Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« The Scream Is Back | Drinking with the Portlanders »

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Drugs in the Mayor’s Office?

Posted by on August 31 at 14:52 PM

So, Dan’s sting at Mayor Nickels’s office on Monday has caused quite a stir.

For starters, there’s about 100 comments on Dan’s post about it.

I wanted to respond to a particular comment in the thread in a new Slog post. But before I do that, check this out: I’ve heard that the mayor’s office is: 1) writing this off as a ridiculous Stranger stunt; and 2) saying we’ve lost all our credibility. Oh no, I’ll never get an interview with the mayor again : (

Let’s see. Of course, it was a ridiculous stunt. More like a sting, actually—that was designed, in its very ridiculousness, to draw attention to Team Nickels’s ridiculous nightlife proposal. Thanks to Savage, as everyone now knows, one of Nickels’s dumb proposals—one that has startled club owners—is this unreasonable demand: “1. Security Standards. ii. Drugs. Nightclubs shall prevent patrons from entering a nightclub premises with any illegal drugs.

If a patron is able to sneak in drugs or weapons, the city can shut down the club. The scariest part being, it’s such a loosey-goosey standard, the SPD can pick and choose who they want to shut down. Raid any bar, nightclub, restaurant, coffee shop or Mariners game and search everyone in the place—you will find drugs, every time, on someone. This provision would give the city the ability to shut down any club, any time, whenever they want. Clubs with “problem” clientele or uppity, politically-active owners would be obvious targets.

Credibility? Whatever. Quit changing the topic. The credibility of the mayor’s proposal is the issue. Whether or not the mayor will speak to me again is irrelevant. If you think the mayor returns our calls now when we’ve got questions about his $4 plus billion tunnel plan, forget it.

Really, the only relevant question about credibility is Team Nickels’s credibility…and how much of it they have left with club owners, patrons, and neighbors as they push a bizarre piece of ill-prepared legislation.

Indeed, at the meeting where it was presented to club owners, the Mayor’s point person on this issue, Jordan Royer, kept addressing club owners’ concerns by saying: “Well, that’s how it’s done in San Francisco. I didn’t make this stuff up.” To which offended club owners like Jeff Steichen from the Showbox asked for specific examples of how these rules were carried out in San Francisco. Royer said he didn’t know and would have to look into it. Wait a minute?! The mayor’s office had proposed legislation based on rules that they didn’t even understand themselves. Talk about underwhelming credibility.

As Savage proved the mayor can’t do what he’s asking others to do. Unless the club is wired like the NSA, airport security, the FBI, and your mom, how the hell are clubs supposed to prevent their patrons from bringing drugs in with any certainty?

Anyway, here’s the comment I wanted to respond to…

This was nothing more than a publicity stunt. The Mayor’s henchmen had already agreed to change the language - and Dan knew it. He had two reporters at the meeting, but it didn’t fit their agenda to tell their readers how it really went down.

This is nothing more than a reporter wanting to BE the story instead of reporting the story. Dan may get kudos from his readers, but with those in the know, he (and The Stranger) have lost just about all of their credibility.—Posted by a different tim

Club owner Dave Meinert jumped in before I fired off a comment of my own. Here’s Meinert:

Tim,

You are wrong. The Mayor has still not agreed to change the language, and Tim Ceiss is pressing hard to not change it. But beyond that there is the issue of the whole ordinance, which no matter the exact language, is flawed at it’s core because it basically makes club owners do the work of the Police. And Dan demonstrated how silly this is.

To say this was a publicity stunt is an incredible understatement. It was indeed, and a very funny one that effectively pointed out the ridiculousness of the nightclub ordinance to many people who might not have otherwise paid attention.

We need a serious overall policy in Seattle to deal with and support a vibrant safe nightlife. This ordinance is a joke and lacks political vision and leadership. Even many Mayoral staffers agree there is no need for the ordinance and that it won’t accomplish what the PR on it claims it will. But it will harm the music community and will result in legal businesses being shut down by government because someone doesn’t like the people or music at a club. We’ve seen it happen without this ordinance, and this ordinance will just make it easier. It seems the ordinance is being pushed by someone other than the mayor, who has generally been very pro-music since elected (Vera, AADO, Music Office, supporting Bumbershoott, etc). It is shocking to see such a blatant anti-music community ordinance coming out of his office. Hopefully Dan’s stunt will bring the whole issue to his attention and Nickels will stop this silliness.—Posted by Meinert

Finally, here’s what I said to Different Tim:

The Stranger did have two reporters at the Task Force meeting. I was one of them. Erica C. Barnett, who’s been covering the hell out of this, was the other. There was no indication at that meeting that Nickels intended to change the security language regarding drugs.

I did a long Slog post about that meeting and reported that Jordan Royer, the point person for the mayor, was evasive and unprepared. He inspired little confidence among the club owners that the mayor would even consider the club owners’ comments—or that the club owners would even get a chance to meet again to discuss the legislation.

In fact, I ran into Tim Ceis after the meeting, and he confirmed that the mayor’s office had no intention of convening the task force again.

When those “in the know” post misleading comments, they lose their credibility.

Finally, what I think is actually going on with all this: Nickels is trying to look like a law & order bad ass to old school Seattle voters because he knows that old school Seattle voters are wary of his push for big city density. Mayor Nickels is hoping his assault on nightlife will inoculate him against the charge that he’s abandoning Seattle’s small-town charm.


CommentsRSS icon

Royer didnt know? And he use to live in San Francisco. Or perhaps he knew and didnt want to be caught in a lie.

If the Mayor didn't want to be charged with abandoning Seattle's "small town charm" he shouldn't have attacked the Blue Moon now, should he?

It occurs to me that I'm not sure what their definition of a "club" is, but let's say amplified music. the lobby of the W Hotel is a "club" on weekend nights. I guarantee you that there are people "holding" there. Is the W supposed to strip search everyone who enters the hotel?

What Dan Savage did was fuckin' great. Someone in this town has to stand up for our right to nightlife. Let's get a pack of plastic pistol packin' people to march into city hall and offer the Mayor pot brownies. Maybe then he'll get the point to back off our nightlife, and let the club owners off the hook.

Can't people offer him something other than pot brownies? I hate to say it, be he isn't the svelte, young lesbian he used to be.

Kudos to The Stranger for calling out badly written legislation... but I didn't exactly hear club owners and local music people calling foul when the City basically instituted just such a range of policies on venues that hosted raves. No wonder several all-ages places closed down when they couldn't afford the extra security and insurance.

I would like to formally apply for the job of strip-searching everyone in the W Hotel lobby.

Why Fnarf?

Are they having a Startrek convention?

Josh,

You're mostly right on point up until the last sentence of your post.

Old-school Seattle voters think Nickels' brand of two-faced law and order pandering sucks ass, and people who wonder where the money for infrastructure to support 350,000 new residents (hint - current Seattle resident taxpayers) will come from ain't gonna give him a pass for strong-arming the Blue Moon (or the Alki Tavern, for that matter)...

Oh, goodie, it's stalking me everywhere now. Hi, Paul! Anything on your mind?

Noticed the Weekly had a lot of comments on its jealous little blog piece - and took them down! Real chicken shit.

Paul:


"Star Trek" is two words. And the convention is NEXT weekend at SFM. I'll let you know if I see FNARF strip-searching there, but I doubt it. Those Klingon chicks are REALLY touchy.


Raid any bar, nightclub, restaurant, coffee shop or Mariners game and search everyone in the place—you will find drugs, every time, on someone.


I can't imagine something like this would even be legal: how could SPD demonstrate just cause to detain and search every single patron in a club, even if they happen to witness one or two individuals using on the premises.


And if they ever DID, THAT would be the time for Dan to return to City Hall, cookies in-hand. After all, what's good for the goose and all that...

It's so funny to see dozens of people attacking Dan's stunt while missing the point completely. It was done to prove a point: that the Mayor cannot realistically expect clubs to monitor all illicit activity, if City Hall itself can't monitor someone walking in with a weapon and drugs.

COOL STUFF! Rock on, Dan! Just had to get my ya-yahs in... Invasive journalism at its best! I’m hoping the dailies pick up this story. Bet they wont.

Philip Dawdy, Seattle Weekly writer and blogger, took harsh issue with Dan Savage on Seattle Weekly’s blog earlier today for Savage’s stunt involving pot cookies, a toy gun, and city hall. That, given the antagonism between the two papers, might have been expected. What wasn’t expected, and indeed might be unprecedented, was how Seattle Weekly reacted when, after exchanging even harsher words with a reader over the blog entre, someone at the Weekly decided to delete the whole exchange: not only the reader’s remarks, but Dawdy’s also. (By chance, this reporter, was able to cut and paste those exchanges before they dissapeared. See below). This might be the very first time any newspaper, say nothing of one belonging to the “alternative press” has undertaken such a drastic measure. And it’s probably a fair to say it’s the first time a writer for a fairly well-respected publication that has New Yorker-of-Seattle aspirations, calls one of its readers/commentors a “douchebag.”

Indeed, even a mainstream daily newspaper, like the Sacramento Bee, would consider such action a case of blatant censorship. Tony Marcano, the Bee’s ombusdman, wrote about the huge controversy surrounding the paper’s blog when it was discovered the author of the blog was subject to some slight edits.

Just so the Weekly knows, there’s a new book out by Reporters Without Borders called the Blog Censorship Handbook. The book instructs journalists how to cicumvent blog censorshop in countries like Iran and China, where such action routinely takes place.

Here are the exchanges. The first one is following the rebuke by Dawdy:


----As Dan's PR director, we thank you for taking the bait. It was a stunt to get people to notice and write about Dan and The Stranger. And you did. The details don't matter much, it's the reactions that count, although the story may, as you indicate, result in new security at City Hall - which apparently it should - and for which Dan can be credited. Thanks again for spreading the word!
Posted today at 10:24 am by Menance
"
----You see, Savage used the power of the press (he was playing reporter when he visited da' mayor's office, how fucking quaint!)
"
Wait ... did Savage flash a press pass or introduce himself to security as a "reporter?" That's not mentioned in his article.
If he didn't — and merely entered as a moderately famous local character — does this argument still apply? Do tell.
Posted today at 11:07 am by h0rati0sanzserif

----To Menace: Just trying to return the favor after Dan's "Ask a Mexican" post on Slog.
Posted today at 11:35 am by Seely

----"I care about what I put into my body."—Savage
"So I skipped the open-air drug market in the vicinity of City Hall. Instead, I scored some quality pot from a quality source and turned it over to a quality baker. My buddy the baker reduced the pot in oil and then, using a box of Ghirardelli chocolate chip cookie mix, whipped me up a huge batch of insanely powerful pot cookies."—Savage
High Quality drugs are better than cheap ones logic..OK, riiight.

"It wasn't a real gun (I'm afraid of real guns), but a really scary-looking prop gun."-Savage

Last I knew, when students in schools bring ANY thing that even remotely resembles a weapon into a school building or onto a campus, they will be expelled.
Or, if a cop saw a person with a realistic prop gun, they would have aimed a real one at the person, and told them to drop the weapon.

To make a point to the Mayor this way, not only sounds Junior High, it does not sound like a credible, intelligent journalist at work.
I hope Savage does not try to prove any points at an airport anytime soon.
Posted today at 11:42 am by steph

----oh hi horatio or whatever the hell your handle is: you don't check in with security at city hall, you check in with a receptionist. if you are known toi them to be a press person or you have your little old press badge in you go.
Posted today at 11:55 am by Dawdy

----Dawdy (or whatever the hell your handle is):
Uh, you didn't answer my question. Was Savage known to be a press person or have "a little old press badge?"
Posted today at 12:43 pm by h0rati0sanzserif

----Dawdy's my name douchebag. Savage is of course widely known in Seattle as a press person. Any otehr questions, Mr. Sanserif?
Posted today at 12:58 pm by Dawdy

----Douchebag? Is this the new, erudite New Yorker-styled Weekly speaking - or am I back reading my high school newspaper? If you can't write, try at least to have a little class.
Posted today at 1:39 pm by Menance

----No, Menance, douchebag is my erudite new jersey-styled way of speaking. i can write better than you likely every have in your life. so go away now little menance.
Posted today at 2:17 pm by Dawdy

Mr. Savage's story about his entry into City hall with pot cookies and a toy gun is incredible.I feel he is definitly not credible. His mention of adopting a son and plugging his book is totally out of context and shameful.This is journalism? This rang many alarms and whistles for me.Tell me after you left city hall did you go and pick up your child from day care or school "stoned out of your mind"? Did you leave your red bike bag and the toy gun out when you got home for your child to eat and play with? Your are a CLUELESS imbecile! So, let me give you a HINT....ever hear of Department of Child Protective Services. DAAA.

Oh give me a break, Dan's action was nothing ore than a childish stunt.

Quite frankly, I'd like to see the Mayor play hardball with Dan.


It seems to me that Dan's behavior, at the very least, calls for a review as his abilities to act as a proper role model as a parent:

A.) Smuggling in weapeons (whether they be a toy version or not) past security and into Seattle City Hall, and then publishing an article in which he alleges doing this.

B.) Openly admittding drug use, offering the same to City officials as well as admitting that your kid came to your work (at your invitation and scheduled time) and you were stoned out of your mind.

Seriously Dan, 3 pot cookies and you are stoned (not high, you ARE fucked up) for a bare minimum of 12 hrs. In fact, anyone who has ever eating THC knows that this is the one flaw in your article, you allege that each time you ate a cookie, you then got immediately higher and higher. How is that possible as the THC has to work tself into your blood stream and that takes a good deal of time?

You are right about one thing, In your article, mentioning that drug use in front of your kids is not cool.... I'd suggest you follow your own advice.

Seriously Dan, you were blessed enough to have been given the gift of becoming a parent. However, these actions are not the act of a responsible adult.

Your behavior should be called into question

If a "publicity stunt" is what's necessary to make it utterly clear what a fucking stupid idea the Mayor's proposal is, then so be it.

Give me a fucking break....

This was totally irresponsinble.

So if someone does not like an article the stranger prints or one of their political endorsements, it would be permissible to enter their offices and confront them?

How about a brandishing a gun replica that just does not have the working parts of a real gun? Technically, it would just be a very realistsic toy.

Where does one draw the line?

Why not, just shits and giddles, get high on crystal meth for 3 days straight, storm the Strangers office (announce, hey I'm high on crystal, proceed to walk about the strangers offices with the replica in hand) and then ask where the writer and Dan are?


Think they would have a sense of humor about that? Think for one second people would not be scampering for cover and calling the police?

Considering the frequency in which violent attacks happen in the workplace, with guns, The SPD and the Mayors office should be going after The Stranger and taking this very seriously. Quite Frankly, the rest of the real reporters in this city should be coming down on you idiots as well.

Paul, as a 20 something young professional whose parents regularly smoke pot, I can tell your argument that pot-smoking = bad child rearing is fucking ludricrous.

Paul in Seattle,

You seem pretty dim.

You write: "So if someone does not like an article the stranger prints or one of their political endorsements, it would be permissible to enter their offices and confront them?"

Dan Savage's stunt wasn't just a random confrontation over his disagreement with the Mayor. His stunt highlighted exactly why he disagreed with Nickels—and, I think, proved that the Mayor's policy is ill-considered. Seems legit to me.

Your comments are consistently weird and bitter. Seems like the Stranger should worry about you showing up with a gun.

I think the Stranger Election Control Board should get high (on various things) and brandish weaponry at all potential candidates for office.

I mean, do you want to see someone elected, and only *then* find out they can't handle pressure?

Back to the real issue at hand - the Mayor's nightlcub ordinance. I am on my way to the Mayor's Arts Awards. One of the recipients this year is Reggie Watts. The first time I saw Reggie perform was at a small restaurant bar named Flowers in the U-District. He had recently left school at Cornish and was earning money and his chops gigging around town wherever he could. I saw him one night playing electric piano and singing. He was brilliant and spent many years performing at these types of spaces while he was becoming an internationally known performer. The nightclub ordinance will force this very type of venue to stop having music. These small venues support new, experimental and long time musicians trying to support themselves. But music is not the main draw of these spaces. These spaces are typically restaraunts with bars that have music on off nights. Under the Mayor's new ordinance they will be labelled 'nightclubs', be forced to pay for a permit and required to operate under some ridiculous standards. So instead of getting the permit, they will decide not to have music and Seattle will lose a whole level of venue that creates some of it's best artists - one of who ironically is receiving an award from the Mayor today.

There is a new bar opening in Ballard whose owner has already decided not to have Dj's so they aren't classified a nightclub. If the ordinance passes, expect more of the same, and watch one of the best things about the city slowly erode while our downtown becomes nothing more than a shopping mall with high-rise condos.

It's really too bad the mayor wasn't around to recieve a cookie. He and Dan could have had it all worked out before press time and maybe instead of talking about shutting down nightclubs, they could have been talking about opening up "coffee shops".

Hey, a guy can dream, right?

Seattle Weakly is racist and practices censorship. Dan Savage is our local hero for walking into the Mayor's office high and packin' heat.


Saving Seattle's vibrant nightlife is the most important issue in our world today. It's worth risking getting killed for by carrying a plastic gun.

I know for a personal fact that, at one time, Greg would have gladly ate that cookie.

But he'll never admit that nowadays.

Pot-filled rice cake and a diet soda, perhaps?

Jesus! And I thought I was dense! I just read through a good chunk of the blogs on the topic of Dan’s ‘balls busting’ venture. Does the stupidities posted reflect the mentality of the local population? While I certainly wouldn’t put Dan up there with god, what he did took balls. As for Nickels, he’s feeling the squeeze of change in a community that doesn’t like change. I don’t know if he can lead Seattle into progressive change unless he’s willing to get ‘old school voters’ to recognize that ‘small-town’ feel in a growing city means entropy and decay. Does Nickels have the balls to do that? He won't even take the cookie he wants.

Next up--

Dan enters a crowded movie theatre and, to show us how inadequately prepared they are for an emergency and to make some sort of vague, semi-stoned statement about freedom of speech,

yells "fire!"

Oh, the giggles we will have.

Hearting Dan so much,

Sam

Sam doesn't like Dan. Please make a note of it.

Sam Chanderson--undisputed king of sarcastic wit. My aching sides...

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).