What would be delightful (so may never occur) is to have Seattle declared its own county like San Francisco. For starters, Seattle wouldn't be almost single-handedly supporting transit for Carnation (for example)
"The county estimates a $60 million shortfall next year; the largest drain would be $47 million from sheriff’s deputies (70 layoffs), prosecutors (36 layoffs), and county firefighters—with potentially dire and obvious ramifications."
Not knowing what these layoffs actually represent as a percentage of service provided it is not "obvious" that these layoffs are "potentially dire" (if that's what you were trying to say (as opposed to potentially dire and potentially obvious)). If this translates to a 5% reduction in service... I can live with that. If it translates to a 40% reduction in service... maybe "dire" is "obvious". Factual content & perspective please...
Make you assumption obvious to us instead of just telling us it is obvious to you.
Suburban and rural politicians scoring points by shitting on the "the big bad scary other" (i.e. the city that is in fact the region's economic engine and net tax donor) is so 1950s-1980s.
Seattle's problem is that even our Democrats put up with and/or partake in it.
Urban Democrats need to draw the line. Withhold support for all of Gregoire's policy priorities (jury's still out on Constantine) until this particular brand of intra-party douchebaggery is put to sleep.
So, let me get this straight: The Republican members of the County Council are floating a proposal whereby the incorporated parts of the county contribute more into the general fund, but the unincorporated parts receive more?
Hm, this sounds vaguely familiar. How does that go again? "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"?
You want to complain, Seattle? Three little letters for you to suck on: CAO. You think this proposal screws you? How about the rural areas getting to tell you urbanites that you can't use 2/3 of your apartment/condo/home? It has to remain open and unused, but guess what? We're still going to tax you on it, because we out in the rural areas want to be able to come ride on our bikes and enjoy the open space on the weekend.
One time my bike broke while in North Bend and I was able to take a couple busses and got off within a mile of my house in central Seattle*. So rural bus service is something that I have benefited from to a very small degree. I've also planned bike rides with rural bus service cutting out dozens of hideous suburban miles.
*For what it's worth, there were about 10 total other riders from North Bend to Issaquah, and it wasn't even a peak time!
Why is anyone trying this bi-partisan crap anymore anyway? It hasn't worked for about five or six years now. Ignore the Republitards, increase the income tax and be done with it.
Also, I really like the idea of Seattle being its own county.
Aw, boo-hoo Mr. developer wannabe, I feel so sorry for your plight, just like I did 15 years ago when I moved away from East King County because the unchecked explosion of suburban development was making it literally impossible to continue maintaining a rural existence. When newbies move into their cookie-cutter McMansions then immediately start complaining about the smell from the dairy farm next door that's been there for 50 some-odd years, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize something is out of whack.
What the CAO does is tell developers hell-bent on paving over the last few acres of rural land, wet lands, working agriculture, etc., in unincorporated parts of the county that building inefficient suburban sprawl miles and miles away from where people work, then forcing them to drive even more tens or scores of miles in pollution-spewing single-occupancy automobiles to get to said work, or even the grocery store for that matter, isn't a very efficient use of limited natural resources.
You want to develop your land - buy in-city and build away.
@16, @17: Sure, sales taxes suck. But getting a county-level (this is a King Co issue, remember) income tax just isn't going to happen, at least not in the short term.
And yet the most important issue for all is building a 5 billion dollar tunnel through a quarter mile of what seems to me like a relatively abandoned downtown:
We'll still own all their water and power.
/stupid liberals
yeah, til they get floated by our taxes. fucking douchenozzles.
@6 ftw. @7 for the America-hating epic fail.
Not knowing what these layoffs actually represent as a percentage of service provided it is not "obvious" that these layoffs are "potentially dire" (if that's what you were trying to say (as opposed to potentially dire and potentially obvious)). If this translates to a 5% reduction in service... I can live with that. If it translates to a 40% reduction in service... maybe "dire" is "obvious". Factual content & perspective please...
Make you assumption obvious to us instead of just telling us it is obvious to you.
You report, we’ll decide.
Seattle's problem is that even our Democrats put up with and/or partake in it.
Urban Democrats need to draw the line. Withhold support for all of Gregoire's policy priorities (jury's still out on Constantine) until this particular brand of intra-party douchebaggery is put to sleep.
Hm, this sounds vaguely familiar. How does that go again? "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"?
Now, where have I heard this before?
One time my bike broke while in North Bend and I was able to take a couple busses and got off within a mile of my house in central Seattle*. So rural bus service is something that I have benefited from to a very small degree. I've also planned bike rides with rural bus service cutting out dozens of hideous suburban miles.
*For what it's worth, there were about 10 total other riders from North Bend to Issaquah, and it wasn't even a peak time!
Needs to be income tax. Try harder, guys.
Also, I really like the idea of Seattle being its own county.
Aw, boo-hoo Mr. developer wannabe, I feel so sorry for your plight, just like I did 15 years ago when I moved away from East King County because the unchecked explosion of suburban development was making it literally impossible to continue maintaining a rural existence. When newbies move into their cookie-cutter McMansions then immediately start complaining about the smell from the dairy farm next door that's been there for 50 some-odd years, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize something is out of whack.
What the CAO does is tell developers hell-bent on paving over the last few acres of rural land, wet lands, working agriculture, etc., in unincorporated parts of the county that building inefficient suburban sprawl miles and miles away from where people work, then forcing them to drive even more tens or scores of miles in pollution-spewing single-occupancy automobiles to get to said work, or even the grocery store for that matter, isn't a very efficient use of limited natural resources.
You want to develop your land - buy in-city and build away.
"Rush hour" 4 pm for second and third avenues:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/47446064@N0…
Third avenue:
A veritable "gridlock"!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/47446064@N0…
I'm thinking a gay panda bear romping on a field of sunflowers ...