Tim Burgess is pushing a measure to outlaw panhandling near ATM’s, or parking meters. One of the reasons he says that people from the rest of the city and elsewhere are afraid to come downtown. “The visitors do not feel comfortable walking from their hotels, to the market, or catching the bus without being approached by many different panhandlers and street people along their route.” That may be, but I doubt that people asking for change near parking meters (aka, everywhere downtown) is really among the top concerns of downtown residents.
In the couple years I’ve lived downtown, I’ve seen countless things worse than yellie beggars who are pretty much anywhere on the street. And while much of it is already illegal, I think the city should probably deal with open drug dealing, and use, prostitution, late night noise, and drunks spilling out of clubs yelling “Wooooooooooooooooo” and getting into fights from before midnight to well past closing time on a Friday or Saturday night. (Just to be clear, I love living downtown, but there are problems.) Talking to other Belltown residents about the proposed law, the reaction has usually been somewhere between “it’s a war on homelessness” to “I guess it’s worth trying.” Personally, I’m against it, but not terribly so, but I haven’t heard anyone say that dealing with beggars is a high priority.
So while I applaud Burgess for at least trying, I still don’t feel represented on the council. I know, I know everybody represents me, and if I want something done, let someone on the relevant committee know. But I’m relatively well informed, and I have no idea who sits on what committee, or who among all of my supposed representatives on the city council would be receptive to downtown issues. I’d really prefer to have my council member, rather than having to guess who might be the most helpful when none of them seem to be.
Why not use the same process for City Council positions as we use for school board? In the primary the candidates run in a district, then face the voters citywide in the general election. It seems to combine the best of both worlds — accountability to a core constituency, but with a check to prevent officeholders from becoming too parochial in their service to a single district.
Well, you’re right. But that’s the point, isn’t it? If you don’t know who represents you, you can’t hold anyone responsible.
The people I know who live downtown tell me that the problems are drug dealing and violence. The homeless aren’t at the top of the lsit.
The real problem is that we have all of these unemployed and mentally ill homeless who are living the good life and won’t give it up.
drug dealing, panhandling, violence….seems as thought the downtown area has always had those issues – nothing new.
Tip O’Neill famously said, “All politics is local.” This isn’t always a good thing, in fact it rarely is, because Congress is full of provincials. (Jim McDermott is an exception; he actually cared about what would happen to the innocent people living in Baghdad before the U.S. bombing started.)
Well, here’s an idea: Let’s do away with congressional districts, ignore state boundaries, and elect all congressmen and senators at large to represent all of us.
This way maybe we could defeat the provincialism that produces perennial gridlock (alliteration intentional) in D.C. — and get something done about America’s national problems.
So, let’s put all the seats in Congress on one ballot, and everybody votes on ’em, and we’ll see what we get. And if Democrats win every single seat in Congress, well, that’s better than the “tyranny of one” we have now.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....77910.html
I had an important issue to discuss with one City Councilmember some years ago, and when I requested an appointment, her aide wanted to know the subject matter. When I explained it, she barked at me “Why do you want to talk to (name of councilmember) about that?! That’s not one of her issues!!” The soonest I could get an appointment was six weeks later, long after the outcome was to be decided.
Yes, district elections or proportional representation, anything to give us some accountability on City Council — not to mention representation of minority viewpoints.
Amen! Districts are a long needed reform that somehow most other cities have adopted. They are the best way to connect with city government and they are a way to grow leadership here without candidates reaching deep into developer and big money pockets. Right now we have virtually no accountability for our (overpaid) city council members.
I don’t see panhandlers, by themselves, being a problem. The perceived problem by those from outside Seattle is the question of what will happen if the person refuses the panhandler’s request. Will he/she get violent? Is there an implied threat behind the “Buddy, can you spare a dime/quarter/dollar/any spare change?”
I’ve got a simple solution to panhandlers. I rarely carry cash. If someone asks me for money, I shrug, and just explain that I’m not carrying any cash. I’ve yet to have a problem with that solution.
But what I will do is have a few gift coupons in my pocket for a fast food outlet nearby. If they look like they could really use a break, I give them one of those. Some obviously don’t want them, and I see them trying to sell them to the next victim to come along. But others are quite grateful – it allows them to get a hot cup of coffee on a cold day, etc.
District elections will guarantee that we get more councilmembers with an exceedingly narrow focus, the kind who will fight to the death to keep out a halfway house, or a children’s hospital and who will insist that the number one city priority should become putting a stop sign at the corner of Boring Ave and Howell Do I Care Street, and so on.