City Drugs in the Mayor’s Office?
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, actuallythat 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 proposalsone that has startled club ownersis 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 placeyou 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.â 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’ commentsor 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.
Royer didnt know? And he use to live in San Francisco. Or perhaps he knew and didnt want to be caught in a lie.