his ambition was to make Mike McGinn a one-term mayor. As it turned out in 2013, Tim Burgess wanted his job - one of the candidates running for it. So these are all people who have a reason to close ranks against Mike McGinn and to use a tunnel as a bludgeon against him to do so. [00:39:58] Mike McGinn: There were other bludgeons. After I won the general election and before I took office, they passed their annual budget - they cut the mayor's office budget by a third before I even took office. Just boom - I know - they were determined, they were determined. And so that was when the planning - that council then and with WSDOT - that was when basically the contours of the waterfront were locked into place, including what we now see as that very wide surface road. That was that Council. So if you're wondering, if you're looking at that going - Okay, wow, who decided that and where did it come from? Again, our current mayor and his current advisor and others - they've always been for that. Building that big surface road has always been the plan to go along with the tunnel, because highway capacity was their highest priority. And the park on the waterfront, along with a lot of money into the aquarium and into these new structures - that's their signature thing for so many other people. But the idea that you should, that there was an opportunity to transform our transportation system and transform our city to make it more equitable and climate friendly was never a priority in this process. Just wasn't. [00:41:20] Crystal Fincher: It was never a priority. It was never seriously considered. And to me, through this process - lots of people know, have talked about it on the show before - I actually didn't start off Team McGinn. I wound up Team McGinn - didn't start off that way. But through that - and you won me over with logic - it was you being proven right on several things. You pointed out that their projections, their traffic projections were just so far out of left field that there was no way that they were going to come close. And they even had to come down on their projections before we even saw the traffic - the actual traffic turned out to be lower. You were right on that one - the laughable - [00:41:59] Mike McGinn: They're under 40,000 cars a day - for a highway that was carrying 110,000 cars a day beforehand. So even as a traffic solution - to put that into context, 40,000 cars a day is like the Ballard Bridge. And I can guarantee you the replacement costs of the Ballard Bridge is not $4 billion or $3.1 billion. The E Line, I think, carries 15,000 people a day. Metro carries 220,000 people a day. What you could do with that $3.1 billion or $4 billion in terms of bus lanes, bike lanes, rolling stock for Metro, maybe pay raises for bus drivers so that we could actually have service - you could do so much with those billions of dollars. And we put it all into moving 40,000 cars a day? It's just pathetic. That's three Rapid Ride lines we could have had for a 10th of the cost, or even less. I think the investments in Rapid Ride lines are about $50-100 million a line to make the capital investments to make it work. So the waste - even if you don't care about climate, the waste of dollars - and who's paying those taxes? To a great degree, we have the most regressive state and local tax system in the nation. And we'll have a ballot measure soon, and I know a lot of environmentalists will be out there if the package spends for the right thing saying - Hey, we need money for local streets. Imagine if we'd taken that gas tax money and the Legislature had allowed cities and towns to use it to improve their streets - which they can do. I know that the constitution says highway purposes, but when you read highway purposes, it says roads and bridges. It includes everything. You can use gas taxes for anything that improves the road. And they do. WSDOT has used gas taxes to pay for bike lanes and sidewalks. It's legal. That's a choice. So we're driving around potholed streets. We have - we're putting up little plastic dividers because we care more about the car getting hurt than the bicyclist on the other side of that plastic divider. We're watching our transit service melt away because we can't pay bus drivers enough. But hey, man, somebody's got a really rapid - 3,000 people a day get to skip Downtown in their private vehicles. Where are our priorities for equity? Where are the priorities for economy, or even just plain old-fashioned fiscal prudence? None of that was there - because all of those dollars were going to fund the needs of the most powerful people in the City. And they captured those dollars - and all of us will pay the taxes, all of us will breathe the smoky air, and all of us will watch our streets deteriorate and our transit service evaporate. [00:44:52] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And to me, it was such a foundational lesson that the people that we have making decisions really matter - and that we have to really explore their records, their donors, their histories - because over and over again, we look at the decisions that wind up being made that frequently conflict with campaign promises, but that very, very rarely conflict with their donor rolls. [00:45:16] Mike McGinn: And yes - and every one of them knows how to make the value statements. So if I had any advice for people in this year's election - everyone is going to say they care about housing, everyone's going to say they think biking safe. I don't - one of the things that I came away with - I don't care about the goals you put into some policy anymore. Show me the hard physical action you will take that might piss somebody off, but you're willing to do it because it's right. And if you can't do that, then your value statements are meaningless. So take a look - who actually, and that's the question I always ask candidates for office - Tell me about a time you did something hard that might've caused you criticism, but you did it because it was right. Or that you made somebody who was an ally or friend upset, but you did it because it was right. Tell me about that time. [00:46:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's a challenge. And to your point and learning through just watching how people operated through that and some other processes - but that certainly was a big learning for me - is the role of coalitions, the role of accountability, and understanding. You have always had your finger on the pulse of Seattle, really - you're extraordinarily good at that. You're actually - both of you - are great strategists. But our political class is so detached from that sometimes - certainly I'm feeling frustration at some recent actions by our Legislature - we just had our special session day where they increased criminalization of substances, personal possession of substances - just reflecting on legislation to provide school, kids with free meals at school, things that seem like really basic and foundational that we should be able to land this. If we can call a special session to hand Boeing billions of dollars, we should be able to feed kids, right? [00:47:00] Mike McGinn: At the time we were cutting school budgets - when we found money for that. But I don't want to be too gloomy. And then I want to turn it over to Robert to get a last word in here, 'cause I just loved - his analysis is so awesome. I don't want to be too gloomy because - I look at what happened in the Legislature this year on housing, that we're finally going to allow housing, people to build more housing in places so people can actually live closer to their jobs and live more affordably. 10 years ago, we would have thought that was impossible. There's a lot of hard organizing that did it. At America Walks, we're the host of the Freeway Fighters Networks - there are people in 40 cities or more around the country that are organizing to remove highways. And while it's just a small amount of money compared to the amount going to highway expansion, there's actually federal funds to study and remove highways. So it's a long, hard slog. What felt for us - for Robert and me and Cary Moon and others fighting this - which felt like an impossible fight at the time is a fight that is now winning in places. Not winning enough - we're not winning fast enough - but it can change. And so that's - I don't want to be too negative. They got money, but organizing and people - and we actually have the public with us on this, just like we have the public with us on housing. So we just have to do more. We just got to keep at it, folks - got to keep at it. We can win this one. Don't allow this story of how hard it was to deal with the unified political class in the City of Seattle for their climate arson - should not deter you. It should inspire you, 'cause I actually won the mayor's office and we actually did do a lot of good. And the next fight is right in front of us again today, so get in it people. We need you. [00:48:46] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's spot on. And I remember coming to work in your office at the very beginning of 2011, when it seemed like the tunnel was just dominating discussion, but not in the mayor's office, right? When I joined, I fully expected to be like - roll my sleeves up to take on that tunnel. Instead, I'm working on the mayor's jobs plan, the Families and Education Levy, on transit. That's the stuff that was really getting done, and I think McGinn left a really great legacy on that. But we didn't win the tunnel fight. And I think we've diagnosed many of the reasons why, but one thing that really stands out to me as I look back from 12, 13 years distance is we didn't have the same density of genuinely progressive and social democratic organizations and people and leaders in Seattle that we have now. I think that matters because Mike's been talking about what's the next fight. I think one of the big fights coming up next year - when it comes time to renew that Move Seattle Levy - that's nearly a billion dollars that's going to be on the table. And we keep getting promised - when we are asked to approve these massive levies - that a lot of that money is going to go to safe streets, it's going to go to protect vulnerable users, we're going to do something to finally get towards Vision Zero. And instead it all gets taken away to build more car infrastructure. At what point do we finally stand - literally in the road - and say, No more. Do we look at the broken promises on the waterfront where we were promised a beautiful pedestrian-friendly waterfront and got another car sewer? We're going to have to organize and come together. We have many more groups now and many more leaders who are willing to stand up and say - We're not passing this levy unless it actually focuses on safe streets, unless it focuses on pedestrians and cyclists and transit users, and gives iron-clad promises to make sure stuff gets built so that some future mayor can't just walk in and start canceling projects left and right that we were promised. That's the lesson I take from this is - we're better organized now, we have more resources now, but it's still going to be a slog, and we're going to have to stand our ground - otherwise we get rolled. [00:50:34] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I thank you both for this conversation today - reflections on the tunnel fight, how it came to be, what it was like in the middle of it, and the lessons that we take moving forward in these elections that we have coming up this year, next year, and beyond. Thanks so much for the conversation. [00:50:50] Mike McGinn: Thank you, Crystal. [00:50:51] Robert Cruickshank: Thank you - it's been wonderful. [00:50:52] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks, which is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or 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. 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.

On this re-air, Crystal chats with former Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and his former Senior Communications Advisor Robert Cruickshank about the missed opportunity for generational impact through how decisions were made about Seattle's waterfront and the SR99 tunnel. Mike and Robert review how the vision of the scrappy People's Waterfront Coalition, centered around making a prized public space accessible for all while taking the climate crisis on by transforming our transportation system, nearly won the fight against those who prioritized maintaining highway capacity and those who prioritized increasing Downtown property values.  The conversation then highlights how those with power and money used their outsized influence to make backroom decisions - despite flawed arguments and little public enthusiasm for their proposal - leaving Seattle with an underutilized deep bore tunnel and a car-centric waterfront. Some of the decision makers are still active in local politics - including current Mayor Bruce Harrell and his current advisor Tim Burgess. With important elections ahead, Crystal, Mike and Robert discuss how political decisions tend to conflict with campaign promises rather than donor rolls, how proven action is a better indicator than value statements, and how today's dense ecosystem of progressive leaders and organizations can take inspiration and win the next fight. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii, Mike McGinn at @mayormcginn, and Robert Cruickshank at @cruickshank.   Mike McGinn Mike is the Executive Director of national nonprofit America Walks.  He got his start in local politics as a neighborhood activist pushing for walkability. From there he founded a non-profit focused on sustainable and equitable growth, and then became mayor of Seattle. Just before joining America Walks, Mike worked to help Feet First, Washington State's walking advocacy organization, expand their sphere of influence across Washington state. He has worked on numerous public education, legislative, ballot measure and election campaigns – which has given him an abiding faith in the power of organizing and volunteers to create change.   Robert Cruickshank Robert is the Director of Digital Strategy at California YIMBY and Chair of Sierra Club Seattle. A long time communications and political strategist, he was Senior Communications Advisor to Mike McGinn from 2011-2013.   Resources “Seattle Waterfront History Interviews: Cary Moon, Waterfront Coalition” by Dominic Black from HistoryLink   “State Route 99 tunnel - Options and political debate" from Wikipedia   “Remembering broken promises about Bertha” by Josh Cohen from Curbed Seattle   “Fewer drivers in Seattle's Highway 99 tunnel could create need for bailout” by Mike Lindblom from The Seattle Times   “Surface Highway Undermines Seattle's Waterfront Park” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Seattle Prepares to Open Brand New Elliott Way Highway Connector” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist   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. Today, I am very excited to be welcoming Robert Cruickshank and former Mayor Mike McGinn to the show to talk about something that a lot of people have been thinking about, talking about recently - and that is Seattle's new waterfront. We feel like we've spent a decade under construction - from a deep bore tunnel to the tunnel machine getting stuck - that's not even covering all the debate before that, but all of the kind of follies and foibles and challenges that have beset the process of arriving at the waterfront that we have now. And now that we are getting the big reveal, a lot of people have feelings about it. So I thought we would talk about it with one of the people who was at the forefront of criticisms of the tunnel and calling out some red flags that turned out to be a very wise warning - several wise warnings that have come to pass, unfortunately - for not listening to them. But I want to start early on in the beginning, both of you - and I had a short stint in the mayor's office - worked on this, talked about this on the campaign, really got it. But when did you first hear that we needed to replace the viaduct and there were some different opinions about how to make that happen? [00:02:06] Mike McGinn: Okay, so I'm sure I can't pin down a date, but the really important date was, of course, the Nisqually earthquake in 2001. And so it gave the Alaska Way Viaduct a good shake - the decks weren't tied into the columns, the columns were on fill, which could liquefy - and everybody understood that if that quake had been a little stronger and harder, the elevated would come down. Now you might think that that would call for immediately closing the roadway for safety reasons, but what it did call for was for reconstructing it. And you have to remember that highway was really one of the very first limited access highways - it was built long ago and it was just at the end of its useful life anyway. Certainly not built to modern seismic standards or modern engineering standards. So the conversation immediately started and I don't know when everything started to settle into different roles, but the Mayor of Seattle Greg Nickels, was immediately a proponent for a tunnel - and a much larger and more expensive tunnel than what was ultimately built. And it would have been a cut-and-cover tunnel along the waterfront that included a new seawall. So they thought they were solving two things at one time - because the seawall too was rotting away, very old, very unstable. But it would have gone all the way under South Lake Union and emerged onto Aurora Avenue further north, it would have had entrances and exits to Western and Elliott. And I seem to remember the quoted price was like $11 billion. And the state - governor at the time was Christine Gregoire - they were - No, we're replacing the highway. We don't have $11 billion for Seattle. And of course had the support of a lot of lawmakers for obvious reasons - we're not going to give Seattle all that money, we want all that highway money for our districts. And those were immediately presented as the alternatives. And so much of the credit has to go to Cary Moon, who lived on the waterfront and started something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. I think Grant Cogswell, a former City Council candidate - now runs a bookstore down in Mexico City, but wrote a book about the Monorail, worked on the different Monorail campaigns before that - they launched something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. And the basic proposition was - We don't need a highway. This is a great opportunity to get rid of the highway and have a surface street, but if you amp up the transit service - if we invest in transit instead - we can accommodate everyone. And so that was really - as it started - and actually I remember being outside City Hall one day, going to some stakeholder meeting - I went to so many different stakeholder meetings. And I remember Tim Ceis saying to me - he was the Deputy Mayor at the time - You're not supporting that Cary Moon idea - I mean, that's just crazy. I was - Well, actually, Tim. So the Sierra Club was - I was a volunteer leader in the Sierra Club - and the Sierra Club was one of the first organizations - I'm sure there were others, I shouldn't overstate it - but the Sierra Club was persuaded by the wisdom of Cary's idea and supported it in that day. And so that was really how the three different options got launched - no public process, no analysis, no description of what our needs were. The mayor went to a solution, the governor went to a solution - and it was up to members of the public to try to ask them to slow down, stop, and look at something different. [00:05:42] Crystal Fincher: And Robert, how did you first engage with this issue? [00:05:47] Robert Cruickshank: For me, I had just moved to Seattle the first time in the fall of 2001 - so it was about six months after the Nisqually quake - and I came from the Bay Area. And that was where another earthquake had damaged another waterfront highway, the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco. And that was where San Francisco had voted - after that quake had damaged their viaduct beyond repair - they voted to tear it down and replace it with the Embarcadero Waterfront, which is a six-lane arterial but they built a lot more transit there. So they did the - what we might call the surface transit option - and it worked really well. It was beautiful. It still is. And so when I came up here and started to learn a little bit about the place I was living and the legacy of the Nisqually quake, I thought - Oh, why don't you just do the same thing here? It worked so well in San Francisco. Let's just tear down this unsightly monstrosity on the waterfront and replace it with a surface boulevard and put in a bunch of transit - San Francisco's made it work successfully. And the more I learned about Seattle, I realized there's a legacy of that here, too. This is a city where we had a freeway revolt, where activists came together and killed the RH Thomson freeway, which would have destroyed the Arboretum. They killed the Bay Freeway, which would have destroyed Pike Place Market. And so I naturally assumed - as being a relatively new resident - that Seattle would stay in that tradition and welcome the opportunity to tear this down and build a great waterfront for people, not cars. But as we'll talk about in a moment, we have a lot of business interests and freight interests and others who had a different vision - who didn't share that community-rooted vision. And I think at numerous points along the way, though, you see people of Seattle saying - No, this is not what we want for our waterfront. We have an opportunity now with the fact that this viaduct nearly collapsed, as Mike mentioned, in the Nisqually quake - we have an opportunity for something really wonderful here. And so I think Cary Moon and then Mike McGinn and others tapped into that - tapped into a really strong community desire to have a better waterfront. I wasn't that politically engaged at the time in the 2000s - I was just a grad student at UW - but just talking to folks who I knew, anytime this came up - God, wouldn't it be wonderful down there if this was oriented towards people and not cars, and we took that thing down? So I think one of the things you're going to see is this contest between the vision that many of us in Seattle had and still have - this beautiful location, beautiful vista on Elliott Bay, that should be for the people of the city - and those in power who have a very different vision and don't really want to share power or ultimately the right-of-way with We the People. [00:08:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. And I was involved in some things at the time - some curious coalitions - but definitely I was around a lot of people who favored either rebuilding the viaduct or the tunnel. Definitely not this roads and transit option - there's no way that's workable. That's pie-in-the-sky talk from those loony greenies over there. What are you talking about? But as this went on - I think no matter what camp people were in - there was always a clear vision articulated and people really focused on the opportunity that this represented, and I think correctly characterized it as - this is one of these generational decisions that we get to make that is going to impact the next generation or two and beyond. And there's an opportunity - the waterfront felt very disconnected with the way things were constructed - it was not easy just to go from downtown to the waterfront. It wasn't friendly for pedestrians. It wasn't friendly for tourists. It just did not feel like a world-class waterfront in a world-class city, and how we see that in so many other cities. You talk about the decision with the Embarcadero, Robert, and looking at - that definitely seemed like a definitive step forward. This was sold as - yeah, we can absolutely take a step forward and finally fix this waterfront and make it what it should have been the whole time. As you thought about the opportunity that this represented, what was the opportunity to you and what did you hear other people saying that they wanted this to be? [00:09:38] Mike McGinn: Yeah, so I think there are - I think that's really important, because I don't think there was a real discussion of what the vision was. People will say there was, but there really wasn't. Because what was baked in and what you're referring to is - well, of course you have to build automobile capacity to replace the existing automobile capacity, right? In fact, this state is still building more highways across the state in the misguided belief that more highway capacity will somehow or another do some good. So this idea that you have to replace and expand highway capacity is extremely powerful in Washington state and across the country. And there were very few examples of highway removal, so that was just a real challenge in the first place - that somehow or other the first priority has to be moving automobiles. For me, at that time I had become - the issue of climate had really penetrated me at that point. And in fact, when Greg Nickels took office and the Sierra Club endorsed him over Paul Schell - I was a local leader in the Sierra Club and a state leader in the Sierra Club - and my goal was that Mayor Nickels would do more than Paul Schell. And Paul Schell, the prior mayor, had done some good things. He had made Seattle City Light climate neutral - we'd gotten out of coal plants and we didn't purchase power from coal plants. He was really progressive on a number of environmental issues and we wanted Mayor Nickels to do more - and Mayor Nickels had stepped up. So we put on a campaign to urge him to do more. And he had stepped up to start something called the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative - which was the City of Seattle was going to meet the standards of the Kyoto Protocol, which was like the Paris Agreement of its day. And that was - it set an emissions reduction target by a date in the future. And that was really great - in fact, over a thousand cities around the country signed up to the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative. And I was appointed to a stakeholder group with other leaders - Denis Hayes from the Bullitt Foundation and others - to develop the first climate action plan for a city. Al Gore showed up at the press conference for it - it was a big - it was a BFD and a lot of excitement. And one of the things that was abundantly clear through that process of cataloging the emissions in the City of Seattle and coming up with a plan to reduce them was that our single largest source of emissions at that time was the transportation sector. We'd already gotten off of coal power under Mayor Schell - we received almost all of our electricity from hydroelectric dams. We had good conservation programs. Unlike other parts of the country, transportation was the biggest. Now what's fascinating is now - I don't know if I want to do the math - almost 20 years later, now what we see is that the whole country is in the same place. We're replacing coal and natural gas power plants. And now nationally, the single largest source of emissions is transportation. So how do you fix that? If we're serious about climate - and I thought we should be - because the scientists were telling us about heat waves. They were telling us about forest fires that would blanket the region in smoke. They were telling us about storms that would be bigger than we'd ever seen before. And flooding like we'd never seen and declining snowpack. And it was all going to happen in our futures. Honestly, I remember those predictions from the scientists because they're in the headlines today, every day. So what do we do to stop that? So I was - I had little kids, man - I had little kids, I had three kids. How are we going to stop this? Well, it's Seattle needs to lead - that's what has to happen. We're the progressive city. We're the first one out with a plan. We're going to show how we're going to do it. And if our biggest source is transportation, we should fix that. Well, it should seem obvious that the first thing you should do is stop building and expanding highways, and maybe even change some of the real estate used for cars and make it real estate for walking, biking, and transit. That's pretty straightforward. You also have to work on more housing. And this all led me to starting a nonprofit around all of these things and led to the Sierra Club - I think at a national level - our chapter was much further forward than any other chapter on upzones and backyard cottages and making the transition. So to me, this was the big - that was the vision. That was the opportunity. We're going to tear this down. We're going to make a massive investment in changing the system, and this in fact could be a really transformative piece. That's what motivated me. That climate argument wasn't landing with a whole bunch of other interests. There was certainly a vision from the Downtown and Downtown property owners and residents that - boy, wouldn't it be great to get rid of that elevated highway because that's terrible. There was also a vision from the people who still believed in highway capacity and that includes some of our major employers at the time and today - Boeing and Microsoft, they have facilities in the suburbs around Seattle - they think we need highway capacity. As well as all of the Port businesses, as well as all the maritime unions - thought that this highway connection here was somehow critical to their survival, the industrial areas. And then they wanted the capacity. So there were very strong competing visions. And I think it's fair to say that highway capacity is a vision - we've seen that one is now fulfilled. The second priority was an enhanced physical environment to enhance the property values of Downtown property owners. And they cut the deal with the highway capacity people - okay, we're here for your highway capacity, but we have to get some amenities. And the climate folks, I'm not seeing it - never a priority of any of the leaders - just wasn't a priority. [00:15:44] Crystal Fincher: How did you see those factions come into play and break down, Robert? [00:15:48] Robert Cruickshank: It was interesting. This all comes to a head in the late 2000s. And remembering back to that time, this is where Seattle is leading the fight to take on the climate and the fight against George W. Bush, who was seen as this avatar of and deeply connected to the oil industry. Someone who - one of his first things when he took office - he did was withdraw the U.S. from the Kyoto Protocol, which is the earlier version of what's now known as the Paris Agreement - global agreement to try to lower emissions. And so Seattle, in resisting Bush - that's where Greg Nickels became a national figure by leading the Mayors' Climate Action Group - not just say we're going to take on climate, we're going to do something about really de facto fighting back against Bush. And then Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore comes out with An Inconvenient Truth. And by 2007, people in Seattle are talking a lot about climate and how we need to do something about climate. But then what you see happening is the limits of that - what are people really actually willing to do and willing to support? The other piece that comes together, I think - in the 2000s - is a revival of the City itself. Seattle spends the late 20th century after the Boeing bust - since the 70s "Will the last person out of Seattle turn out the lights," recovering in the 80s somewhat, recovering in the 90s, and then the tech boom. And by the 2000s, Seattle is a destination city for young people coming to live here and living in apartments and working in the tech industry. I think that unsettles a lot of people. One thing that really stood out to me about the discussion about what to do on the waterfront was this vision from old school folks - like Joel Connelly and others - we've got to preserve that working waterfront. And it's very much the sense that blue collar working class labor is under threat - not from corporate power, but from a 20-something millennial with a laptop working at Amazon who comes to Seattle and thinks - Gosh, why is this ugly viaduct here? It's unsafe. Why don't we just tear it down and have a wonderful waterfront view? And those who are offended by this idea - who are so wedded to the 20th century model that we're going to drive everywhere, cars, freedom - this is where you see the limits of willingness to actually do something on climate. People don't actually want to give up their cars. They're afraid they're going to sacrifice their way of life. And you start to see this weird but powerful constellation come together where rather than having a discussion about transportation planning or even a discussion about climate action, we're having this weird discussion about culture. And it becomes a culture war. And the thing about a culture war is people pushing change are never actually trying to fight a war. They're just - This is a good idea. Why don't we do this? We all say these - we care about these values. And the people who don't want it just dig in and get really nasty and fight back. And so you start to see Cary Moon, People's Waterfront Coalition, Mike McGinn, and others get attacked as not wanting working class jobs, not wanting a working waterfront, not caring about how people are going to get to work, not caring about how the freight trucks are going to get around even though you're proposing a tunnel from the Port to Wallingford where - it's not exactly an industrial hub - there are some businesses there. But dumping all these cars out or in South Lake Union, it's like, what is going on here? It doesn't add up. But it became this powerful moment where a competing vision of the City - which those of us who saw a better future for Seattle didn't see any competition as necessary at all - those who are wedded to that model where we're going to drive everywhere, we're going to have trucks everywhere, really saw that under threat for other reasons. And they decided this is where they're going to make their stand. This is where they're going to make that fight. And that turned out to be pretty useful for the Port, the freight groups, the establishment democratic leaders who had already decided for their own reasons this is what they wanted too. [00:19:11] Mike McGinn: It's important to recognize too, in this, is to follow the money. And I think that this is true for highway construction generally. You have a big section of the economy - there's a section of the economy that believes in it, as Robert was saying, right? And I do think the culture war stuff is fully there - that somehow or another a bike lane in an industrial area will cause the failure of business. Although if you went to the bike - outside the industrial building - you'll find a bunch of the workers' bike there, right? Because it's affordable and efficient. So there's this weird belief that just isn't true - that you can't accommodate industry and transit and walking and biking. Of course you can. And in fact, adding all the cars is bad for freight movement because of all the traffic jams. So there's that belief, but there's also a whole bunch of people - I mentioned Downtown property owners - that gets you to your Downtown Seattle Association. The value of their property is going to be dramatically enhanced by burying, by eliminating the waterfront highway. But then you also have all of the people who build highways and all of the people who support the people who build highways. Who's going to float $4 billion in bonds? It's going to be a Downtown law firm. And by the way, the person who worked for that Downtown law firm and did the bond work was the head of the greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time. So you have the engineering firms, you have the material providers, and then you have the union jobs that go with it. So really at this point - and this isn't just about the waterfront highway, this could be any highway expansion - you've captured the business community because a big chunk of the business community will get direct dollars from the government to them. And you've actually captured a significant chunk of the labor community as well, because labor fights for labor jobs. In the big picture, service workers are taking transit, service workers need housing in town, and you can start to see a split - like in my ultimate run for mayor, I won some service worker unions, never won any construction trades. In fact, they held a rally my first year in office to denounce me, right? Because I was standing in the way of jobs. So that's a really powerful coalition. And I think what you see today in the country as a whole - as you know, I'm the ED of America Walks, so I get to see a lot more - this is a pattern. Highways aren't really supported by the public. They don't go to the public for public votes on highways anymore - the public wouldn't support it. And in fact, the data suggests the public gets that building more highway lanes won't solve everything. But you've got a big, big chunk of the economy that's gotten extremely used to billions and billions of dollars flowing into their pockets. And they need to protect that in every year. So you get that level of intensity around - Look, we're talking about $4 billion on the waterfront and a bunch of that money's coming to us. Better believe it's a good idea, and what are you talking about, climate? [00:22:03] Robert Cruickshank: You talk about public votes, and I think there are three crucial public votes we got to talk about. One is 2007, when these advisory votes are on the ballot - and they're not binding, but they're advisory. Do you want to rebuild the viaduct or build a tunnel? They both get rejected. And then the next big vote is 2009, the mayoral election, where Mike McGinn becomes mayor - in part by channeling public frustration at this giant boondoggle. And then ultimately, the last public vote on this, 2011 - in June, I believe it was, it was in August - about whether we go forward or not and the public by this point, fatigued and beaten down by The Seattle Times, decides let's just move on from this. [00:22:43] Mike McGinn: There's no other alternative. And it is worth returning to that early vote, because it was such a fascinating moment, because - I think the mayor's office didn't want to put his expansive tunnel option in a direct vote against the new elevated, fearing it would lose. So they engineered an agreement with the governor that each one would get a separate up or down vote. And by the way, Tim Ceis, the Deputy Mayor at the time, called in the Sierra Club, briefed us on it, and one of our members said - What would happen if they both got voted down? And Deputy Mayor Ceis said - by the way, Tim Ceis has got a big contract right now from Mayor Harrell, longtime tunnel supporter. Tim Ceis is the consultant for most of the business side candidates. Tim Burgess, another big supporter of the tunnel, now works for Mayor Harrell. Oh, and Christine Gregoire has been hired by the biggest corporations in the region to do their work for them as well. So there's a pretty good payoff if you stick around and support the right side of this stuff. But anyway, Mayor Ceis, Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis, when said, What happens if they're both voted down? He goes - Well, that would be chaos. You don't want that, do you? And I remember all of us just kind of looked at each other - and we all went out on the sidewalk, there were like six of us. And we went - We want that, right? And so we joined in and supported the No and No campaign. And The Stranger came in really hard. And I think Erica Barnett wrote the articles. And Cary Moon was in on it. And the defeat of that, for the first time, opened up the possibility - Well, let's think about something else. And so a stakeholder group was formed. Cary Moon was appointed. Mike O'Brien was appointed. The waterfront guys were appointed. And the Downtown folks were appointed. And the labor folks were appointed. And I think a really important part of the story here is that it was advisory - they weren't making the decisions, it was advisory. But they got to a point at which the head of the State DOT, the head of the Seattle DOT, and the head of the King County DOT all expressed to their respective executives that surface transit worked and was worth it. And this was extremely distressing to the business community. So they mounted a big lobbying push and went straight to Gregoire. And Gregoire, for the first time, became a tunnel supporter. And they were promised that this new tunneling technology - the deep bore tunnel - would solve the cost issues of the deep bore tunnel. And not only that, the state's commitment, which to date was $2.4 billion - they had committed $2.4 billion to a rebuild - the state wouldn't have to pay anymore, because the Port would put in $300 million and they would raise $400 million from tolling. And coincidentally, the amount they thought they could raise from tolling was the exact amount needed to meet the projected cost of using the deep bore tunnel boring machine. So the deal was cut and announced. And the whole stakeholder group and the recommendations from the DOT heads were abandoned. And that occurred, basically, late 2008, early 2009 - the deal was made. And that was about the time that I was contemplating - well, I think I'd already decided to run, but I had not yet announced. [00:26:14] Crystal Fincher: And this was an interesting time, especially during that vote. Because at that time, I had an eye into what the business community was doing and thinking, and it was clear that their numbers didn't add up. [00:26:26] Mike McGinn: Oh my God - no. [00:26:28] Crystal Fincher: But they just did not want to face that. And what they knew is they had enough money and resources to throw at this issue and to throw at a marketing effort to obfuscate that, that they wouldn't have to worry about it. And there was this sense of offense, of indignation that - Who are these people trying to come up and tell us that we don't need freight capacity, that we don't need - that this extra highway capacity, don't they understand how important these freeways are? Who are these people who just don't understand how our economy works? [00:27:02] Mike McGinn: They were the grownups who really understood how things worked. And we were the upstarts who didn't understand anything. But there's a great line from Willie Brown talking about - I think the Transbay Bridge, and Robert can correct the name, in California, which was way over budget. And people were lamenting that the early estimates had been made up. And he goes - Look, this is how it works. You just need to dig a hole in the ground so deep that the only way to fill it up is with money. I think that's pretty much the quote. So that's the strategy. You get it started. Of course you have rosy estimates. And then you just have that commitment, and it's the job of legislators to come up with the cost overruns, dollars later. [00:27:43] Robert Cruickshank: And I think it's so key to understand this moment here in the late 2000s, where the public had already weighed in. I remember voting - it was the last thing I voted on before I moved to California for four years. I'm like no - I was No and No. And that's where the Seattle voters were. They rejected both options. And then you start to hear, coming out of the stakeholder group - Okay, we can make the surface transit option work. And I left town thinking - Alright, that's what's going to happen, just like the Embarcadero in San Francisco and done. And the next thing I hear in late 2008, early 2009, there's this deal that's been cut and all of a sudden a deep bore tunnel is on the table. And this is Seattle politics in a nutshell. I think people look back and think that because we are this smart, progressive technocratic city - those people who live here are - we think that our government works the same way. And it doesn't. This is - time and time again, the public will make its expression felt. They'll weigh in with opinion poll or protest or vote. And the powers that be will say - Well, actually, we want to do this thing instead. We'll cook it up in a backroom. We're going to jam it on all of you, and you're going to like it. And if you don't like it, then we're going to start marshaling resources. We're gonna throw a bunch of money at it. We'll get The Seattle Times to weigh in and pound away at the enemy. And that's how politics works here - that's how so much of our transportation system is built and managed. And so people today, in 2023, looking at this monstrosity on the waterfront that we have now think - How did we get here? Who planned this? It was planned in a backroom without public involvement. And I think that's a thing that has to be understood because that, as we just heard, was baked in from the very start. [00:29:11] Mike McGinn: Well, Robert, the idea of a deep bore tunnel was brought forward by a representative of the Discovery Institute, who you may know as the folks that believe in creationism. [00:29:21] Robert Cruickshank: Well, and not only that, the Discovery Institute is responsible for turning Christopher Rufo from a failed Seattle City Council candidate in 2019 into a national figure. [00:29:31] Mike McGinn: The Discovery Institute, with money from local donors - major, very wealthy local folks - they actually had a long-term plan to turn all of 99 into a limited access freeway. It's like - we need to get rid of that First Avenue South and Highway 99 and Aurora Avenue stuff - all of that should be a freeway. So they were the architects of the idea of - Hey, this deep bore tunnel is the solution. But Robert's point is just right on - transportation policy was driven by power and money, not by transportation needs, or climate needs, or equity needs, or even local economy needs really. When you get right down to it, our city runs on transit - that's what really matters. Our city runs on the fact that it's a city where people can walk from place to place. The idea that our economic future was tied to a highway that would skip Downtown - the most valuable place in the Pacific Northwest, Downtown Seattle. No, that's not really what powers our economy. But it certainly worked for the people that were going to get the dollars that flowed from folks and for the people who own Downtown property. [00:30:42] Crystal Fincher: And I want to talk about money and power with this. Who were the people in power? What was the Council at that time? Who made these decisions? [00:30:50] Mike McGinn: The Council at the time was elected citywide. And I think some people have concerns about district representation, but one of the things that citywide elections meant at the time was that you had to run a citywide campaign, and that's expensive. There's no way to knock on enough doors citywide. I did not have a lot of money when I ran for mayor, but at least I had the media attention that would go to a mayoral candidate. A City Council candidate would kind of flow under the radar. So you had people come from different places, right? They might come from the business side, they might come from the labor side. But ultimately, they would tend to make peace with the other major players - because only business and only labor could finance a campaign. They were the only ones with the resources to do that. So the other interests - the environmentalists, the social service folks, neighborhood advocates of whatever stripe - we chose from amongst the candidates that were elevated by, they would unify - in some cases, the business and labor folks would unify around a candidate. In fact, that's what we saw in the last two mayoral elections as well, where they pick a candidate. And so this doesn't leave much room. So when I was mayor, almost the entire council was aligned with the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time, either endorsed by them or had made their peace with them so the challenger was not being financed. So Robert said something about those outsiders - I went under the radar screen as a candidate at the beginning of my campaign. When I entered the race, nobody was running because everybody thought that Greg Nickels had the institutional support locked down. [00:32:33] Crystal Fincher: But then a snowstorm happened. [00:32:35] Mike McGinn: Well, it was even before that - honestly, everybody thought that he could win. And long before the snowstorm, I was like - We're getting a new mayor. And I was actually looking around to try to figure out who it was going to be - because I wanted a mayor who actually believed in climate, who had my values. But nobody - I was looking through who the people were that might run, and it dawned on me - Well, nobody's going to run. But we're going to get a new mayor and I have my values - and I've actually run ballot measure campaigns and had a very modest base of support. So I was really the first one in the race that got any attention. So I got some great media attention off that. Then my opponent in the general, Joe Mallahan - whatever else you may think about Joe Mallahan - he actually saw it too. He saw that there was an opening. And then we were joined by a long-time City Councilmember, Jan Drago. And I remember the headline from The Seattle Times or the comments at the time was - Okay, now it's a real race. But it just really wasn't. So I was really under the radar screen in that race because they were disregarding me. But there was in fact a lot of anger about the tunnel. There was a lot of just - Greg, for whatever his positives or negatives that history will deal with - and by the way, I actually think Greg did a lot of good. I just was disappointed in his highway policies and his climate policies at the end of the day - I have a lot of respect for Greg Nickels, but he wasn't going to win that race. And I came out of the primary against Joe Mallahan. And all of a sudden we had these two outsiders and the business community's freaking out. All of it - I remember watching it - all of the support, the business support shifted to Joe. It took about a month, it took a few weeks. But all of a sudden - there was actually one week where I think I raised more money than he did, that was pretty unusual - and then all of a sudden all the money was pouring in. And boy, did Joe believe in that tunnel. And did Joe believe in what the Chamber of Commerce wanted to do. In fact, he believed in it so much that he believed that Seattle should pay cost overruns if there were cost overruns on the tunnel - an admission I got from him during the televised debate, I was shocked he admitted to it. [00:34:41] Crystal Fincher: I remember that debate. [00:34:43] Mike McGinn: Yeah. So you were kind of asking about how politics worked. It was really something. Yeah - here's another memory. About two weeks before the election, the City Council took - three weeks before the, two, three weeks, four weeks - they took a vote to say that the tunnel was their choice. Even though there's a mayoral election in which the tunnel is on the ballot, so to speak - in terms of the issues of the candidates - they took a vote for no reason to say it was a done deal. And then WSDOT released a video of the elevated collapsing in a highway, which is the first time a public disclosure request from a third party was ever given straight to a TV station, I think, in my experience in Seattle. I had Gregoire and the DOT folks down there working on that campaign too - their tunnel was threatened. So it really was something how - I indeed was kind of shocked at - it was such a learning experience for me - how much the ranks closed around this. I didn't appreciate it. I had my own nonprofit, I had been on stakeholder committees, I'd worked with a lot of people that weren't just Sierra Club members and neighborhood types. I'd worked with a lot of business people, many of whom had supported my nonprofit because they liked its vision. But they were very clear with me that as long as I supported the surface transit option, there was no way they could be associated with my run for mayor in any way, shape, or form - even if they liked me. It was a complete lockdown - right after the primary where Greg lost the primary and it was me and Joe, I was - Okay, open field running. I can now reach out to these people. There's no incumbent - maybe some of them can support me now. And they were abundantly clear on all of those phone calls that - Nope, can't do it. Until you change your position on the tunnel, we just can't do it. We have business in this town, Mike. We have relationships in this town. We cannot do that. So it was a real lockdown - politically. [00:36:38] Crystal Fincher: That was also a big learning experience for me - watching that consolidation, watching how not only were they fighting for the tunnel against you and making the fight against you a fight about the tunnel, but the enforcement to those third parties that you were talking about that - Hey, if you play ball with him, you're cut off. And those kinds of threats and that kind of dealing - watching that happen was very formative for me. I'm like - Okay, I see how this works, and this is kind of insidious. And if you are branded as an outsider, if you don't play ball, if you don't kiss the ring of the adults in the room - which is definitely what they considered themselves - then you're on the outs and they're at war. And it was really a war footing against you and the campaign. Who was on the Council at that time? [00:37:30] Mike McGinn: Oh my God. Let me see if I can go through the list. No, and it really, it was - your point about it was a war footing was not something that I fully, that I did not appreciate until actually going through that experience - how unified that would be. Excuse me. The City Council chair was Tim Burgess at the time. Bruce Harrell was on the Council. Sally Clark, Richard Conlin, Nick Licata. Mike O'Brien was running on the same platform as me with regard to the tunnel and he'd just been elected. Jean Godden, Sally Bagshaw. I hope I'm not leaving anything out - because - [00:38:04] Robert Cruickshank: Tom Rasmussen will forgive you. [00:38:06] Mike McGinn: Tom Rasmussen. Yeah - because City Councilmembers would get really offended if you didn't thank them publicly - that was another thing I had to learn. You have to publicly thank any other politician on stage with you or they held a grudge. Yeah. So I had - I didn't know all the politicians' rules when I started. [00:38:25] Crystal Fincher: There are so many rules. [00:38:27] Mike McGinn: There are so many, there's so many rules. But really what you saw then was that the Council tended to move in lockstep on many issues - because if they all voted together and they all worked citywide, there was protection. None of them could be singled out. So it was very - and it's not to say that some of them didn't take principled votes and would find themselves on an 8-1 position sometimes, but for the most part, it was much, much safer to be - it was much, much safer to vote as a group. And they tended to do that. And they had coalesced around the tunnel, except for O'Brien. And that could not be shaken by anything we brought to bear. [00:39:04] Robert Cruickshank: And this is wrapped up in not just the electoral politics, but the power politics. Because Mike McGinn comes in - mayor leading the 7th floor of City Hall, the head of City government - and smart guy, nice guy, willing to talk to anybody. But is not from their crew, is not from that group. And as Crystal and Mike said, the ranks were closed from the start. This is - again, 2009, 2010 - when nationally Mitch McConnell is quoted as saying, It's his ambition to make Obama a one-term president. I don't know if he's ever caught on record, but I would be quite certain that Tim Burgess would have said the exact same thing - that his ambition was to make Mike McGinn a one-term mayor. As it turned out in 2013, Tim Burgess wanted his job - one of the candidates running for it. So these are all people who have a reason to close ranks against Mike McGinn and to use a tunnel as a bludgeon against him to do so. [00:39:58] Mike McGinn: There were other bludgeons. After I won the general election and before I took office, they passed their annual budget - they cut the mayor's office budget by a third before I even took office. Just boom - I know - they were determined, they were determined. And so that was when the planning - that council then and with WSDOT - that was when basically the contours of the waterfront were locked into place, including what we now see as that very wide surface road. That was that Council. So if you're wondering, if you're looking at that going - Okay, wow, who decided that and where did it come from? Again, our current mayor and his current advisor and others - they've always been for that. Building that big surface road has always been the plan to go along with the tunnel, because highway capacity was their highest priority. And the park on the waterfront, along with a lot of money into the aquarium and into these new structures - that's their signature thing for so many other people. But the idea that you should, that there was an opportunity to transform our transportation system and transform our city to make it more equitable and climate friendly was never a priority in this process. Just wasn't. [00:41:20] Crystal Fincher: It was never a priority. It was never seriously considered. And to me, through this process - lots of people know, have talked about it on the show before - I actually didn't start off Team McGinn. I wound up Team McGinn - didn't start off that way. But through that - and you won me over with logic - it was you being proven right on several things. You pointed out that their projections, their traffic projections were just so far out of left field that there was no way that they were going to come close. And they even had to come down on their projections before we even saw the traffic - the actual traffic turned out to be lower. You were right on that one - the laughable - [00:41:59] Mike McGinn: They're under 40,000 cars a day - for a highway that was carrying 110,000 cars a day beforehand. So even as a traffic solution - to put that into context, 40,000 cars a day is like the Ballard Bridge. And I can guarantee you the replacement costs of the Ballard Bridge is not $4 billion or $3.1 billion. The E Line, I think, carries 15,000 people a day. Metro carries 220,000 people a day. What you could do with that $3.1 billion or $4 billion in terms of bus lanes, bike lanes, rolling stock for Metro, maybe pay raises for bus drivers so that we could actually have service - you could do so much with those billions of dollars. And we put it all into moving 40,000 cars a day? It's just pathetic. That's three Rapid Ride lines we could have had for a 10th of the cost, or even less. I think the investments in Rapid Ride lines are about $50-100 million a line to make the capital investments to make it work. So the waste - even if you don't care about climate, the waste of dollars - and who's paying those taxes? To a great degree, we have the most regressive state and local tax system in the nation. And we'll have a ballot measure soon, and I know a lot of environmentalists will be out there if the package spends for the right thing saying - Hey, we need money for local streets. Imagine if we'd taken that gas tax money and the Legislature had allowed cities and towns to use it to improve their streets - which they can do. I know that the constitution says highway purposes, but when you read highway purposes, it says roads and bridges. It includes everything. You can use gas taxes for anything that improves the road. And they do. WSDOT has used gas taxes to pay for bike lanes and sidewalks. It's legal. That's a choice. So we're driving around potholed streets. We have - we're putting up little plastic dividers because we care more about the car getting hurt than the bicyclist on the other side of that plastic divider. We're watching our transit service melt away because we can't pay bus drivers enough. But hey, man, somebody's got a really rapid - 3,000 people a day get to skip Downtown in their private vehicles. Where are our priorities for equity? Where are the priorities for economy, or even just plain old-fashioned fiscal prudence? None of that was there - because all of those dollars were going to fund the needs of the most powerful people in the City. And they captured those dollars - and all of us will pay the taxes, all of us will breathe the smoky air, and all of us will watch our streets deteriorate and our transit service evaporate. [00:44:52] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And to me, it was such a foundational lesson that the people that we have making decisions really matter - and that we have to really explore their records, their donors, their histories - because over and over again, we look at the decisions that wind up being made that frequently conflict with campaign promises, but that very, very rarely conflict with their donor rolls. [00:45:16] Mike McGinn: And yes - and every one of them knows how to make the value statements. So if I had any advice for people in this year's election - everyone is going to say they care about housing, everyone's going to say they think biking safe. I don't - one of the things that I came away with - I don't care about the goals you put into some policy anymore. Show me the hard physical action you will take that might piss somebody off, but you're willing to do it because it's right. And if you can't do that, then your value statements are meaningless. So take a look - who actually, and that's the question I always ask candidates for office - Tell me about a time you did something hard that might've caused you criticism, but you did it because it was right. Or that you made somebody who was an ally or friend upset, but you did it because it was right. Tell me about that time. [00:46:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's a challenge. And to your point and learning through just watching how people operated through that and some other processes - but that certainly was a big learning for me - is the role of coalitions, the role of accountability, and understanding. You have always had your finger on the pulse of Seattle, really - you're extraordinarily good at that. You're actually - both of you - are great strategists. But our political class is so detached from that sometimes - certainly I'm feeling frustration at some recent actions by our Legislature - we just had our special session day where they increased criminalization of substances, personal possession of substances - just reflecting on legislation to provide school, kids with free meals at school, things that seem like really basic and foundational that we should be able to land this. If we can call a special session to hand Boeing billions of dollars, we should be able to feed kids, right? [00:47:00] Mike McGinn: At the time we were cutting school budgets - when we found money for that. But I don't want to be too gloomy. And then I want to turn it over to Robert to get a last word in here, 'cause I just loved - his analysis is so awesome. I don't want to be too gloomy because - I look at what happened in the Legislature this year on housing, that we're finally going to allow housing, people to build more housing in places so people can actually live closer to their jobs and live more affordably. 10 years ago, we would have thought that was impossible. There's a lot of hard organizing that did it. At America Walks, we're the host of the Freeway Fighters Networks - there are people in 40 cities or more around the country that are organizing to remove highways. And while it's just a small amount of money compared to the amount going to highway expansion, there's actually federal funds to study and remove highways. So it's a long, hard slog. What felt for us - for Robert and me and Cary Moon and others fighting this - which felt like an impossible fight at the time is a fight that is now winning in places. Not winning enough - we're not winning fast enough - but it can change. And so that's - I don't want to be too negative. They got money, but organizing and people - and we actually have the public with us on this, just like we have the public with us on housing. So we just have to do more. We just got to keep at it, folks - got to keep at it. We can win this one. Don't allow this story of how hard it was to deal with the unified political class in the City of Seattle for their climate arson - should not deter you. It should inspire you, 'cause I actually won the mayor's office and we actually did do a lot of good. And the next fight is right in front of us again today, so get in it people. We need you. [00:48:46] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's spot on. And I remember coming to work in your office at the very beginning of 2011, when it seemed like the tunnel was just dominating discussion, but not in the mayor's office, right? When I joined, I fully expected to be like - roll my sleeves up to take on that tunnel. Instead, I'm working on the mayor's jobs plan, the Families and Education Levy, on transit. That's the stuff that was really getting done, and I think McGinn left a really great legacy on that. But we didn't win the tunnel fight. And I think we've diagnosed many of the reasons why, but one thing that really stands out to me as I look back from 12, 13 years distance is we didn't have the same density of genuinely progressive and social democratic organizations and people and leaders in Seattle that we have now. I think that matters because Mike's been talking about what's the next fight. I think one of the big fights coming up next year - when it comes time to renew that Move Seattle Levy - that's nearly a billion dollars that's going to be on the table. And we keep getting promised - when we are asked to approve these massive levies - that a lot of that money is going to go to safe streets, it's going to go to protect vulnerable users, we're going to do something to finally get towards Vision Zero. And instead it all gets taken away to build more car infrastructure. At what point do we finally stand - literally in the road - and say, No more. Do we look at the broken promises on the waterfront where we were promised a beautiful pedestrian-friendly waterfront and got another car sewer? We're going to have to organize and come together. We have many more groups now and many more leaders who are willing to stand up and say - We're not passing this levy unless it actually focuses on safe streets, unless it focuses on pedestrians and cyclists and transit users, and gives iron-clad promises to make sure stuff gets built so that some future mayor can't just walk in and start canceling projects left and right that we were promised. That's the lesson I take from this is - we're better organized now, we have more resources now, but it's still going to be a slog, and we're going to have to stand our ground - otherwise we get rolled. [00:50:34] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I thank you both for this conversation today - reflections on the tunnel fight, how it came to be, what it was like in the middle of it, and the lessons that we take moving forward in these elections that we have coming up this year, next year, and beyond. Thanks so much for the conversation. [00:50:50] Mike McGinn: Thank you, Crystal. [00:50:51] Robert Cruickshank: Thank you - it's been wonderful. [00:50:52] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks, which is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or 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. 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.

Rhythm & News Podcast interview with Bidgette Bascomb about Seattle City Light's Apprenticeship workshop on Saturday July 22nd from 10-2pm. Interview by Chris B. Bennett.

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 Mayor Harrell's re-launch of an anti-graffiti campaign,  the future of a "dual dispatch" 9-1-1 alternative, a cleanup around T-Mobile Park leading up to All-Star Week July 7, a potentially expensive challenge ahead for Seattle City Light, and some local insights into the deadly voyage of the Titan submersible. If you like this podcast, please support it on Patreon! 

Debra Smith, the General Manager and CEO of Seattle City Light, interviews Mike Hummel after his recent retirement as general manager and CEO of Salt River Project. They reflect on how the industry has changed during his career and look ahead to the exciting advancements SRP will make to provide clean, reliable energy to its customers. Mike shares about his career including some of his proudest accomplishments, lessons learned along the journey, and keys to leading others well.

On this midweek show, Crystal chats with former Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and his former Senior Communications Advisor Robert Cruickshank about the missed opportunity for generational impact through how decisions were made about Seattle's waterfront and the SR99 tunnel. Mike and Robert review how the vision of the scrappy People's Waterfront Coalition, centered around making a prized public space accessible for all while taking the climate crisis on by transforming our transportation system, nearly won the fight against those who prioritized maintaining highway capacity and those who prioritized increasing Downtown property values.  The conversation then highlights how those with power and money used their outsized influence to make backroom decisions - despite flawed arguments and little public enthusiasm for their proposal - leaving Seattle with an underutilized deep bore tunnel and a car-centric waterfront. Some of the decision makers are still active in local politics - including current Mayor Bruce Harrell and his current advisor Tim Burgess. With important elections ahead, Crystal, Mike and Robert discuss how political decisions tend to conflict with campaign promises rather than donor rolls, how proven action is a better indicator than value statements, and how today's dense ecosystem of progressive leaders and organizations can take inspiration and win the next fight. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii, Mike McGinn at @mayormcginn, and Robert Cruickshank at @cruickshank.   Mike McGinn Mike is the Executive Director of national nonprofit America Walks.  He got his start in local politics as a neighborhood activist pushing for walkability. From there he founded a non-profit focused on sustainable and equitable growth, and then became mayor of Seattle. Just before joining America Walks, Mike worked to help Feet First, Washington State's walking advocacy organization, expand their sphere of influence across Washington state. He has worked on numerous public education, legislative, ballot measure and election campaigns – which has given him an abiding faith in the power of organizing and volunteers to create change.   Robert Cruickshank Robert is the Director of Digital Strategy at California YIMBY and Chair of Sierra Club Seattle. A long time communications and political strategist, he was Senior Communications Advisor to Mike McGinn from 2011-2013.   Resources “Seattle Waterfront History Interviews: Cary Moon, Waterfront Coalition” by Dominic Black from HistoryLink   “State Route 99 tunnel - Options and political debate" from Wikipedia   “Remembering broken promises about Bertha” by Josh Cohen from Curbed Seattle   “Fewer drivers in Seattle's Highway 99 tunnel could create need for bailout” by Mike Lindblom from The Seattle Times   “Surface Highway Undermines Seattle's Waterfront Park” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Seattle Prepares to Open Brand New Elliott Way Highway Connector” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist   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. Today, I am very excited to be welcoming Robert Cruickshank and former Mayor Mike McGinn to the show to talk about something that a lot of people have been thinking about, talking about recently - and that is Seattle's new waterfront. We feel like we've spent a decade under construction - from a deep bore tunnel to the tunnel machine getting stuck - that's not even covering all the debate before that, but all of the kind of follies and foibles and challenges that have beset the process of arriving at the waterfront that we have now. And now that we are getting the big reveal, a lot of people have feelings about it. So I thought we would talk about it with one of the people who was at the forefront of criticisms of the tunnel and calling out some red flags that turned out to be a very wise warning - several wise warnings that have come to pass, unfortunately - for not listening to them. But I want to start early on in the beginning, both of you - and I had a short stint in the mayor's office - worked on this, talked about this on the campaign, really got it. But when did you first hear that we needed to replace the viaduct and there were some different opinions about how to make that happen? [00:02:06] Mike McGinn: Okay, so I'm sure I can't pin down a date, but the really important date was, of course, the Nisqually earthquake in 2001. And so it gave the Alaska Way Viaduct a good shake - the decks weren't tied into the columns, the columns were on fill, which could liquefy - and everybody understood that if that quake had been a little stronger and harder, the elevated would come down. Now you might think that that would call for immediately closing the roadway for safety reasons, but what it did call for was for reconstructing it. And you have to remember that highway was really one of the very first limited access highways - it was built long ago and it was just at the end of its useful life anyway. Certainly not built to modern seismic standards or modern engineering standards. So the conversation immediately started and I don't know when everything started to settle into different roles, but the Mayor of Seattle Greg Nickels, was immediately a proponent for a tunnel - and a much larger and more expensive tunnel than what was ultimately built. And it would have been a cut-and-cover tunnel along the waterfront that included a new seawall. So they thought they were solving two things at one time - because the seawall too was rotting away, very old, very unstable. But it would have gone all the way under South Lake Union and emerged onto Aurora Avenue further north, it would have had entrances and exits to Western and Elliott. And I seem to remember the quoted price was like $11 billion. And the state - governor at the time was Christine Gregoire - they were - No, we're replacing the highway. We don't have $11 billion for Seattle. And of course had the support of a lot of lawmakers for obvious reasons - we're not going to give Seattle all that money, we want all that highway money for our districts. And those were immediately presented as the alternatives. And so much of the credit has to go to Cary Moon, who lived on the waterfront and started something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. I think Grant Cogswell, a former City Council candidate - now runs a bookstore down in Mexico City, but wrote a book about the Monorail, worked on the different Monorail campaigns before that - they launched something called the People's Waterfront Coalition. And the basic proposition was - We don't need a highway. This is a great opportunity to get rid of the highway and have a surface street, but if you amp up the transit service - if we invest in transit instead - we can accommodate everyone. And so that was really - as it started - and actually I remember being outside City Hall one day, going to some stakeholder meeting - I went to so many different stakeholder meetings. And I remember Tim Ceis saying to me - he was the Deputy Mayor at the time - You're not supporting that Cary Moon idea - I mean, that's just crazy. I was - Well, actually, Tim. So the Sierra Club was - I was a volunteer leader in the Sierra Club - and the Sierra Club was one of the first organizations - I'm sure there were others, I shouldn't overstate it - but the Sierra Club was persuaded by the wisdom of Cary's idea and supported it in that day. And so that was really how the three different options got launched - no public process, no analysis, no description of what our needs were. The mayor went to a solution, the governor went to a solution - and it was up to members of the public to try to ask them to slow down, stop, and look at something different. [00:05:42] Crystal Fincher: And Robert, how did you first engage with this issue? [00:05:47] Robert Cruickshank: For me, I had just moved to Seattle the first time in the fall of 2001 - so it was about six months after the Nisqually quake - and I came from the Bay Area. And that was where another earthquake had damaged another waterfront highway, the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco. And that was where San Francisco had voted - after that quake had damaged their viaduct beyond repair - they voted to tear it down and replace it with the Embarcadero Waterfront, which is a six-lane arterial but they built a lot more transit there. So they did the - what we might call the surface transit option - and it worked really well. It was beautiful. It still is. And so when I came up here and started to learn a little bit about the place I was living and the legacy of the Nisqually quake, I thought - Oh, why don't you just do the same thing here? It worked so well in San Francisco. Let's just tear down this unsightly monstrosity on the waterfront and replace it with a surface boulevard and put in a bunch of transit - San Francisco's made it work successfully. And the more I learned about Seattle, I realized there's a legacy of that here, too. This is a city where we had a freeway revolt, where activists came together and killed the RH Thomson freeway, which would have destroyed the Arboretum. They killed the Bay Freeway, which would have destroyed Pike Place Market. And so I naturally assumed - as being a relatively new resident - that Seattle would stay in that tradition and welcome the opportunity to tear this down and build a great waterfront for people, not cars. But as we'll talk about in a moment, we have a lot of business interests and freight interests and others who had a different vision - who didn't share that community-rooted vision. And I think at numerous points along the way, though, you see people of Seattle saying - No, this is not what we want for our waterfront. We have an opportunity now with the fact that this viaduct nearly collapsed, as Mike mentioned, in the Nisqually quake - we have an opportunity for something really wonderful here. And so I think Cary Moon and then Mike McGinn and others tapped into that - tapped into a really strong community desire to have a better waterfront. I wasn't that politically engaged at the time in the 2000s - I was just a grad student at UW - but just talking to folks who I knew, anytime this came up - God, wouldn't it be wonderful down there if this was oriented towards people and not cars, and we took that thing down? So I think one of the things you're going to see is this contest between the vision that many of us in Seattle had and still have - this beautiful location, beautiful vista on Elliott Bay, that should be for the people of the city - and those in power who have a very different vision and don't really want to share power or ultimately the right-of-way with We the People. [00:08:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. And I was involved in some things at the time - some curious coalitions - but definitely I was around a lot of people who favored either rebuilding the viaduct or the tunnel. Definitely not this roads and transit option - there's no way that's workable. That's pie-in-the-sky talk from those loony greenies over there. What are you talking about? But as this went on - I think no matter what camp people were in - there was always a clear vision articulated and people really focused on the opportunity that this represented, and I think correctly characterized it as - this is one of these generational decisions that we get to make that is going to impact the next generation or two and beyond. And there's an opportunity - the waterfront felt very disconnected with the way things were constructed - it was not easy just to go from downtown to the waterfront. It wasn't friendly for pedestrians. It wasn't friendly for tourists. It just did not feel like a world-class waterfront in a world-class city, and how we see that in so many other cities. You talk about the decision with the Embarcadero, Robert, and looking at - that definitely seemed like a definitive step forward. This was sold as - yeah, we can absolutely take a step forward and finally fix this waterfront and make it what it should have been the whole time. As you thought about the opportunity that this represented, what was the opportunity to you and what did you hear other people saying that they wanted this to be? [00:09:38] Mike McGinn: Yeah, so I think there are - I think that's really important, because I don't think there was a real discussion of what the vision was. People will say there was, but there really wasn't. Because what was baked in and what you're referring to is - well, of course you have to build automobile capacity to replace the existing automobile capacity, right? In fact, this state is still building more highways across the state in the misguided belief that more highway capacity will somehow or another do some good. So this idea that you have to replace and expand highway capacity is extremely powerful in Washington state and across the country. And there were very few examples of highway removal, so that was just a real challenge in the first place - that somehow or other the first priority has to be moving automobiles. For me, at that time I had become - the issue of climate had really penetrated me at that point. And in fact, when Greg Nickels took office and the Sierra Club endorsed him over Paul Schell - I was a local leader in the Sierra Club and a state leader in the Sierra Club - and my goal was that Mayor Nickels would do more than Paul Schell. And Paul Schell, the prior mayor, had done some good things. He had made Seattle City Light climate neutral - we'd gotten out of coal plants and we didn't purchase power from coal plants. He was really progressive on a number of environmental issues and we wanted Mayor Nickels to do more - and Mayor Nickels had stepped up. So we put on a campaign to urge him to do more. And he had stepped up to start something called the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative - which was the City of Seattle was going to meet the standards of the Kyoto Protocol, which was like the Paris Agreement of its day. And that was - it set an emissions reduction target by a date in the future. And that was really great - in fact, over a thousand cities around the country signed up to the Mayors' Climate Protection Initiative. And I was appointed to a stakeholder group with other leaders - Denis Hayes from the Bullitt Foundation and others - to develop the first climate action plan for a city. Al Gore showed up at the press conference for it - it was a big - it was a BFD and a lot of excitement. And one of the things that was abundantly clear through that process of cataloging the emissions in the City of Seattle and coming up with a plan to reduce them was that our single largest source of emissions at that time was the transportation sector. We'd already gotten off of coal power under Mayor Schell - we received almost all of our electricity from hydroelectric dams. We had good conservation programs. Unlike other parts of the country, transportation was the biggest. Now what's fascinating is now - I don't know if I want to do the math - almost 20 years later, now what we see is that the whole country is in the same place. We're replacing coal and natural gas power plants. And now nationally, the single largest source of emissions is transportation. So how do you fix that? If we're serious about climate - and I thought we should be - because the scientists were telling us about heat waves. They were telling us about forest fires that would blanket the region in smoke. They were telling us about storms that would be bigger than we'd ever seen before. And flooding like we'd never seen and declining snowpack. And it was all going to happen in our futures. Honestly, I remember those predictions from the scientists because they're in the headlines today, every day. So what do we do to stop that? So I was - I had little kids, man - I had little kids, I had three kids. How are we going to stop this? Well, it's Seattle needs to lead - that's what has to happen. We're the progressive city. We're the first one out with a plan. We're going to show how we're going to do it. And if our biggest source is transportation, we should fix that. Well, it should seem obvious that the first thing you should do is stop building and expanding highways, and maybe even change some of the real estate used for cars and make it real estate for walking, biking, and transit. That's pretty straightforward. You also have to work on more housing. And this all led me to starting a nonprofit around all of these things and led to the Sierra Club - I think at a national level - our chapter was much further forward than any other chapter on upzones and backyard cottages and making the transition. So to me, this was the big - that was the vision. That was the opportunity. We're going to tear this down. We're going to make a massive investment in changing the system, and this in fact could be a really transformative piece. That's what motivated me. That climate argument wasn't landing with a whole bunch of other interests. There was certainly a vision from the Downtown and Downtown property owners and residents that - boy, wouldn't it be great to get rid of that elevated highway because that's terrible. There was also a vision from the people who still believed in highway capacity and that includes some of our major employers at the time and today - Boeing and Microsoft, they have facilities in the suburbs around Seattle - they think we need highway capacity. As well as all of the Port businesses, as well as all the maritime unions - thought that this highway connection here was somehow critical to their survival, the industrial areas. And then they wanted the capacity. So there were very strong competing visions. And I think it's fair to say that highway capacity is a vision - we've seen that one is now fulfilled. The second priority was an enhanced physical environment to enhance the property values of Downtown property owners. And they cut the deal with the highway capacity people - okay, we're here for your highway capacity, but we have to get some amenities. And the climate folks, I'm not seeing it - never a priority of any of the leaders - just wasn't a priority. [00:15:44] Crystal Fincher: How did you see those factions come into play and break down, Robert? [00:15:48] Robert Cruickshank: It was interesting. This all comes to a head in the late 2000s. And remembering back to that time, this is where Seattle is leading the fight to take on the climate and the fight against George W. Bush, who was seen as this avatar of and deeply connected to the oil industry. Someone who - one of his first things when he took office - he did was withdraw the U.S. from the Kyoto Protocol, which is the earlier version of what's now known as the Paris Agreement - global agreement to try to lower emissions. And so Seattle, in resisting Bush - that's where Greg Nickels became a national figure by leading the Mayors' Climate Action Group - not just say we're going to take on climate, we're going to do something about really de facto fighting back against Bush. And then Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore comes out with An Inconvenient Truth. And by 2007, people in Seattle are talking a lot about climate and how we need to do something about climate. But then what you see happening is the limits of that - what are people really actually willing to do and willing to support? The other piece that comes together, I think - in the 2000s - is a revival of the City itself. Seattle spends the late 20th century after the Boeing bust - since the 70s "Will the last person out of Seattle turn out the lights," recovering in the 80s somewhat, recovering in the 90s, and then the tech boom. And by the 2000s, Seattle is a destination city for young people coming to live here and living in apartments and working in the tech industry. I think that unsettles a lot of people. One thing that really stood out to me about the discussion about what to do on the waterfront was this vision from old school folks - like Joel Connelly and others - we've got to preserve that working waterfront. And it's very much the sense that blue collar working class labor is under threat - not from corporate power, but from a 20-something millennial with a laptop working at Amazon who comes to Seattle and thinks - Gosh, why is this ugly viaduct here? It's unsafe. Why don't we just tear it down and have a wonderful waterfront view? And those who are offended by this idea - who are so wedded to the 20th century model that we're going to drive everywhere, cars, freedom - this is where you see the limits of willingness to actually do something on climate. People don't actually want to give up their cars. They're afraid they're going to sacrifice their way of life. And you start to see this weird but powerful constellation come together where rather than having a discussion about transportation planning or even a discussion about climate action, we're having this weird discussion about culture. And it becomes a culture war. And the thing about a culture war is people pushing change are never actually trying to fight a war. They're just - This is a good idea. Why don't we do this? We all say these - we care about these values. And the people who don't want it just dig in and get really nasty and fight back. And so you start to see Cary Moon, People's Waterfront Coalition, Mike McGinn, and others get attacked as not wanting working class jobs, not wanting a working waterfront, not caring about how people are going to get to work, not caring about how the freight trucks are going to get around even though you're proposing a tunnel from the Port to Wallingford where - it's not exactly an industrial hub - there are some businesses there. But dumping all these cars out or in South Lake Union, it's like, what is going on here? It doesn't add up. But it became this powerful moment where a competing vision of the City - which those of us who saw a better future for Seattle didn't see any competition as necessary at all - those who are wedded to that model where we're going to drive everywhere, we're going to have trucks everywhere, really saw that under threat for other reasons. And they decided this is where they're going to make their stand. This is where they're going to make that fight. And that turned out to be pretty useful for the Port, the freight groups, the establishment democratic leaders who had already decided for their own reasons this is what they wanted too. [00:19:11] Mike McGinn: It's important to recognize too, in this, is to follow the money. And I think that this is true for highway construction generally. You have a big section of the economy - there's a section of the economy that believes in it, as Robert was saying, right? And I do think the culture war stuff is fully there - that somehow or another a bike lane in an industrial area will cause the failure of business. Although if you went to the bike - outside the industrial building - you'll find a bunch of the workers' bike there, right? Because it's affordable and efficient. So there's this weird belief that just isn't true - that you can't accommodate industry and transit and walking and biking. Of course you can. And in fact, adding all the cars is bad for freight movement because of all the traffic jams. So there's that belief, but there's also a whole bunch of people - I mentioned Downtown property owners - that gets you to your Downtown Seattle Association. The value of their property is going to be dramatically enhanced by burying, by eliminating the waterfront highway. But then you also have all of the people who build highways and all of the people who support the people who build highways. Who's going to float $4 billion in bonds? It's going to be a Downtown law firm. And by the way, the person who worked for that Downtown law firm and did the bond work was the head of the greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time. So you have the engineering firms, you have the material providers, and then you have the union jobs that go with it. So really at this point - and this isn't just about the waterfront highway, this could be any highway expansion - you've captured the business community because a big chunk of the business community will get direct dollars from the government to them. And you've actually captured a significant chunk of the labor community as well, because labor fights for labor jobs. In the big picture, service workers are taking transit, service workers need housing in town, and you can start to see a split - like in my ultimate run for mayor, I won some service worker unions, never won any construction trades. In fact, they held a rally my first year in office to denounce me, right? Because I was standing in the way of jobs. So that's a really powerful coalition. And I think what you see today in the country as a whole - as you know, I'm the ED of America Walks, so I get to see a lot more - this is a pattern. Highways aren't really supported by the public. They don't go to the public for public votes on highways anymore - the public wouldn't support it. And in fact, the data suggests the public gets that building more highway lanes won't solve everything. But you've got a big, big chunk of the economy that's gotten extremely used to billions and billions of dollars flowing into their pockets. And they need to protect that in every year. So you get that level of intensity around - Look, we're talking about $4 billion on the waterfront and a bunch of that money's coming to us. Better believe it's a good idea, and what are you talking about, climate? [00:22:03] Robert Cruickshank: You talk about public votes, and I think there are three crucial public votes we got to talk about. One is 2007, when these advisory votes are on the ballot - and they're not binding, but they're advisory. Do you want to rebuild the viaduct or build a tunnel? They both get rejected. And then the next big vote is 2009, the mayoral election, where Mike McGinn becomes mayor - in part by channeling public frustration at this giant boondoggle. And then ultimately, the last public vote on this, 2011 - in June, I believe it was, it was in August - about whether we go forward or not and the public by this point, fatigued and beaten down by The Seattle Times, decides let's just move on from this. [00:22:43] Mike McGinn: There's no other alternative. And it is worth returning to that early vote, because it was such a fascinating moment, because - I think the mayor's office didn't want to put his expansive tunnel option in a direct vote against the new elevated, fearing it would lose. So they engineered an agreement with the governor that each one would get a separate up or down vote. And by the way, Tim Ceis, the Deputy Mayor at the time, called in the Sierra Club, briefed us on it, and one of our members said - What would happen if they both got voted down? And Deputy Mayor Ceis said - by the way, Tim Ceis has got a big contract right now from Mayor Harrell, longtime tunnel supporter. Tim Ceis is the consultant for most of the business side candidates. Tim Burgess, another big supporter of the tunnel, now works for Mayor Harrell. Oh, and Christine Gregoire has been hired by the biggest corporations in the region to do their work for them as well. So there's a pretty good payoff if you stick around and support the right side of this stuff. But anyway, Mayor Ceis, Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis, when said, What happens if they're both voted down? He goes - Well, that would be chaos. You don't want that, do you? And I remember all of us just kind of looked at each other - and we all went out on the sidewalk, there were like six of us. And we went - We want that, right? And so we joined in and supported the No and No campaign. And The Stranger came in really hard. And I think Erica Barnett wrote the articles. And Cary Moon was in on it. And the defeat of that, for the first time, opened up the possibility - Well, let's think about something else. And so a stakeholder group was formed. Cary Moon was appointed. Mike O'Brien was appointed. The waterfront guys were appointed. And the Downtown folks were appointed. And the labor folks were appointed. And I think a really important part of the story here is that it was advisory - they weren't making the decisions, it was advisory. But they got to a point at which the head of the State DOT, the head of the Seattle DOT, and the head of the King County DOT all expressed to their respective executives that surface transit worked and was worth it. And this was extremely distressing to the business community. So they mounted a big lobbying push and went straight to Gregoire. And Gregoire, for the first time, became a tunnel supporter. And they were promised that this new tunneling technology - the deep bore tunnel - would solve the cost issues of the deep bore tunnel. And not only that, the state's commitment, which to date was $2.4 billion - they had committed $2.4 billion to a rebuild - the state wouldn't have to pay anymore, because the Port would put in $300 million and they would raise $400 million from tolling. And coincidentally, the amount they thought they could raise from tolling was the exact amount needed to meet the projected cost of using the deep bore tunnel boring machine. So the deal was cut and announced. And the whole stakeholder group and the recommendations from the DOT heads were abandoned. And that occurred, basically, late 2008, early 2009 - the deal was made. And that was about the time that I was contemplating - well, I think I'd already decided to run, but I had not yet announced. [00:26:14] Crystal Fincher: And this was an interesting time, especially during that vote. Because at that time, I had an eye into what the business community was doing and thinking, and it was clear that their numbers didn't add up. [00:26:26] Mike McGinn: Oh my God - no. [00:26:28] Crystal Fincher: But they just did not want to face that. And what they knew is they had enough money and resources to throw at this issue and to throw at a marketing effort to obfuscate that, that they wouldn't have to worry about it. And there was this sense of offense, of indignation that - Who are these people trying to come up and tell us that we don't need freight capacity, that we don't need - that this extra highway capacity, don't they understand how important these freeways are? Who are these people who just don't understand how our economy works? [00:27:02] Mike McGinn: They were the grownups who really understood how things worked. And we were the upstarts who didn't understand anything. But there's a great line from Willie Brown talking about - I think the Transbay Bridge, and Robert can correct the name, in California, which was way over budget. And people were lamenting that the early estimates had been made up. And he goes - Look, this is how it works. You just need to dig a hole in the ground so deep that the only way to fill it up is with money. I think that's pretty much the quote. So that's the strategy. You get it started. Of course you have rosy estimates. And then you just have that commitment, and it's the job of legislators to come up with the cost overruns, dollars later. [00:27:43] Robert Cruickshank: And I think it's so key to understand this moment here in the late 2000s, where the public had already weighed in. I remember voting - it was the last thing I voted on before I moved to California for four years. I'm like no - I was No and No. And that's where the Seattle voters were. They rejected both options. And then you start to hear, coming out of the stakeholder group - Okay, we can make the surface transit option work. And I left town thinking - Alright, that's what's going to happen, just like the Embarcadero in San Francisco and done. And the next thing I hear in late 2008, early 2009, there's this deal that's been cut and all of a sudden a deep bore tunnel is on the table. And this is Seattle politics in a nutshell. I think people look back and think that because we are this smart, progressive technocratic city - those people who live here are - we think that our government works the same way. And it doesn't. This is - time and time again, the public will make its expression felt. They'll weigh in with opinion poll or protest or vote. And the powers that be will say - Well, actually, we want to do this thing instead. We'll cook it up in a backroom. We're going to jam it on all of you, and you're going to like it. And if you don't like it, then we're going to start marshaling resources. We're gonna throw a bunch of money at it. We'll get The Seattle Times to weigh in and pound away at the enemy. And that's how politics works here - that's how so much of our transportation system is built and managed. And so people today, in 2023, looking at this monstrosity on the waterfront that we have now think - How did we get here? Who planned this? It was planned in a backroom without public involvement. And I think that's a thing that has to be understood because that, as we just heard, was baked in from the very start. [00:29:11] Mike McGinn: Well, Robert, the idea of a deep bore tunnel was brought forward by a representative of the Discovery Institute, who you may know as the folks that believe in creationism. [00:29:21] Robert Cruickshank: Well, and not only that, the Discovery Institute is responsible for turning Christopher Rufo from a failed Seattle City Council candidate in 2019 into a national figure. [00:29:31] Mike McGinn: The Discovery Institute, with money from local donors - major, very wealthy local folks - they actually had a long-term plan to turn all of 99 into a limited access freeway. It's like - we need to get rid of that First Avenue South and Highway 99 and Aurora Avenue stuff - all of that should be a freeway. So they were the architects of the idea of - Hey, this deep bore tunnel is the solution. But Robert's point is just right on - transportation policy was driven by power and money, not by transportation needs, or climate needs, or equity needs, or even local economy needs really. When you get right down to it, our city runs on transit - that's what really matters. Our city runs on the fact that it's a city where people can walk from place to place. The idea that our economic future was tied to a highway that would skip Downtown - the most valuable place in the Pacific Northwest, Downtown Seattle. No, that's not really what powers our economy. But it certainly worked for the people that were going to get the dollars that flowed from folks and for the people who own Downtown property. [00:30:42] Crystal Fincher: And I want to talk about money and power with this. Who were the people in power? What was the Council at that time? Who made these decisions? [00:30:50] Mike McGinn: The Council at the time was elected citywide. And I think some people have concerns about district representation, but one of the things that citywide elections meant at the time was that you had to run a citywide campaign, and that's expensive. There's no way to knock on enough doors citywide. I did not have a lot of money when I ran for mayor, but at least I had the media attention that would go to a mayoral candidate. A City Council candidate would kind of flow under the radar. So you had people come from different places, right? They might come from the business side, they might come from the labor side. But ultimately, they would tend to make peace with the other major players - because only business and only labor could finance a campaign. They were the only ones with the resources to do that. So the other interests - the environmentalists, the social service folks, neighborhood advocates of whatever stripe - we chose from amongst the candidates that were elevated by, they would unify - in some cases, the business and labor folks would unify around a candidate. In fact, that's what we saw in the last two mayoral elections as well, where they pick a candidate. And so this doesn't leave much room. So when I was mayor, almost the entire council was aligned with the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce at that time, either endorsed by them or had made their peace with them so the challenger was not being financed. So Robert said something about those outsiders - I went under the radar screen as a candidate at the beginning of my campaign. When I entered the race, nobody was running because everybody thought that Greg Nickels had the institutional support locked down. [00:32:33] Crystal Fincher: But then a snowstorm happened. [00:32:35] Mike McGinn: Well, it was even before that - honestly, everybody thought that he could win. And long before the snowstorm, I was like - We're getting a new mayor. And I was actually looking around to try to figure out who it was going to be - because I wanted a mayor who actually believed in climate, who had my values. But nobody - I was looking through who the people were that might run, and it dawned on me - Well, nobody's going to run. But we're going to get a new mayor and I have my values - and I've actually run ballot measure campaigns and had a very modest base of support. So I was really the first one in the race that got any attention. So I got some great media attention off that. Then my opponent in the general, Joe Mallahan - whatever else you may think about Joe Mallahan - he actually saw it too. He saw that there was an opening. And then we were joined by a long-time City Councilmember, Jan Drago. And I remember the headline from The Seattle Times or the comments at the time was - Okay, now it's a real race. But it just really wasn't. So I was really under the radar screen in that race because they were disregarding me. But there was in fact a lot of anger about the tunnel. There was a lot of just - Greg, for whatever his positives or negatives that history will deal with - and by the way, I actually think Greg did a lot of good. I just was disappointed in his highway policies and his climate policies at the end of the day - I have a lot of respect for Greg Nickels, but he wasn't going to win that race. And I came out of the primary against Joe Mallahan. And all of a sudden we had these two outsiders and the business community's freaking out. All of it - I remember watching it - all of the support, the business support shifted to Joe. It took about a month, it took a few weeks. But all of a sudden - there was actually one week where I think I raised more money than he did, that was pretty unusual - and then all of a sudden all the money was pouring in. And boy, did Joe believe in that tunnel. And did Joe believe in what the Chamber of Commerce wanted to do. In fact, he believed in it so much that he believed that Seattle should pay cost overruns if there were cost overruns on the tunnel - an admission I got from him during the televised debate, I was shocked he admitted to it. [00:34:41] Crystal Fincher: I remember that debate. [00:34:43] Mike McGinn: Yeah. So you were kind of asking about how politics worked. It was really something. Yeah - here's another memory. About two weeks before the election, the City Council took - three weeks before the, two, three weeks, four weeks - they took a vote to say that the tunnel was their choice. Even though there's a mayoral election in which the tunnel is on the ballot, so to speak - in terms of the issues of the candidates - they took a vote for no reason to say it was a done deal. And then WSDOT released a video of the elevated collapsing in a highway, which is the first time a public disclosure request from a third party was ever given straight to a TV station, I think, in my experience in Seattle. I had Gregoire and the DOT folks down there working on that campaign too - their tunnel was threatened. So it really was something how - I indeed was kind of shocked at - it was such a learning experience for me - how much the ranks closed around this. I didn't appreciate it. I had my own nonprofit, I had been on stakeholder committees, I'd worked with a lot of people that weren't just Sierra Club members and neighborhood types. I'd worked with a lot of business people, many of whom had supported my nonprofit because they liked its vision. But they were very clear with me that as long as I supported the surface transit option, there was no way they could be associated with my run for mayor in any way, shape, or form - even if they liked me. It was a complete lockdown - right after the primary where Greg lost the primary and it was me and Joe, I was - Okay, open field running. I can now reach out to these people. There's no incumbent - maybe some of them can support me now. And they were abundantly clear on all of those phone calls that - Nope, can't do it. Until you change your position on the tunnel, we just can't do it. We have business in this town, Mike. We have relationships in this town. We cannot do that. So it was a real lockdown - politically. [00:36:38] Crystal Fincher: That was also a big learning experience for me - watching that consolidation, watching how not only were they fighting for the tunnel against you and making the fight against you a fight about the tunnel, but the enforcement to those third parties that you were talking about that - Hey, if you play ball with him, you're cut off. And those kinds of threats and that kind of dealing - watching that happen was very formative for me. I'm like - Okay, I see how this works, and this is kind of insidious. And if you are branded as an outsider, if you don't play ball, if you don't kiss the ring of the adults in the room - which is definitely what they considered themselves - then you're on the outs and they're at war. And it was really a war footing against you and the campaign. Who was on the Council at that time? [00:37:30] Mike McGinn: Oh my God. Let me see if I can go through the list. No, and it really, it was - your point about it was a war footing was not something that I fully, that I did not appreciate until actually going through that experience - how unified that would be. Excuse me. The City Council chair was Tim Burgess at the time. Bruce Harrell was on the Council. Sally Clark, Richard Conlin, Nick Licata. Mike O'Brien was running on the same platform as me with regard to the tunnel and he'd just been elected. Jean Godden, Sally Bagshaw. I hope I'm not leaving anything out - because - [00:38:04] Robert Cruickshank: Tom Rasmussen will forgive you. [00:38:06] Mike McGinn: Tom Rasmussen. Yeah - because City Councilmembers would get really offended if you didn't thank them publicly - that was another thing I had to learn. You have to publicly thank any other politician on stage with you or they held a grudge. Yeah. So I had - I didn't know all the politicians' rules when I started. [00:38:25] Crystal Fincher: There are so many rules. [00:38:27] Mike McGinn: There are so many, there's so many rules. But really what you saw then was that the Council tended to move in lockstep on many issues - because if they all voted together and they all worked citywide, there was protection. None of them could be singled out. So it was very - and it's not to say that some of them didn't take principled votes and would find themselves on an 8-1 position sometimes, but for the most part, it was much, much safer to be - it was much, much safer to vote as a group. And they tended to do that. And they had coalesced around the tunnel, except for O'Brien. And that could not be shaken by anything we brought to bear. [00:39:04] Robert Cruickshank: And this is wrapped up in not just the electoral politics, but the power politics. Because Mike McGinn comes in - mayor leading the 7th floor of City Hall, the head of City government - and smart guy, nice guy, willing to talk to anybody. But is not from their crew, is not from that group. And as Crystal and Mike said, the ranks were closed from the start. This is - again, 2009, 2010 - when nationally Mitch McConnell is quoted as saying, It's his ambition to make Obama a one-term president. I don't know if he's ever caught on record, but I would be quite certain that Tim Burgess would have said the exact same thing - that his ambition was to make Mike McGinn a one-term mayor. As it turned out in 2013, Tim Burgess wanted his job - one of the candidates running for it. So these are all people who have a reason to close ranks against Mike McGinn and to use a tunnel as a bludgeon against him to do so. [00:39:58] Mike McGinn: There were other bludgeons. After I won the general election and before I took office, they passed their annual budget - they cut the mayor's office budget by a third before I even took office. Just boom - I know - they were determined, they were determined. And so that was when the planning - that council then and with WSDOT - that was when basically the contours of the waterfront were locked into place, including what we now see as that very wide surface road. That was that Council. So if you're wondering, if you're looking at that going - Okay, wow, who decided that and where did it come from? Again, our current mayor and his current advisor and others - they've always been for that. Building that big surface road has always been the plan to go along with the tunnel, because highway capacity was their highest priority. And the park on the waterfront, along with a lot of money into the aquarium and into these new structures - that's their signature thing for so many other people. But the idea that you should, that there was an opportunity to transform our transportation system and transform our city to make it more equitable and climate friendly was never a priority in this process. Just wasn't. [00:41:20] Crystal Fincher: It was never a priority. It was never seriously considered. And to me, through this process - lots of people know, have talked about it on the show before - I actually didn't start off Team McGinn. I wound up Team McGinn - didn't start off that way. But through that - and you won me over with logic - it was you being proven right on several things. You pointed out that their projections, their traffic projections were just so far out of left field that there was no way that they were going to come close. And they even had to come down on their projections before we even saw the traffic - the actual traffic turned out to be lower. You were right on that one - the laughable - [00:41:59] Mike McGinn: They're under 40,000 cars a day - for a highway that was carrying 110,000 cars a day beforehand. So even as a traffic solution - to put that into context, 40,000 cars a day is like the Ballard Bridge. And I can guarantee you the replacement costs of the Ballard Bridge is not $4 billion or $3.1 billion. The E Line, I think, carries 15,000 people a day. Metro carries 220,000 people a day. What you could do with that $3.1 billion or $4 billion in terms of bus lanes, bike lanes, rolling stock for Metro, maybe pay raises for bus drivers so that we could actually have service - you could do so much with those billions of dollars. And we put it all into moving 40,000 cars a day? It's just pathetic. That's three Rapid Ride lines we could have had for a 10th of the cost, or even less. I think the investments in Rapid Ride lines are about $50-100 million a line to make the capital investments to make it work. So the waste - even if you don't care about climate, the waste of dollars - and who's paying those taxes? To a great degree, we have the most regressive state and local tax system in the nation. And we'll have a ballot measure soon, and I know a lot of environmentalists will be out there if the package spends for the right thing saying - Hey, we need money for local streets. Imagine if we'd taken that gas tax money and the Legislature had allowed cities and towns to use it to improve their streets - which they can do. I know that the constitution says highway purposes, but when you read highway purposes, it says roads and bridges. It includes everything. You can use gas taxes for anything that improves the road. And they do. WSDOT has used gas taxes to pay for bike lanes and sidewalks. It's legal. That's a choice. So we're driving around potholed streets. We have - we're putting up little plastic dividers because we care more about the car getting hurt than the bicyclist on the other side of that plastic divider. We're watching our transit service melt away because we can't pay bus drivers enough. But hey, man, somebody's got a really rapid - 3,000 people a day get to skip Downtown in their private vehicles. Where are our priorities for equity? Where are the priorities for economy, or even just plain old-fashioned fiscal prudence? None of that was there - because all of those dollars were going to fund the needs of the most powerful people in the City. And they captured those dollars - and all of us will pay the taxes, all of us will breathe the smoky air, and all of us will watch our streets deteriorate and our transit service evaporate. [00:44:52] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And to me, it was such a foundational lesson that the people that we have making decisions really matter - and that we have to really explore their records, their donors, their histories - because over and over again, we look at the decisions that wind up being made that frequently conflict with campaign promises, but that very, very rarely conflict with their donor rolls. [00:45:16] Mike McGinn: And yes - and every one of them knows how to make the value statements. So if I had any advice for people in this year's election - everyone is going to say they care about housing, everyone's going to say they think biking safe. I don't - one of the things that I came away with - I don't care about the goals you put into some policy anymore. Show me the hard physical action you will take that might piss somebody off, but you're willing to do it because it's right. And if you can't do that, then your value statements are meaningless. So take a look - who actually, and that's the question I always ask candidates for office - Tell me about a time you did something hard that might've caused you criticism, but you did it because it was right. Or that you made somebody who was an ally or friend upset, but you did it because it was right. Tell me about that time. [00:46:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's a challenge. And to your point and learning through just watching how people operated through that and some other processes - but that certainly was a big learning for me - is the role of coalitions, the role of accountability, and understanding. You have always had your finger on the pulse of Seattle, really - you're extraordinarily good at that. You're actually - both of you - are great strategists. But our political class is so detached from that sometimes - certainly I'm feeling frustration at some recent actions by our Legislature - we just had our special session day where they increased criminalization of substances, personal possession of substances - just reflecting on legislation to provide school, kids with free meals at school, things that seem like really basic and foundational that we should be able to land this. If we can call a special session to hand Boeing billions of dollars, we should be able to feed kids, right? [00:47:00] Mike McGinn: At the time we were cutting school budgets - when we found money for that. But I don't want to be too gloomy. And then I want to turn it over to Robert to get a last word in here, 'cause I just loved - his analysis is so awesome. I don't want to be too gloomy because - I look at what happened in the Legislature this year on housing, that we're finally going to allow housing, people to build more housing in places so people can actually live closer to their jobs and live more affordably. 10 years ago, we would have thought that was impossible. There's a lot of hard organizing that did it. At America Walks, we're the host of the Freeway Fighters Networks - there are people in 40 cities or more around the country that are organizing to remove highways. And while it's just a small amount of money compared to the amount going to highway expansion, there's actually federal funds to study and remove highways. So it's a long, hard slog. What felt for us - for Robert and me and Cary Moon and others fighting this - which felt like an impossible fight at the time is a fight that is now winning in places. Not winning enough - we're not winning fast enough - but it can change. And so that's - I don't want to be too negative. They got money, but organizing and people - and we actually have the public with us on this, just like we have the public with us on housing. So we just have to do more. We just got to keep at it, folks - got to keep at it. We can win this one. Don't allow this story of how hard it was to deal with the unified political class in the City of Seattle for their climate arson - should not deter you. It should inspire you, 'cause I actually won the mayor's office and we actually did do a lot of good. And the next fight is right in front of us again today, so get in it people. We need you. [00:48:46] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's spot on. And I remember coming to work in your office at the very beginning of 2011, when it seemed like the tunnel was just dominating discussion, but not in the mayor's office, right? When I joined, I fully expected to be like - roll my sleeves up to take on that tunnel. Instead, I'm working on the mayor's jobs plan, the Families and Education Levy, on transit. That's the stuff that was really getting done, and I think McGinn left a really great legacy on that. But we didn't win the tunnel fight. And I think we've diagnosed many of the reasons why, but one thing that really stands out to me as I look back from 12, 13 years distance is we didn't have the same density of genuinely progressive and social democratic organizations and people and leaders in Seattle that we have now. I think that matters because Mike's been talking about what's the next fight. I think one of the big fights coming up next year - when it comes time to renew that Move Seattle Levy - that's nearly a billion dollars that's going to be on the table. And we keep getting promised - when we are asked to approve these massive levies - that a lot of that money is going to go to safe streets, it's going to go to protect vulnerable users, we're going to do something to finally get towards Vision Zero. And instead it all gets taken away to build more car infrastructure. At what point do we finally stand - literally in the road - and say, No more. Do we look at the broken promises on the waterfront where we were promised a beautiful pedestrian-friendly waterfront and got another car sewer? We're going to have to organize and come together. We have many more groups now and many more leaders who are willing to stand up and say - We're not passing this levy unless it actually focuses on safe streets, unless it focuses on pedestrians and cyclists and transit users, and gives iron-clad promises to make sure stuff gets built so that some future mayor can't just walk in and start canceling projects left and right that we were promised. That's the lesson I take from this is - we're better organized now, we have more resources now, but it's still going to be a slog, and we're going to have to stand our ground - otherwise we get rolled. [00:50:34] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I thank you both for this conversation today - reflections on the tunnel fight, how it came to be, what it was like in the middle of it, and the lessons that we take moving forward in these elections that we have coming up this year, next year, and beyond. Thanks so much for the conversation. [00:50:50] Mike McGinn: Thank you, Crystal. [00:50:51] Robert Cruickshank: Thank you - it's been wonderful. [00:50:52] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks, which is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or 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. 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.

Back in the 1970s, Joanne Ward became interested in non-traditional job roles for women, and she applied for a position as a line crew helper for Seattle City Light, where she later served as a crew chief and crew coordinator. Years after her retirement, she published a poetry book titled, Utility. For Part 3 of our Women on the Line series, Joanne recites some of her poems, including "1978: Affirmative Action," "Utility" and "Cable Terminations." She also shares her memories of working as a high-voltage electrician in substation maintenance and construction and offers tips on crew leadership for women who are currently working in the line trade. 

Back in the 1970s, Joanne Ward became interested in non-traditional job roles for women, and she applied for a position as a line crew helper for Seattle City Light, where she later served as a crew chief and crew coordinator. Years after her retirement, she published a poetry book titled, Utility. For Part 3 of our Women on the Line series, Joanne recites some of her poems, including "1978: Affirmative Action," "Utility" and "Cable Terminations." She also shares her memories of working as a high-voltage electrician in substation maintenance and construction and offers tips on crew leadership for women who are currently working in the line trade. 

Seattle City Light has released a new plan for managing three hydroelectric dams on the Skagit River. The dams provide 20% of Seattle's electric power, and have been the subject of a series of lawsuits by tribes arguing that the dams stop salmon from flourishing.

Our guest for the April 2023 Line Life Podcast is Alice Lockridge, who helped to prepare some of the first women lineworkers at Seattle City Light for a career in the line trade. In Part 2 of our Women on the Line series, Alice shares tips on how utilities can attract, train and retain women in the field workforce. 

Our guest for the April 2023 Line Life Podcast is Alice Lockridge, who helped to prepare some of the first women lineworkers at Seattle City Light for a career in the line trade. In Part 2 of our Women on the Line series, Alice shares tips on how utilities can attract, train and retain women in the field workforce. 

There were 26 Seattle City employees that made over $200,000 in overtime pay in 2022. Out of the 26 employees, there were 17 Seattle City Light employees who made over $200,000 in overtime pay. That is the most out of any Seattle department.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/washington-in-focus/support

With quotes from the hit comedy “Shrinking”, Paul navigates the vibes after a Regional Expansion Summit hosted by Seattle City Light, Portland General Electric, and the Bonneville Power AdministrationJan Smutny-Jones, Mary Wiencke, Jim Shetler, and Chris Robinson join Paul Dockery to debrief and synthesize the participants shared understanding after a California/Northwest Regional Expansion Summit hosted by Seattle City Light, Portland General Electric, and the Bonneville Power Administration on March 10th, 2023.In true Public Power Underground fashion the topics were introduced with quotes from the first two episodes of the new Apple TV comedy Shrinking starring Jason Segel, Jessica Williams, and Harrison Ford who all play psychologists. The timestamps for the quotes are included in the show notes, just in case you want to get some laughs before diving into the discussion.05:03 - History of Market Development in the West“Classic compassion fatigue, we ask questions, listen, stay non-judgmental and you don't make that face” - Dr. Paul Rhoades played by Harrison Ford (Episode 1, 10:13)19:12 - Benefits, Opportunities and Barriers“Look, I don't have people in my home, it's not that I'm antisocial. I know that you do this [referring to Jimmy and Gaby asking probing questions] to shame me because I'm a somewhat private person, but it just strengthens my resolve. I'm pro boundaries, my family is for me, my home is my fortress of solitude” - Dr. Paul Rhoades played by Harrison Ford (Episode 2, 7:54)48:12 - Decarbonization pathways and the role of Regional Markets“I know someone does [i.e., who “gets it”], he's tall and he calls me too much.” - Dr. Paul Rhoades played by Harrison Ford (Episode 2, 17:16)1:03:55 - A shared understanding of the mutual benefits of ongoing collaboration“Hey, anybody that helps us raise our kids with love and respect, we should be grateful” - Dr. Paul Rhoades played by Harrison Ford (Episode 2, 12:43)You can find the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Remember to share this with any friends you have that are electric utility enthusiasts like us!Public Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, it's work to watch!

The Best of the Jason Rantz Show What's Trending: A Florida news reporter was shot and killed covering a crime scene, private security companies are doing well and being stretched thin and more anger about the Ship Canal encampment.Big Local: Skagit farmers are upset with Seattle City Light, Pasco council takes back its vote on retail cannabis stores and Federal Way residents fight back on proposed park demolition. // St. Louis prosecutor is getting fired by the Missouri AG. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's Trending: A Florida news reporter was shot and killed covering a crime scene, private security companies are doing well and being stretched thin and more anger about the Ship Canal encampment.Big Local: Skagit farmers are upset with Seattle City Light, Pasco council takes back its vote on retail cannabis stores and Federal Way residents fight back on proposed park demolition. // St. Louis prosecutor is getting fired by the Missouri AG. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Will Honea, Skagit County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, joins Dillon with an update on the ongoing battle by farmers, tribes and other local interests working together to stave off a greenwashed land grab by Seattle City Light.

Advocates for protecting farming in Skagit County are continuing to push back against Seattle City Light's attempts to buy up farmland and take it out of production to mitigate for the lack of fish passage on its Skagit River dams. Will Honea, Skagit County Senior Deputy Prosecutor, updates Dillon on the latest developments, including an upcoming public hearing on Skagit County's efforts to make its ban on such land grabs permanent.

The average renter or homeowner will see their bill go up by about $5 each month, according to Seattle City Light.

Seattle City Light is raising its rates, again, even though the inflation reduction act specifically says it will keep energy costs down. Inslee announces the end to the two year state of emergency. California sensing checks to the "middle class." Oregon unemployment surpasses prepandemic levels. Oregon to raise rent cap. California taxpayers give $50M to Berkeley journalism school. California spends $200M on abortion services for out of state people, including $1M to make a website for it. #pnw #pnwnews #pacificnorthwest #washingtonnews #oregonnews #californianews #idahonews #headlines #headlinenews #trendingnews #behindtheline #rent #newspodcast #conservativenews #nnn #netnewsnetwork #inslee #electricity #inflationreductionact #unemployment #Newsome #abortion #taxpayers --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/behindtheline/support

In the latest episode of Public Power Now, Angela Song, Transportation Electrification Portfolio Manager at Seattle City Light, details Seattle City Light's efforts to build out electric vehicle charging infrastructure and discusses what she sees as the key challenges and opportunities for Seattle City Light when it comes to electrification.

Seattle City Light plans to install 30 fast EV chargers on streets, giving priority to those near apartments, condos and mobile home parks. Learn more at https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/ 

Fastest 15 Steve Martin plans retirementStudy says your brain is not meant to work past midnight Seattle City Light wants a 4.5% rate hike, Man steals back his stolen trailer when police don't respond in time, Wild Dallas catalytic converter theft story //  Brandi Kruse stops by // Kamala  back Biden's 'zero' inflation lieSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Protecting farming and some of the best farmland in the world is important to Skagitonians, as well as working to restore struggling salmon runs. Will Honea, Skagit County Senior Deputy Prosecutor, joins Dillon to explain how Seattle City Light wants to buy up Skagit delta farmland to use instead for salmon habitat projects to mitigate for its lack of fish passage on its Skagit River dams. He says it amounts to 'greenwashing' that will ultimately harm farming and fish.

If you've heard about the recent release of the draft report on the subject commissioned by Gov. Inslee and Sen. Murray, you'll know that the subject of saving the salmon is on everyone's mind. And with good reason. Salmon are essential to our region–on our economy, our environment, and our cultural heritage--and their populations are threatened. Their potential loss would have a devastating effect, not least on our struggling Orca population, but especially on tribal nations in the Pacific Northwest whose lives and culture are inextricably linked to these fish populations. One of the more important efforts to save the salmon is focused on breaching four dams on the Snake River, something that was the subject of the draft report. Discussing all of this is an exceptional panel: Emily Washines— is an historian, educator, author and member of the Yakama Nation facilitating equitable history Dr. Helen Neville— is the senior scientist for Trout Unlimited, performing research, science guidance and public education on salmon and trout recovery Bryan Jones— is a 4th generation wheat grower, orchardist and salmon recovery advocate Marc Sullivan— is northwest Washington coordinator for the Save Our wild Salmon Coalition and formerly served as director of strategic and power supply planning for Seattle City Light. Show Notes: ACTION: Comment by July 11 on the draft report on breaching the Lower Snake River dams. After watching this panel discussion you'll see that it's a total no brainer. We've already spent $26 billion trying to mitigate the damage. Instead of pouring more money into repairing and maintaining old structures and strategies that don't work, it's time to invest in solutions that free up the river, save the salmon and orcas, provide better energy solutions, and equally (or more) effective ways of moving grain to shipping ports. It's a win-win all around. But big corporate farms are opposed, and are spending a lot of money trying to convince people to keep spending money on failed solutions. SUGGESTED COMMENT LANGUAGE: (provided by Don and the panelists) Right now the report's tables only show the costs of breaching the dams with no table summarizing the costs of leaving the dams in place. Please provide a companion data table reflecting the costs of leaving the dams in place — which will provide a more accurate comparison of costs.

Debra Smith, the General Manager and Chief Executive Officer for Seattle City Light, joined the Karen, Matt, and Paul for a special bonus discussion about the electric utility enthusiast trifecta: Electrification, Markets, and People. We also get some jokes, elephant noises, an intermission game, and some new merch ideas.05:49 - what's going well, a numbered list12:14 - Attracting, retaining, and recruiting public power people36:56 - an Intermission Game called “Fantasy Utility Draft” where we do a mock electric utility draft from the characters of Schitts Creek, Succession, Ted Lasso, and Parks & Rec51:27 - Debra's thoughts on market development in the Northwest57:03 - Seattle City Lights approach to electrification and highlights of their recent projects Curbside EV charging New electric bus charging base Electrification study developed in collaboration w/ EPRI 1:01:46 - Scaling up our workforce as the biggest challenge facing electric utilities background from interview w/ Jesse Jenkins Saul Griffith's book Electrify and link to Rewiring America the hk tweet 1:10:03 - new merch ideasYou can find our merch on shopify. Remember to share this with any friends you have that are electric utility enthusiasts like us!Public Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, where you're valued and appreciated.

4:39 - Arin Reports8:16 - B2H news13:58 - Advanced nuclear fission projects in the news and fun twitter follows23:10 - Dispatches from #energytwitter on ev charger siting32:35 - California Public Utilities Commission takes up NEM 3.0 and Jason has some thoughts41:20 - Seattle City Light's newly released electrification study48:57 - Matt and Paul interview BPA CEO and Administrator, John Hairston and celebrate his one year anniversary as Administrator1:07:30 - TL;DR the rest of the newsYou can find the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Remember to share this with any friends you have that are electric utility enthusiasts like us!

While 2021 might have been somewhat of a return to normalcy after 2020, the power and energy sector continued to see a rapid pace of news, developments, and trends. As the Energy Central Power Perspectives Podcast brought in guest week-in and week-out, we found that these episodes served as a great time capsule of such an eventful year for the utility industry. As such, we thought it only appropriate to continue the tradition started last year of featuring discussion and clips from the episodes during the previous 12 months that we enjoyed the most, that the audience engaged with most frequently, and that continued to shape our thinking through 2021 and into the new year. Listen in as podcast host Jason Price and producer Matt Chester are joined by Energy Central's VP Audra Drazga to highlight some of the best guests and moments that took place on the podcast during our second full year in your podcast queue. And if we missed your favorite guests or key insights you can't let go of, hop onto EnergyCentral.com to let us know! From all of us at the Energy Central Team and who work on the Power Perspectives Podcast, a sincere thanks goes to our listeners for an overwhelmingly successful 2021—we surely couldn't do it without you! Transcript: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-64-%E2%80%98revisiting-hottest-episodes-2021-our-2nd-annual-podcast-year-review Episode #34: 'Rising to the Moment, But Creating a Movement' with Garrick Rochow, CEO of Consumers Energy: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/energy-central-power-perspectives%E2%84%A2-podcast-episode-29-rising-moment-creating Episode #39: ‘Taking the Grid of Tomorrow from Concept to Reality with Mark Gabriel, Former Administrator and CEO of Western Area Power Administration: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/34-%E2%80%98taking-grid-tomorrow-concept-reality%E2%80%99-mark-gabriel-former-administrator-and Episode #41: ‘The Whole Grid and Nothing But the Whole Grid' with Doug Houseman, Principal Consultant at 1898 & Co.:https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-35-%E2%80%98-whole-grid-and-nothing-whole-grid%E2%80%99-doug-houseman-principal Episode #47: GIS, Digital Twin, and the Intelligent Reality of Utilities Today with Pat Hohl and Bill Meehan of Esri:https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/special-edition-gis-digital-twin-and-intelligent-reality-utilities-today-pat-hohl Episode #48: 'Elevating Customer Care for Electric Cooperative Members' with Sean Vanslyke, CEO and General Manager of SEMO Electric Cooperative: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-40-elevating-customer-care-electric-cooperative-members%E2%80%99-sean-vanslyke Episode #50: 'The Increasing Role of Nuclear Energy to Meet Climate Change Challenges' with Rudy Shankar of Lehigh University: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-42-increasing-role-nuclear-energy-meet-climate-change-challenges%E2%80%99-rudy Episode #51: 'EVs As A Grid Asset, Will Utilities Take Advantage' With Charlie Botsford:https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-42-evs-grid-asset-will-utilities-take-advantage-charlie-botsford-energy Episode #55: Artificial Intelligence in the Modern Digital Utility with Bhavani Amirthlingam of Ameren and Jeremy Renshaw of EPRI: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/special-edition-artificial-intelligence-modern-digital-utility-bhavani Episode #56: Embarking on the Utility's Digital and Data Journey with Mike Murphy of Con Edison and Paul DeCotis of West Monroe: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/special-edition-embarking-utilitys-digital-and-data-journey-mike-murphy-con Episode #58: 'Setting an Example for Utilities Everywhere via SEPA's Utility Transformation Challenge' with Sharon Allan of SEPA, Debra Smith of Seattle City Light: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-43-setting-example-utilities-everywhere-sepa%E2%80%99s-utility-transformation

In this episode we interview David Bayard, the Vegetation Manager at Seattle City Light, the 10th largest publicly owned utility in the United States. With a job that includes oversight and involvement with both UVM and the municipal/urban forest, David provides insights into what some have wrongly considered to be competing interests. During this thoughtful, and at times philosophic interview, we discuss a range of topical issues including:How an English Literature major moves from prose to UVMThe history of Seattle City LightThe migrating fire problem in Washington State Potential changes to utility practices as a result of the increased threat of fires in the Pacific Northwest.Seattle City Light's customer focus and accomplishmentsSuccessfully managing priorities for canopy cover, social equity, and the need for providing safe and reliable electric service.  Seattle City Light's past and future UVM-related Tech capabilitiesWe hope that you find this episode of The UVM Podcast insightful. If you have any feedback on the episode or suggestions for topics you'd like us to cover in future episodes, please feel free to get in contact at podcast@utilityvegetationmanagement.com.

The utility industry is a unique one in that the landscape of companies aren't operating in a zero-sum competitive environment. Instead, utilities seek to share lessons learned, raise each other up, and collectively move towards the industry-wide goals of ensuring the entire country has access to reliable, affordable, and clean energy. It's this collaborative environment and tendency to share best practices that makes leadership in utilities particularly important, as a success in one corner of the country can directly lead to the same type of success for a utility anywhere else. Recognizing the value of highlighting these successes, the Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA) released its inaugural Utility Transformation Challenge, recognizing industry leaders who are creating the future carbon-free, modern grid. To learn more about the Utility Transformation Challenge, podcast host Jason Price and producer Matt Chester are joined by SEPA's Chief Strategy and Innovation Officer, Sharon Allan, as well as a leader whose organization made an appearance on SEPA's leaderboard of utilities in Debra Smith, CEO and General Manager of Seattle City Light. This duo provides a dynamic one-two punch on assessing the landscape of the utility industry today and where it's going in the future. The conversation was so dynamic, this episode ended up being an exciting two-parter—if you didn't listen to Part 1 where our guests focused on the Utility Transformation Challenge and the march towards decarbonization, we recommend you start there. Then come back here and listen to Part 2 where this pair of industry leaders dives into forward-looking assessments of equity in the energy industry, as well as the pending workforce transformation facing utilities everywhere. Key Links: Full post with transcript of this episode on EnergyCentral.com: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-45-setting-example-utilities-everywhere-sepa%E2%80%99s-utility-transformation Part 1 of the Conversation: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-43-setting-example-utilities-everywhere-sepa%E2%80%99s-utility-transformation Sharon Allan's Energy Central Profile: https://energycentral.com/member/profile/sharon-allan-2/about Grid Mod in the Age of Utility Carbon Reduction: https://energycentral.com/c/gr/grid-mod-age-utility-carbon-reduction Seattle City Light's Clean Energy Leadership Garnering Industry Recognition, with Emeka Anyanwu, Energy and Innovation & Resources Officer- [an Energy Central Power Perspectives™ Interview]: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/seattle-city-lights-clean-energy-leadership-garnering-industry-recognition-emeka Link to register as a member of the Energy Central Community: www.energycentral.com/user/register Did you know? The Energy Central Power Perspectives Podcast has been identified as one of the industry's 'Top 25 Energy Podcasts': blog.feedspot.com/energy_podcasts/

The utility industry is a unique one in that the landscape of companies aren't operating in a zero-sum competitive environment. Instead, utilities seek to share lessons learned, raise each other up, and collectively move towards the industry-wide goals of ensuring the entire country has access to reliable, affordable, and clean energy. It's this collaborative environment and tendency to share best practices that makes leadership in utilities particularly important, as a success in one corner of the country can directly lead to the same type of success for a utility anywhere else. Recognizing the value of highlighting these successes, the Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA) released its inaugural Utility Transformation Challenge, recognizing industry leaders who are creating the future carbon-free, modern grid. To learn more about the Utility Transformation Challenge, podcast host Jason Price and producer Matt Chester are joined by SEPA's Chief Strategy and Innovation Officer, Sharon Allan, as well as a leader whose organization made an appearance on SEPA's leaderboard of utilities in Debra Smith, CEO and General Manager of Seattle City Light. This duo provides a dynamic one-two punch on assessing the landscape of the utility industry today and where it's going in the future. The conversation was so dynamic, this episode ended up being an exciting two-parter—so enjoy Part 1 which focuses on the Utility Transformation Challenge and the march towards decarbonization. Then hang tight for Part 2 where this pair of industry leaders dives into forward-looking assessments of equity in the energy industry, as well as the pending workforce transformation facing utilities everywhere. Key Links: Part 2 of this Episode: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-45-setting-example-utilities-everywhere-sepa%E2%80%99s-utility-transformation Sharon Allan's Energy Central Profile: https://energycentral.com/member/profile/sharon-allan-2 Grid Mod in the Age of Utility Carbon Reduction: https://energycentral.com/c/gr/grid-mod-age-utility-carbon-reduction Seattle City Light's Clean Energy Leadership Garnering Industry Recognition, with Emeka Anyanwu, Energy and Innovation & Resources Officer- [an Energy Central Power Perspectives™ Interview]: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/seattle-city-lights-clean-energy-leadership-garnering-industry-recognition-emeka Link to Energy Central Post with Full Transcript of this Episode: https://energycentral.com/o/energy-central/episode-43-setting-example-utilities-everywhere-sepa%E2%80%99s-utility-transformation Link to register as a member of the Energy Central Community: www.energycentral.com/user/register Did you know? The Energy Central Power Perspectives Podcast has been identified as one of the industry's 'Top 25 Energy Podcasts': blog.feedspot.com/energy_podcasts/

The estimated reopening is midday tomorrow, according to Seattle City Light.

Show Notes Today on the show, Executive Director of America Walks and former mayor of Seattle, Mike McGinn joins Crystal to discuss new Covid-19 vaccine mandates, planned walkouts by some workers in Seattle fizzling, rising gun violence and the conspicuous lack of analysis by the media and the mayor's office, the knee-jerk desire for police presence when crime rises (in spite of it being ineffective), and the integration of Compassion Seattle into a certain mayoral campaign now that it's off the November ballot. 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: "State employees union announces agreement with Inslee over vaccine mandate" by Joseph O'Sullivan https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article254009258.html    “Biden Lays Out Plan To Mandate Vaccines Or Testing For Millions Of Workers” by Alana Wise and Tamara Keith from NPR: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/09/1035149651/biden-will-require-vaccines-for-federal-workers-as-part-of-a-new-covid-strategy    “‘Every hospital is quite full' in Washington as delta variant of coronavirus spreads” by Elise Takahama from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/every-hospital-is-quite-full-in-washington-as-delta-variant-of-coronavirus-spreads/    “‘Don't have a clue': It turns out Washington state set a murder record in 2020, but no one knows why” by Danny Westneat from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/dont-have-a-clue-it-turns-out-washington-state-set-a-murder-record-in-2020-but-no-one-knows-why/    “Sickout at Seattle City Light over COVID-19 vaccine mandate doesn't materialize” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/sickout-at-seattle-city-light-over-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-doesnt-materialize/    “Unions warn of ‘mass exodus' over city of Seattle vaccine mandate” by David Kroman from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/news/2021/08/unions-warn-mass-exodus-over-city-seattle-vaccine-mandate    “Seattle's arrest alternative, LEAD, moves beyond police” by David Kroman from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/2020/07/seattles-arrest-alternative-lead-moves-beyond-police    “‘Compassion Seattle' Is Dead. Now What?” by Katie Wilson from Publicola: https://publicola.com/2021/09/06/compassion-seattle-is-dead-now-what/    “Harrell Says He'll Implement Key Provisions of ‘Compassion Seattle' Measure, Clear Encampments” by Erica C. Barnett of Publicola: https://publicola.com/2021/09/03/harrell-says-hell-implement-key-provisions-of-compassion-seattle-clear-encampments/    "Durkan Won't Sign Crowd Control Weapons Bill, Raises Specter of Court Challenge" by Paul Kiefer https://publicola.com/2021/09/07/durkan-wont-sign-crowd-control-weapons-bill-raises-specter-of-court-challenge/   "Harrell Ducks Police Accountability Forum, Burgess Rides In to Attack González" by Doug Trumm https://www.theurbanist.org/category/politics-and-government/elections-and-endorsements/2021-election/ Transcript: Transcript will be uploaded shortly.

Brian Sallade is the president and CEO of Kinsmen Group. He has built his 30-year career in leadership as a startup entrepreneur and CEO of several companies. One of Brian's most significant accomplishments was the development of a turn-key solution to help pharmaceutical companies comply with regulations such as FDA 21 CFR part 11. He has also previously worked with the US Department of Interior, General Motors, Hydro One, New York Power Authority, Seattle City Light, Idaho Power, Johnson & Johnson, Amgen, Pfizer, Gerdau, Entergy, and Koch Industries to help build world-class engineering information systems. Now, Brian continuously displays a wealth of business acumen in a myriad of industries, while staying true to his unique passion for engineering information management.Kinsmen Group is an award-winning team of engineering information management specialists with a passion for applying innovation to prominent oil, gas, pharmaceutical, and utility companies. Their organization strives to deliver superior business results through excellence and pragmatism each time they partner with any business, revolutionizing each with wiser decision-making, risk reduction, safety improvement, and higher returns on their investments. Kinsmen Group is ranked as the "Best of the Best Professional Service Organizations" by Service Performance Insight Research and among the "Fastest-Growing Private Companies in America" by Inc. Magazine. To learn more, visit www.kinsmengroup.com.

Today, we make history.  It’s the first time we’ve had an executive from the city on our show.  All of our guests before this show have been business executives. Today’s guest is Debra Smith, Seattle City Light’s CEO.  She graduated with a finance degree from Arizona State University, and kickstarted her career in the oil industry working for ConocoPhillips.  Shortly after, transitioned into commercial banking in Portland, then moved into utilities at the Eugene Water and Electric Board, then Central Lincoln PUD, before joining Seattle City Light in 2018.  Now, you’ll want to be sure to stick around until the end because Debra takes us through not only her career journey, which pivoted from oil and gas to banking to utilities management, but her personal journey that impacted her career progression.  Her challenging childhood with her parents being unhappily married, the breakups, divorces, and ultimately, the personal lessons from all of her experiences.  In 2018, Debra was nominated by Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan to lead Seattle City Light, Seattle's largest department by budget, as the CEO & General Manager.  Today, Debra leads Seattle City Light, responsible for providing power to the entire city, has over 1,800 employees, and is responsible for 25% of Seattle’s entire budget as a city. 

This week Port of Seattle Commissioner Ryan Calkins joins Crystal to discuss not only what a port commissioner actually does, but how it can impact the lives of our entire state. Topics include what the Port is doing to fight climate change, how it can protect the rights of gig workers operating within the Port's area, and how an entity like the Port - that operates in several jurisdictions and cities - can promote environmental, social, and economic justice. 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 guest, Commissioner Ryan Calkins, at @ryancalkinsSEA. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Learn more about the Port of Seattle's plans to fight climate change here: https://www.portseattle.org/blog/port-programs-fight-climate-change  Get into the pollution from the port that specifically affects South Seattle here: https://crosscut.com/2019/06/can-beacon-hill-win-fight-quieter-skies-and-healthier-neighborhood  Learn more about the cleanup of the Duwamish River here: https://www.duwamishcleanup.org/  Find out more about ideas for insuring gig workers here: https://hbr.org/2020/07/gig-workers-are-here-to-stay-its-time-to-give-them-benefits  Find information that has been presented to the Port's Biometrics External Advisory Group here: https://www.portseattle.org/page/biometrics-external-advisory-group  Find out more about the inaccuracies and risks of employing facial recognition technology here: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2020/racial-discrimination-in-face-recognition-technology/  Read about Washington State's airports response to ICE deportations using their facilities here: https://crosscut.com/2019/10/searching-airports-host-deportation-flights-ice-gets-rejected-everett-and-bellingham  Learn about offshore wind farms, like the one referenced in the episode, here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest-could-get-its-own-offshore-wind-farm-by-2017/    Transcript Crystal Fincher: [00:00:00] Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm your host, Crystal Fincher. On this show, we talk to political hacks and policy wonks to gather insight into local politics and policy through the lens of those doing the work and provide behind-the-scenes perspectives on politics in our state. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. And I'm very pleased to be welcoming Ryan Calkins, Port Commissioner for the Port of Seattle to the show today. Thanks for being with us. Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:01:00] Thank you. Yeah, long-time listener, first-time caller. I'm really excited to be here. Crystal Fincher: [00:01:05] Super excited to have you. And I'm excited to talk about the Port. Being a Port Commissioner is a really, in my opinion, over the years has been slept on, but a really important position, really important function. You have a huge jurisdiction. You're responsible for a lot. So I guess I just wanted to start off by asking what attracted you to look at serving on the Port Commission and what are you responsible for? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:01:35] Yeah, so I mean, when I first ran four years ago, my motivation was really driven by a couple of things. Principally by what I felt like was the need to take climate change more seriously at the Port of Seattle, that it is an agency that is deeply involved in transportation and ships, trucks, planes, trains. And obviously the transportation sector has got a climate problem, and we need to act quickly to address it. And then the other part of it was it's an economic development agency at heart. And so when we look at our regional economy and how - that was right in the middle of this boom period for our City, prior to the pandemic, where we were seeing overall macroeconomic numbers go through the roof. And yet it wasn't a vision of shared prosperity for our economy. And I felt like the Port of Seattle was one place where we could really instill a sense of shared prosperity. How do we make sure that the - forgive the maritime metaphor - but how could we make sure a rising tide will lift all boats? And in particular, the areas in King County, in our jurisdiction where we have seen people historically be furthest from economic justice are areas right around Port facilities, the airport, the seaport. And so yeah, like you said, it's kind of a quiet political jurisdiction, but a really, really important one. And we have about $1 billion a year roughly in operating budget. And right now, we're doing about $1 billion a year in capital construction budget as well. So it's a hugely impactful agency to be a part of. And so that's why I got interested and was able to kind of surprise, I think, an incumbent. And before he knew it, I was off and running, and we managed to squeak out a win four years ago. And now I'm up for reelection and the messaging hasn't changed a whole lot, but I will say that there's one area that I didn't emphasize enough as a first-time candidate, and this time I'm really going to lean into, and that's that question of equity. That I came in very much an environmentalist, and now I would say that I'm an environmental justice advocate. And particularly after four years of lots of community meetings with folks who really appreciate the intent of a lot of the environmental movement, but have, like me - I'll admit I didn't understand how important it was to make sure that we had the right people at the table. And so this campaign cycle, I'm really thinking a lot about how do we do this? How do we carry forward a vision of shared prosperity and a message of environmental justice for those communities that historically have been most impacted by Port activities? Crystal Fincher: [00:04:36] Yeah and crucially important - a lot of conversations around that right now. And as someone who lives in the 33rd, certainly, there has been a lot of research done specifically when it comes to the airport, and impacts from the airport on air quality, and those who live in the surrounding areas, and having direct impacts on the health of the families that live there. And I guess starting out in terms of what can be done to mitigate that impact, I know that's something that you have been looking at, are going to be continuing. What is happening to help reduce the amount of pollution that's being put into the air, the surrounding neighborhoods, and to mitigate that impact and to make sure that we aren't looking at the kinds of health disparities between one area of our region versus other areas? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:05:34] Yeah. I mean, the 33rd, obviously, I hear from a lot of constituents there about the air and noise pollution associated with airport operations. And then in other parts of the district, and particularly in the Duwamish Valley, the neighborhoods of South Park and Georgetown and cities of Tukwila and elsewhere, they're dealing with the water and air pollution associated with maritime operations and just the overall industrial activity that occurs around a Port facility - trucks coming and going and the machines that operate on the facilities. And so we're really looking at how we tackle - what it comes down to for us, in most instances, is that we're a fossil fuel economy and we need to break that addiction as quickly as possible. So on the seaport side of things, we have put forward a plan called the Seattle Waterfront Clean Energy Plan that seeks to essentially decarbonize the waterfront in the next 30 years. And it's in collaboration with the City of Seattle because our waterfront is entirely within the City of Seattle, and we need their help. We need more electricity. We need Seattle City Light to bring us more electrons on the waterfront so that we can replace that source of energy that is currently coming from a lot of diesel fuel. And we also need industry partnerships in other things. There's a lot of areas that while we're a port, we may not have jurisdiction over. And that's where, with my colleagues, I like to distinguish between hard power and soft power, which is kind of from my old days in foreign policy stuff. We may not have hard power in certain areas, but we do have soft power to create influence or model the way for other agencies to say there is an economically viable way that we can sort of destroy that myth of environmental sustainability at odds with economic development. I really believe we're at a point now where those things go hand in glove in most places, and particularly in Seattle. And at the airport, where we're dealing with both the issues related to air pollution and noise pollution from airport facilities, probably the single most important project we're working on is sustainable aviation fuels, which is the creation of combustible fuels that can be used in current airplanes. You don't have to change anything about the airplanes, but it burns a lot cleaner and isn't a fossil fuel. And so the news this week that the State Senate passed the low carbon fuel standard, now it's going back to the House for concurrence, is a really important step for us. We are waiting with bated breath to see if that will get agreed upon and sent to the governor's desk. But if it does, it's a necessary but not sufficient step towards sustainable aviation fuels and a greater supply of clean electricity for our waterfront project as well. So that has been our highest legislative priority ever since I joined the Port of Seattle Commission. And so a lot rests on that and I will keep pushing that for the next - I think we're down to 10 days in session - because we really need that to be able to take some strides. Just imagine, for instance, if we were able to produce sustainable aviation fuels from the municipal solid waste that is going into the landfill in Cedar Hills, in King County. We could divert that waste flow, turn it into energy that could then be used in our planes and our ships, and it burns a lot cleaner too. So the air quality benefits are good for our communities as well. And then we've got a number of - for the water quality piece, I think a really important part of that is what we've been working on in the Duwamish River. And that project has been successful in large part because the community mobilized and it wasn't just a bunch of electeds or public servants doing the planning. But instead it was led by community efforts in Georgetown and South Park to say, "We want cleanup and we want it done this way so that the folks in the community benefit." Crystal Fincher: [00:09:45] Well, that's certainly useful and helpful. One thing I wanted to talk about - you talked about balancing economic development and sustainability, and making sure that we don't harm our environment and the people living in it while still being competitive economically and growing our region and the economy in our region. There's been a lot of talk about wages workers are paid, conditions, workers - everyone from direct employees of the Port to truckers, people working throughout the entire ecosystem of the Port. I guess where are you at in terms of - do you feel like things are where they should be today? Do you feel like we still have a ways to go? And what's on the agenda? What's on your agenda for advancing worker conditions and pay and rights? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:10:42] Well, I want to start with wages because I think there's nothing like more money in people's pockets to improve outcomes in health, education, quality of life, longevity, all sorts of things. When you give people money - no, when people are able to earn more money, virtually every metric goes towards the positive, right? So 10 years ago when the debate was happening around 15 Now, I was part of the coalition of small business - I was a small business owner prior to this - I was part of the coalition supporting 15 Now, and I was pleased to see it pass in SeaTac originally, and then in Seattle. And I'm very much in favor of an increase in the national minimum wage, the federal minimum wage, as quickly as possible. And I personally believe that we ought to be north of $20 now for our region, for the country, to get back to where we were 30 years ago, let alone 40 years ago when really the Reagan revolution kicked off and undercut middle income families and has slowly resulted in income disparities that I think are really harmful to our democracy. And so wages are critically important at the Port of Seattle. This session, we're working with labor partners to ensure that this carve-out that had resulted in a number of workers around the airport, the flight kitchen workers, had been exempted. And it was originally part of Prop 1 - it was well-intended, but it resulted in a group of workers that were still earning $11.50-12 an hour instead of the north of $15 that they should be earning. And so we were able to go to Olympia this session, work with Senator Keiser and labor leaders to get that sort of technical fix in the bill. And as soon as the governor signs it, we'll be ready to work with the employers in the area to bring those employees up to the wages they deserve. In the larger Port ecosystem, there are a lot of folks who work in and around the Port that are gig workers. And I think there is an opportunity for Port elected officials to raise our voices about the need to backstop those workers with the same kind of protections that regular-wage workers have. So in the pandemic, we've understood that it's critically important for those people to have access to unemployment benefits. And I think portable benefits should be an option for workers, whether they're working for what we call TNCs, the transportation network companies like Uber or Lyft, or other forms of gig work that are popping up all over the place. And the ability for folks to maintain their healthcare, to maintain their pensions, to maintain other forms of benefits, as they move around in our really mobile economy now is, I think, really important. And so that's a conversation that we're having and something that I'm very supportive of because I think that kind of employee mobility forces employers to compete for workers too. Crystal Fincher: [00:14:11] Absolutely. And I think that's critically important and certainly part of our national conversation, the local conversation. What levers do you have, just within your jurisdiction in the Port, to try and move that forward? Is that something that you can address in contracts? Or if you're awarding contracts to vendors or doing that, what can you do as a Port Commissioner to help make that happen? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:14:41] So the Port of Seattle operates mostly as a landlord. I mean, we have 2,000 employees, roughly - 1,000 of whom work at the airport, and 1,000 scattered about at our administration building, or our maintenance facilities, or elsewhere. We have a police department, a fire department. We have, I think, just about two dozen unions that we negotiate directly. So we have a large workforce ourselves. But you think about the number of direct jobs at SeaTac, for instance. We figure there's about 21,000 people who work at the airport. So 1,000 of them are our employees, the other 20,000 work for the roughly 350 businesses - very large businesses like Delta and Alaska Airlines, and very small businesses like independent contractors who have a taxi. And figuring out how to herd those cats and get everybody providing quality jobs has been a real challenge, right? Because you're working with various levels of - you've got the federal government saying, "Here's a set of rules that you have to follow because you're an FAA grant recipient." You've got the state government saying, "Here's a set of rules that you have to abide by because you're an employer in the State of Washington." And then we've got municipal rules from the City of SeaTac, too. So there are a whole host of intersecting jurisdictions. And the way that Washington set up our port districts back in 1911 was as a limited-purpose jurisdiction. So we don't get all the same authorities that a city gets. And we fought that a few times. So we, for instance, can't personally set a minimum wage at the airport. That's set by the City of SeaTac, right? But we can, as I was saying before, use some soft power to say, "Hey, City of SeaTac. We would like to be able to do certain things within your jurisdiction." And we're a huge part of their tax base, and so that can be a conversation. In other circumstances, we can, as you talked about, work with contracts and leases to say, "If you're going to operate a business in our facility, then there are certain baseline minimum things that we want you to adhere to." Sometimes that pushes over certain lines and we get pushback. But a good example of that is - and they call that a use of a proprietary power - they say Sea-Tac Airport, as an operator of a big facility, is entitled to make certain requirements of its tenants to ensure that the facility runs in the way that we, the Port of Seattle, want it to run. And so yeah, when we sit down at the table with potential partners, whether it's airlines or concessionaires or others or taxi cab associations, we build into those negotiations - environmental key performance indicators, labor harmony agreements, customer service requirements, so that we have set of values that we're trying to make sure are carried out whether we're the operator or we contract with somebody else to do it. So that is absolutely a really important way that we can live out the values that we talk about on the campaign trail. Crystal Fincher: [00:18:00] I appreciate that. Another thing I'm wondering about, you mentioned that the Port has its own police department. You certainly work because there is federal facilities, federal travel, interstate travel. There's Customs and Border Patrol who are operating there in a number of jurisdictions, especially dealing with immigration and immigration enforcement. And we have been having a lot of conversations. And certainly in King County, it's pretty clear, just in terms of policies and cities throughout the county, that limiting interaction, cooperation with Customs and Border Patrol and ICE in terms of expanding their authority and cooperation - informing them, sharing data, that kind of thing, is not something that most cities here are comfortable with, most jurisdictions are comfortable with. And certainly looking at some of the actions that we saw from the Trump administration that are still continuing to this day and people being uncomfortable with the, I guess, scope of authority that other agencies have when it comes to immigration enforcement. Where do you stand on that? And what do you think is working right, and what do you think needs to change? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:19:35] I personally am - I believe we need to change the overall narrative around immigration. I think a lot of us on the left have simply bought into the storytelling that the right uses around immigration - that immigration is a sort of, it's an evil that we need to avoid. And instead, I think immigration is the secret sauce of our country. I mean, the narrative tends to be, how do we stop these people from coming? And we know that some will eventually get through anyways. And instead, I think we should be saying, how do we embrace those immigrants who are coming to the United States? Because it has forever been what has made us so innovative and vital and continue to push economic and cultural leadership around the world because we get the very best ideas from all over the place. And it isn't that we assimilate them. It's that we change to be more like the cultures that come and make up our new blend. And so this is something I'm personally very passionate about. I'm especially exercised right now about what's happening on the southern border with children, where the narrative continues to be, how do we stop this flow of children? And I feel like, No, we ought to be talking about how do we step up with all of our societal wealth and rescue these kids who are escaping a place that has undergone horrible natural disasters that in fact, weren't natural. They were human disasters as a result of terrible policies. And I speak from a position of real experience, right? My first job out of college was - I spent a year in Honduras working disaster relief. And it felt in so many ways like this year was just a repeat of what we saw 20 years ago, when two hurricanes this time came through. And these folks are desperate. And if we were in their shoes, we would simply be asking for an opportunity to find safety and a bite to eat and a roof over our heads. And I think we in the United States need to recognize that we have an obligation. We have a moral obligation to provide help to these folks. So let me start by saying that. Now, putting back on my Port Commissioner hat - so the Commission provided a policy directive to our police force that they will not share information with federal agencies around immigration status. And that's actually been in place for some time now. But around that issue of our relationship with Customs and Border Protection, the TSA, ICE, and other agencies, we are attempting right now to craft a policy that will limit the amount of data that's shared overall, particularly as it relates to biometrics. So you're probably familiar with all the different ways in which our biological identifiers, whether it's our eyes or thumbprints, or even things like the way we walk, and of course, facial recognition, which gets the most news, I think. How that information can be gathered and used - and so we put a moratorium on the use of biometrics by our police department. We put a moratorium on the use of any sort of mass surveillance because we are a quasi-public plaza, right? If you walk into SeaTac Airport, you don't think I'm walking into a place where somebody would have the right to just grab my image from the video feed and use that to identify who I am. And now what we're working on is how do we - we have a set of seven criteria that we're using to determine our own use of biometrics around justification, transparency, making it voluntary so that you're not just automatically - you have to personally choose to be a part of it, equity, and I'm forgetting the other two. But the idea is to create a system with guardrails in place. Biometrics is already a part of most everybody's lives. If you have a smartphone, you're using it in some way in most cases. We've used biometrics for decades in thumbprint analysis and other things in our criminal legal system. But at the Port of Seattle, we're really trying to conscientiously think about - here's this technology that has been supercharged by artificial intelligence. So on the one hand, it's a double-edged sword. It's becoming great for things like convenience and efficiencies, but the double-edged sword is it's also becoming a really powerful means of identifying people who do not want to be identified, or are real concerns about privacy violations. And so we're trying to figure out where our jurisdiction and our powers allow us to limit the use of that, and then negotiating with our partners, whether it's federal government agencies or private enterprises that are operating at the airport, where we can put those same guardrails in place for the relationships with them. Crystal Fincher: [00:24:52] Certainly. And even beyond just whether someone has the ability and right to identify you, and whether that's an opt-in situation or not, and privacy concerns - there are also accuracy concerns. And I'm sitting here as a Black woman, familiar with a lot of research and data demonstrating that a lot of biometric technology is not as accurate on people with darker skin tones. And misidentification with - in these contexts, really potentially massive consequences, horrible consequences, life-altering consequences. And so I guess throughout that process, I appreciate there being a thoughtful process to look at that. How are you addressing that and who is involved in the conversations to craft this policy to make sure that that is accounted for and adequately addressed? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:25:52] So we started up the process of a Biometrics Working Group. And Sam - Commissioner Cho - and I, Sam Cho and I lead that working group. And it's been - gosh, I want to say we've been at it for about 18 months now. We have brought in a group of external stakeholders who have provided feedback - experts on AI, the ACLU, some Microsoft experts were there as well. As well as had numerous public sessions, study sessions, a couple of presentations at our public meeting where these experts came and presented. And out of that formulated these seven criteria. We are trying to both address the real concerns that organizations like the ACLU have brought to the table around the inequity of certain of these systems and the fact that there's real data privacy concerns associated with it. And then also avoid putting in place policies that are going to get knocked down immediately in a lawsuit. So we're trying to thread that needle, and Sam and I have been working on it now for over a year, but we think we are going to take the next step here in the next few months on a guiding policy for biometrics at the Port of Seattle. Crystal Fincher: [00:27:20] And you talked about looking at limiting the information that you're sharing with federal immigration agencies. Dow Constantine previously signed an order basically amending lease practices, wanting to ban flights of immigration detainees chartered by ICE. Is that something that the Port is doing, can do, will do in the same vein? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:27:54] We have never had a charter flight like the ones that were leaving King County Airfield, or at least certainly not during the time that I was there. And when those flights were happening out of KCA, and I believe out of Yakima, we immediately went to staff and said - I went to staff and said, "Is this occurring at SeaTac unbeknownst to the Commission? And what can we do to stop it?" And we were given a set of kind of legal parameters and told that should it ever, should we ever be requested, you will know. And so far we've had to avoid that. The good news is Biden won. And our federal liaison, our liaison to the federal government has been working on what it looks like now in a post-Trump world. For me, the real concern becomes - what happens when the federal government is no longer of a mindset that this kind of in-the-dark-of-night flight shouldn't be happening. And so we do need to make sure that we put policies in place that avoid that kind of concern. There are still instances where - well, I shouldn't say that - the most recent instance I heard, of that kind of use of charter flights, was in Yakima, but it's been probably six months since I've been briefed on that. Crystal Fincher: [00:29:27] Would you support banning that type of use? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:29:32] If we could put a moratorium on those flights, absolutely. Crystal Fincher: [00:29:37] I suppose looking ahead - we have a couple minutes left here - just in terms of, looking forward, certainly you're making your case to the voters again right now about why you should be re-elected. What might be flying under the radar right now that you think is really important for voters to be considering as they look at all of these Port races? Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:30:02] Yeah. I would ask voters to think about who's bringing ideas to the table that are going to - I think about it, the three Es. So economy, equity, and environment. Who's bringing ideas to the table that are really going to move the needle in those areas? And so we are in a moment at the Port and in the port ecosystem where we really need to get economic recovery right. And just increasing top line revenue is not a good metric. What we really want to be looking at is how many family wage jobs have we preserved or created as a result of our economic development policies. So that's key. The second one is how are we addressing environmental justice at the Port of Seattle? And as I was saying earlier, I don't believe that it's a trade-off anymore. In fact, I believe that those agencies, cities, regions that are embracing industries prepared to take action on climate are the ones that are going to get that first mover advantage and be out ahead as the new clean energy economy really takes root. And an example that I've been working on for the last year or so is the development of renewable offshore energy. So the Pacific Coast has historically not been an area where there's a lot of renewable energy created offshore, but we're going to catch up. And particularly now that President Biden has devoted so much energy to offshore wind in particular. It really started in Europe and has been very successful there, Asia not far behind. Now the East Coast of the United States is developing significant wind farms. And the next is going to be the West Coast. We have some unique challenges because the Pacific is very deep. It drops off really quickly. And so our wind turbines are going to have to float. But they're also going to be enormous. And if my math is right, one of these enormous wind turbines will produce sufficient energy to power all the homes in Edmonds, for instance. And the Port of Seattle has some unique opportunities to be a part of that supply chain, which would mean tens of thousands of union jobs on our waterfront could potentially be activated by the development of that advanced manufacturing, assemblage, and the servicing of these offshore wind farms. And so that kind of idea, we need somebody to build the coalition and get that work done. And so that's my biggest project for the next four years - is how do we bring that part of the green economy to fruition here in Seattle because it'll mean jobs for 50 years, at least. And it's the kind of work that will replace the fossil fuel economy and move us towards diminishing greenhouse gases and local air pollution. And I also think it's just a really fun project to work on. So it's a question I ask of everybody who's seeking my endorsement. What are you doing to advance that kind of project for our region? Crystal Fincher: [00:33:14] Well, certainly exciting to look forward to - certainly the kind of innovation and direction we need to be moving towards, in order to make sure that as you said, this rising tide can lift all boats here in our region. So thank you so much for joining us today - sincerely appreciate it. Commissioner Ryan Calkins: [00:33:32] Thank you so much, Crystal. It's been a pleasure. Crystal Fincher: [00:33:36] Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks. Our chief audio engineer at KVRU is Maurice Jones, Jr. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. 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 in "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our mid-week show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full text transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced during the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

It's Cluster of Symbiotic Markets! week on Public Power Underground! Naming for this week's episode came from a wonderful interview of The Energy Authority's (TEA) Director of Power Trading - West, Tu Phan. We also got a double-feature interview with Kurt and Austin from Northwest River Partners, and continued our series of interviews by Public Power Underground's Special Salmon War Correspondent, Matthew Schroettnig, this time touching base with Northern Wasco County PUD's Roger Kline about the future of the federal system and Public Power Council's Blue Sky initiative. 01:43 - Arin Reports; 04:40 - TEA's Tu Phan joins to talk markets (and also talk NFTs and NBA Top Shots); 17:05 - More about NFTs (definitely too much about NFTs); 18:41 - Seattle City Light's microgrid test bed; 19:22 - Northwest River Partners double-feature where we talk to Kurt Miller and Austin Rohr; 30:02 - Distribution Systems increasingly at risk for cyber attacks; 32:16 - Updated Genesis Forecast for Federal Hydro-generation; 33:56 - A shareable article about snow's impact on the region that is accessible and fun even for people outside our industry; 34:58 - Matt Schroettnig interviews Roger Kline about the future of the federal system and PPC's Blue Sky initiative; 52:13 - Correcting the record from last week, w/ some Charging Speed Fee promo Public Power Underground, it's work to watch. Public Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts. to sign up for the newsletter visit our substack at publicpowerunderground.substack.com.

In the latest episode of Public Power Now, Debra Smith, CEO and General Manager of Seattle City Light, discusses her current priorities, the utility's reliability strategies and what advice she would give to women who want to pursue leadership positions in public power.

Seattle City Light hired 10 women for the first time in the 1970's and fired them because of rampant sexism.  It ended in a 7 ½ year legal battle for reinstatement of the women workers. We go to the Melbourne launch of Ellie Belew's book High Voltage Women, published by Red Letter Press, which tells the story of these heroic women workers.

Season two of Grid Forward Chats kicks off with special guest host and a former guest Debra Smith, general manager and CEO of Seattle City Light, in discussion with Paula Gold Williams the President & CEO of CPS Energy in San Antonio Texas. As these two municipal power leaders talk, they cover various topics around the acceleration of innovation on our grid, including as Paula puts it how to "blend the tried and the true with the new.” We hope you are inspired by the authentic leadership both Paula and Debra bring to their organizations and the practical ideas they share for how we can progress our energy systems to meet rapidly evolving changes. Produced by Grid Forward.

Seattle City Light was using the same software that was notoriously hacked by foreign agents. It's the same hacked software that the Department of Homeland security was using.

Seattle City Light was using the computer software that's been widely infiltrated by hackers. But utility officials say its network remains secure.

Sloan Ritchie's firm Cascade Built has delivered around 100 units of comfortable, healthy, and energy efficient multi-family buildings in Seattle, and has 200 more in their pipeline. Sloan talks about learning through mistakes and his journey to combining energy efficiency, financial returns, and quality housing. We also explore a new Seattle City Light program that helps solve the split incentive and rewards holistic, integrated design and operations.

“Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 2 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan continue their conversation about Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information or to buy the book ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew, go to www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comment: Reagan was right! #LaborRadioPod

“Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 1 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan examine Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information or to buy the book ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew, go to www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comments: > Why is the nation a barrel and the people considered fish? > Why is the nation considered co-dependent? #LaborRadioPod

Seattle City Light is shutting off power in my building for the rest of the night #quarantineglamour - so our full episode will be released tomorrow. In the meantime, enjoy our new segment, Mitch Monday Minute, where we rant about how awful Mitch McConnell is - but just for one minute!    - www.feministswithoutmystique.com  Support us on Ko-fi!  Twitter: @fwmpodcast  Instagram: @feministswithoutmystique  Facebook: facebook.com/fwmpodcast  Email: feministswithoutmystique@gmail.com

The Seattle area was one of the earliest communities to have to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. We talk with Debra Smith, CEO and general manager of Seattle City Light, about the work that utility is doing to take care of its customers, how it is positioning its system for future grid modernization efforts, how electrification efforts may be impacted, the role that resiliency will play ahead, and much more. Produced by Grid Forward.

Seattle City Light has started the process of relicensing three large dams in the North Cascades that supply the utility with about a third of its power. The utility will go through a detailed federal process over the next five years, to meet regulations to keep operating the 100-year-old Skagit River Hydroelectric Project. The current license was enacted in 1995 and expires on April 30, 2025.

The British Columbia government has stopped all logging in a Canadian part of the Skagit Valley, which is part of a major salmon producing stream for Puget Sound. The area is known as the “Donut Hole,” or Silverdaisy, and was an unprotected area of land between Manning and Skagit Valley Provincial parks, which are on the Canadian-U.S. border. In making the announcement, the B.C. government suspended all licenses to harvest timber in the 14,332-acre area. Doug Donaldson, British Columbia’s forests minister, says the government will transfer logging rights to another area of the province. "While we are committed to conserving the environment for future generations, we also need to protect forestry jobs as well,” Donaldson said. “To do this, we've been working with the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy to secure access to new harvest areas.” A stream near the area feeds into the Skagit River, which is a major source of salmon for Puget Sound. The area also is home to endangered wildlife, such as grizzly bears and spotted owls. The announcement does not cover mining interests in the area. Possible sale or transfer of those rights are being negotiated with relevant mining companies. Skagit Valley Provincial Park itself was created when Seattle City Light canceled construction of the High Ross Dam in 1984. In return, British Columbia agreed to sell power to Seattle, to compensate for what the hydroelectric dam would have generated. In a statement, Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan applauded the announcement, saying she will continue to advocate for total protection of the area from any future mining exploration. One of the companies that own mining rights in the area is Imperial Metals. In 2014, a dam holding back mine tailings ruptured near Mount Polley, sending more than 6 billion gallons of mining waste materials into Quesnel Lake.

Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 1 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan examine Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information or to buy the book ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew and history, go to www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comment: Different techniques of voting suppression was huge during the 2018 elections and are still happening today.

Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 2 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan continue their conversation about Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information or to buy the book ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew, go to www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comment: Which party would benefit if voting was mandatory?

This week is the last part 3 of episode 90 with amazing Sheila Delaney Duke. A beautiful person in and out! Full of energy and spark. We had a very rich and deep conversation and that is why you will have the opportunity to hear her four parts, two full hours.  Don't forget to send me your feedback and comments about my conversation with Sheila Delaney Duke or any other episode. Hope you will follow her episode 90 with multiple parts starting this Wednesday 13th, November 2019. Some topics that we touched upon: - How can you suspend your disbelief? - The importance of listening? - How can we encourage and create space in our communities, our schools, our neighborhoods, our friendships, for other faiths, ethnicities, and diversities? - How to heal through our stories? - How to change your story? Going through semantics and content. - Is there a new way of being? - Emotional fluency? Being able to distinguish our emotional frequencies? Some more questions and issues we touched in this episode: How to listen with an open heart and not just your ears What is your spiritual journey? Is there one? Do you believe in prayer and do you have a prayer ritual? Is going to your worship place painful in any way? Do our egos come in the way of our human experience? Comments? What exhausts you? What medicine do you offer the world? What type of conversation do you enjoy? Get to Know Sheila, Your Co-Creator in the Coaching Experience Expanding Mastery Coach, Speaker, Facilitator Sheila is a student of the human experience in all of its complexity. Madly in love with our creative, wandering, triumphant, ingenious, flailing, trying, stumbling, falling, dust-ourselves-off and go-it-again selves, Sheila is a Guardian and Keeper of what matters most: S he illuminates meaning and purpose where it seems lost, especially in the shadowy, dark, uncertain places so that the best of ourselves and our teams can be reclaimed and empowered. Drawing on tools from diverse areas of study and personal and professional experience, Sheila supports her clients, above all, in mastering emotional fluency so they can do what they do best at the minimal cost to themselves. https://www.deldukes.com/ - Visit her website In her nearly 20 years as an Executive Coach, Sheila has worked with professionals, leaders, business owners, and difference makers who lead with fire, competence, confidence, and clarity, where the margin for error is small. They call Sheila when crisis hits and “the way we've always done it” stops working; She is often called in when other approaches haven't worked. She operates from the principle that transformation does not require a personality transplant, but flows naturally from remembering the best of ourselves and creating opportunities for that to shine. Sheila's business and legal experience supplements her intuition and curiosity to co-create impactful, transformational experiences with her clients. She is a displaced Canadian who grew up in the shadow of the Canadian Rockies, living now in Bellevue, Washington with her teenage daughters, her husband, and one nutty doodle pup. Her client list crosses many industries, in service of strong professionals and leaders committed to leading with mission and heart. Clients include: University of Washington, MICROSOFT, REI, Seattle City Light, Evergreen Healthcare Medical Center, Mount Nittany Medical Center, Obstetrix, Mednax, PCC Community Markets, Whole Foods Market, and Susan G. Komen for the Cure. What her clients say: ‘No matter how chaotic my life felt before getting on a call with Sheila, I left feeling grounded and at ease. Sheila pulls from a wealth of visualizations and practices and knows exactly how to tailor those to our needs and goals.' ~ Business Owner ‘The tougher the situation and the hotter the fire, the better Sheila seems to be… she can single handedly rein-in and redirect a whole executive team of strong personalities going sideways.  I've seen her do it.  She's fearless.'  ~ Hospital CEO Shua - شعا ع  www.lightupwithshua.com - Podcast http://bit.ly/2nc9tZM - Youtube channel https://goo.gl/rf3HQ9 - The Groton Channel http://apple.co/2BteyA3 - iTunes https://goo.gl/dWpvLF - Instagram

This week I am honored to be sitting with amazing Sheila Delaney Duke. A beautiful person in and out! Full of energy and spark. This is her second part. We had a very rich and deep conversation and that is why you will have the opportunity to hear her four parts, two full hours.  Don't forget to send me your feedback and comments about my conversation with Sheila Delaney Duke or any other episode. Hope you will follow her episode 90 with multiple parts starting this Wednesday 13th, November 2019. Some topics that we touched upon: - How can you suspend your disbelief? - The importance of listening? - How can we encourage and create space in our communities, our schools, our neighborhoods, our friendships, for other faiths, ethnicities, and diversities? - How to heal through our stories? - How to change your story? Going through semantics and content. - Is there a new way of being? - Emotional fluency? Being able to distinguish our emotional frequencies? Get to Know Sheila, Your Co-Creator in the Coaching Experience Expanding Mastery Coach, Speaker, Facilitator Sheila is a student of the human experience in all of its complexity. Madly in love with our creative, wandering, triumphant, ingenious, flailing, trying, stumbling, falling, dust-ourselves-off and go-it-again selves, Sheila is a Guardian and Keeper of what matters most: She illuminates meaning and purpose where it seems lost, especially in the shadowy, dark, uncertain places so that the best of ourselves and our teams can be reclaimed and empowered. Drawing on tools from diverse areas of study and personal and professional experience, Sheila supports her clients, above all, in mastering emotional fluency so they can do what they do best at the minimal cost to themselves. https://www.deldukes.com/ - Visit her website In her nearly 20 years as an Executive Coach, Sheila has worked with professionals, leaders, business owners, and difference makers who lead with fire, competence, confidence, and clarity, where the margin for error is small. They call Sheila when crisis hits and “the way we've always done it” stops working; She is often called in when other approaches haven't worked. She operates from the principle that transformation does not require a personality transplant, but flows naturally from remembering the best of ourselves and creating opportunities for that to shine. Sheila's business and legal experience supplements her intuition and curiosity to co-create impactful, transformational experiences with her clients. She is a displaced Canadian who grew up in the shadow of the Canadian Rockies, living now in Bellevue, Washington with her teenage daughters, her husband, and one nutty doodle pup. Her client list crosses many industries, in service of strong professionals and leaders committed to leading with mission and heart. Clients include: University of Washington, MICROSOFT, REI, Seattle City Light, Evergreen Healthcare Medical Center, Mount Nittany Medical Center, Obstetrix, Mednax, PCC Community Markets, Whole Foods Market, and Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Shua - شعا ع  www.lightupwithshua.com - Podcast http://bit.ly/2nc9tZM - Youtube channel https://goo.gl/rf3HQ9 - The Groton Channel http://apple.co/2BteyA3 - iTunes https://goo.gl/dWpvLF - Instagram

“Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 2 Mar 5, 2019 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan continue their conversation about Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information about the book launch of ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew on March 9, other events, and history, go to https://www.solidaritycentennial.com/ or www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comment: Which party would benefit if voting was mandatory? Listen to the program: https://exchange.prx.org/p/268711 
https://exchange.prx.org/pieces/268711-learn-yourself-with-conor-casey-labor-archi/floating_piece

“Learn Yourself” with Conor Casey, Labor Archivist for the Labor Archives of Washington, Ellie Belew, author, and Megan Cornish, retiree from Seattle City Light, Part 1 Interview by Mike Dumovich: Conor, Ellie, and Megan examine Seattle City Light’s Electrical Trades Program and how the first trade’s women were treated as well as the effects of affirmative action and other organizations of the 1970’s. For more information about the book launch of ‘High Voltage Women’ by Ellie Belew on March 9, other events, and history, go to https://www.solidaritycentennial.com/ or www.laborarchives.org or http://www.redletterpress.org/highvoltagewomen.html. We Do The Work Comment: Different techniques of voting suppression was huge during the 2018 elections.

The need for energy innovation has never been more urgent. To effectively reduce climate change, we need to implement new technologies at scale quickly. Yet, the politics and regulations that dictate the energy industry make it incredibly difficult to put new ideas into practice. Despite the challenges around change, the use of solar energy continues to grow as production becomes more and more affordable. So, how do we navigate public policy and continue to innovate in a space where brilliant ideas can take a decade to adopt on a large scale? Connor Birkeland is research fellow working with Seattle City Light through the US Department of Energy Solar Technology Office. He is passionate about creating more effective environmental and energy policy by way of creative thinking and data-driven analysis. Connor has 10 years of hands-on experience working in renewable energy, and he earned his Master’s in Public Policy and Governance from the University of Washington Evans School. Connor has a specific interest in policy analysis, economic modeling and utility management. Today, Connor joins Ross, Christophe and Paul to explore the lay of the land in solar energy. He covers the main drivers of cost in solar, explaining why the industry has been able to scale exponentially in recent years. Connor shares his frustration in working with a public utility, walking us through the pros and cons of regulating the space and the challenges of innovating in such an entrenched industry. Listen in for Connor’s insight around the environmental impact of hydroelectric power and learn how the blockchain might play a central role in energy innovation!   Resources Element 8 Itek Energy The Solar Foundation US Energy Information Administration Georgetown, TX UL 1741 Edward Abbey John Muir Clean Line Energy ASU Decision Theater Order No. 1000 Electric Rule 21 IEEE 1547   Connect with Ross & Christophe Nori Nori on Facebook Nori on Twitter Nori on Medium Nori on YouTube Nori on GitHub Email hello@nori.com Nori White Paper Subscribe on iTunes   Key Takeaways [2:12] Connor’s path to reversing climate change Undergrad in astrophysics (NASA satellites) Solar installations in Colorado Master’s in renewable energy policy [4:24] The current overview of solar energy Drastic changes in last 10 years (price drop) Able to scale exponentially [7:32] The main drivers of cost in solar Soft costs (permitting, customer acquisition, interconnection) Cost reduction of aluminum, glass and PV backsheet [11:35] The life cycle of a solar panel 25-year warranty, rated to last much longer Annual cell degradation rate of 0.5% [14:30] Connor’s frustration with working at a utility Apathy of employees nearing retirement  [15:49] The environmental impact of hydroelectric power Decomposition of trees releases CO2 Dams cause flooding, canyons underwater Prevents breeding and flow of fish [19:58] The challenges around innovating in the energy space 8-10 years for utilities to adopt ideas on large scale None of Clean Line’s HVDC lines built after 10 years Must navigate policy, politics and regulations  [26:02] The pros and cons of regulating utilities Mitigate moral hazard of quasi-monopolies Causes lack of innovation in space  [28:09] The blockchain’s role in energy innovation Facilitates use of tech (i.e.: smart solar inverter) Provides secure communication structure  [31:23] Connor’s take on the future of energy Shift to renewables in light of high risk (e.g.: CA fires)

Are Seattle’s public utilities prepared for the influx of people? Hear from Ray Hoffman, former Director of Seattle Public Utilities, which oversees water, sewage, and solid waste management. In an in-depth interview, he shares which utilities are ready to expand with demand and which utilities concern him. Hear from Larry Weis, CEO of Seattle City Light, share the impact of new development on electricity usage. He also shares what changes have been made in reaction to the population growth and his vision for the future. Through this episode you will have a better understanding of how growth impacts the public utilities and the scalability of these services.

In this episode, we spend a significant amount of time discussing the depravity of humanity and how together, if we have the guts, we can stand up, stand out, and make a difference. But, dealing with corporations is another story altogether. You remember Bella from the previous episode... I met Bella through my friend Eddie. Eddie was hanging out in the CounterCulture Society Mad Lab one day and mentioned, "You know who you need to have on the podcast? BELLA BIAGIO!" I immediately acted like I knew who she was because clearly, she was famous and I was just out of the loop. I gave Eddie some LOR stickers and asked him to give them to her, then immediately Facebook messaged her and introduced myself. Name dropping Eddie of course. Months later we finally got together to have drinks in the Lab, and now I'm in love with my new friend. Bella is Italian, like MOB Italian. Don't fuck with her! She is a petite, but strong, woman, who came out at the age of 18, which was very early back then! She has amazing life stories. Little did I know when Eddie suggested I have her on the show, that she had worked at one of my favorite Seattle Restaurants for over a decade, (Mama's Mexican Kitchen). Which means, I am almost sure we met, but years ago, in my holy asshole days. I would not have left a lasting impression. In other words, assholes are easy to forget. Bella is a performer, with characters such as Coach, Joey, Electra Snow, and Buck Reynolds. (Pictured on the landing page.) I get the feeling that everyone loves her because she cares for and takes care of everyone around her. Even the fuck heads she encounters that she doesn't even know. When I asked Bella for a BIO, here's what she gave me... "Bio like I'm a human trying to be human with other humans, and hopefully, we see that this is just spiritual boot camp, and we all just need to pull our heads out of our asses, get our heads out of our phones and talk to someone? And for the love of God hold on to anyone like grim death that you can relate too...it doesn't happen often." - Bella Biagio GREAT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE FROM BELLA "If people would just stand up for what is right, care enough when things are really out of whack, and say something..." "I just want people to stop thinking of themselves...I can't make it happen cause everyone does it." "Phones are making us so disconnected." "No one has ever died from being uncomfortable." FROM ZAC "The more pain I go through, that I embrace, the more loving, compassionate, open, and inclusive I have become." WE CHAT ABOUT Being questioned about your gender. Coming out of the bubble of religion, culture, long term work, and corporations. The changes in our neighborhood and world. Going through life changes, career changes, mid-life transitions. Vagina washing in the public bathroom! Who does this? Helping humanity by speaking up, saying something, sticking up for others. Vigilante Love Lessons. Addiction to phones and social media. Escaping real life though our phones. The market runs our world. Money makes the world go round. No one is making music anymore; they're just sampling from actual musicians. Are we just getting old? Guns and Bella having a gun pointed at her. There should be more Bella's on the planet and why. Seattle City Light and their battle with THE Bella. The frustrations of communicating with a corporation. Releasing the poison of the American corporation. There is magic when sitting one on one with human beings.   iTunes | Soundcloud | Stitcher | Google Play   JOIN US Join the CounterCulture Society:  http://eepurl.com/bwqMWT Become a Producer:  https://www.patreon.com/losingourreligion Find Out More:  http://www.losingourreligion.org Twitter:  https://twitter.com/LosingRReligion Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/LosingOurReligion Call 'Losers Anonymous' Hotline: 206-395-5608 This Episode's Landing Page: http://www.losingourreligion.org/episodes/2016/8/1/054-vigilante-love-bella-biagio-lgbtq-standing-up-for-what-is-right

Bainbridge Island citizens have the opportunity to own and control its own nonprofit electric utility, as do more than 50 other Washington communities. Consumer owned utilities, from the City of Blaine to Seattle City Light, provide lower cost, cleaner and more reliable power than Puget Sound Energy (PSE). In 2008, Jefferson County (Port Townsend) voted to give electric authority to their public utility district, Jefferson PUD, and buy out PSE.  Today they have their own 100% carbon-free, locally controlled, nonprofit power system. Is it possible on Bainbridge Island?What are the pros and cons?How much will it cost?Who will run it?What about hydropower and droughts?Why not partner with PSE's Green Power initiative? Join us as we answer these questions and more with Jane Lindley and Steve Johnson of Island Power.

Guest Crystal Raymond, Climate Research and Adaptation Strategic Advisor, Seattle City Light, speaks with Diane Horn about Seattle City Light's Climate Change Research and Adaptation Initiative.

Guest David Wilma, former deputy director of HistoryLink.org, speaks with Diane Horn about his book "Power for the People: A History of Seattle City Light", co-authored with Walt Crowley and the HistoryLink Staff.

Guests Pam Burton, President, Solar Washington, and Meg Gluckman, Acting Solar Cities Coordinator, Seattle City Light, speak with Diane Horn about the status of solar energy in the Seattle area and the 2008 Solar Tour.