Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

The Biggest Greenhouse Gas Culprit in the State

1. Mayor Mike McGinn held the first meeting for his Youth and Families Initiative last night at the Rainier Community Center. In several crowded meeting rooms (including one room filled with about 75 Burmese speakers), hundreds of participants divided up into a dozen groups to answer three primary questions: What do we want for our children and families? What are our most critical challenges and how should we prioritize them? And what are the solutions?

PubliCola sat in on one of the small groups. Their top five suggestions weren’t terribly surprising: Making schools more accountable; providing more support for families to make kids ready to learn; creating more affordable housing; closing the academic achievement gap and reducing the high-school dropout rate; and giving kids more opportunities to get engaged. But the overwhelming community response to the forum—hundreds of people, many of them with young kids in tow, showing up for a two-hour community forum on a Monday night?—was.

McGinn’s challenge, after the five forums and a final “Kids and Family Congress” at Seattle Center are over, will be to turn all the good ideas into action—easier said than done, given that most of the goals listed tonight are the responsibility of the Seattle school district, not city government. However, this week’s forums could provide the political backing McGinn needs to implement changes to the upcoming Families and Education Levy—implementing a so-called “cradle to college” approach, which Burgess alluded to at the council meeting yesterday, and sending more money to struggling South End schools.

2. There’s some good news and some bad news for environmentalists coming today in the state Senate’s budget proposal.

Good news first: Kirkland-area Sen. Eric Oemig’s (D-45) bill to end a $4 million a year tax break for TransAlta’s Centralia coal plant—the biggest greenhouse gas culprit in the state—is included in the Senate proposal. The bad news: The budget includes a proposal to shelf tax incentives for renewable engergy.

And some more bad news, Governor Gregoire—currently in negotiations with TransAlta about transitioning away from coal in the next 15 years—had threatened to veto Oemig’s bill. Now that his proposal to kill the TransAlta tax break is in the budget, things get really tricky.

3. In an hourlong meeting with housing advocates last Thursday, Mayor McGinn reportedly did not respond to concerns that he plans to eliminate the Office of Housing, whose former director Adrienne Quinn resigned last month. Instead, he focused on the need to “reorganize” the city to improve coordination between departments, and returned repeatedly to (perennial) complaints that city departments don’t coordinate with each other and that the permitting process takes too long.

No one from the housing office attended the meeting, further stoking fears that the office is again on the chopping block.

During yesterday’s city council meeting, council member Nick Licata said he looked forward to “keeping the Office of Housing and working with the mayor to find someone good to lead it.”

Asked later whether he planned to eliminate the office, McGinn said,  “We have some big decisions to make about how we’re going to reduce our $50 million budget deficit next year … so we’re going to be looking for how we can find efficiencies in how we organize government so that we can preserve services, including housing.”

4. The state senate’s transportation budget, adopted Monday afternoon, included one provision that’s troubling transit, bicycling, and pedestrian advocacy interests: A transfer of $14 million from the regional mobility transit grant program into bike and pedestrian programs, which in turn were raided to fund the state ferry program. Bike, pedestrian, and transit projects, in other words, have been raided to pay for auto ferries.

Andrew Austin, Olympia lobbyist for the Transportation Choices Coalition, calls the transfer “a really convoluted way to take transit money to pay for ferries.” He says just one percent of the state’s transportation budget pays for transit, “which is minuscule, and [now] they’ve drastically reduced that pool.”

5. Bank lobbyists in Olympia got another victory yesterday (they already won out earlier in the session when a bill to prevent foreclosures on home loans failed). This time, a bill to fund energy efficiency improvements with local bonding authority (the bonds would be paid back with the savings from increased property values thanks to the green retrofits) was killed because banks didn’t like the idea of property onwers prioritizing green bond payments over mortgage payments.

The bill, sponsored by Seattle Sen. Ed Murray (D-43), had sailed out of the Senate 44-2. But despite the fact that it would have increased property values—a good thing for banks—the House promptly killed it under pressure from banking lobbyists who didn’t like the shorterm implications of mortgage payments taking second priority to green retrofit bonds.

6. City council member Tim Burgess met yesterday afternoon with representatives from the music and nightlife community to talk about a new proposal he alluded to in yesterday’s roll out of the council’s priorities—”developing a continuum of responses to street disorder” like aggressive panhandling, open-air drug markets, and crime, all longtime concerns of the nightlife community. Burgess will unveil the details of his proposed legislation (panhandling ban?) at a public safety forum sponsored by the Downtown Seattle Association this coming Thursday morning.

Today’s Morning Fizz is sponsored by:




  • giffy

    Can we get some more info on 4? I mean ferries are transit. Lots of people walk on them and they are certainly preferable to a bunch more bridges. Was it only 14 million that was transferred and used or did they take more from bike and ped monies? If it was just an accounting game with transit money that's one thing.

  • gidge

    I understand that people are feeling a little uncertain about the future of the Office of Housing, and that uncertainty causes anxiety. But I think the focus should be on preserving the essential work of the Office in a structure that makes sense. If there's a more effective organizational structure, I don't think we need to cling to the current structure.

  • North Seattle Mom

    I hope that he struggling Northend schools like Northgate Elementary, Olympic Hills and Broadview Thompson are not forgotten in all attention being paid to the also struggling Southend schools.

  • Pete_on_Ferries

    I agree that ferries are transit, but west sound communities are always touting that state law designates the ferries as part of the state highway system. To fill the revenue gap left by I-695 (limitation on MVET), WSF has gradually raised rates so that now almost all of the operating expenses are recovered at the fare box. This has really pissed off riders on the other side. If you make the arguement that ferries are transit, they'll argue that no other transit agency covers its operating expenses at nearly as high a proportion as WSF does. I suspect that the money shift is to cover capital improvements at terminals, some of which are in really horrible condition.

  • gumgum

    #5–the banks killing an energy efficiency financing bill, is a huge mistake by our gutless legislators. 18 other states have that financing tool, and the feds have made it very clear that they will direct federal energy efficiency funds only to the states that do. This sets back our ability to generate jobs and meet greenhouse gas goals in a big way.

  • http://michaelmaddux.blogspot.com/ Michael M.

    What was the overwhelming response? It seems your paragraph after the photo didn't quite complete itself.

    While on the one hand, I despise town hall after town hall, on the other hand, large portions of the city are being left out. The five locations: Garfield CC in the CD, Beacon Hill, Rainier, West Seattle (god I hate west Seattle), and one in Northgate. None for Capitol Hill/Montlake/Madison Valley/First Hill, none for UW/Wallingford/Ravenna/Laurelhurst, none for Ballard/Crown Hill/Fremont/Green Lake/Greenwood…while I get that a lot of the issues we are seeing in the city lately are south of I-90, perhaps some of the solutions can come from north of Ship Canal.

    It will be interesting to see what these meetings come up with.

  • TranspoGuy

    Also, keep in mind, the state constitution does not allow gas tax to fund transit, but it does allow gas tax to fund auto ferries. What's so criminal about Mary Margaret Haugen grabbing transit money for ferries is that she is stealing from what is only a very small pot of state transportation money that can fund transit when the big pot (gas tax revenue) is already available to ferries. She's doing this because she wants to make sure we still have plenty of revenue of available to build big road projects.

  • Stacy

    Does anyone else think that it is completely insane that our Governor, who claims to be a leader on climate change, continues to support a $4 million tax break for the state's largest greenhouse gas polluter (the TransAlta coal plant)? We can't afford to keep kids on health care, keep our buses running, pay our teachers; but we can afford to subsidize dirty coal power? Seriously?

  • RBeach

    How does Not sharing histhoughts on the future of the Office of Housing with housing professionals prepare the Mayor to make a good decision about a structure that makes sense?

  • Mikos

    No doubt one reason the Senate overwhelmingly backed the anti-foreclosure bill is that many knew it would get killed in the House. 44-2 voted don't happen by chance. This bill sounds like it was all for show.

  • transitadvocate

    It is right in line with the lack of leadership she's shown on transportation issues.

  • morning fizzy

    We used to be part owners of the coal plant but the SCC led by Mr. Green sold off our interest so we would look greener. We lost any influence on how the plant was run. This is a prime example of sweeping GHGs under the rug. Just like offsets.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    I'd like to hear exactly which representatives killed this. *Because the bank lobby says so* should not be a reason to kill legislation, and we need to kick these corrupt politicians out of office.

  • Stacy

    And water issues, and labor issues, and tax fairness issues and…. Will a real progressive candidate please stand up; 2012 is just around the corner.

  • Andrew Austin

    I agree that like transit ferries face drastic shortfalls and need dedicated sustainable funding. I also understand that a lot commuters use the auto ferries as pedestrians especially on the routes that go into downtown.

    The larger issue is the state embarrassingly spends less than 1% of its transportation budget on transit. The regional mobility grants program constitutes a significant portion of that spending. State auto-ferries are considered state highways thus they can be funded by the constitutionally restricted gas tax, whereas transit and bike-ped projects can not. By raiding the regional mobility grants, the State Senate has yet again* taken a flexible revenue source to back fill gas tax eligible projects. On a more basic level, they have significantly decreased their already pitiful contribution to transit.

    As transit, bicycle, commute trip reduction, and pedestrian advocates we approach transportation revenue packages with those interest in mind and in the last two packages we won some significant funding in these areas. We supported the last two packages because we believed in good faith that the multi-modal dollars would not be robbed to pay for gas-tax eligible highway projects. Unfortunately year after year we have to defend the multi-modal dollars from being peeled off to pay for highways. Ultimately, all of this highlights that in any future revenue package we need to legally bind mutli-modal/transit dollars the same way gas tax dollars are restricted to highways in order to prevent future raiding.

    *they did this all over the place with the two year transportation budget last year. Just two examples; the state rail capitol projects were zeroed out and the GTEC program that funded great organizations like Commute Seattle was zeroed out in the middle of its 2 year pilot.

  • Long time Seattlelite

    The fact that OH staff were specifically Not Invited continues the complete disrespect the Mayor shows for the professionals that work for the Office. he might learn something from some of the folks that have worked in City Housing from the first Levy in 1987. under Royer it was Housing and Community Development, Under Rice is was merged with Humand Services, Then split again into Housing and Community Development. Then it beame the Office of Housing. Better to learn from prior attempts and the people involved, then pretend everybody is idiot and the new Mayor is smarter because he can think outside of the box (and without knowledgable input)

  • Ed Murray

    Just a little clarification:
    What the bill does
    SSB 6656 would authorize cities in the Central Puget region to “pilot” (through June 2015) municipally sponsored energy efficiency financing assistance for residents and business owners. It would be done through creating an energy conservation services utility, that would provide loans for the energy efficiency improvements that would be repaid through incremental additions to municipal utility billings or when property taxes are paid. This would not be an increase in taxes or an increase in billings for energy services, but merely use of this billing cycle as a convenient way to repay the loan.

    Cities using this optional authority would be allowed to issue bonds as a source of financing for the program, but they could also use other funding sources, such as federal ARRA or other energy efficiency grants from the federal government. Cities might also partner with banks or other private lending sources to finance the program. The loan would be secured by a lien on the property which would be prior to any subsequently filed liens (except tax liens), but would be junior to any previously filed liens on the building.

    The posting is inaccurate about the source of loan repayments

    The Publicola posting is inaccurate when it says the “the bonds would be paid back with the savings from increased property values thanks to the green retrofits”. The legislation is quite clear that loan repayments would be through incremental additions to municipal utility bills or to tax bills. The cost-effectiveness provisions in the legislation also ensure that in most cases the loan repayments will be less than the utility bill savings due to the reduced energy consumption in the building.

    The posting is misleading when it says the bankers killed the bill in the House

    The Publicola posting is misleading when it says the bill was “killed because banks didn’t like the idea of property onwers prioritizing green bond payments over mortgage payments”. The “superlien” provision was removed from the bill before it left the Senate so the city’s lien for repayment of the energy efficiency loan would not be prioritized over mortgage liens that already existing on the building. It was our understanding that the banking community largely went “neutral” on the bill with this change.

    So why did the bill die in committee in the House? We’d probably have to ask the chair directly to know for sure, but we think it was a combination of the chair not feeling it was really needed, as well as negative input he was getting from electric utilities about the bill. The utilities had repeatedly raised questions about whether cities should even be in the “business” of assisting with energy conservation financing, as well as whether it was constitutional for cities to provide loans of this nature. Also, utilities do some of this financial assistance now and they may not have wanted the “competition” from cities in providing this energy conservation work, even though the bill as it left the Senate allowed the local retail electric utility to claim the “credit” for the conservation under the green power requirements of Initiative 937, several of the larger utilities were still pretty negative about this legislation.

    Assigning responsibility for “killing” a bill is guesswork in the Legislature, but the Publicola guess in this case seems to be way off.

  • sarah68

    It prepares him to be able to claim that he met with the people on the ground. Then he can simply ignore what they said and do what he wants.

  • Pete_on_Ferries

    Excellent point.

  • City Union Employee

    Most of the mayors new ideas have been proposed or tried before. But he seems to have an issue talking to the 12000 people who have experience at the city. Its OK to do something different but at least get the INFORMATION first.

    There are lost of good reasons things work the way they do. Many are legal reasons or audit reasons. Many things that seem obvious don't work when you look at the details. McGinn can drastically shorten his learning curve by asking people why things work as they currently do before he announces changes.

    Oh and the “departments don't work together” comment is LAZY. I've been on many all city or multi department projects and they work fine. People are used to working together.

    I'm sure there are disfunctional relationships between departments. but they usually start with personality problems at the top. If the department directors want things to happen, they do. Those department directors report to the Mayor, so what's the problem.

    I think the mayor is looking for pixie dust to fix his budget problems. Hate to say it, but there is no such thing as pixie dust. Sorry.