Mallahan Spokeswoman: Joe Didn't "Come Out Against" Parking Tax

So where does he come out against the parking tax here? Not seeing it.

So where does he come out against the parking tax here? Not seeing it.

She calls to deny that he’s against it, but can’t say if he’s for it? How utterly bizarre.

He thinks the tax is too high, but he’s not against it?

She calls to deny that he’s against it, but can’t say if he’s for it? How utterly bizarre.

He thinks the tax is too high, but he’s not against it?

And Erica why didn’t you include the questions?

And Erica why didn’t you include the questions?

“I’m not saying we can get there. … “

Is Mallahan implying we need to be more like Bellevue and Redmond? I’m glad to know Joe will be in there fighting every day to make Seattle a little more pleasant for cars. When he drives 6 blocks to work, he probably wishes there was a drive-thru Starbucks or two like in Superblock City.

“I’m not saying we can get there. … “

Is Mallahan implying we need to be more like Bellevue and Redmond? I’m glad to know Joe will be in there fighting every day to make Seattle a little more pleasant for cars. When he drives 6 blocks to work, he probably wishes there was a drive-thru Starbucks or two like in Superblock City.

Boring day of he said/ she said today.

Boring day of he said/ she said today.

I heard that KUOW interview with Mallahan. The very paragraph you’ve highlighted here was the moment I realized that this moron is totally unqualified to be mayor of Seattle.

I heard that KUOW interview with Mallahan. The very paragraph you’ve highlighted here was the moment I realized that this moron is totally unqualified to be mayor of Seattle.

I’m SO CONFUSED … but I think the Mallahan camp is EVEN MORE CONFUSED.

The visiting suburbanites (who are apparently more important to satisfy than funding our transportation infrastructure) don’t pay the tax themselves. The commercial parking tax is paid by commercial parking vendors. The only way visiting folks “pay” the tax is if the parking vendor has chosen to pass on some of the cost to the parking consumer. If they choose to park in city spots they’re not affected.

So…Joe’s said the parking tax is too much. He said it more than once (one of my friends said he talked about it at a SE event).

So… no matter what, considering the fact that they want to greatly increase it to pay for the tunnel, it sounds like Joe wouldn’t support it. But obviously he doesn’t know where the cashola for the viaduct is supposed to even come from.

One thing’s clear: Joe doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

I’m SO CONFUSED … but I think the Mallahan camp is EVEN MORE CONFUSED.

The visiting suburbanites (who are apparently more important to satisfy than funding our transportation infrastructure) don’t pay the tax themselves. The commercial parking tax is paid by commercial parking vendors. The only way visiting folks “pay” the tax is if the parking vendor has chosen to pass on some of the cost to the parking consumer. If they choose to park in city spots they’re not affected.

So…Joe’s said the parking tax is too much. He said it more than once (one of my friends said he talked about it at a SE event).

So… no matter what, considering the fact that they want to greatly increase it to pay for the tunnel, it sounds like Joe wouldn’t support it. But obviously he doesn’t know where the cashola for the viaduct is supposed to even come from.

One thing’s clear: Joe doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

ECB, this is a stretch at best, a willful distortion of the truth at worst. Instead of writing about baseless inferences, perhaps you could

ASK McGINN THE TOUGH QUESTION YOU’VE ALWAYS AVOIDED:

How are you going to pay for your non-tunnel viaduct replacement proposal?

Mike McGinn has financed 0% of his multi-billion dollar idea.

Erica, show me the money.

ECB, this is a stretch at best, a willful distortion of the truth at worst. Instead of writing about baseless inferences, perhaps you could

ASK McGINN THE TOUGH QUESTION YOU’VE ALWAYS AVOIDED:

How are you going to pay for your non-tunnel viaduct replacement proposal?

Mike McGinn has financed 0% of his multi-billion dollar idea.

Erica, show me the money.

Prog Prism,

not that I’m a huge fan of McGinn but you do realize that the majority of the surface improvements that he’d want would be done even if we bore the tunnel? And that the state ain’t paying for all those surface improvements even if they get their tunnel.

As for this flap…I isn’t good when your campaign “clarifies” by not having a position.

Prog Prism,

not that I’m a huge fan of McGinn but you do realize that the majority of the surface improvements that he’d want would be done even if we bore the tunnel? And that the state ain’t paying for all those surface improvements even if they get their tunnel.

As for this flap…I isn’t good when your campaign “clarifies” by not having a position.

@10 Yes, I am aware of that. More to the point though, the State money is paying for the tunnel and the City money will pay for the surface streets. McGinn is being a hypocrite. He’s critizing Mallahan for not have a financial plan for something he simply feels is inevitable, while at the same time McGinn advocates for a plan that is ENTIRELY unfunded. I guess one of McGinn’s unpaid staffers needs to hold him accountable to his own policies and press releases.

@10 Yes, I am aware of that. More to the point though, the State money is paying for the tunnel and the City money will pay for the surface streets. McGinn is being a hypocrite. He’s critizing Mallahan for not have a financial plan for something he simply feels is inevitable, while at the same time McGinn advocates for a plan that is ENTIRELY unfunded. I guess one of McGinn’s unpaid staffers needs to hold him accountable to his own policies and press releases.

Here’s the entire transcript.

Kind of important to understand the answer in context to the question:

From the KUOW transcript:
“30:35 Kevin in Greenwood asks if Mallahan is willing to increase taxes rather than cut programs and are you willing to further increase parking rates downtown.
JM: Kevin, uh my goal is to drive efficiencies in our current budget. I don’t think it’s a good idea right now to consider additional taxes in this tough economy. You know, we really need to focus on job creation and uh, my goal would be to keep taxes as low as possible uh for residents and businesses alike.

I’ve got a lot of feedback from small business owners in
Seattle that uh, the current parking tax has become uh so
onerous that uh people outside of Seattle uh have chosen not to come. You know I do think, when we think about our tourism industry, the most important tourist, is the tourist from Issaquah, or Redmond or Bellevue or or uh…
SS: And they don’t come why?
JM: Because the the cost, the overall cost of your experience in Seattle
SS: They don’t want to pay the parking?
JM: Yeah…

What I learned from this is that the most important people are from the Eastside, in Joe’s opinion, and he does not support increasing parking, and in fact sympathizes with Eastsiders who think parking is too high. (Current parking tax is too ONEROUS)

Here’s the entire transcript.

Kind of important to understand the answer in context to the question:

From the KUOW transcript:
“30:35 Kevin in Greenwood asks if Mallahan is willing to increase taxes rather than cut programs and are you willing to further increase parking rates downtown.
JM: Kevin, uh my goal is to drive efficiencies in our current budget. I don’t think it’s a good idea right now to consider additional taxes in this tough economy. You know, we really need to focus on job creation and uh, my goal would be to keep taxes as low as possible uh for residents and businesses alike.

I’ve got a lot of feedback from small business owners in
Seattle that uh, the current parking tax has become uh so
onerous that uh people outside of Seattle uh have chosen not to come. You know I do think, when we think about our tourism industry, the most important tourist, is the tourist from Issaquah, or Redmond or Bellevue or or uh…
SS: And they don’t come why?
JM: Because the the cost, the overall cost of your experience in Seattle
SS: They don’t want to pay the parking?
JM: Yeah…

What I learned from this is that the most important people are from the Eastside, in Joe’s opinion, and he does not support increasing parking, and in fact sympathizes with Eastsiders who think parking is too high. (Current parking tax is too ONEROUS)

When Mallahan says that we’re competing with Bellevue and all their “tony shops” and their free parking,it makes me wonder if he’s been downtown Seattle much – or does he drive his car to Bellevue for the malls and the free parking?

When Mallahan says that we’re competing with Bellevue and all their “tony shops” and their free parking,it makes me wonder if he’s been downtown Seattle much – or does he drive his car to Bellevue for the malls and the free parking?

Thanks Christi s, you are hired as the unpaid intern fact checker for Publicola.
(S stands for super).

It looks like he is not FOR raising that tax. That is clearly not the same as being FOR cutting the tax. I see they are not the same because the words are different and in a different order.

I know, let’s just take McGinn’s word for what Mallahan said in a radio program available free on the internet.

Thanks Christi s, you are hired as the unpaid intern fact checker for Publicola.
(S stands for super).

It looks like he is not FOR raising that tax. That is clearly not the same as being FOR cutting the tax. I see they are not the same because the words are different and in a different order.

I know, let’s just take McGinn’s word for what Mallahan said in a radio program available free on the internet.

Mr. Baker:

The question is really straight up, though: If Joe thinks the taxes are onerous (as this interview clearly says) then is it safe to say he intends to cut them? If not, he shouldn’t put it out there, as that just means he’s not willing to put his positions to work and take action, no?

Mr. Baker:

The question is really straight up, though: If Joe thinks the taxes are onerous (as this interview clearly says) then is it safe to say he intends to cut them? If not, he shouldn’t put it out there, as that just means he’s not willing to put his positions to work and take action, no?

Really, Erica?

How does identifying a tax worthy of a re-work translate into an attack headline like that?

You guys are risking credibility with this kind of stuff.

Really, Erica?

How does identifying a tax worthy of a re-work translate into an attack headline like that?

You guys are risking credibility with this kind of stuff.

Well, no, he was asked if he will raise a tax and said no because the businesses that carry that tax against their business already think it is already is too high. Not raising a tax, and giving a reason for not raising it, is not the same as lowing a tax, or saying that you will cut the tax.
You have to assume that he said or meant something he did not say.

The question should frame the limits of the intent of the answer (hopefully).

I have an awsome idea, how about a newsy organization ask your assumed question, (kind of looks like they got that answer).

It is not straight up, it us assumed, and out of context, and then expressed as a fact by McGinn, and repeated by McGinn endorsing Publicola.

I like to assume that people actually mean to say what they say, because they are saying it, and not the words imagined in McGinn’s head.

McGinn is a lawyer depending on something other than testimony, that being the clay-like jury of public opinion.

@16

Seems pretty straightforward to me: Mallahan is unabashedly in favor of the deep-bore tunnel, which requires $200 million in city parking taxes. If he says on the radio that a tax he must raise significantly to fund his highest-priced item is already unfairly high, that’s worthy of further investigation. As usual however, the Great Wall of Charla prevented any clarification on the issue.

Maybe Mallahan just doesn’t know how he’s going to pay for the tunnel.

Well, no, he was asked if he will raise a tax and said no because the businesses that carry that tax against their business already think it is already is too high. Not raising a tax, and giving a reason for not raising it, is not the same as lowing a tax, or saying that you will cut the tax.
You have to assume that he said or meant something he did not say.

The question should frame the limits of the intent of the answer (hopefully).

I have an awsome idea, how about a newsy organization ask your assumed question, (kind of looks like they got that answer).

It is not straight up, it us assumed, and out of context, and then expressed as a fact by McGinn, and repeated by McGinn endorsing Publicola.

I like to assume that people actually mean to say what they say, because they are saying it, and not the words imagined in McGinn’s head.

McGinn is a lawyer depending on something other than testimony, that being the clay-like jury of public opinion.

@16

Seems pretty straightforward to me: Mallahan is unabashedly in favor of the deep-bore tunnel, which requires $200 million in city parking taxes. If he says on the radio that a tax he must raise significantly to fund his highest-priced item is already unfairly high, that’s worthy of further investigation. As usual however, the Great Wall of Charla prevented any clarification on the issue.

Maybe Mallahan just doesn’t know how he’s going to pay for the tunnel.

Why is Mallahan so afraid to talk to the press? What is he so busy doing that he can’t bother to pick up his free T-Mobile cell phone with all those free T-Mobile minutes and just call Erica to clarify his position on the parking tax and maybe answer a couple questions about it? I’m sorry, there is some fundamental problem with a local candidate who is afraid to talk directly to the press. This is not the race for the presidency.

Why is Mallahan so afraid to talk to the press? What is he so busy doing that he can’t bother to pick up his free T-Mobile cell phone with all those free T-Mobile minutes and just call Erica to clarify his position on the parking tax and maybe answer a couple questions about it? I’m sorry, there is some fundamental problem with a local candidate who is afraid to talk directly to the press. This is not the race for the presidency.

Looks like McGinn’s developed a quick-attack strategy to employ whenever Chatty Mallahan gets too specific in his pronouncements.

So here Mallahan’s rebuttal comes out a full news cycle later, relies on specifics for its defense, and contains no media-baiting counterstrike at McGinn.

It’s like he’s never heard of politics or something.

Looks like McGinn’s developed a quick-attack strategy to employ whenever Chatty Mallahan gets too specific in his pronouncements.

So here Mallahan’s rebuttal comes out a full news cycle later, relies on specifics for its defense, and contains no media-baiting counterstrike at McGinn.

It’s like he’s never heard of politics or something.

@19 Exactly! Doesn’t Mallahan keep touting what an open & accountable leader he is? So far he is less open to inquiry than Nickels ever has been.

I would say that Mallahan is all talk, but he doesn’t even do much of that. He pays people for that.

@19 Exactly! Doesn’t Mallahan keep touting what an open & accountable leader he is? So far he is less open to inquiry than Nickels ever has been.

I would say that Mallahan is all talk, but he doesn’t even do much of that. He pays people for that.

and then steve scher asked re free parking “should we get there?” Joe said, “no. no, absolutely not. my point is before we consider additional taxes, we have to think of all the implications. And I believe we have to make sure that Seattle is competitive economically. There’s no question that the Puget Sound is the heart and soul of Puget Sound culture and there’s all kinds of great reasons to come to Seattle… the overall costs of coming to Seattle should be considered carefully.”

How long am I supposed to pretend your questions and coverage are anything but over the top biased? Are you editorial based or news based? I didn’t chew you out for not fact checking McGinn’s misleading release and I didn’t chew you out for making a claim or opinion that wasn’t based on fact. Could you please inform me of the mission of this blog site? Is it to provide fact or rumor? Can’t wait til you decide.

Knock me all you want, but at least be honest about it.

With abated breath,
Charla (not the poser who used my name earlier)

and then steve scher asked re free parking “should we get there?” Joe said, “no. no, absolutely not. my point is before we consider additional taxes, we have to think of all the implications. And I believe we have to make sure that Seattle is competitive economically. There’s no question that the Puget Sound is the heart and soul of Puget Sound culture and there’s all kinds of great reasons to come to Seattle… the overall costs of coming to Seattle should be considered carefully.”

How long am I supposed to pretend your questions and coverage are anything but over the top biased? Are you editorial based or news based? I didn’t chew you out for not fact checking McGinn’s misleading release and I didn’t chew you out for making a claim or opinion that wasn’t based on fact. Could you please inform me of the mission of this blog site? Is it to provide fact or rumor? Can’t wait til you decide.

Knock me all you want, but at least be honest about it.

With abated breath,
Charla (not the poser who used my name earlier)

Charla,

You’re not the poser. Your candidate is. He’s the one that hides behind you day in and day out. Something’s doesn’t smell right here.

Charla,

You’re not the poser. Your candidate is. He’s the one that hides behind you day in and day out. Something’s doesn’t smell right here.

“With abated breath”? Does that make sense?

“With abated breath”? Does that make sense?

Charla, so glad you are here: Any chance you could get your boss to actually answer questions about policy? We all understand that you want to be the one getting nasty and attacking McGinn so that your boss can remain above the fray and stay dignified, but I am pretty sure that at some point we the voters are going to need to hear from his own lips where he stands on this stuff.

So for the record: Is he for the parking tax or not? If not, how is he going to pay for the tunnel?

Charla, so glad you are here: Any chance you could get your boss to actually answer questions about policy? We all understand that you want to be the one getting nasty and attacking McGinn so that your boss can remain above the fray and stay dignified, but I am pretty sure that at some point we the voters are going to need to hear from his own lips where he stands on this stuff.

So for the record: Is he for the parking tax or not? If not, how is he going to pay for the tunnel?

Charla, now that you’ve joined the party, like @1 and @25 asked, how’s Joe going to pay for that tunnel? Pretty sure it’s going to require some tax increases, at least $930 million, maybe a lot more.

More importantly, when are you going to let Joe come out from behind the curtain and actually answer some questions for himself? What are you afraid of, that we’ll all see how completely clueless he is? That if he’s asked questions that he doesn’t have a prepped answer for he might say something he shouldn’t? If you think he can avoid answering real questions and speaking with the public until November then you’re either incredibly stupid or think very little of both the media and the electorate in Seattle.

Charla, now that you’ve joined the party, like @1 and @25 asked, how’s Joe going to pay for that tunnel? Pretty sure it’s going to require some tax increases, at least $930 million, maybe a lot more.

More importantly, when are you going to let Joe come out from behind the curtain and actually answer some questions for himself? What are you afraid of, that we’ll all see how completely clueless he is? That if he’s asked questions that he doesn’t have a prepped answer for he might say something he shouldn’t? If you think he can avoid answering real questions and speaking with the public until November then you’re either incredibly stupid or think very little of both the media and the electorate in Seattle.

@10 maybe she means she is abating her breath.. sometimes my kids do that too when they don’t get their way…

@10 maybe she means she is abating her breath.. sometimes my kids do that too when they don’t get their way…

Sorry… I meant @24

Sorry… I meant @24

Charla @22,

I’m not sure Mallahan’s quotes refute McGinn’s claim that Mallahan wants to cut the parking tax. Mallahan called the tax “onerous” and said we have to compete with cities where it’s free.

But never mind the gray areas of interpretation.

Erica asked you point blank—as she reported here: “What exactly is Mallahan’s position?”

That’s the big question. And that was your chance to clear up any confusion and refute McGinn’s claim.

You didn’t answer the question.

I’m not sure what you expect us to do with your non-answer.

Meanwhile, you can accuse us of bias all you want, but the McGinn camp isn’t happy with our coverage either.

Here’s a recent sampling of our McGinn coverage:

We reported that one of McGinn’s polsters was once a convicted felon http://publicola.net/?p=14531 (a story we broke); grilled McGinn on his budget proposal http://publicola.net/?p=14191; grilled him on his cozy rltshp. with Vulcan (a story we broke) http://publicola.net/?p=13766; reported on the serious questions about his viaduct plan http://publicola.net/?p=14535; explained why the KC Labor Council thinks he’s not up to the job http://publicola.net/?p=14362; critiqued his light rail plan http://publicola.net/?p=14186; dissected his misleading campaign pitch http://publicola.net/?p=14073; and trashed him for defending T-Mobile’s anti-consumer practices as their hired gun attorney (a story we broke) http://publicola.net/?p=11631 … just to name a few.

Yes, we’re hard on Mallahan, but as the record here shows, we’re also hard on McGinn.

And for what it’s worth, this week, PubliCola was (as far as I know) the only site that gave much coverage to Mallahan’s big KC Democrats endorsement http://publicola.net/?p=14700 or posted his pro-gay rights video http://publicola.net/?p=14790

Charla @22,

I’m not sure Mallahan’s quotes refute McGinn’s claim that Mallahan wants to cut the parking tax. Mallahan called the tax “onerous” and said we have to compete with cities where it’s free.

But never mind the gray areas of interpretation.

Erica asked you point blank—as she reported here: “What exactly is Mallahan’s position?”

That’s the big question. And that was your chance to clear up any confusion and refute McGinn’s claim.

You didn’t answer the question.

I’m not sure what you expect us to do with your non-answer.

Meanwhile, you can accuse us of bias all you want, but the McGinn camp isn’t happy with our coverage either.

Here’s a recent sampling of our McGinn coverage:

We reported that one of McGinn’s polsters was once a convicted felon http://publicola.net/?p=14531 (a story we broke); grilled McGinn on his budget proposal http://publicola.net/?p=14191; grilled him on his cozy rltshp. with Vulcan (a story we broke) http://publicola.net/?p=13766; reported on the serious questions about his viaduct plan http://publicola.net/?p=14535; explained why the KC Labor Council thinks he’s not up to the job http://publicola.net/?p=14362; critiqued his light rail plan http://publicola.net/?p=14186; dissected his misleading campaign pitch http://publicola.net/?p=14073; and trashed him for defending T-Mobile’s anti-consumer practices as their hired gun attorney (a story we broke) http://publicola.net/?p=11631 … just to name a few.

Yes, we’re hard on Mallahan, but as the record here shows, we’re also hard on McGinn.

And for what it’s worth, this week, PubliCola was (as far as I know) the only site that gave much coverage to Mallahan’s big KC Democrats endorsement http://publicola.net/?p=14700 or posted his pro-gay rights video http://publicola.net/?p=14790

I guess this is how a Mallahan Administration will go. Mallahan will rarely poke his head out in the sun, when he does he will get confused and be against something “onerous” like parking taxes before he needs to be for increasing the “onerous” tax & and then a snarky spokesperson will come out and try and cover for him.

I hate to even think it, but this is how George W worked.

I guess this is how a Mallahan Administration will go. Mallahan will rarely poke his head out in the sun, when he does he will get confused and be against something “onerous” like parking taxes before he needs to be for increasing the “onerous” tax & and then a snarky spokesperson will come out and try and cover for him.

I hate to even think it, but this is how George W worked.

Hey Charla, care to answer just why Joe flip flopped on Mercer st. after a “talk” with Vulcan? How about his continual confusion over his exact position on the First Hill Streetcar (you didn’t help that situation by the way)? What about Joe’s complete 180 on incentive zoning from the primary to the general? Did that one have to do with his “talk” with Vulcan as well? I’d ask Joe, but he never seems to call back.

Hey Charla, care to answer just why Joe flip flopped on Mercer st. after a “talk” with Vulcan? How about his continual confusion over his exact position on the First Hill Streetcar (you didn’t help that situation by the way)? What about Joe’s complete 180 on incentive zoning from the primary to the general? Did that one have to do with his “talk” with Vulcan as well? I’d ask Joe, but he never seems to call back.

@31

You are going to have to have an excel sheet to keep track of the flip flops. For it? Against it? Joe’s a blank slate (no political experience, no service to community, etc). The establishment is busy making him what they want him to be. When he screws up (every time he talks without a spokeswheel, he just claims he was missquoted or the media is lying.

Why are we still listening to Charla, anyway? She wasn’t cutting it and was replaced. The story was that she has so many roles that she just can’t spokeswheel effectively and needs more help on the strategery, right?

@31

You are going to have to have an excel sheet to keep track of the flip flops. For it? Against it? Joe’s a blank slate (no political experience, no service to community, etc). The establishment is busy making him what they want him to be. When he screws up (every time he talks without a spokeswheel, he just claims he was missquoted or the media is lying.

Why are we still listening to Charla, anyway? She wasn’t cutting it and was replaced. The story was that she has so many roles that she just can’t spokeswheel effectively and needs more help on the strategery, right?

Just how many McGinn sock puppets are on this thread, anyway?

Just how many McGinn sock puppets are on this thread, anyway?

@29, that is just a bunch of bullshit.
Did Mallahan say he wanted to cut that tax, or not?
He did not. It is not a gray area, McGinn made up something, you printed it, and the transcript does not support the claim.

SeattlePI.com repeated the same bullshit.
Are you reporting facts, or journaling opinion?

Welcome to being the example that the idiot Ryan Blethen can point to in his weekly scree.

@29, that is just a bunch of bullshit.
Did Mallahan say he wanted to cut that tax, or not?
He did not. It is not a gray area, McGinn made up something, you printed it, and the transcript does not support the claim.

SeattlePI.com repeated the same bullshit.
Are you reporting facts, or journaling opinion?

Welcome to being the example that the idiot Ryan Blethen can point to in his weekly scree.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/e/ed/Vulcan_mind_meld.jpg/180px-Vulcan_mind_meld.jpg

does Mallahan let everybody touch his face like that?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/e/ed/Vulcan_mind_meld.jpg/180px-Vulcan_mind_meld.jpg

does Mallahan let everybody touch his face like that?

@22: And, again, saying that all parking shouldn’t be free is NOT the same thing as taking a position on Seattle’s existing commercial parking tax. As I asked you numerous times yesterday, what is Joe’s position on the commercial parking tax? Does he support it at its current level, or does he not? And would he support raising it to pay for the tunnel he supports? These are simple questions, and you/Joe still haven’t answered them.

@22: And, again, saying that all parking shouldn’t be free is NOT the same thing as taking a position on Seattle’s existing commercial parking tax. As I asked you numerous times yesterday, what is Joe’s position on the commercial parking tax? Does he support it at its current level, or does he not? And would he support raising it to pay for the tunnel he supports? These are simple questions, and you/Joe still haven’t answered them.

Carla,

I really hope you are getting paid well because Mallahan’s inability to speak for himself must keep you on your toes 24/7.

Carla,

I really hope you are getting paid well because Mallahan’s inability to speak for himself must keep you on your toes 24/7.

Joe Mallaprop®.

Joe Mallaprop®.

It’s getting harder and harder for me to vote for Mallahan. He just may not know what the fuck he’s talking about.
To be clear: SEATTLE DOESN’T WANT THE CAR DEPENDANT SUBURBS DECENDING ON OUR COMMUNITIES JUST TO BUY STUFF. IF THEY WANT FREE PARKING, THEY CAN GO TO FACTORIA OR BELL SQUARE.

It’s getting harder and harder for me to vote for Mallahan. He just may not know what the fuck he’s talking about.
To be clear: SEATTLE DOESN’T WANT THE CAR DEPENDANT SUBURBS DECENDING ON OUR COMMUNITIES JUST TO BUY STUFF. IF THEY WANT FREE PARKING, THEY CAN GO TO FACTORIA OR BELL SQUARE.