City Hall
McGinn Says He'll Veto Panhandling Ordinance, But Council Appears to Have Veto-Proof Majority
UPDATE: Erica has confirmed a sixth likely vote for the panhandling ordinance—Mike O'Brien. It's worth noting that O'Brien is perceived as a tight McGinn ally. McGinn is against the panhandling ordinance.
Mayor Mike McGinn said this morning that he would veto city council member Tim Burgess' proposed aggressive panhandling ordinance if it passes with fewer than six council votes on Monday. (Six votes is a veto-proof majority). "At this point, I do not support the legislation," McGinn said. "The positives don't seem that great."
Yesterday afternoon, the Downtown Seattle Association sent out a letter asking supporters of the legislation to contact council members Jean Godden, Bruce Harrell, Mike O'Brien, and Tom Rasmussen urging them to vote for the legislation, council members they thought may be on the fence.
I did a little vote counting at city hall this morning. Godden said unequivocally that she planned to vote for the panhandling ordinance. "I hate to do anything that would be against free speech, but ultimately, I tend to think that if people are being intimidated, we ought to do something about it," Godden said.
Mike O'Brien also now says he will vote in favor of the ordinance, giving it a probable six-vote supermajority. "I think this is a legitimate issue in Seattle that I think we need to act to address, and the five-point plan council member Burgess laid out is the most thoughtful way of addressing it," O'Brien said this afternoon. "We need to keep a very close eye on this if it passes, and I think it will, to make sure it doesn't get abused."
Rasmussen, meanwhile, said he would oppose the ordinance, and Harrell reportedly plans to vote against it as well. That's two sure votes against the ordinance (Rasmussen and Licata) plus one likely vote against it (Harrell), plus six likely votes in favor (Burgess, Sally Bagshaw, Clark, Godden, Richard Conlin, and Mike O'Brien.
The proposal would ban panhandling at ATMs or parking pay stations, blocking a person's path, using threatening or aggressive gestures, and repeatedly panhandling someone who has already refused to give money. Violators could be subject to a $50 fine and charged with a misdemeanor if they fail to pay.
Mayor Mike McGinn said this morning that he would veto city council member Tim Burgess' proposed aggressive panhandling ordinance if it passes with fewer than six council votes on Monday. (Six votes is a veto-proof majority). "At this point, I do not support the legislation," McGinn said. "The positives don't seem that great."
Yesterday afternoon, the Downtown Seattle Association sent out a letter asking supporters of the legislation to contact council members Jean Godden, Bruce Harrell, Mike O'Brien, and Tom Rasmussen urging them to vote for the legislation, council members they thought may be on the fence.
I did a little vote counting at city hall this morning. Godden said unequivocally that she planned to vote for the panhandling ordinance. "I hate to do anything that would be against free speech, but ultimately, I tend to think that if people are being intimidated, we ought to do something about it," Godden said.
Mike O'Brien also now says he will vote in favor of the ordinance, giving it a probable six-vote supermajority. "I think this is a legitimate issue in Seattle that I think we need to act to address, and the five-point plan council member Burgess laid out is the most thoughtful way of addressing it," O'Brien said this afternoon. "We need to keep a very close eye on this if it passes, and I think it will, to make sure it doesn't get abused."
Rasmussen, meanwhile, said he would oppose the ordinance, and Harrell reportedly plans to vote against it as well. That's two sure votes against the ordinance (Rasmussen and Licata) plus one likely vote against it (Harrell), plus six likely votes in favor (Burgess, Sally Bagshaw, Clark, Godden, Richard Conlin, and Mike O'Brien.
The proposal would ban panhandling at ATMs or parking pay stations, blocking a person's path, using threatening or aggressive gestures, and repeatedly panhandling someone who has already refused to give money. Violators could be subject to a $50 fine and charged with a misdemeanor if they fail to pay.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
