City Council candidate Jessie Israel is turning into one of this year's major local political stories. The 35-year-old King County Parks employee is taking on a popular incumbent, social justice lefty Nick Licata, who was first elected in 1997.

Now that she's racked up some impressive endorsements—the Seattle Police Officers Guild, the local firefighters union, the Cascade Bicycle Club, the Washington Conservation Voters, and the political branch of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce (a hearty cross-section of liberal and conservative interest groups) —conventional wisdom has her making it through next week's primary and actually giving Licata, who won almost 78 percent in his 2005 election and 77 percent in 2001, a real race.



Challenger Jessie Israel

Israel—who leans slightly tough-guy on public safety (she wants cops in the public schools), supports some blockbuster projects like the $4.2 billion deep bore tunnel and the $200,000 million Mercer plan, and has an urban-green rap on growth and density—has, ironically,  fashioned herself as the establishment candidate to incumbent Licata's outsider.

She's done this by deftly portraying Licata as an obstructionist, labeling him a chronic 'No' vote on progress. When you tally the votes, Licata, actually, is rarely a lone 'No' vote—or even on the losing end at all. Colleagues like Tom Rasmussen, Richard Conlin, Sally Clark, and Jan Drago have all lost more votes than Licata in recent years. For example, Richard McIver was on the losing end of 11 votes in 2008 to Licata's six. And Licata's only been on the losing end of one vote this year.

However, Licata's 'No' vote was on Mercer. And this is what Israel has seized upon. Licata's 'No' votes—as far and few between as they are—are often on the big questions facing the city. In addition to this year's 'no' on Mercer, in recent years, Licata has voted against the mayor's viaduct agenda (the tunnel), against the South Lake Union streetcar, against South Lake Union upzones, and against an earlier Mercer vote.

The theme that Israel has identified here is this: Licata is out of step with progress in Seattle, which mostly centers on transportation and density issues. (Sticking to that theme, Israel has also reminded people—as light rail opened this summer—that Licata was involved with the anti-light rail group, Sane Transit.)

"The larger significant pieces of legislation here are where [Licata's] earned that reputation as an obstructionist...coming out agasint transportation," Israel says. "We have the tremendous job of  taking on growth in next 20 years, and keeping housing affordable, and that's going to depend on a multimodal transportation system and building density in urban centers."

Asked for specific examples, Israel says Licata got in the way on the tunnel project, in "making South Lake Union a walkable neighborhood," and on "making sure we're building light rail quicker than on a 40-year timeline."

In response to Israel's allegations about his votes on to the $200 million Mercer project and the South Lake Union streetcar, Licata says, "This is a classic case of putting all your eggs in one basket. Other neighborhoods—where development is happening, where Jessie lives, in [places like] Ballard, West Seattle, Lake City, South Seattle—are in need of assistance. You can't make a $200 million-plus investment in one neighborhood without impacting other neighborhoods."

Licata also claimed that people (like Israel) who support the Mercer plan "don't know what they're talking about," adding: "Do people even know that it's $60 million short?" (The state did not include Mercer on a list of projects getting federal stimulus dollars earlier this year .)



Incumbent Nick Licata

As for Licata's past opposition to the tunnel, Licata admits he lost that one and says it's time to move forward on other projects. His campaign told us earlier today that Licata will continue to "stand up to  any transit projects we can't afford. He does not want to walk into a massive commitment that will leave future generations indebted."

There are other Licata losing-end 'No' votes, but they don't fit into the "Lesser Seattle" stereotype. In fact, they position Licata as the good government, ACLU, watchdog presence on the council (the very image that has made him so popular): No on the four-foot rule (which would have banned lap dances, and was ultimately overturned by voters); no on surveillance cameras in parks (Licata later got the council to strip the cameras out of the budget); no on the racially charged car impound ordinance (after a successful court challenge, the Council came back and put in protections for poor people); no on a tax break for Nucor Steel; no on the (ultimately unconstitutional) parade and demonstration rules; and no on a charter amendment proposal that didn't include a council reconfirmation on the police chief  and fire chief.

"Why would you elect someone who lives in fear of 'No' votes?" Licata asks of Israel. "If you want to be a successful legislator you can't just go along with the pack. We have enough of that. That's not an independent voice."

Israel says Licata wants to be perceived as the "iconclast Lone Ranger coming to people's rescue, but now that we're pressing him on his record of 'No' votes, he says other council members vote 'No' more often. Well, which is it?"