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.

Campaign Fizz: The $60 Car-Tab Fee

1) The League of Women Voters came out this week against Seattle Prop. 1, the $60 car-tab fee, saying in a statement,

While the intentions of the measure are good, the League found the plan to lack sufficient specificity and the proposed use of funds not appropriately prioritized – in particular the plan to spend $18 million to study more streetcar lines. Further, a flat fee on each vehicle licensed within the city is regressive. In many cases, the combination of the lack of appropriate prioritization and the regressivity of the tax would cause the citizens who are taxed to receive no benefit.

That’s not exactly true. Prop. 1 would pay for traffic improvements, road maintenance, and sidewalks throughout the city, benefiting people who would never set foot on a streetcar or ride a bike. Additionally, improved bus times—the measure’s main funding priority—improve travel times for everyone. And a slight reduction in the number of pedestrians and cyclists killed or injured by dangerous road conditions may seem like a minor improvement for the money, but it’s something most people would probably say they support, even if it doesn’t benefit them directly.

2) Streets for All, the campaign for Prop. 1, has tapped city council transportation chair Tom Rasmussen and Metro union president Paul Bechtel to lead a guided bus tour on the Route 44 (Ballard to the U District) to point out some of the speed and reliability improvements the measure would pay for along the route. The tour starts at 11:30 am at the corner of NW Market St. and Ballard Ave. NW.

3) The pro-Prop. 1 campaign received some last-minute contributions this week, including $2,000 from the Cascade Bicycle Club (which, at $17,975, is the campaign’s biggest donor); $500 from the Bicycle Alliance of Washington (for a total of $1,600), and $1,000 from American Life, Inc., a real estate developer. The campaign has raised $103,676; its opponents, Citizens Against Raising Car Tabs, have raised $24,433.


  • Grover

    So now, some of the groups Endorsing NO on PROP 1 are:

    46th District Democrats
    11th District Democrats
    Muni League
    League of Women Voters
    Seattle Times
    Queen Anne News
    Magnolia News
    South Seattle Beacon

    All of the above say:  Vote NO on PROP 1

    Prop 1 is a very regressive tax on motor vehicles, with less than 20% of the revenue going to Seattle’s enormous backlog of street repairs and maintenance, and zero going to Seattle’s bridges, many of which are in poor condition.  Plus, $18 million of Prop 1 revenue would be wasted planning more streetcar routes, which the public does not care about, or want.

    http://citizensagainstraisingcartabs.com/

  • Alexjon

    And how many groups and citizens have endorsed YES on Prop 1? :)

  • Jefferson

    I think it’s cool and very telling that even though the Pro camp raised 75k more, they are more than likely going to lose.  I’d surely call that money well spent.  All of the back and forth about regressive tax makes no matter to me, it’s making sure that our one term mayor doesn’t get this  blank check like a kid in a candy shop. 

  • Pragmastist

    Meanwhile, some of the groups endorsing YES on PROP 1 are:

    Business:

    Capitol Hill Chamber of Commerce
    Chinatown International District Business Improvement Area
    College Inn Pub
    Downtown Seattle Association
    LMN Architects
    SvR Design
    Urban Sparks
    Vulcan, Inc.

    Editorial Boards:

    Real Change News
    Seattle Bike Blog
    Seattle Gay News
    Seattle Transit Blog
    The Stranger – Seattle’s Only Newspaper

    Social Justice:

    El Centro de la Raza
    Low Income Housing Institute
    Puget Sound Sage
    Real Change Homeless Empowerment Project

    Labor:

    Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587
    International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO District 751
    International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 46
    International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 77
    Labors Local 1239
    M. L. King County Labor Council, AFL-CIO
    Professional and Technical Employees Local 17
    Seattle Building and Construction Trades Council
    Seattle Fire Fighters Union, Local 27
    SEIU Health Care 775NW
    Teamsters Joint Council, No. 28

    Community:

    36th Legislative District Democrats
    The Art Affect
    Broadview Community Council
    Capitol Hill Community Council
    Seattle Parks Foundation
    Sustainable Downtown Seattle
    Sustainable Queen Anne
    Uptown Alliance
    Washington Students Association of UW

    Transportation & Smart Growth Advocates:

    Bicycle Alliance of Washington
    Cascade Bicycle Club
    CoolMom
    Feet First
    Friends of Seattle
    Fuse Washington
    Futurewise
    Great City
    Kidical Mass
    King County Conservation Voters
    People’s Waterfront Coalition
    Seattle Likes Bikes
    Sierra Club, Washington State Chapter
    Spokespeople
    Totcycle
    Transportation Choices Coalition
    Undriving
    University of Washington College Greens
    Washington Environmental Council

    People:

    Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin
    Seattle City Councilmember Sally Bagshaw
    Seattle City Councilmember Tim Burgess
    Seattle City Councilmember Sally Clark
    Seattle City Councilmember Jean Godden
    Seattle City Councilmember Bruce Harrell
    Seattle City Councilmember Nick Licata
    Seattle City Councilmember Mike O’Brien
    Seattle City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen
    Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn
    Sharon Lee
    Ref Lindmark
    Charley Royer
    Tony To

  • Guest 5

    the “lack of specificity” makes my blood boil.  It is atrocious that we expect any revenue source to have a dedicated expenditure.  This short-sighted way of budgeting may work politically, but is terrible policy.  Hamstringing elected officials’ ability to make decisions based on facts, and instead micro-managing by popular vote, is a large reason why Washington’s budgeting system is so fucked up. 

    Way to promote poor government, LWV.

  • Andy

    The 55+ organizations (and over 1,110 Seattle residents) endorsing Prop 1 are here: http://www.streetsforallseattle.org/endorsements/

    And nice try listing the QA News + Magnolia News + South Seattle Beacon as 3 different papers, they have the same editorial board (who had their facts so wrong about Prop 1 it was embarrassing) so that only counts as one.  

    29% of Prop 1 goes to street repair and maintenance and 70% of the $365 million Bridging the Gap measure (which the Muni league and most of the members of CART ironically opposed) goes towards street maintenance and bridges.

  • David Miller

    “Additionally, improved bus times—the measure’s main funding priority—improve travel times for everyone.”

    Completely and utterly false. As false as most of the claims in the flashy mailer put out by the Prop 1 campaign.

  • Big Jim Slade

    See #3 or do your own leg work?

  • Monster

    why dont you tell us faggit. google is your friend

  • Bob Feemster

    I just spent $900 on a 44″ lcd tv, and since it has sucky sound, another $500 on bose surround sound speakers, there’s no way in this economy I can afford $60 for these non-specific “improvements.”

  • More reasoned than you

    False, like your arguments.  False, like your trust in government.  False, like your ability to be part of a team.  False, like your ability to attract followers other than your wife (and a handful of fellow nut jobs).  False, like your political future, David.

  • David Miller

    lol. You crack me up.

  • Andy

    David, when you say things like the 2007 Roads and Transit package that voters shot down was “imbalanced” and that the 2008 ST2 package was “better” (I agree, but it was definitely not “balanced,” it was all transit), you lose all credibility to call others out for their political statements.  

  • Bob Feemster

    Oh, so now you’re worried about regressiveness. So I assume you voted for the income tax last year, and against eyman’s $30 license fee for all scheme. 

  • Mr. X

    Stuff and nonsense – Seattle bonds and levies have always had specific project lists in the past.  Heck, even the non-voted $20 for tabs approved by the TBD had a project list.

  • More reasoned than you

    Gallows humor is appropriate.

  • More reasoned than you

    He lost that years ago.

  • Big Jim Slade

    Ad hominem, last refuge of the pwned.

  • Big Jim Slade

    At least with the TV and speakers you would be getting something tangible for your dollars. . .

  • More reasoned than you

    They are actually fun to do to David as he always responds.  Anyone more savvy would just ignore it.  Or, better yet, they would not be trying to use comment sections to get a message out.

  • Anonymous

    McGinn would have little control over how the Prop 1 money is spent. Why don’t you vote against motherhood and apply pie too since McGinn surely like them as well.

  • Anonymous

    You want the specific potholes identified?

  • Anonymous

    I don’t agree with DM on this one, but it’s eminently reasonable to use these blogs “to get the message out.” The dialogue is much more informative than slick mailers.

  • Anonymous

    Intangibles like better bus service and fewer potholes have value also.

  • Mr. X

    A firm line item with actual dollars would be nice.

    I don’t vote for slush funds or blank checks – and you’re about to find out that a majority of Seattle voters won’t either.

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s going to fail also, but I think the main reason is the “regressiveness” and opposition from David Miller, John Fox, David Bloom, etc., not the failure to name each pothole to be filled. If the “otherneighborhoodactivists” and progressives hadn’t come so unglued, Prop 1 would pass easily.

  • Jefferson

    Oh look at you and your fancy coy word use.  McGinn can influence the team and has wasted enough of our meager dollars ‘studying’ or ‘proposing studies’… but you keep up your McGinn support there good buddy.

  • Verd1n

    Well now.  I’d hope the mayor and council support Prop 1.  Hell, they put it there for Chrissakes.

  • Mr. X

    Hardy har har.  Wrong tax, wrong time.  It’s nice of you to give props to your political opponents, though.

  • Mr. X

    Bullshit – plain and simple.  The various city departments would control how these funds are spent, and last I checked McGinn is at least nominally in control of them….

  • Anonymous

    >> Additionally, improved bus times—the measure’s main funding priority—improve travel times for everyone.

    If that were true, downtown would/should have more dedicated bus lanes. Just another Publicola “fact.”

  • fgruben

    I would be for it except for the “spend $18 million to study more streetcar lines”. Dang. I would do it for $100. It would go like this. Yeah we need some more but can’t afford them right now. And spend the $18,000.000 on streets, sidewalks, bike paths. You know, stuff we need. Not filling up some good old boys ( or girls ) consulting pockets.

  • Mr. X

    …and if this was such a slam dunk, an underfunded ragtag campaign wouldn’t be eating the political lunch of the who’s who list (of all the usual establishment suspects, I would add) that someone posted above….

  • Big Jim Slade

    Yep, if only those darn annoying progressives would just get in line and not ask stupid questions like “What is this money actually FOR?”, it would pass.

    That’s priceless. Really.

  • Big Jim Slade

    Ad hominem, also the last refuge of  “about to go down harder than the bag tax.”

  • Anonymous

    You don’t know whether I support him or not. Good buddy, my ass.

  • Big Jim Slade

    If you believe that Prop 1 will deliver either of those things, I’d like to talk to you about the value of this bridge I have for sale.

  • Prop1

    I heard that you are doing this to get some kind of name recognition to run for a city council against Obrein. Is that True David?

  • Anonymous

    BS to you too. Last I checked, the City Council makes final budget decisions. Especially here since they’re also the “seattle transportation benefit district”. Due to his poor management style and lousy relations with council, McGinn’s control over the departments is nominal at this point.

  • Paul B

    Michael Judd is that your name?

  • Anonymous

    Without “those darn annoying progressives” on the same side as you tax/government haters, you wouldn’t have made a dent. I don’t mind if they “ask stupid questions” because I don’t think the questions are stupid. I just disagree on their opinion concerning the best way forward on this issue. And unlike you, I work well with most of them most of the time, and plan on continuing to do so. Enjoy the moment.

  • Miller4seattle redux

    Miller running again would be awesome entertainment.  I hope he attempts this.  It will bring much needed amusement to what otherwise promises to be a heated election year.

  • Mr. X

    Let us take one example – the Council approved the Mayor’s budget, but didn’t have anything to say about the hiring (or wage) of David Hiller. 

    I can think of lots of other examples where Mayors have ignored SLI’s and spent funds as they wished, but I’ll let you do your own research on that.

  • Mr. X

    In a less crowded field, he’d do better than you (want) to give him credit for. 

    Notwithstanding the impression you might get in this here echo chamber, more Seattleites think like him than the New Urbanist/Bike crowd.

  • Mr. X

    But, I hasten to add, O’Brien has the power of incumbency now, and his negatives aren’t up there with McGinn’s (yet).

  • Miller4seattle redux

    Encourage him to run again. It will end the debate one and for all. Then we can go back and enjoy the conversation without his self-important aires.

  • David Miller

    You’re kidding, right? If I was looking to do this for political reasons I would have hopped on the Pro bandwagon for this flawed measure.

    I’m doing it because it is fatally flawed and we can do better.

    In less than a week we find out.

  • Mr. X

    Be careful what you wish for – it took former Councilmember Margaret Pageler 3 tries before she won her seat.

  • Anonymous

    The council gives the mayor a staff budget, and he hires who he likes. So what? David Hiller fills how many potholes per day? And tells SDOT which projects to work on next month?

  • Miller4seattle redux

    Bring it on, baby.  I ain’t gonna worry.

  • Eddiew

    by simple majority vote, the TBD board (city council) could revise Attachment A to reprogram the $18 million for streetcar study to more productive investments.  I will argue for that and vote yes.

  • Grover

    That list should make everyone realize they should vote NO on PROP 1.

  • Mr. X

    Last I checked, SDOT is an executive department – and they’re the City agency that Prop. 1 hands a blank check to.

  • Mr. X

    Right, and they can also do exactly the same thing for the 20% loosely earmarked for road maintenance that they’re promising now to try and sell this turkey to the voters.  You’re making the NO side’s case, here.

  • Mr. X

    How does allowing in-lane stops for buses “improve travel times for everyone”? 

    Miller is absolutely right – this claim is pure bullshit.

  • gohuskies

    Those cyclistas at the Downtown Seattle Association at it again

  • Jefferson

    Then why are you defending him, or you just spending some time trolling? 

  • Anonymous

    That’s one like you don’t deserve (mistake).

    Here’s where the budget is cooked including SDOT’s; do you see the mayor’s name on the final product?

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr Baker

    Lies.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr Baker

    This is some shitty journalism.
    Are you reporting, or was this supposed to be filed under “C” is for Crank?

    Josh, the next time you float your “balanced” journalism bullshit, remember “reporting” like this.

  • Anonymous

    How am I defending him? I’m responding to the drumbeat of “McGinn’s for it, so I’m against it.” It’s a moronic way to argue, let alone make policy.

  • Girl w/o bangs

    Faster buses save me time. Not sure about your time, but mine is valuable. Pothole fixes are important for public safety and reducing the long-term cost of road repair.

  • shane phillips

    You don’t have to like someone to defend them against lies and baseless slander. You just have to have a shred of integrity.

  • shane phillips

    Seattle City Council decides how the money is spent. They have little reason to change it unless there’s a very good reason though, seeing as they’re pretty much the ones who decided on the allocations and the amount in the first place.

  • shane phillips

    Yeah, this is the type of argument Tim Eyman would make, and it’s the expectation that we can foresee everything we’ll need, in what ratios, at what times, that is hamstringing us into this one-size-fits-all revenue system that is very clearly failing to produce the infrastructure this city needs.

  • shane phillips

    So, I assume you’ll you be leading the charge on the ballot initiative next year to create a more progressive transportation funding system?

  • shane phillips

    This is silly. Do you actually believe none of the money will go to potholes or bus service, despite 80% of the total being dedicated to it? If not, what else could it possibly go to? Do you think there’s a chance in hell the council could get away with switching all the money to streetcars or bicycle infrastructure improvements? It’s one thing to think the money won’t be spent as it’s been allocated (a ridiculous thing, but we’ll put that aside), but it’s another thing entirely to actually claim that it won’t improve bus service or increase the amount of potholes being repaired. There is literally no sane argument you can make that would lead you to this conclusion.

  • shane phillips

    You realize how angry this would make Seattle voters, right? That any council member who actually voted for this would be out on their ass the next election. Pick another argument, cause this one is seriously pathetic.

  • FrequentPoster

    Fucking liar. Just under 20% of the money would go to street repair. Fortunately, this time the voters see through your cyclista bullshit.

  • Mr. X

    Also in response to anotherneighborhood activist – those allocations AREN’T line items – the departments will ultimately decide those, which is a rather significant difference.

  • Mr. X

    You obviously haven’t been around Seattle politics for long.

  • Big Jim Slade

    “There is literally no sane argument you can make that would lead you to this conclusion. ”

    Oh please shane. Give it up already. 20+ years of living in this region and a cursory look at most Seattle streets would lead anyone to my conclusion.

  • Big Jim Slade

    If your time is truly that valuable, save up for a scooter, bike or car. You are the master of your own destiny.

  • Mr. X

    …and heck, because there isn’t a specific project list they don’t even have to do that to spend most (if not all) of the maintenance money fulfilling the longstanding Hallivulcan demand that the City rebuild Terry Ave. (for just one likely example of how these funds could be misused if voters hand out this blank check). 

  • Jefferson

    We could hit reply on this all day for days ana, as I see you spend a good portion of your day doing just that all over this forum.  I can own my opinion, and dislike McGinn, and still believe that he influences what goes on with the money the voters of Seattle decide to give or not give, and at the end of the day, all you have is name calling, bullying with your fine words, and that little reply button so carry on.

  • Mr. X

    Hmm, my previous reply to this disappeared.

    Snarky reply – you obviously haven’t been around Seattle politics for long.  Just watch, 3 or 4 years in (at the most) the Council will be looking to reprogram these funds, and will face no consequences for doing so.

    Other reply – as it is now, without an actual project list, there’s nothing preventing them from programming every single maintenance dollar into appeasing a longtime Hallivulcan demand of rebuilding Terry Avenue (for just one example).  The so-called review panel – which will largely consist of the same City-friendly folks who wrote Prop 1 in the first place – will then sign off on this after the fact.  Or, if they’re really skeptical, will complain after the money has already been spent.

    That’s how things work in the real world, kiddo.

  • David Miller

    If Prop 1 goes down on Nov 8, I’ll start working on Nov 9 to bring back a better measure. I’ve said that all along.

  • shane phillips

    Yet another ridiculous argument. Seattle roads are bad, so spending more money on fixing them won’t do anything. Quite a leap you’re making.

  • Girl w/o bangs

    with whom

  • Anonymous

    “all you have is name calling, bullying with your fine words”

    Excuse me for trying to write well. I think your namesake would be embarrassed by your resentment and (mis)labelling me as a troll and bully. I work very hard to avoid fallacious arguments (ad hominim, name calling, guilt by association) which is a large proportion of many blogs. If you are referring to “moronic way to argue,” I stand by it as a reference to the suggestion (not just in your post) that if McGinn likes something we should be opposed to it. I do not think you are a moron, but we all act moronic at least occasionally.

    So, feel free to believe what you do, and to express your opinion, and I’ll do the same. If you don’t like to engage with someone, you too are free to ignore that little reply button. Cheers.

    p.s. Thanks for reminding me to spend less time here.

  • Forward Thinker

    By keeping the buses moving rather than having them weave in and out of traffic. Not to mention moving more people in the same constrained road space with a more efficient bus system

  • Forward Thinker

    After two years of McGinn as mayor, haven’t we learned that we need to elect people who are for something, not against everything.  David Miller is just another member of the naysaying, do nothing, NIMBY crowd that keeps us from ever getting anything done in this town. 

  • Guest

    Yeah, right. 

  • Guest

    This is the biggest lie about Prop. 1.  There is a specific project list. Not down to every pothole, but down to the number of bus corridors, specific bus improvements, number of neighborhood street repairs, number of bike and ped safety improvements – and most of them are explicitly prioritized according to existing plans.  This proposal is every bit as specific as Bridging the Gap when it went before the voters in 2006.  It’s just that the current mayoral administration is completely incompetent in communicating the facts in comparison to Team Nickels back in ’06.

  • shane phillips

    Can you outline what you would consider a better measure? Just broadly?

  • Guest

    Why are you so convinced this will happen when Bridging the Gap has been delivered almost exactly as advertised in 2006.  Actually, even better than advertised with more projects than promised being delivered.

  • Mr. X

    If I’m stuck behind that bus, it ain’t making my travel time faster – it makes it slower.  I’m not sure what planet you live on where this is not true.

    For one real world example, look at the U-District.  There are in-lane stops on the Ave, and this is why lot of other drives and I take Brooklyn, 15th, or 12th to avoid them, which actually slows those streets down too (albeit not as much). 

    You can eliminate left turns from 15th Ave NE to NE 45th Street (which has been done for peak hours, though the fact that it isn’t being enforced makes me suspect that City staff will use the resulting noncompliance to argue for the all-hours prohibition they initially proposed and backed off on in the face of community opposition.  Yeah, I know, call me cynical), but shaving 5 minutes off of the 44 isn’t going to attract significant new ridership.  It just won’t.

    I’m willing to entertain the idea of transit priority streets, but don’t try and convince me that most of the time it will speed trips for cars up, because they will almost always do the opposite. 

  • Mr. X

    David Miller has had a significant role in getting a ton of neighborhood matching fund  and other positive community projects done – far more, I suspect, than you or I have.  You don’t know what you’re talking about.

  • Mr. X

    Well, if they stick to the non-binding list I saw, the top two priorities I saw for corridor improvements are to put trolley wires in SLU (which could suck up a quarter of those funds) and extending the SLUT.

    Heck, the notion that they might keep the promise to spend $18 million on streetcar studies (for a system that would cost upwards of $1 billion that would mostly be better spent elsewhere, at least as far as extending the SLUT to the U-District and duplicating ST Link service is concerned) is enough to secure my hearty NO vote.

    And notwithstanding the (happy) fact that BTG was able to do a few extra projects in the midst of a recession that had driven construction costs way down, it’s interesting to note that almost every one of those $75+ million non-voted dollars the City raised with the accompanying parking tax all went to the Mercer project – which would have gone a long way toward doing the things they’re now trying to get us to impose a massively regressive tax on ourselves for.

    No way, no how – and I’m proud to be one of those awful “naysayers” on this issue.

    Way nay.

  • FrequentPoster

    It’s fun to see Publicola still shilling for Mayor McDope and his $60 car tax. Boy oh boy, I can hardly wait for your whining to start!

  • Shemlock Shomes

    Every time Ms. Barnett writes about anything anti-motorized vehicle, I am reminded of Municipal Court of Seattle Defendant #1073728 and her fifteen parking infractions within 4.5 years with charges, fines and interest totaling $1564.93.

  • Graham

    No one will work with you because you’re an arrogant asshole who thinks he’s smarter than everyone