Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, February 25, 2009
City The Brouhaha Over Children's Hospital Continues
Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Tomorrow morning, a lawyer representing the Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC), which claims to represent the interests of every household in the neighborhood, will appear before a city hearing examiner to appeal the expansion of Children’s Hospital. The move has outraged many Laurelhurst neighbors because the LCC is using tens of thousands of dollars, in part paid by membership dues, for an effort they resent. Dixie Wilson filed a lawsuit yesterday against the LCC, demanding that the group disclose its financial statements and other records. I’ve got an article in this week’s paper; in comments, folks are already shaking their fists.
But there wasn’t room in the paper to address another challenge to the LCC. David Miller, a former president of the Seattle Rugby Club who is upset that the LCC pushed to delay new playfields in Magnuson Park, is fighting the LCC’s appeal. The LCC, he argues in a statement submitted Monday, has no legal standing to represent the neighborhood. The LCC has “substantially distorted the community’s interests” and has overestimated the number of households it claims to represent, he says. What’s odd is that Miller lives in north Seattle, not Laurelhurst.
But it’s understandable why people who live in other neighborhoods may find that confronting the LCC is fair game; the LCC has historically involved itself with matters beyond its geographic boundaries. For instance, The LCC has taken positions on projects as distant as the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.
And a few weeks ago, the LCC board of trustees voted to curtail development in the Roosevelt neighborhood, says Jim O’Halloran, the land use chair of the Roosevelt Neighborhood Association. An LCC board member heard that Roosevelt residents are updating the neighborhood plan, but that many neighbors opposed tall buildings on the east side of the neighborhood. The LCC board voted to oppose any buildings over six stories in Roosevelt—a mile from Laurelhurst. “They sort of editorialized a bit ... about adding an absolute limit on what they felt building height should be in the Roosevelt neighborhood,” says O’Halloran. He points out that the Roosevelt Neighborhood Association itself hasn’t taken any formal position on buildings' heights. “It strikes me as odd that they would take such an interest in such a specific topic,” he says.
Something I wanted to include in the article: While the LCC seems a tad persnickety in its fight against Children's, their earlier work wasn't completely misguided. The hospital initially proposed 240-foot towers—which is unnecessarily tall, like a skyscraper, for a low-density neighborhood. But now that the hospital has agreed to 150-foot-tall buildings—which accommodate the same number of sick kids—and made other concessions to the group, the LCC needs to give it a rest.
Meanwhile, the group's claim to represent everyone in the neighborhood is clearly wearing thin. "They sort of portray themselves as the voice of the community," says Dewey Potter, spokeswoman for Seattle Parks and Recreation, who has interacted with the group on issues related to Magnuson Park. "We think it is not the community overall; it is just some individuals."
1
LCC is a pill for sure.
Btw why not have 240 foot tall towers? What's the automatic rejection based on?
That's like 24 stories. That's not that high. We're talking about in a city.
Btw why not have 240 foot tall towers? What's the automatic rejection based on?
That's like 24 stories. That's not that high. We're talking about in a city.
2
240 feet isn't a big deal, especially if it keeps more of their land space open. If LCC wants to keep fighting, then Children's should go back to their original idea.
Childrens has great tree coverage. Smaller towers that stretch out on the ground and surface parking lots eating up those trees are the devil.
Fuck the LCC.
Childrens has great tree coverage. Smaller towers that stretch out on the ground and surface parking lots eating up those trees are the devil.
Fuck the LCC.
3
Why shouldn't LCC weigh in on a zoning issue in another neighborhood that could well set a precedent in theirs?
While the RNA may have not taken a position on specific building heights, I'm pretty sure the citizens who participated in their neighborhood planning process did - and as I recall they set heights mostly at 45', with a few pockets at 65'.
On that note, I'd oppose letting Hugh Sisley build 16 story buildings across the street from Roosevelt High School for the same reasons I was opposed to letting Children's increase their heights to 240' - it's way out of scale with the surrounding area and sets a precedent for substantial upzones in other neighborhoods.
While the RNA may have not taken a position on specific building heights, I'm pretty sure the citizens who participated in their neighborhood planning process did - and as I recall they set heights mostly at 45', with a few pockets at 65'.
On that note, I'd oppose letting Hugh Sisley build 16 story buildings across the street from Roosevelt High School for the same reasons I was opposed to letting Children's increase their heights to 240' - it's way out of scale with the surrounding area and sets a precedent for substantial upzones in other neighborhoods.
4
Fuck the LCC.
(Childrens has insane money, which is just awesome. If I were Childrens, I'd start a decades-long program to quietly buy every piece of property within a half mile that comes up for sale. Then I'd fill it up with Hugh "Roosevelt Slumlord" Sisley's rejected rental applicants. Fuck the LCC.)
(Childrens has insane money, which is just awesome. If I were Childrens, I'd start a decades-long program to quietly buy every piece of property within a half mile that comes up for sale. Then I'd fill it up with Hugh "Roosevelt Slumlord" Sisley's rejected rental applicants. Fuck the LCC.)
6
It's not out of scale. Scale is a set of values you import to reality. It's not an objective reference -- it's just another way for you to say "I hate towers."
16 story buildings or 24 story buildings or 50 story buildings next to a HS is just fine.
It's near light rail. It's a city.
Change. Reset. Reboot.
Little 4 or 6 story buildings near light rail -- what an insane joke.
16 story buildings or 24 story buildings or 50 story buildings next to a HS is just fine.
It's near light rail. It's a city.
Change. Reset. Reboot.
Little 4 or 6 story buildings near light rail -- what an insane joke.
7
@6,
OK, let me get this straight.
The Roosevelt neighborhood has a long and expensive City-sponsored planning process in which they both welcome a light rail station and plan for significant new density around it, but also choose to preserve a certain amount of livability (and sunlight!) in exchange for accepting substantial growth.
This plan meets all of the City's Comprehensive Plan growth goals, and probably has sufficient zoned capacity to meet even Futurewise's most optimistic legislation, and none of that matters because some yobbo like you thinks we have to remake their neighborhood in Chicago's image.
Got it.
Oh, and you'll find that most every area station area along the light rail line is and will remain zoned for 4-6 story buildings, so you might want to get used to the idea that Seattle is going to continue to look like - gasp - Seattle.
I suspect that the Seattle School District is going to have a lot of concerns about zoning changes that would shade Roosevelt HS with a 16-story high-rise, and the lawyers to make sure they are heard.
OK, let me get this straight.
The Roosevelt neighborhood has a long and expensive City-sponsored planning process in which they both welcome a light rail station and plan for significant new density around it, but also choose to preserve a certain amount of livability (and sunlight!) in exchange for accepting substantial growth.
This plan meets all of the City's Comprehensive Plan growth goals, and probably has sufficient zoned capacity to meet even Futurewise's most optimistic legislation, and none of that matters because some yobbo like you thinks we have to remake their neighborhood in Chicago's image.
Got it.
Oh, and you'll find that most every area station area along the light rail line is and will remain zoned for 4-6 story buildings, so you might want to get used to the idea that Seattle is going to continue to look like - gasp - Seattle.
I suspect that the Seattle School District is going to have a lot of concerns about zoning changes that would shade Roosevelt HS with a 16-story high-rise, and the lawyers to make sure they are heard.
8
In traditional Stranger style Dominic has already pushed his values upon us.... "which is unnecessarily tall" ... based upon what other than your personal opinion, Dom?
I appreciate that you are drilling down on this more than the traditional media but nobody asked for your fucking opinion! Post the article objectively then comment with your own opinion.
PS- It's not at all strange that David Miller is not a resident of Laurelhurst. LCC has fought a community resource outside their boundaries. David Miller is a user of these resources who disagrees with their objection and their motives. It would be much more strange if he was a LCC member!
I love what The Stranger covers but hate that hack writers like ECB and DH routinely editorialize without a disclaimer and without, in any way shape or form, backing up their stance.
I appreciate that you are drilling down on this more than the traditional media but nobody asked for your fucking opinion! Post the article objectively then comment with your own opinion.
PS- It's not at all strange that David Miller is not a resident of Laurelhurst. LCC has fought a community resource outside their boundaries. David Miller is a user of these resources who disagrees with their objection and their motives. It would be much more strange if he was a LCC member!
I love what The Stranger covers but hate that hack writers like ECB and DH routinely editorialize without a disclaimer and without, in any way shape or form, backing up their stance.
10
Great logic in this article. The LCC is a bunch of busy bodies who represent nobody. Well, yes 240-foot towers in a single-family neighborhood are a concern, but enough. Give it a rest! These LCCers represent nobody!
Make up your mind. Do they represent a legitimate of concerns, at least as much as the Stranger might grant?
Wow.
Dominic Holden, how about a piece on the lobbyists working for childrens -- except for ECs beloved Peter Steinbrueck who tripped over the ethics laws.
Make up your mind. Do they represent a legitimate of concerns, at least as much as the Stranger might grant?
Wow.
Dominic Holden, how about a piece on the lobbyists working for childrens -- except for ECs beloved Peter Steinbrueck who tripped over the ethics laws.
11
#8 Um, this is a blog, not the news. Since when is anything on the SLOG objective?!? And why would you expect it to be?
12
@8:
You're kidding right? How long have you actually been reading The Stranger? Writers for this rag have been inserting their personal opinions into the stories they cover pretty much from Day One, so it's just a teeny bit late to be getting your panties in a twist over it now.
You're kidding right? How long have you actually been reading The Stranger? Writers for this rag have been inserting their personal opinions into the stories they cover pretty much from Day One, so it's just a teeny bit late to be getting your panties in a twist over it now.
13
@ 11, 12:
Full of shit is full of shit, no matter where it is. In case *you* haven't noticed, this is about the only coverage of this issue anywhere. That is why I read Slog 3-4-5 times a day, every day, and keep coming back.
The P-I will be toast in days, and the times is circling the drain. Don't tell me what we read here isn't news.
Just because *your* standards are low doesn't mean the rest of us will tolerate it.
Full of shit is full of shit, no matter where it is. In case *you* haven't noticed, this is about the only coverage of this issue anywhere. That is why I read Slog 3-4-5 times a day, every day, and keep coming back.
The P-I will be toast in days, and the times is circling the drain. Don't tell me what we read here isn't news.
Just because *your* standards are low doesn't mean the rest of us will tolerate it.
14
Good for Dixie Wilson and others who are ending the anonymity of LCC\Jeanne Hale. Perusal of LCC’s minutes and corporate documents (finally being updated on the web thanks to Wilson) makes it clear that he directors of this group make decision after decision to oppose things all over the region. They never consult the members. Then they say “Laurelhurst” opposes this or that. It is obvious that they only represent themselves. They have been misrepresenting to the community at large that they represent all of Laurelhurst. The way their “membership” works, they do not even know who their “members” are. Incredible. LCC’s comments on anything should be seen for what they are: the comments of a group of eight or nine people. Their credibility is at the level of any other group of eight or nine people.
15
Mr. X above misses the point about LCC taking a stand in Roosevelt. What is offensive about LCC is that it arbitrarily takes stands based on the whims of Jeanne Hale and her tame Board members and then represents it as a Laurelhurst position. Before such a group butts into the business of other neighborhoods, they should hear both sides and do a bit of study. LCC in making this decision, heard from only one side. And blithely voted. They never consulted their members. That is an incredibly egotistical and poor decision making approach. Hale and crew have no business saying they represent Laurelhurst in such decisions. If they want to represent Laurelhurst, then consult with their members before taking positions all over the region.
16
Don't these people have something better to do than file lawsuits against Children's Hospital? There's a depression going on. Maybe actually do something positive for your community.
17
@16,
Fair enough - and if enough people in Laurelhurst have a problem with that (and I strongly suspect that one would find a lot more division over the expansion of Children's Hospital than you would to upzoning a small neighborhood business district to 16 stories), they can show up at meetings, replace the Board, and make their views known.
I think that's called democracy.
Fair enough - and if enough people in Laurelhurst have a problem with that (and I strongly suspect that one would find a lot more division over the expansion of Children's Hospital than you would to upzoning a small neighborhood business district to 16 stories), they can show up at meetings, replace the Board, and make their views known.
I think that's called democracy.
18
Clearly Jeannie Hale's subjects are getting pretty wound up by an existing and growing counterforce in Laurelhurst.
A "community" can't be run by a despot forever.
Once again The Stranger is out in front on a news story that strikes an unpleasant chord with the powers that be.
Well done.
A "community" can't be run by a despot forever.
Once again The Stranger is out in front on a news story that strikes an unpleasant chord with the powers that be.
Well done.
19
Consider this:
Laurelhurst Community Club - Jeannie Hale, President
Northeast Seattle District Council - Jeannie Hale, former co-chair and LCC is a founding member
Seattle Community Council Federation - Jeannie Hale, chair
How many times has the LCC referenced all of the other community groups that agree with it's positions? Might there be some pressure applied to other groups to support the LCC in exchange for LCC'support of their issues. Sure looks like Jeannie is in postion to exort such support. Might that be what's going on when "The LCC board voted to oppose any buildings over six stories in Roosevelt—a mile from Laurelhurst. “They sort of editorialized a bit ... about adding an absolute limit on what they felt building height should be in the Roosevelt neighborhood,” says O’Halloran. He points out that the Roosevelt Neighborhood Association itself hasn’t taken any formal position on buildings' heights. “It strikes me as odd that they would take such an interest in such a specific topic,” he says.
Sure sound's to me like one person is using many platforms to make their views more credible.
Something is very wrong with this picture!
Laurelhurst Community Club - Jeannie Hale, President
Northeast Seattle District Council - Jeannie Hale, former co-chair and LCC is a founding member
Seattle Community Council Federation - Jeannie Hale, chair
How many times has the LCC referenced all of the other community groups that agree with it's positions? Might there be some pressure applied to other groups to support the LCC in exchange for LCC'support of their issues. Sure looks like Jeannie is in postion to exort such support. Might that be what's going on when "The LCC board voted to oppose any buildings over six stories in Roosevelt—a mile from Laurelhurst. “They sort of editorialized a bit ... about adding an absolute limit on what they felt building height should be in the Roosevelt neighborhood,” says O’Halloran. He points out that the Roosevelt Neighborhood Association itself hasn’t taken any formal position on buildings' heights. “It strikes me as odd that they would take such an interest in such a specific topic,” he says.
Sure sound's to me like one person is using many platforms to make their views more credible.
Something is very wrong with this picture!
20
It is time for Jeannie Hale and her hand select, self perpetuating directors to have some respect for the Children’s Hospital Citizens Advisory Committee which met 27 times and heard from all those from Laurelhurst who took their time to come and testify on the Hospital. I was there.
The majority of Laurelhurst residents, who spoke, supported exactly what the CAC recommended – careful expansion of Children’s hospital with substantial mitigation.
If Jeanne Hale wishes to represent “Laurelhurst” then she should drop her appeal against the CAC’s recommendation and get on board with the people in Laurelhurst.
Dixie Wilson has done a wonderful service standing up for the residents of Laurelhurst, who are being tainted by LCC’s misrepresentation of the Laurelhurst community.
The majority of Laurelhurst residents, who spoke, supported exactly what the CAC recommended – careful expansion of Children’s hospital with substantial mitigation.
If Jeanne Hale wishes to represent “Laurelhurst” then she should drop her appeal against the CAC’s recommendation and get on board with the people in Laurelhurst.
Dixie Wilson has done a wonderful service standing up for the residents of Laurelhurst, who are being tainted by LCC’s misrepresentation of the Laurelhurst community.
21
@13:
Of COURSE you'll tolerate it. You're tolerating it RIGHT NOW! When The PI goes down, and The Times goes to a 3 days a week edition, VVM finally gives up the ghost, and Pacific Publishing is reduced to printing one weekly edition of the QueenAnneMagnoliaCapitolBeaconHillTimes, The Stranger will be all that's left.
And anybody who believes journalism is now, has always been, and forever should be pristinely objective hasn't made much of an effort to learn the history of the industry - does the term "yellow journalism" ring any bells?
Of COURSE you'll tolerate it. You're tolerating it RIGHT NOW! When The PI goes down, and The Times goes to a 3 days a week edition, VVM finally gives up the ghost, and Pacific Publishing is reduced to printing one weekly edition of the QueenAnneMagnoliaCapitolBeaconHillTimes, The Stranger will be all that's left.
And anybody who believes journalism is now, has always been, and forever should be pristinely objective hasn't made much of an effort to learn the history of the industry - does the term "yellow journalism" ring any bells?
22
You know, if we just put up a giant wall around Seattle so only the old folks could stay here, and kept away new people, they wouldn't need to expand.
Oh, wait, this isn't Eastern Germany.
Never mind.
Oh, wait, this isn't Eastern Germany.
Never mind.
23
Right on Dewey Potter. I suspect it takes a bit of courage for a public servant publicly to tell the truth about someone like Hale.
You voice, with an example, what is starting to come out. Hale does not speak for Laurelhurst. Indeed watching the Children’s CAC proceedings the majority of residents of Laurelhurst were for what DPD and the CAC recommended.
Hale represents a small segment who are not appealing the City’s actions. That is probably true of many other issues where Hale misled the public as to Laurelhurst citizens views. Kudos to Dave Miller for calling BS and to you for revealing the truth.
You voice, with an example, what is starting to come out. Hale does not speak for Laurelhurst. Indeed watching the Children’s CAC proceedings the majority of residents of Laurelhurst were for what DPD and the CAC recommended.
Hale represents a small segment who are not appealing the City’s actions. That is probably true of many other issues where Hale misled the public as to Laurelhurst citizens views. Kudos to Dave Miller for calling BS and to you for revealing the truth.
24
Good for Miller. LCC (read: Jeanne Hale) is an egotistical tyrant sticking her nose in matters all over the City. She is also very untruthful when she says she represents Laurelhurst. She cloaks herself in a false mantle. She does not consult Laurelhurst residents. She just issues her own edicts in the name of many Laurelhurst people who would be aghast if they knew what she was doing.
All of us in Seattle agree. We met and voted on it. Or more truthfully I met and voted on it, but I feel qualified to speak for the entire City, just like Hale thinks she can speak for all of Laurelhurst
All of us in Seattle agree. We met and voted on it. Or more truthfully I met and voted on it, but I feel qualified to speak for the entire City, just like Hale thinks she can speak for all of Laurelhurst
25
Finally, someone has the chutzpah to go at LCC. Dixie and Dave: good on you. Put your armor on and stay the course.
LCC probably doesn't want any sunlight disinfectant near its financial documents.
LCC probably doesn't want any sunlight disinfectant near its financial documents.
26
As the 'David Miller' referenced in the article, let me take this unique opportunity to correct you -- @8 -- on your assertion that I am a user of Children's resources, (and by implication, have no concern for what happens in not-my-neighborhood).
On the contrary, my family has never had to rely on Children's resources. I am thankful. But the fact that our hospitals (Children's, Swedish, et al) are able to grow should be solace to our community, no matter where we all live.
Should I only be worried about access to healthcare when it effects MY kids? Certainly not.
Should you only be concerned with the availability of recreation facilities when it suits your interests? Of course not.
Should I only worry about the climate for businesses when it effects me? Or should I foster job-creation for others?
These aren't simply matters of building height. They are issues of social justice. And LCC is on the wrong side of FAR too many things.
The fact is, the children in our community are worse-off for the actions of LCC. With less access (directly!) to healthcare, recreation and affordable housing. Add-in the millions (yes) of City dollars consumed by LCC's agenda to "prohibit ALL growth," and it begins to touch even more facets of city living.
I'm not a Laurelhurst resident. I am simply fed up.
If you're concerned in the least about Dominic's fairness, then perhaps LCC is the organization to which you should turn your attention. Anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity can see that this is a rogue organization. It's one thing to be an oligarchy in your own community, but when it spills over to effect the quality (and in some cases, the continuation) of people's lives, then it's time for people to have the huevos to stand-up and call bullshit.
Let's simply look at the facts:
This organization regularly fails to comply with its own bylaws regarding financial records; fails to disclose simple records that are required by state statute; changed its bylaws to avoid direct election by members; lacks any term limits; exercises the right to appoint new trustees without election; possesses no mechanism to terminate or discipline officers; funds the creation of other shell organizations to create a veneer of popular support; holds its substantive meetings in executive session, away from its members; interferes with, (to the point of violating) the integrity of other community council processes; and creates "shadow" organizations to do the things that it can't or shouldn't do.
(Frankly, these people would give ol' Dick Cheney a run for is money.)
If you doubt any - and I mean ANY of these assertions - I would be happy to reference very (very) specific cases for you here.
If you're a Laurelhurst resident, you would likely be outraged that your community has been represented in this way, by your so-called "leaders." It is shameful, and they need to be held accountable.
If you're like me, "just" another resident of Seattle, frustrated by a lack of community amenities (parks, playfields); angered by the waste of City resources; embarrassed that we can't seem to muster what other world-class cities manage; weary of mindless, perpetual process; concerned that the climate for sustainable economic growth has been stymied -- then don't sit on your ass when it comes to people like the LCC.
Enough.
More...
On the contrary, my family has never had to rely on Children's resources. I am thankful. But the fact that our hospitals (Children's, Swedish, et al) are able to grow should be solace to our community, no matter where we all live.
Should I only be worried about access to healthcare when it effects MY kids? Certainly not.
Should you only be concerned with the availability of recreation facilities when it suits your interests? Of course not.
Should I only worry about the climate for businesses when it effects me? Or should I foster job-creation for others?
These aren't simply matters of building height. They are issues of social justice. And LCC is on the wrong side of FAR too many things.
The fact is, the children in our community are worse-off for the actions of LCC. With less access (directly!) to healthcare, recreation and affordable housing. Add-in the millions (yes) of City dollars consumed by LCC's agenda to "prohibit ALL growth," and it begins to touch even more facets of city living.
I'm not a Laurelhurst resident. I am simply fed up.
If you're concerned in the least about Dominic's fairness, then perhaps LCC is the organization to which you should turn your attention. Anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity can see that this is a rogue organization. It's one thing to be an oligarchy in your own community, but when it spills over to effect the quality (and in some cases, the continuation) of people's lives, then it's time for people to have the huevos to stand-up and call bullshit.
Let's simply look at the facts:
This organization regularly fails to comply with its own bylaws regarding financial records; fails to disclose simple records that are required by state statute; changed its bylaws to avoid direct election by members; lacks any term limits; exercises the right to appoint new trustees without election; possesses no mechanism to terminate or discipline officers; funds the creation of other shell organizations to create a veneer of popular support; holds its substantive meetings in executive session, away from its members; interferes with, (to the point of violating) the integrity of other community council processes; and creates "shadow" organizations to do the things that it can't or shouldn't do.
(Frankly, these people would give ol' Dick Cheney a run for is money.)
If you doubt any - and I mean ANY of these assertions - I would be happy to reference very (very) specific cases for you here.
If you're a Laurelhurst resident, you would likely be outraged that your community has been represented in this way, by your so-called "leaders." It is shameful, and they need to be held accountable.
If you're like me, "just" another resident of Seattle, frustrated by a lack of community amenities (parks, playfields); angered by the waste of City resources; embarrassed that we can't seem to muster what other world-class cities manage; weary of mindless, perpetual process; concerned that the climate for sustainable economic growth has been stymied -- then don't sit on your ass when it comes to people like the LCC.
Enough.
28
Everything that David Miller says in his post about LCC is absolutely true. Sadly, I, like many others, have been too intimidated to stand up and speak the truth.
29
What nerve. The LCC has just sent out their annual appeal for "Dues."
For those of you in Laurelhurst, please take note: these are not Dues. You do not have to pay any dues to live in Laurelhurst or to be a member of the Laurelhurst Community Club. These "dues" are a VOLUNTARY CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTION. They are not dues. Did you hear me? Nobody owes dues to the LCC, and paying them does not give you any special right or privilege. Those monies go into the LCC pot and then they do whatever the hell they want with it -- without consulting you, by the way. So don't pay those damn dues! Don't give the LCC one more cent until they have completely fessed up (in a verifiable way) what they do with their money. And then, if you disagree with what they do with their money, then by all means, don't give them any more!
And then next, you need to show up at the Annual Meeting in May (or whenever they decide to hold it) and vote these people out. Be there in numbers and drum these people out. This has all gotten to be too ridiculous for words.
For those of you in Laurelhurst, please take note: these are not Dues. You do not have to pay any dues to live in Laurelhurst or to be a member of the Laurelhurst Community Club. These "dues" are a VOLUNTARY CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTION. They are not dues. Did you hear me? Nobody owes dues to the LCC, and paying them does not give you any special right or privilege. Those monies go into the LCC pot and then they do whatever the hell they want with it -- without consulting you, by the way. So don't pay those damn dues! Don't give the LCC one more cent until they have completely fessed up (in a verifiable way) what they do with their money. And then, if you disagree with what they do with their money, then by all means, don't give them any more!
And then next, you need to show up at the Annual Meeting in May (or whenever they decide to hold it) and vote these people out. Be there in numbers and drum these people out. This has all gotten to be too ridiculous for words.
30
Dominick,
how about a count of all the publicists, consultants, lawyers and even ECB's heart throb, Peter Steinbrueck, who have engineered an astro turft effort to undercut a legitimate community organization?
C'mon, Dominic, report the list and the pay outs....then let's talk democracy, chump.
how about a count of all the publicists, consultants, lawyers and even ECB's heart throb, Peter Steinbrueck, who have engineered an astro turft effort to undercut a legitimate community organization?
C'mon, Dominic, report the list and the pay outs....then let's talk democracy, chump.
31
LCC is a "legitimate community organization?"
Ummm...maybe you haven't been following the news, but this group has been shown to be totally full of shit, and made to look like idiots.
LCC pays people to produce communications, uses paid consultants, and pays for lots of attorneys, so let's not pretend this is a bunch of quaint community do-gooders.
LCC is a "legitimate community organization?"
Ummm...maybe you haven't been following the news, but this group has been shown to be totally full of shit, and made to look like idiots.
LCC pays people to produce communications, uses paid consultants, and pays for lots of attorneys, so let's not pretend this is a bunch of quaint community do-gooders.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (31) RSS