The Mariners are trying to sharpen an obtuse lawsuit to block a Déjà Vu strip club from opening near Safeco Field. The baseball team and Safeco Field are claiming in briefs filed with King County Superior Court that a fenced parking lot, a busy street, a wide sidewalk, and the ball field itself each constitute a “park and open space use.” Under city law, strip clubs must be over 800 feet from a park—but the strip club would be about 400 feet away. The first "park" is the Mountains to Sound Greenway, an unfinished patchwork of trails, which the Mariners argue received parks funding and should provide “a bike and pedestrian trail network that will enable city kids to walk and bicycle safely.” Here’s what that safe area for kids—ahem, park for kids—looks like now:

In other gloriously safe places for kids, the Mariners argue that Edgar Martinez Plaza, across the street from Safeco Field, is “attuned to passive recreation, such as people-watching, sightseeing, and photography.” Behold the park’s natural beauty:

And below, you’ll see Safeco Plaza, which the Mariners say is a park "devoted to recreational, aesthetic and educational and cultural uses."

But the attorney for Déjà Vu, Peter Buck, points out Safeco Field uses the sidewalk for runoff parking for charter buses. “It is hardly a park and open space use when the Mariners use it for overflow parking,” he says. “We think that from the record we can make a pretty compelling case that [these sites] are not permanently dedicated to public parks and recreational use.”

Of course, the Mariners aren’t pushing this because they love parks. The team is attempting to claim moral high ground over stripping. In its petition filed in December, the Mariners said Déjà Vu strip clubs have “adverse impacts repugnant to a family entertainment environment.” Good thing families don’t see that at Sluggers, or the drunken fans in the bleachers.

The Mariners' suit, which will reach a courtroom showdown in two weeks, is appealing a city decision in December to allow the strip club. Under city rules, strip clubs are banned within 800 feet of parks and community centers. But the city found that "Safeco Field is not regulated as a community center under the Land Use Code, nor do the stadium or its associated facilities qualify as ‘public parks and open space.’"

In last week's Stranger I wrote about Michelle McCully, the University of Washington grad student who took the law into her own hands to get her stolen road bike back, stalking her missing property on Craigslist, jawboning authorities in two states into action, and even setting up a Wal-Mart parking-lot sting operation.

Tonight Michelle will be on the radio show Too Beautiful to Live, talking about "her one-woman bike detective agency."

That's 8 p.m. on 97.3 KIRO FM if you want to hear Michelle's tips on thwarting bike thieves—who, I'm told, tend to be more active during the spring and summer months.

The latest person rumored to be entering the mayor's race is former King County Council chief of staff Ross Baker, an unsuccessful candidate for the city council seat vacated by Jim Compton in 2006. (Sally Clark ultimately won the seat). Also rumored to be running: Joe Mallahan, a Wallingford resident and T-Mobile VP.

Meanwhile, Jan Drago, who's retiring from city council this year, says she's still seriously considering getting into the mayoral race. "I'm not going to go on a fool's errand," Drago says, "but there are a lot of people who would like to see a different style of mayor." Drago acknowledges that her differences with the mayor are more about style than substance (although she adds, "I certainly have my differences with the mayor.") "It's the difference between Chicago style and Seattle style. [I can] work together with the council and restore the relationship between the mayor and the citizens." Drago says she's taking "ten days to two weeks" to decide if her candidacy is viable (meaning, presumably: to do a poll).

Property taxes that go toward building and maintaining affordable housing would increase by 61 percent—up to $79 a year—for the average Seattle property if voters pass a proposed housing levy this November. That’s less than the alarmist “nearly double” that the Seattle Times reported earlier this morning before removing the statement from its website.

Mayor Greg Nickels’s proposal would maintain the same level of housing assistance as the previous levy in 2002, he told reporters outside a Wallingford apartment building constructed with levy funds. However, due to increasing construction costs and inflation, this package would costs $145 million (69 percent more than in 2002).

“I am confident we will put it on the ballot and I am confident it will pass,” said Council Member Tim Burgess. The city council will deliberate the proposal and hold sessions for public comment in May. However, Burgess added, “I think there is some sentiment in decreasing” the amount of the levy.

One obvious line item to slash is $9 million for first-time homebuyers. The fund would extend home loans to people making 80 percent of the county median income ($51,200 for a two-person household). I’m all for the housing levy, but, as a renter who cannot afford to buy a home, I can’t justify increasing my rent payments so that other people can buy houses.

The meat of the levy: Four-fifths of the the funds would go toward building 1,670 new apartments by constructing new buildings and restoring old buildings. Adrienne Quinne, director of the city’s Office of Housing, says 55 percent of those new units would be reserved for renters making under 30 percent of the area median income, about $17,000 a year. Most of the remaining stock would be reserved for people making between 30 percent and 60 percent of the area median income. Market-rate units would also be sprinkled into the buildings.

The real question, of course, is whether voters will pass this thing. A press packet included the results of a poll commissioned by the city and conducted by EMC Research. It boasts Seattleites support low-income housing funding “more than ever” by a three-to-one margin. However, that wasn’t a voter poll. The survey interviewed a cross section of Seattle adults, says Julie Moore at the Office of Housing. "We can't do polls of voters because that would be a campaign," she says. But the electorate, on average older and more conservative than the general population, could be less likely to support a levy.

The last housing levy squeaked by in 2002, when Seattle experienced a localized recession, garnering only 54 percent of the vote.

But voters should support this levy for families like the Gilberts. After Vernae Gilbert got out of the Army in 2005, she struggled to take care of her daughter, Natahlia, who has cerebral palsy and needs to be near Children's Hospital. Along with Greg Gilbert, they struggled to make ends meet and care for their daughter, while they lived for five months in a motel on public assistance. Then a housing-levy funded building opened in Wallingford. "If we didn't find this place, I don't know what we would do," says Vernae.

Although Dan wondered if the additional housing stock on the market will lower rental costs, making a housing levy unnecessary. But the lower rates are still unaffordable to people making $17,000 a year. For instance, apartments at the recently finished Leva in Ballard—where housing is in surplus—are going at a discount, but one-bedrooms are still $1,200 to $2,000 a month, far too much for thousands of local workers and families like the Gilberts who need a home in the city .