Category: podcasts

Elections, homelessness, Mayor Harrell, podcasts

Seattle Nice: Harrell Talks Tough on Food Deserts and Homelessness

By Erica C. Barnett

Mayor Bruce Harrell has issued a fusillade of official announcements in the weeks leading up to the November 4 election, including one, last week, about legislation that would prohibit restrictive covenants that limit the size of grocery stores and pharmacies. On this week’s podcast, we discussed the timing and implications of the proposal, which Harrell pitched as one solution to the problem of “food deserts”—areas with few grocery stores (or pharmacies) where residents have to travel long distances to get basic items.

As I noted in my story about the plan, size restrictions didn’t prevent grocery stores from opening in the two locations the city gave as examples of this phenomenon. In one case, a Sprouts organic food store replaced a long-vacant Albertson’s, joining an Amazon Fresh and several cultural grocery stores to create a diverse mini-food hub in North Seattle. In the second, neighbors successfully lobbied for a Trader Joe’s to anchor a development that brought hundreds of new apartments Greenwood; that project replaced a single-story Safeway and a parking lot, and is just four blocks away from a giant Fred Meyer.

The size of grocery stores in Seattle is limited primarily by zoning, not rarely-used restrictive covenants; in the lowest-density neighborhood commercial zones, for instance, grocery stores can’t be larger than 10,000 square feet. And the problem in food deserts isn’t that grocery stores are too small—it’s that there aren’t enough (or any) grocery stores of any size in those areas, while wealthier, whiter neighborhoods like Ballard are almost overrun with options.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

You could argue (and I have) that Harrell’s anti-covenant proposal is a solution in search of a problem. But what about other ideas for enticing grocery stores to open in Seattle, like a separate Harrell proposal to simply exempt all grocery stores from state business and occupation taxes? We were all pretty skeptical of this idea, since tax breaks aren’t free—when the government cuts taxes for one group, they always pass the losses on to someone else.

We also discussed ongoing turmoil at the King County Regional Homelessness Authority, whose CEO, Kelly Kinnison, was recently the target of several toxic-workplace allegations. Kinnison’s only penalty was a round of executive coaching and a written reminder that the KCRHA prohibits retaliation, but the agency itself still faces criticism from all sides—including KCRHA board member Harrell, who has recently been arguing that Seattle spends more than its fair share on the regional authority. Sandeep said it’s time to “write [the KCRHA] off as a failure, because it is a failure.” To which I asked: “But then what?”

Elections, housing, King County, Mayor Harrell, podcasts, Police

Seattle Nice: Harrell’s Election-Year Budget, King County’s RealPage Ban, and Mayor Pete’s Endorsement

 

By Erica C. Barnett

On this week’s episode of Seattle Nice, we discussed Mayor Bruce Harrell’s election-year budget proposal, a one-year plan for 2026 that increases spending by more than $50 million, including “one-time” programs that will almost certainly require ongoing funds. Harrell’s budget also adds $26 million to hire new police officers, on top of the Seattle Police Department’s existing budget; public safety, including police and fire, now makes up more than half the city’s discretionary budget.

The one-time spending in Harrell’s budget includes temporary funding for programs that are likely to lose federal funding under the Trump Administration, as well as assistance for immigrants being targeted by the federal government. These needs are likely to accelerate, rather than diminish, over the next several years.

Sandeep and I actually agreed that the city should be doing more to address future budget deficits (Harrell’s budget, not counting the one-time funds, assumes a deficit that will grow from $140 million in 2027 to $374 million in 2029). Where we departed ways was on the question of whether the city should be “”goring some oxes” in the budget by telling some human services organizations they’re “not going to get money because we’re not seeing results. … I think there would be a human cry coming from the progressive side saying, this is austerity budget[ing]. ”

While it’s definitely true that slashing the city’s budget for human services would anger progressives, I argued that the call for cuts seems to always focus on programs designed to help people directly with needs like food, housing, and other basic needs, rather than departments like SPD, whose funding only goes up every year. (Police are always a sacred cow, never a gored ox). This year, public safety departments will consume more than half the city’s discretionary budget, with SPD accounting for half that amount, at $486 million.

Perhaps the city could reduce some of this year’s expansion plans for SPD, I suggested, by taking a peek into the extremely opaque police budget and finding some money there; personally, I’d stop the CCTV surveillance program, which Harrell added to the budget as a new ongoing obligation last year, and look for other places where money is sitting unused or being spent ineffectively.

We also talked about the King County Council’s recent vote to ban the use of rent-pricing software like RealPage. David noted that bans on rent-fixing software are similar to “trust-busting,” in which the federal government cracked down on mergers, price-fixing, and other anti-competitive practices. Landlords use algorithmic pricing tools to charge the highest rent possible, a rate that can vary day by day—much like Ticketmaster, Expedia, and Uber use “dynamic” pricing to determine the price of tickets, flights, hotels, and rides.

Finally, we all issued our verdict on former transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg’s endorsement of Harrell. Our assessment: A big “whatever.”

podcasts, Police, Privacy

Seattle Nice: Does Police Surveillance Make Us Safer?

By Erica C. Barnett

Seattle Nice is back after a couple weeks away, and we’re talking about police surveillance in the age of Trump. As PubliCola readers are surely aware, the Seattle council just passed legislation sent down by Mayor Bruce Harrell to install live, 24/7 police surveillance cameras in several new neighborhoods—a rapid expansion of a “pilot” program so new that the city has no data on its efficacy.

Civil rights and privacy groups, immigrant rights organizations, and the city’s own civil rights office, surveillance working group, and Community Police Commission opposed the expansion, as did virtually all of the people who showed up last week to express their opposition before the council’s lopsided 7-2 vote.

In our discussion of Seattle’s expanding web of police surveillance, we debated whether police cameras are effective at preventing and solving violent crimes—the stated purpose of the legislation—and if the loss of privacy is worth it to have a safer city.

You probably know where I come down on all this stuff. I’m not a fan of police surveillance, particularly when it targets so-called “high crime” neighborhoods while allowing residents of “safe” neighborhoods to go about their lives without cameras on every corner .But the potential downsides go much further than standard cop-brain overreach (i.e.: if cameras don’t make you feel safer, maybe it’s because you’re doing something wrong) at a time when the Trump administration and red states are seeking to use footage like the kind SPD is now collecting to target immigrants and people seeking abortions and gender-affirming care.

 

Not surprisingly, Sandeep and David had a somewhat different view—Sandeep says bring on the surveillance state (“I use Clear” at the airport, he said gleefullyy, in perhaps the most shocking revelation on this week’s show), and argued that the council has “built safeguards” into the legislation, like a provision that says the city can turn off the cameras for up to 60 days if the Trump administration issues a subpoena for footage.

David said a lot of people probably feel safer knowing police are watching, and suggested that my headline, “City Expands Police Surveillance Despite Overwhelming Opposition, Concerns About Civil Liberties,” was unsubstantiated, because the people who show up at public comment only make up a small percentage of the population. In other words: There could be a silent, unseen majority who supports police surveillance because it makes them feel safe.

We also discussed the mayor’s recent proposal to use city funding—$20 million a year—to help Black Seattle residents buy houses. Harrell didn’t release any specific details about his proposal at an announcement last week, and it seems likely that the money will come out of existing Office of Housing funds. Sandeep said the proposal is a sign Harrell’s campaign is taking affordable housing seriously; I argued that it’s more important to look at a candidate’s record than their rhetoric—particularly with Harrell, who’s been in elected office for most of the last 20 years but perennially campaigns as the candidate of change and new ideas.

City Council, Elections, housing, podcasts, Taxes

This Week on PubliCola: August 10, 2025
The crowd begins to gather at Mayor Bruce Harrell’s party early on Election Night

A huge election upset led this packed week, which included two podcasts (plus two-thirds of Seattle Nice on KUOW!)

By Erica C. Barnett

Monday, August 4

New Forecast Reduces City’s Projected Revenue Shortfall to $150 Million

Seattle’s latest revenue forecast, which will form the basis of the 2026-2027 biennial budget, reduced the. city’s projected two-year budget shortfall from around $240 million to about $150 million. The city’s revenue forecasters used a more optimistic model than the April forecast.

Seattle Nice: Seattle Sues Trump, Camping Ban Proposed, Business Tax Hike Heads to Ballot

On the first of two Seattle Nice episodes this week, we discussed the broader implications of a proposed ballot initiative that would make it illegal to fall asleep outdoors in unincorporated King County, a Seattle ballot measure to raise business and occupation taxes to pay for housing stability and human services, and a lawsuit filed by City Attorney Ann Davison, a Republican who’s struggling to retain support, over a seven-month-old Trump executive.

Tuesday, August 5

Business Tax Will Be on November Ballot, Despite Council Objections Over Spending “Buckets”

The city council approved the business and occupation tax proposal for the November ballot, overcoming objections from some councilmembers that it shouldn’t be dedicated to any specific purpose, but instead should go toward any current or future general-fund purpose elected officials decide they want to fund. In general, voters approve taxes for specific purposes, and there is no recent precedent for sending a blank-check tax measure to the ballot.

In Anti-Incumbent Rout, Progressive Candidates Lead In All Local Races

This week’s local elections represented a massive rebuke of the people elected in the wake of COVID and the 2020 protests against police brutality. Across the board in Seattle, progressive candidates were leading big, from Katie Wilson (running against Mayor Bruce Harrell) to Erika Evans (headed for victory against Davison).

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

Thursday, August 7

Council Amendments to Comprehensive Plan Reveal Competing Priorities

City councilmembers have proposed more than 100 amendments to Mayor Bruce Harrell’s much-delayed Comprehensive Plan update, which only deals with neighborhood residential (former single-family) zoning. Some amendments would further shrink the size of neighborhood centers—small nodes of potential future density—while others would expand them and create new incentives for housing.

Seattle Nice: Election Results Emergency Edition!

On this week’s second edition of the podcast, we debated what’s behind the shift toward progressive candidates this year. I argued that it’s a combination of people’s desire to have people in office who’ll fight Trump policies that impact Seattle and a rejection of politicians who’ve prioritized cracking down on minor crimes over solving the affordability crisis; Sandeep says voters are reflexively “lurching to the left” because of Trump, not any specific local issues.

Friday, August 8

Another Tree Petition, Another Council Staff Departure, and Another Round of Election Results

A petition to “save the trees” is more blatantly misleading than usual, as the trees in question aren’t threatened by the development people are protesting. Maritza Rivera can’t seem to keep staff for more than six months. And the latest election results put Katie Wilson at 50.2 percent to Harrell’s 41.7, while Ann Davison and City Council President Sara Nelson lost ground too: The two incumbents have 33.8 percent and 35.8 percent of the vote, respectively.

City Council, Elections, housing, podcasts

Another Tree Petition, Another Council Staff Departure, and Another Round of Election Results
Google image of the site before demolition; the “million dollar house” is the white house in foreground, with the closest tree to the property visible on the right.

1. More than 400 people have signed a Change.org petition imploring the city to “Save Three Sisters Park in Ballard,” which the petition page describes as “a trio of trees that must be over 100 years old” that, the petition claims, are now threatened by development.

“What was once a quiet refuge could soon be overshadowed by development. Someone’s living room window will be mere feet away from what was once a community space. All for what? So that some corporate entity can replace the existing million dollar home with SEVEN million dollar homes. Lining the pockets of capitalism.”

Just a few problems with that description. First, there’s no park called “Three Sisters Park”—as with other campaigns to whip up opposition to new housing, the petitioners have anthropomorphized the trees. (See also: “Luma,” “Kaia,” “Astra,” and of course, “Grandma’s Cedar.” Second, the “park” isn’t even a park—it’s a stand of three Western Red Cedars on what’s known as an “unopened street end,” like a planting strip that functions as a barrier to traffic, owned by the Seattle Department of Transportation. (The trees’ age is unknown).

Third, and most important: The trees aren’t threatened by the development next door. According to an SDOT spokesperson, “There are no current plans to prune or remove the Western Redcedars.If construction requires pruning in the future, the developer will need to file an amendment to the permit. This would be reviewed by SDOT Urban Forestry to assess the necessity and impact. If approved, the work would need to be completed by a Registered Tree Service Provider (RTSP).”

In addition, the developer, MRN Homes, plans to plant four new trees on a site that currently has nowsignificant trees, just bushes, adding tree canopy in the future. (It’s also ironic that the petition posits proximity to trees as a bad thing for people living in these future townhouses, when their more common tactic is to claim people living in new buildings will lose the benefits of shade if trees are removed).

Finally, it’s pretty disingenuous to claim that a “million-dollar home” is being replaced by “seven million-dollar homes.” MRN, a local Seattle builder, has built some large, almost-million-dollar townhouses in the city. However, their smaller townhouses sell for a more typical-for-Seattle price of around $700,000—not affordable housing, by any stretch, but considerably more in reach than the $2 million to $3 million single-family houses currently for sale in the neighborhood near this development site.

As for the “million-dollar home” that was on the site—an 875-square foot, 2-bedroom house from the 1960s? That “house” was valuable not because of the house itself but because of the land underneath it, which is zoned for multifamily use.

2. City Councilmember Maritza Rivera has lost another legislative assistant—the fourth person to leave the position in the 19 months Rivera has been in office. Unlike most other council members, Rivera has just two legislative assistants, or LAs—longtime aide Wendy Sykes, and another position that has gone under several different titles in Rivera’s brief time on the council, including “policy lead,” “policy director,” and “district director.”

The turnover rate is higher, by far, than in most council offices, which tend to have more staff and retain them longer. (Only Rob Saka has had similarly high staff turnover).

The latest staffer, who we were unable to reach, lasted less than six months. That’s actually a better record than some of Rivera’s previous staffers, who’ve lasted between four and six months. In 2023, according to the Stranger, 26 employees at the city’s Office of Arts and Culture signed off on a letter complaining about a toxic environment at the office, quoting workers who called her a micromanager who treated them with condescension.

3. Friday update: Yup, Thursday’s results were an anomaly. As of the latest vote count, Katie Wilson leads the mayor’s race with more than 50 percent of the vote, to Harrell’s 41.7 percent. That’s a terrible result for an incumbent.

Thursday’s election numbers, which reflected the second set of ballots counted since Tuesday (election night), saw a notable shift away from the progressive trend in Wednesday’s results, moving the needle back slightly toward centrist incumbents. In the latest batch of about 32,000 ballots, challenger Katie Wilson led Mayor Bruce Harrell 47 to 45; challenger Erika Evans led incumbent City Attorney Ann Davison 53.4 to 36.7; and challenger Dionne Foster led incumbent Sara Nelson 54.9 to 39.3.

Overall, Wilson is currently leading Harrell 47.8 to 43.8, Evans is leading Davison 53 to 36, and Foster is leading Nelson 55.4 to 38. Rinck has 76.7 percent of the vote.

It’s unclear why Thursday’s ballots swung slightly back toward centrist candidates. Thursday’s count may have included ballots mailed before election day, while Wednesday’s reflected ballots dropped off at drop boxes on Tuesday; later votes almost invariably trend more progressive.

In the race for City Council in District 2—the seat currently held by appointee Mark Solomon—city land-use attorney Eddie Lin was leading SDOT outreach staffer (and former Harrell transportation advisor) Adonis Ducksworth by 46 percent to 30 percent overall, reflecting a slight gain by Lin (considered the more progressive candidate in this race) in the latest round of ballots, in which Lin got 47.7 percent to Ducksworth’s 30.4.

As of Friday, there are about 15,000 Seattle ballots left uncounted.

4. If you couldn’t get enough of Sandeep and me beefing over the election results, and/or if you’d like to hear what an actual current council member thinks Tuesday’s election means, check out Week in Review on KUOW this week, with host Bill Radke, City Councilmember Joy Hollingsworth, and us two chuckleheads. It’s a fun, lively listen.

Elections, podcasts

🚨🚨Seattle Nice: Election Results Emergency Edition!🚨🚨

By Erica C. Barnett

We recorded this week’s Seattle Nice podcast on Wednesday, just before the afternoon drop of results from King County Elections reinforced what was already clear on Election Night: Progressive candidates swept the local primary election in Seattle, coming in ahead of incumbents in the races for mayor, city council, and city attorney.

And it isn’t just a challengers-vs.-incumbents phenomenon. Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck, who was winning her 2024 race with 76.6 percent of the vote as of Wednesday afternoon), is poised to overtake Sally Bagshaw for the second-highest showing, by percentage, in any council primary election; first place is held by former councilmember Sue Donaldson, who won 81.5 percent in her primary in 1991.

Looking at just the latest batch of election results from Wednesday (which I’ll update to reflect Thursday’s vote drop when it arrives), challenger Katie Wilson was beating incumbent mayor Bruce Harrell 48 percent to 43.5 percent; challenger Erika Evans was beating incumbent city attorney Ann Davison 53 percent to 35.8 percent; and city council Position 9 challenger Dionne Foster was beating incumbent Sara Nelson by 55.8 to 37 percent.

UPDATE: Thursday’s results looked much more like election night, with Wilson leading Harrell, just in the new batch of votes, 47 to 45; Evans leading Davison 53.4 to 36.7; and Foster leading Nelson 54.9 to 39.3. Overall, Wilson is currently leading Harrell 47.8 to 43.8, Evans is leading Davison 53 to 36, and Foster is leading Nelson 55.4 to 38. Rinck has 76.7 percent of the vote.

Meanwhile, in the race for District 2, city land-use attorney Eddie Lin was leading SDOT outreach staffer (and former Harrell transportation advisor) Adonis Ducksworth 46 percent to 30 percent overall.

So what’s behind these results? I think it’s two things. First, people are terrified about what Trump’s policies will mean for Seattle, and they don’t see city leaders—particularly Republican city attorney Ann Davison—addressing the situation with urgency.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

Second, and related: Four years since the backlash election of 2021, voters have had plenty of time to see results from the people they elected, and they’re not impressed. Affordability is an urgent issue to Seattle residents struggling to live in an increasingly expensive city, but the council, mayor, and city attorney have focused more on arresting drug users and increasing fines for graffiti than providing affordable housing and services for people in need. Seattle has seen what the leadership of Ann Davison, Sara Nelson, and Bruce Harrell looks like, and they aren’t impressed.

Sandeep disagrees that people are concerned about, or even aware of, the policies Seattle leaders have been passing and overlooking over the last four years. He argues that local politics are now nationalized, and that fear of Trump has translated into a kind of throw-the-bums-out overreach that has resulted in a “lurch to the left” among Seattle’s “fickle” vote base. In this theory, Ann Davison lost not because she relentlessly promoted and passed policies that are broadly unpopular, from ending therapeutic court to reinstating ineffective banishment zones for people caught using drugs, but because she has an “R” by her name.

And David kind of agrees with both of us, saying people are “taking out their anxieties and their frustrations about the status quo against the incumbents who are in office,” but also that Katie Wilson is speaking to the concerns of ordinary people—like why a slice of pizza in Seattle costs $8.

Listen: