Jolt
Monday Jolt: McGinn Wins, Seattle Times Loses
Today's winner: Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn.
On a day when King County Executive Dow Constantine came across, once again, as the region's golden boy---Constantine announced a county budget this morning that would, for the first time since 2008, require no cuts to the county's general fund ---Mayor Mike McGinn scored an unexpected win today with his own budget.[pullquote]"This is the first time in the past dozen years, when we've had a budget shortfall, that a mayor hasn't cut human services."—Julia Sterkovsky, director of Seattle Human Services Coalition[/pullquote]
Although McGinn's budget does require $18 million in cuts---to community centers, the city's housing office, the department of transportation, and other services across the city ---it does not, notably, include any cuts to human services, earning McGinn accolades from the same groups that blasted Constantine's budget for including only one-time fixes.
"This is the first time in the past dozen years, when we've had a budget shortfall, that a mayor hasn't cut human services," Julia Sterkovsky, Executive Director at the Seattle Human Services Coalition, said.
Frankly, that is an A+ quote to get on a day when you announce your budget in the middle of a recession.
Today's loser: The Seattle Times editorial board.
The Times , joining with a chorus of neighborhood groups, ran editorial after editorial after editorial slamming the city (and, specifically, Mayor Mike McGinn) for supporting changes to parking rates that included higher on-street meter rates downtown. (Rates in many neighborhoods actually decreased).[pullquote]Instead, what actually happened is that the city achieved its goal of one to two vacant parking spaces per block face and revenues from parking meters downtown went up.[/pullquote]
The detractors argued that having different rates in different areas was too "confusing," that higher downtown rates would prompt downtown shoppers to drive to Bellevue, and that downtown would become an empty wasteland of overpriced parking and vacant storefronts.
Instead, what actually happened is that the city achieved its goal of one to two vacant parking spaces per block face (the level at which drivers can easily find parking but parking spots aren't underutilized), and revenues from parking meters downtown went up.
People are still parking downtown at the higher rates, and that parking is readily available---precisely the goal McGinn and other supporters of the new rates like city council member Tim Burgess said they would accomplish.
On a day when King County Executive Dow Constantine came across, once again, as the region's golden boy---Constantine announced a county budget this morning that would, for the first time since 2008, require no cuts to the county's general fund ---Mayor Mike McGinn scored an unexpected win today with his own budget.[pullquote]"This is the first time in the past dozen years, when we've had a budget shortfall, that a mayor hasn't cut human services."—Julia Sterkovsky, director of Seattle Human Services Coalition[/pullquote]
Although McGinn's budget does require $18 million in cuts---to community centers, the city's housing office, the department of transportation, and other services across the city ---it does not, notably, include any cuts to human services, earning McGinn accolades from the same groups that blasted Constantine's budget for including only one-time fixes.
"This is the first time in the past dozen years, when we've had a budget shortfall, that a mayor hasn't cut human services," Julia Sterkovsky, Executive Director at the Seattle Human Services Coalition, said.
Frankly, that is an A+ quote to get on a day when you announce your budget in the middle of a recession.
Today's loser: The Seattle Times editorial board.
The Times , joining with a chorus of neighborhood groups, ran editorial after editorial after editorial slamming the city (and, specifically, Mayor Mike McGinn) for supporting changes to parking rates that included higher on-street meter rates downtown. (Rates in many neighborhoods actually decreased).[pullquote]Instead, what actually happened is that the city achieved its goal of one to two vacant parking spaces per block face and revenues from parking meters downtown went up.[/pullquote]
The detractors argued that having different rates in different areas was too "confusing," that higher downtown rates would prompt downtown shoppers to drive to Bellevue, and that downtown would become an empty wasteland of overpriced parking and vacant storefronts.
Instead, what actually happened is that the city achieved its goal of one to two vacant parking spaces per block face (the level at which drivers can easily find parking but parking spots aren't underutilized), and revenues from parking meters downtown went up.
People are still parking downtown at the higher rates, and that parking is readily available---precisely the goal McGinn and other supporters of the new rates like city council member Tim Burgess said they would accomplish.
