Week in Review: August 2, 2024 - with Lex Vaughn

“The Stranger newspaper sold to former state legislator Brady Walkinshaw” by Ashley Hiruko from KUOW

“Democratic voters still haven’t coalesced behind a candidate for Commissioner of Public Lands, NPI poll finds” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate

“Wildfire smoke increases dementia risk more than other forms of air pollution, landmark study finds” by Alex Wigglesworth from The Los Angeles Times

@houseRneighbors on Twitter/X: “Heads up! Big Business backed poll in the field last night that would propose a competing measure to I-137 that would increase the housing levy and allow some of the proceeds to go to social housing, but would only define social housing as going up to 80% of Area Median Income!”

“Minimum Wage Workers Can’t Afford Council Member Joy Hollingsworth’s Attack on Their Paycheck” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger

“City’s Plan to Jail Misdemeanor Offenders at SCORE in Des Moines Moves Forward Despite Concerns” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola

@AshleyNerbovig on Twitter/X: “NOW: City Council Public Safety Committee meets to discuss proposed SCORE contract. The contract estimates spending at least $2 million in coming years on additional jail beds at the Des Moines facility.”

“Public Defenders Pull Out of Talks after Mayor Reportedly Ignores Concerns over Jail Contract” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger

“Council Fizz: Moore To Propose “Prostitution Loitering” Bill, Anti-Woo Graffiti May Be Coming From Inside the Building” from PubliCola

Find stories that Crystal is reading here

Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here

[00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you could do is leave a review wherever you listen. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at OfficialHacksAndWonks.com and in our episode notes.

Our primary election ends this Tuesday, so check out our candidate interviews to help make decisions about how you'll vote. And be sure to mail your ballot so that it's postmarked by August 6th, or return it to a ballot dropbox before 8 p.m. this coming Tuesday, August 6th. It is important and it does count.

Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling - and we all love The Needling - Lex Vaughn!

This week, we received news that was pretty surprising to a lot of people - that The Stranger, Seattle's notorious alt media outlet and self-proclaimed only newspaper, has new ownership. Brady Walkinshaw's company, Noisy Creek, has purchased The Stranger - which was pretty big news. How did you take this?

[00:01:49] Lex Vaughn: I think initially people are scared when they hear that a publication has been sold, especially a local one, because we have so few sources - in general here in this country - of just a diverse set of real independent local news. So naturally, I think there's a little bit of anxiety - like who are these people? What's the agenda? Is the spirit of The Stranger going to change forever based on who bought this? And overall, I think as more information has come out this week about who owns it and who's being brought into the fold, it actually seems really exciting because there's just some really incredible, talented, diverse set of people that are being brought in to The Stranger. So it seems like overall - even the prior owners are excited about the expanded investment here. And I know there's some talk of - David Kroman at The Seattle Times pointed out that Brady Walkinshaw lost a race in Seattle to Pramila Jayapal because The Stranger endorsed her over him. But he was CEO of Grist - environmental journalism news outlet - and over the last decade has mostly become very interested in just improving the quality of journalism that's available to all kinds of communities. So I think overall, if you look at who they brought in, it just seems like it's a thoughtful change that could bode well for The Stranger and local journalism in general. So it'll be exciting to see what happens.

[00:03:19] Crystal Fincher: I agree with you. There was understandably, especially from people who work in journalism, kind of an immediate reaction of fear because we're so used to hearing - some hedge fund, some private equity firm has taken over this paper, and that means that layoffs are imminent, and they notoriously drive things that they buy into the ground. And there are so many examples of it from national outlets to local media outlets. And we've seen so many local media outlets disappear like that - we've already endured the loss of the Seattle P.I. We don't have much local journalism left here, especially legacy media. The Stranger is the alternative - certainly more progressive than the more moderate, centrist, center-right paper that The Times is. But it is hard for a lot of people, especially in the city of Seattle, to feel like they're heard and like they can connect to what's being written. So I totally get that. What I - similar to you - does make me hopeful and optimistic and excited to see a lot of things was the immediate announcement that everyone had been offered new jobs. So Walkinshaw is the largest shareholder, chairman, publisher of Noisy Creek - and they acquired The Stranger, The Portland Mercury, the events site EverOut, Bold Type Tickets, so kind of the whole shebang. These were taken all over and we're going to maintain the footprint that we have and expand. And if Walkinshaw had no background in journalism, would be like - And what makes you think you could do that? I have been following Grist over the past several years and was worried, kind of in the same vein, when he went to Grist and that was shortly after his stint in politics. But watching that - was very pleasantly surprised with how things proceeded with Grist. And I did find it notable that a number of Grist's current and former employees were like - Hey, this is a good thing. We were happy with how he treated us, the respect that we felt, how he grew the publication. And so, hey, maybe someone who actually knows what they're doing in journalism - who, as you said, has assembled a team that is diverse and that excites a lot of people - maybe this is a very positive development. Maybe this is what a market like Seattle really needs. And maybe this is providing more long-term stability that wasn't there before.

[00:05:47] Lex Vaughn: If they really play out the vision that they've put forth this week and really have the financial backing for it, this could be really one of the most inspirational local news stories in the country. So I think it's really exciting - I mean, The New York Times covered it, so I do think national media are interested in watching what becomes of this. The only question I still have, and I think a lot of people have, is - well, this sounds amazing, but good people having enough money to do this? What? Honestly, if you've been following journalism the last decade or two, it does seem like - yes, this has been a very difficult industry to be a part of and stay alive in. And even the big players struggle. And the issue is just money. Well, how are you going to have enough money? But there's also been the problem of old legacy local media just not pivoting and being flexible and adaptable enough and really valuing younger talent more. And I'll go ahead and call The Seattle Times out - you suck at that. You suck at that. And that's a major strength that this publication has here. And they picked a great editor-in-chief - fabulous experience at the Rolling Stone and ProPublica, that's legit good stuff right there. That's solid, very respectable journalism background right there. So it's exciting to see that really quality journalism is being valued there. And it seems like they're going to be kind of a nimble, well-funded local media organization like people have kind of been hoping and wishing to see for a while. But again, we've wanted something like this for a long time - a lot of cities and places in the country have wanted something like this to happen, but there usually just isn't the money. So I think my main question is - this sounds fabulous, but where did the money come from? Were you a trust fund kid? What happened here?

[00:07:40] Crystal Fincher: I think that's a fair question. I know a lot of people are wondering that. I've also heard people wondering about - well, endorsements are very impactful. Certainly, The Stranger has been very influential for Democratic and progressive candidates in the Seattle area. Walkinshaw has said he won't be directly involved in the endorsements process as the publisher. For me, what I am more interested in seeing, what I feel is more impactful overall - I feel like endorsements are an extension of just the political leanings of the editorial board. And so what is that going to look like? And is that going to bleed into coverage and the way things are framed and characterized?

[00:08:22] Lex Vaughn: I really hope not. I really hope there isn't suddenly some weird neoliberal bent at The Stranger. But the staff itself - I don't think would voluntarily go in that direction at all - the staff that I see. So I'm not too worried about it right now.

[00:08:39] Crystal Fincher: And one thing that I think escaped a lot of people's notice because they're - Whoa, this former elected official's taking this and people looking at a distrust of kind of politicians overall and being like, what nefarious agenda is at play here? Where really, I think Brady Walkinshaw does have credibility as a executive in journalism and has a resume that speaks very well for him in that vein. But we do actually have not a former, but a current elected official right now who is an owner of a publication - Port of Seattle Commissioner and Director of Strategic Initiatives for Mayor Harrell. Port of Seattle Commissioner Sam Cho is an owner of Northwest Asian Weekly, which is certainly an influential publication here in the Seattle area. It's certainly written on people in power here. And that-

[00:09:31] Lex Vaughn: They published a recent thing that Tanya Woo submitted, right?

[00:09:37] Crystal Fincher: Well, you know, there is, there has been very interesting coverage and knowing that someone who works for the mayor, someone who is a elected Port of Seattle commissioner may have in there - and what I saw is that financial details of that weren't disclosed. If questions are going to be asked of one publication, I do think questions should be asked of another, particularly with a sitting elected official, because that seems like there are inherently conflicts there. But it's really interesting to see. And also just the entire landscape overall is going through so much change and churn that maybe there is - I'm not aware of sitting officials owning things. I think of Bloomberg in New York - he was obviously in media long before he was elected, but that comes up. But there aren't many that I think of there.

[00:10:21] Lex Vaughn: In general, it's just a fact of life that every publisher and owner of a media organization, even if they say they don't have a bias - of course they do. But to varying degrees, there are established walls put in place between ownership and the staff of a newsroom. And often that ends up being a battle. Like when I was at The Seattle Times, our whole newsroom signed a public petition against our editorial board and ownership for some of the kind of basic free advertising they were giving some Republican candidates. So it's a part of journalism - that often newsrooms try to separate themselves from the ownership and keep their integrity. And some newsrooms have to battle, and journalists have to battle for that separation more than others. And you just hope that a good publication has less of that war going on, period.

[00:11:14] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, we will certainly continue to pay attention to that. Also this week, a poll came out that has worried a lot of Democrats - fearing that Democratic candidates could potentially get locked out of the general election in the Commissioner for Public Lands race. In this poll commissioned by Northwest Progressive Institute, it shows that while nearly half of likely voters for the August primary reported that they're not sure who they're voting for. As it stands now, and this was in the field from July 24th and 25th, so a week after primary ballots came out where people become aware that there is an election happening - regular people, obviously. Hacks and wonks have been paying attention to this the entire time, but most - the average voter figures that out when they receive their ballot. It has Jaime Herrera Beutler at 18%, Sue Kuehl Pedersen - I hope I pronounced that right - at 12%. And then - who are widely considered to be the leading Democratic candidates - Dave Upthegrove at 6%, Kevin Van De Wege at 5%, Patrick DePoe at 4%, and also Allen Lebovitz 3%, Jeralee Anderson, 5%. So quite a ways behind the two leading candidates right now in this poll who are Republicans. Now, again, really important to mention - 48% are Not Sure. That's a really big percentage following the first weekend of voting in this window where people have their ballots and can return them at any time until August 6th - make sure you return your ballots by August 6th. But really interesting to see. What was your reaction when you saw this?

[00:13:02] Lex Vaughn: I was like - Whoa, sound the alarm - because there's some kind of belief among too many people that the primaries don't really matter, especially in a state where you feel like everything's pretty safely Democratic or whatever. Oh, whatever, I'll end up with two blue options for the general, probably. But this is one race where it's like - wow, this is Lands Commissioner. This is about how we treat the environment in the state. It's something we love and really feel passionate about protecting. And the two over-the-top leading candidates right now in this poll are Republican. Yeah, Jamie 18%, Sue 12%. The next Democrat with the most support is Dave Upthegrove with 6%. So he's only getting half the support of one of these leading Republican candidates. This is really surprising to me that this situation is happening, but I'm like - Oh, this is bad. Hopefully one of these Democratic candidates pull it out and end up in the general election. I'm sure a lot of people, when they get their ballot, just pick based on party. Or, I admittedly get out The Stranger cheat sheet because I don't have the time to research everything. So I'm hopeful that one of these Democratic candidates will make it to the general. But this poll is pretty alarming.

[00:14:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it shows that even after voting has started, Democrats have not coalesced behind a candidate. And support among Democrats is varied. Certainly, if you look at the endorsements - we talked about this a couple of weeks ago on a week-in-review - but The Times and The Urbanist have endorsed Patrick DePoe, The Stranger endorsed Dave Upthegrove. Lots of people pull - when it is time to vote, they'll look at their voter guide and read those statements. They'll also look up who has endorsed who. As you said, lots of people go to The Stranger cheat sheet or The Times cheat sheet for who they've endorsed. So a lot, certainly, to be decided upon. But another very influential aspect is the spending. How much communication is happening? I think one of the challenges is that certainly Jaime Herrera Beutler has a larger statewide profile, is more known across the state - having been a congressional representative, representing more people than most of these others. We're looking at Dave Upthegrove and Kevin Van De Wege - I think they're largely known in King County and not necessarily beyond that. And even saying "in King County," Dave Upthegrove represented a legislative district in the Legislature and a district in the King County Council, so even saying countywide is probably a stretch. Van De Wege - legislative district, not a big footprint. And so they have a lot of work to do to communicate who they are, to even let voters know that they exist. I know for a lot of listeners of this program - if you and your circles pay attention to politics regularly, you're very familiar with these people and have been for quite some time. But it is always useful to remember that regular people - they don't function like that. This does not make it onto their radars. And it is also helpful to remember that it's not like people are being ignorant by doing that or just cynically tuning out. We do have social media platforms that are actively suppressing and hiding political speech - and it's harder to get around. So if something's not a big headline for an extended period of time, and if it's not governor, if it's not President or, you know-

[00:16:31] Lex Vaughn: It's really hard to break through with the local news.

[00:16:34] Crystal Fincher: Yes. Yeah. So that's more challenging. And we've also lost a lot of local media, so things that used to be headlines on local papers in communities across the state - they don't exist anymore or their coverage is on a much smaller footprint than it used to be. So there are some challenges. And that's partly why it costs so much money to run these elections - because you have to pay to get in front of people's faces. You have to pay to air your ads, your videos that people see online, and the banner ads, and the commercials that people see on TV, and the mailers that come in your mailbox. That all costs money, but that is the only way that you can let a lot of people know that you exist and get your message out. It is not really penetrating in any other way. I think this poll really is showing that messages are not penetrating naturally - they aren't getting it from evening news and local papers in a way that is really getting through.

And so, looking at the spending in this race has been interesting - because although we see where a lot of endorsements have gone and LD party endorsements have gone, the spending is a bit different. Kevin Van De Wege, who has not received many Democratic and institutional endorsements - certainly he's supported by firefighters' unions and I think another union or two, spending on his behalf. And independent expenditure spending in that race is humongous with him being the biggest recipient. The last time I looked, it was over $700,000 of communication, a couple of statewide mailers. It costs like a quarter million dollars to send a mailer statewide. It's not cheap. They've done a couple of them for him, cable TV ads. So he seems to be communicating more than other cand- I mean, not seems to be - his campaign and independent expenditures communicating on his behalf. An independent expenditure is basically electioneering activity that is not coordinated directly with a campaign, like statewide PACs - they're not super PACs that anything can happen with them. But in the state, you can give without spending limits before a certain time to these PACs and they can electioneer in support of or in opposition to a candidate. But what they can't do is coordinate with the campaign. They can't call up and be like, What are you talking about? Well, we're going to talk about this and we're going to. You can't do that. So they try and pick up signals from what's publicly happening. They will see a mailer that comes out, an ad on TV, and be like - Okay, I see what they're saying. I see what they're doing. I'm going to try and do something that complements that. But the bottom line is Kevin Van De Wege has had more of that activity done on his behalf. Behind him is Dave Upthegrove that has had some activity there, not as much as Van De Wege. And then behind that on the Democratic side is Patrick DePoe. So you look at the spending story, it's kind of opposite to the endorsement story. So really up in the air as to how this finally ends up.

[00:19:34] Lex Vaughn: I haven't seen any advertising for any of these candidates so far. Maybe they're just all focused, or a lot of them are focused, on other areas of the state. Maybe Dave Upthegrove feels like he's got enough name recognition here that he's blowing his dough in eastern Washington or something like that. I don't know. But I'm actually intrigued by this campaign because I think overall, Hilary Franz did a great job of making a name for herself running for this position, and really painting a picture of what she could do. And I think this is actually a political position, especially in the state of Washington, that could be so easily popular on social media. We love nature. We love hiking. We love environmentalism in this state. Making the case that you want to love and protect the environment of this state should be a very popular case to make on social media. And I know that I saw that a lot from Hilary. I'm not seeing any of that from anybody right now. And it seems like a huge - someone's dropping the ball majorly on the social media game, if I haven't seen any of this.

[00:20:37] Crystal Fincher: I cannot speak to that. What I do think is that there's probably thoughts that at least they're known here - and trying to let endorsements speak on their behalf. Or we just saw a pretty compelling piece by Patrick DePoe in The Stranger and trying to do things like that. So I have seen stuff from those candidates here, but I think they're largely probably focused on areas where they feel like they are not known at all and need to make inroads there. We'll see. It'll be interesting to talk about this. We will be doing a post-primary live stream, as we normally do the week following the election with Hacks & Wonks, and we will certainly be talking about this race. But yeah, it is pretty intriguing. And watching this race unfold in terms of just the messages of each one of them, because - yes, preservation is part of it, but really it's managing the state lands as a resource. So logging activity, mining activity, fishery activity - all of that is under the purview and how we manage logging and not clear cutting and doing that responsibly and not doing too much. But not, you know-

[00:21:41] Lex Vaughn: Well, finding the balance between the economy and keeping our environment safe and protected and thriving.

[00:21:48] Crystal Fincher: And what's on top of people's minds with wildfires that we are dealing with so much more because of climate change.

[00:21:55] Lex Vaughn: Major issue in eastern Washington.

[00:21:58] Crystal Fincher: Major issue presently in so many more places than it used to be. And then an issue of air quality for everybody everywhere. And also news this week that came out that wildfire smoke is more associated with dementia than other kinds of air pollution - there's something about wildfire smoke that's especially damaging. Anyways-

[00:22:18] Lex Vaughn: I would think smoke generally does a lot of bad things to you.

[00:22:22] Crystal Fincher: It does generally do a lot of bad things. And wildfire smoke seems to be even worse for dementia in particular. I will, since I mentioned it, link that in the show notes also if people are interested in hearing about it. But for the Commissioner of Public Lands race, it's very interesting. As a reminder, we did talk to some Commissioner for Public Lands candidates. So if you are curious about where they stand, you can certainly listen to those Hacks & Wonks shows and hear in detail where they stand on a variety of issues. But certainly one to follow and make sure you make your voice heard because this can be one where it matters, where your individual vote could matter. This may be a very close race with a lot of people who have yet to make up their minds.

Speaking of initiatives, moving to one on a local level - with Initiative 137 in support of Social Housing. The city of Seattle passed Social Housing last year. Residents made their voices heard and they said - Yes, we want social housing. Because of the single issue rule with initiatives, they could only set up the public developer that is going to handle social housing and the funding mechanism for it needed to be handled in a separate initiative. They talked about that all before the initiative, Seattle residents knew that, they passed it. And so they knew that this follow-up initiative, which has qualified for the ballot - Initiative 137, to fund social housing - was coming. So bing, bing, boom, should be done. Hey, they got it in to the Council in time for them to take action by August 6th, be on the November ballot. And whoo, that could totally be taken care of. Except for - we have a Council that is hostile to the city of Seattle residents' preference for social housing. And instead of allowing this to be on the November ballot, they are delaying taking action on that to delay it to be on the February ballot. We've talked about the importance of turnout overall and how it varies widely between different elections. It's highest in even years in general elections, so it was going to be great to have this on the general election ballot. They know that. They don't like it. They're trying to scuttle it and push it to a lower turnout time. Now, initially, this was passed on a February ballot. Seattle residents liked it that much that they even did it in a low turnout situation.

[00:24:42] Lex Vaughn: Sometimes the special elections work out.

[00:24:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Yeah.

[00:24:47] Lex Vaughn: Because only the people that are passionate about it, like show up and it actually works out. So it just depends sometimes.

[00:24:53] Crystal Fincher: Turnout does not guarantee a particular outcome. And in a city like Seattle, where the more people turn out, the more progressive the overall vote gets - just because more people in Seattle are progressive. So sometimes people don't realize that's not the case everywhere. And they'll be like - yeah, in Southwest Washington, Southeast Washington, higher turnout is great. And no, whatever your general population is-

[00:25:18] Lex Vaughn: It just amplifies.

[00:25:20] Crystal Fincher: Yes, it truly amplifies that. And so that can turn out a variety of ways. In the city of Seattle, it turns out to be progressive. But what we are seeing is not just opposition to the Social Housing initiative that was passed by the city of Seattle residents and now this funding initiative, but also an effort to add a competing initiative that is also not social housing, that allows them to say - Hey, we totally care about it, but it's going to do something different. And-

[00:25:50] Lex Vaughn: We Heart Seattle has a different idea.

[00:25:52] Crystal Fincher: Oh, my gosh. So what was revealed this week because someone very astutely got pinged for a poll. And as I shared on social media - hey, if you get called or if you get texted to take a poll from a legitimate source, take it. Screenshot it or record it if you can or write down what it was and someone did and there is someone out there on behalf of interests from Cathy Moore, who is evidently leading this, polling a competing initiative. I'll read this to you. It says - There'll be two competing social housing measures on the ballot in Seattle this February, Proposition 1-A and 1-B. Voters can vote for Proposition 1-A or 1-B, or they can vote against both measures. So one, just in the lead up to this - clearly, the Council has until August 6th to take action to get this on the ballot. Many people suspected this, but clearly they've already decided - so much so that they're already polling on it - that they're going to punt this. Even though Sara Nelson has previously said - Oh, we're not going to hold up the work of initiatives. We're not going to hold up the voice of the people - for another issue. But this one she disagrees with, so it's a different story. And so it goes on to explain - Proposition 1-A - that's not the actual name, but that's how they're titling it in this poll. And it describes the social housing funding initiative - would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle. The tax rate would be 5% on annual compensation above $1 million paid in Seattle to any employee. Proceeds would support the Social Housing Developer, a public development authority created to develop, own, and maintain social housing in Seattle. So that explains social housing - basically a high salary tax, anything over a million bucks. Then it goes on and it says - Proposition 1-B would increase the 2023 Housing Levy to fund low-income housing and housing services, including social housing, and housing for seniors, working families, people with disabilities, and people experiencing homelessness. It would authorize a five-year property tax of approximately 10 cents per $1,000 in assessed value, exempting seniors, veterans, and other qualified groups. Having read this, should either of these two measures be enacted into law?

[00:28:07] Lex Vaughn: I love how complicated and convoluted that was. Like, wow.

[00:28:11] Crystal Fincher: I mean, it is hard when you're using actual - and that's not actual ballot language, that hasn't been decided yet.

[00:28:18] Lex Vaughn: I'm surprised they think a property tax would be more popular. But I think maybe the strategy is that people get confused about which one is which, and then they just think it's all a property tax and - throw it all in the trash.

[00:28:31] Crystal Fincher: This is ultimately so cynical, such a cynical effort. And really what the issue here is that Seattle - again, there's no ambiguity here. Polling supports this, but we don't even have to rely on polling. We can rely on what Seattle just voted for. They just voted to enact social housing. They knew going in that we're establishing just the structure of the developer - the entity that is going to be running this thing. And then we have to do a follow-up initiative to fund the thing. Boom - people were like - yes, Seattle residents wanted that. They support it. You would think that elected officials would listen to that and say - Yeah, we talked about listening to our constituents. We're doing that. So we're going to figure out how to best implement this. Unfortunately, no - we have a majority of the Council who was very, very supported with a million plus dollars to get them elected. Since they were elected, that entity that had the independent expenditure on behalf of them made up of corporate interests say - We feel like we're entitled to a say in Seattle politics. We covered that before on the show. And what they're really saying is - We're going to fight against taxes on us. And we know that's not a winning fight, so what we're going to do is try and muddy the waters and we'll give you another option. And that other option, we'd rather tax everyone else in the city with a property tax. That is not a progressive tax. That is not ideal. And some people are like - Well, that's just a tax that impacts homeowners. Oftentimes, like pair that with other things.

[00:30:04] Lex Vaughn: Oh, come on.

[00:30:04] Crystal Fincher: Where property tax impacts everyone.

[00:30:05] Lex Vaughn: It really amplifies gentrification.

[00:30:07] Crystal Fincher: Yes. And it's also passed through to renters and usually at a markup. So they're saying - We would rather not pay our fair share. We would rather pass that on to all the residents in Seattle. And this is a time when Seattle is in-

[00:30:22] Lex Vaughn: They will say - This is actually more equitable, in our really weird perspective of what is progressive. This Council has a crazy - whenever they're talking about themselves being progressive, like they're just really co-opting that into some crazy policies.

[00:30:42] Crystal Fincher: But we see what the game is here.

[00:30:44] Lex Vaughn: Just making it confusing.

[00:30:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, they're trying to muddy the waters. The residents of the city voted for this to happen. The residents of the city knew that there was this funding initiative coming up - that was part of the deal that they knew going into the first one. They provided their signatures to qualify this initiative for the ballot, thinking it was going to be November. They're already not doing that. But they know that's not enough to defeat it alone. They just can't let this be on the ballot alone in November or else the residents would pass it, as they did before, because the people of Seattle support this. But instead, yeah, they're going to muddy the waters and they're saying - Well, we're going to raise property taxes and it'll go to all of these things. Really, it's going to increase the Housing Levy that supports all of these things. Well, the Housing Levy, while being absolutely necessary and it's good that it's in place, cannot deal with the scale of the housing affordability crisis that there is. That's why Seattle residents recognize that and passed the Social Housing initiative in the first place. Now they're saying we're going to put things in that limited bucket and spread it amongst even more groups. So it's going to be a marginal increase to everyone, even if it were to pass. Again, we have issues of scale and we need more options to be able to address this problem. And a sustainably funded option. Seattle residents voted for and passed this additional option and want to sustainably fund this additional option. This is taking away that funding and saying - We're just going to put it in this other pot and spread it among the many, many, many.

[00:32:19] Lex Vaughn: But they're just making it more confusing and creating more opportunities for infighting and making it this - I don't know what to do situation, when right now there's actually just plenty of support for this original idea.

[00:32:33] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. The entities behind this are fundamentally corporate anti-tax interests. That is, as we've talked about before on this show, that's what's driving this.

[00:32:43] Lex Vaughn: And that needs to get labeled. Believe me, if there's anything I want to keep trying to get people to get, it's that - man, this city council here in Seattle - I like Tammy Morellas, and that's about it. The rest of them - it's not an exaggeration. In action, these people are extreme conservatives. Extreme. They might have a little rainbow flag around the office somewhere, but other than that, these are conservatives. Shameless. Going after minimum wage, all kinds of just little things - picking apart at people who hardly make enough money to live here already, making it more difficult to find housing, to pay their bills. It's ridiculous. This is the last thing we need from these people, and they're making life harder for the most vulnerable people in the city. They're disgusting. I just cannot tamp down how disgusted I am in pretty much everyone on that council, with the exception of Tammy Morales - she's the only real progressive left on that council right now. And it's just really sad that Seattle is in this position with this many really not progressive at all leadership. It's very upsetting.

[00:33:58] Crystal Fincher: It is upsetting. And aside from ideological differences, this council just isn't serious about doing the work that is necessary on behalf of Seattle residents. And it's stunts. They're doing these stunts and trying to message their way out of accountability for doing things that materially improve life for residents on the ground.

[00:34:20] Lex Vaughn: And they're blocking any real progressive leadership - that Seattle should be a leader on - by making us fight for the most basic things that should not be even getting debated on right now. Minimum wage? How did we get here? We're having to fight for minimum wage, not just for gig workers, but for all workers right now - because of some of the legislation they put forth. Where are we - I mean, Alabama? What is this? This is very disappointing.

[00:34:47] Crystal Fincher: Well, and that kind of goes into the next issue that we were going to talk about, which is Joy Hollingsworth introducing a measure to repeal minimum wage legislation and essentially codify a permanent sub-minimum wage in Seattle, which is really demoralizing and the exact opposite of what's needed.

[00:35:09] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, and she represents Capitol Hill, a very dense community where - okay, it's very high rent, very hard for anyone who's not working in a tech company to live there at all anymore. But it's also chock full of all kinds of small businesses - baristas, bartenders, all kinds of minimum wage workers working in restaurants. And this messes with how much money they make. Basically, it seems like the proposed law is that business owners can incorporate tips into paying for the minimum wage. So effectively using your tips - whatever you tip - to just pay people minimum wage. They don't get anything on - or maybe they get something on top of that - but the tips can be used to pay the minimum wage.

[00:35:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so background here. In 2014 - this is part of legislation that had been passed that had a long runway for implementation. So in 2014 - I saw this characterized as progressive legislation, but I don't know if you're familiar with what the council looked like in 2014. Progressive is not how a lot of people would describe it. So, business won a concession, really, creating a tiered system during the $15 per hour minimum wage battle. So the compromise, which is what Hollingsworth is trying to undo, allowed small businesses to pay their workers less than larger businesses until 2025 - next year. So long, long, long runway - longer than many people, many organizations get, longer than is standard with this kind of legislation that has passed in several localities in the state and continues to because it's really popular. So small businesses right now only have to pay their workers $17.25 per hour, as long as their tips and benefits add up to the regular minimum wage of $19.97. So their minimum wage is lower than the standard regular minimum wage. At a time of rising costs of everything - we've dealt with inflation that has hit people who are making minimum wage the hardest. And so, this is a challenge. So the 2025 minimum wage hasn't been set yet, but the current law would require those businesses to give their employees at least a $3 an hour raise next year. And basically Hollingsworth's bill blocks that raise. So Hollingsworth is preventing every minimum wage worker that receives tips - which is a lot more people than it was when this was initially passed - from getting a raise, from being able to more easily pay their bills in a city where it's kind of unprecedentedly hard to pay bills. Which is just wild.

Because again, this would have been so much higher and happened so much sooner if business in the first place didn't get their way. If Tim Burgess and Bruce Harrell on the council at the time weren't pushing for this, for business to get their way. And it is just wild to see a negotiation by and passed by Bruce Harrell, who is now mayor, and Tim Burgess, who are known for being anything but progressive, to be now too much for Joy Hollingsworth and these new councilmembers to bear. Again, we've talked about this. They know that they don't have a mandate to do this - in the same way that they know that they have to do kind of underhanded things to prevent social housing from passing. Like, yes, they have to let it on the ballot. But if they only do that, it's going to pass. So now they have to delay it and put a competing initiative against it to try and do that, instead of just how do we implement this to the best of our ability in Seattle. They know Seattle residents don't support this - that's supported by polling, it's supported by elections, it's supported by every single metric it possibly could. We know that people are struggling and they need help. And when we say small business, we're talking about under 500 people - so a pretty broad definition of that. And so it's really unfortunate to see that this is what they're choosing to spend their time on while homelessness is getting worse, while we see troubling incidents on the streets, while we could be talking about productive solutions to the biggest problems that we're facing. Did Joy Hollingsworth run on lowering a minimum wage, on codifying a permanent subminimum wage, on blocking the people most in need from getting a much needed raise? Of course not. That's not a winning thing. So it's not even - can you at least do the things that you said you were going to do when you ran? Can you at least focus on that?

[00:39:44] Lex Vaughn: This council is just exhausting because it's literally - their strategy is just exhausting every progressive person in this city, every person in a vulnerable position in this city. Where it's like the second you take your eyes off them, they are trying to do something horrible to the most vulnerable people in this city economically. It's just what is the most pro-business? How can we make the people who are already rich, richer policy? And the second you take your eye off them, they're doing something even more horrible. Earlier this year, Sara tried to get passed legislation that these gig companies, food delivery companies - basically, she admitted drafted, and then she introduced it straight into council - this thing that would roll back minimum wage for gig workers. And it hit a lot of resistance. People showed up. They said - No, this is bad. Stop it. And they've just been kicking this can down the road. And everybody who's been interested in that legislation and blocking it has spent - what - several months now going, What's going on? How many more meetings do I need to show up and tell you to not do this? And they're just waiting for people to get so tired they stop showing up and then they pass it. I wish these people at least had the confidence to be as awful as they really are - just pass the awful legislation you want to pass in front of everyone. At least have that. But these cowards are kicking these cans down the road, hoping there's only two people left showing up to public comment when they finally pass it.

[00:41:23] Crystal Fincher: Speaking of that, there is one other item that we wanted to talk about that the Council is taking up - and that is planning to jail misdemeanor offenders at the SCORE detention facility in Des Moines.

[00:41:35] Lex Vaughn: Another example of - why do I have to tell you to not do this? This is awful.

[00:41:43] Crystal Fincher: Seattle's Public Safety Committee is going to consider a contract with the South Correctional Entity, abbreviated SCORE, this week - that would grant the city the use of at least 20 beds for Seattle misdemeanor offenders at a cost of about $2 million a year, not counting transportation to and from the Des Moines jail, which is owned by six South King County cities. This was reported on by PubliCola. The legislation anticipates moving people to SCORE as soon as September and would use an underspend of $600,000 to pay for the beds in 2024 money that was not spent on something else that it was originally slated for to pay for those beds. So there's been a lot of pushback from a lot of different corners on this. One, there are just straight up capacity and safety issues. And a shortage of staff that has led to inhumane conditions and deaths. The contractor there that they have-

[00:42:40] Lex Vaughn: It's a private contractor?

[00:42:41] Crystal Fincher: It's a - there is a private contractor at SCORE. So-

[00:42:45] Lex Vaughn: It's a government facility run-

[00:42:47] Crystal Fincher: it's not a private prison. But as we see in so many corporations and today's economy.

[00:42:52] Lex Vaughn: I feel like that has to be said.

[00:42:53] Crystal Fincher: Yes.

[00:42:54] Lex Vaughn: If you look it up online, it's like - oh, it's a government public facility.

[00:42:59] Crystal Fincher: It's a public facility.

[00:42:59] Lex Vaughn: But managed-

[00:42:59] Crystal Fincher: It's technically a government facility.

[00:43:01] Lex Vaughn: by a private contractor.

[00:43:03] Crystal Fincher: Yes. But it's managed by a private contractor.

[00:43:06] Lex Vaughn: So it basically is a private prison. In operational-

[00:43:11] Crystal Fincher: in operation. Yes, it is. And that private contractor has been dragged before Congress before for chronic issues like the ones that we've seen leading to a troubling number of deaths - we're not even talking about injuries and continued illnesses, but resulting in-

[00:43:28] Lex Vaughn: Compared to or worse than Rikers.

[00:43:30] Crystal Fincher: Yes, which is notoriously horrible. So this has problems that have not been fixed. And this contractor has not been held accountable and is functioning - although it's publicly owned, they've contracted out activity to this troublesome private entity that is drawing profits at the expense of the operations and care that is supposed to be shown there. So that's one issue. Another issue is just logistically - hey, if we have people who have committed misdemeanors - which it is important to be said that incarceration for misdemeanors has a higher rate of leading to recidivism than not incarcerating people and using alternative diversion methods. So we're already setting ourselves up for creating more crime instead of preventing crime. But we'll go on - just logistically, it's really tough. It was talked about at council that they were saying - You know, it's not a big deal. People appear by Zoom and they have laptops, no big deal. There was a pilot of this before and it turned out to be a big deal because Wi-Fi was a problem - it would just drop out. There were also problems like providing secure locations, confidential locations to have those conversations in. So it didn't work out in function. They did pilot this and that failed. So I know we have a new council and they haven't gotten up to speed, been slow on making some decisions and rushing to make others. Doesn't seem like they've quite done their homework on that - and they were told, and it seems like they're happy to ignore that. Furthermore, just - a public defender, lawyers need to show up to be on site with their clients in Seattle. Because of technical concerns or if they need to be in person, that basically takes a whole day where it could be - hey, an hour or two in and out in Seattle. Now they've got to go down to Des Moines - handle that, do that. It's a whole different scope of capacity needed and what they need in their day, and they're already extremely overworked and overburdened in the caseloads that they have now. So you're putting a lot more strain on an already strained system.

And also, just in the good government element of this, if we recall, City Attorney Ann Davison last year announced a high-use offender initiative - basically people who have committed repeated misdemeanors, instead of diversion programs it was - hey, we're going to send them to jail right away. Well, it turns out that that high-use offender program or initiative has barely been used. In the last year, the City's only completed 14 bookings of those, as reported by Ashley Nerbovig, and three of those was one person being booked three times. So the high-utilizer program itself seems underutilized. And it seems to make sense that wouldn't we focus on that first, if we were going to do that first? Is there any evaluation of how that turned out? Did that turn out to be a useless program? They're really eager to move on to this other thing. What happened with that?

[00:46:30] Lex Vaughn: When you just step back from all of this stuff, it's like - yeah, first of all, it just seems not very well researched or thought out. And so then when you back up, a lot of what these councilmembers are introducing really remind me of what a lot of mainstream Republicans are proposing these days, where it's just - I don't have any integrity on my own policy-wise. I just want to tear down whatever progress progressives have made in the last few years. Let's look at the list. What progress has been made on minimum wage? What progress has been made on criminal justice reform? Let's just see what we can tear apart. And it's like - wow, really? Here in Seattle, we're dealing with this? It's not even a national level thing or county level - it's right here in this city that is supposed to be some sort of liberal bubble. And I don't know - these people just make me really ashamed. It's just unfortunate how much effort has to go into fighting every single one of these awful policy measures. Like nothing good is happening. It's just all of this effort is being poured into stopping awful things from happening. And every day, week, month, they continue to do this. I think a lot of these councilmembers are underestimating how hated they're becoming. And I don't know why they don't seem to care about that, but my blood boils more and more with them as the year goes on.

[00:47:56] Crystal Fincher: Well, I think the bottom line is who do they feel accountable to? And it seems like they feel accountable to their list of donors more than they feel accountable to the residents of Seattle. Because this is happening while they're punting dealing with a massive budget deficit - a $250 million budget deficit that is growing.

[00:48:18] Lex Vaughn: Ah yeah, true. That's really the big step back is distraction from that.

[00:48:23] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And so - one, they're not talking about that. They should be, especially with the new council. Usually they're talking about it now, but they've decided to delay that until later this year. And they've been taking a lot of heat for being inactive. And they've been taking a lot of heat for growing homelessness - something that they got elected because they said that they were going to address. And they haven't meaningfully done that. They haven't done that at all - problem has gotten worse. And so it's just really cynical. And they're trying to signal that they're doing things and they're scrambling and - hey, this is something else we can do. But what is the goal here? Is the goal to make the streets safer? If so, how does this accomplish that? How do the other things that you said you were going to do accomplish that? If it's hiring, how are you going on your hiring things? If that's not doing well, are you trying something else? Or are you just hammering the same nail in the same way? I think it's a challenge that they have not figured out how to deal with yet. So we will continue to follow that story.

The last thing I wanted to do today was provide a quick update on a story that we talked about before on the show - about graffiti regarding Tanya Woo, different reactions to that - there is an update that was in PubliCola this week. A few weeks ago, Tanya Woo reported graffiti to the FBI, saying that she and other councilmembers were targeted by hate speech. The messages said, "F*** Tanya Woo," "Get her out," and "Tanya Woo hates Black people." There were some people who denounced it as racist, sexist, xenophobic. And Woo said she was later threatened while walking in the area by two men who she believed were motivated to target her by the graffiti. This is Publicola's coverage - Woo noted that some of the graffiti was scrawled on a historic building and would be costly to remove, which was an oblique reference to a building that her family owns - the Louisa Hotel apartment building. After the story ran, a PubliCola reader sent them a photo that they said was taken inside a stairwell at the Louisa Apartments that said, "F*** Tanya Woo." And it looked very similar to what was outside of the building, suggesting that the graffiti may have been written by someone who lived in the building rather than a random member of the public targeting Woo. So the reader noted that a management company recently took over management of the hotel from the Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority. And Tanya Woo's family owns that building, and has talked about on the campaign trail - frequently refers to herself as a workforce housing provider. She is not involved in managing it, but her family does own the property. And in there, apartment managers have posted notices at various times. People in the building reportedly took notice that before Juneteenth, June 19th, which commemorates the end of slavery - and is a relatively new officially recognized federal holiday, although it's been celebrated for quite some time in the Black community. They said that apartment managers posted notices warning residents that charcoal barbecues are not permitted anywhere on the property and reminding them to "observe quiet time hours and no loud music at any time." "Please assist your guests with being courteous to your neighbors with parking and observing the rules," the notice said. According to the resident, a notice posted on the 4th of July merely reminded residents that fireworks are illegal, and only that Juneteenth message included warnings about barbecue grills and rowdy guests. Interesting.

And just kind of going to the larger point that I think is always useful - we have several people running for office who refer to themselves as business owners, employers, executives, several landlords. And the first thing that media should do, that people who are looking into them should do is talk to people's employees, talk to their tenants if they're a landlord. That is so predictive about how someone actually governs if they are elected - tells you about how they deal with people under their control who they have an obligation to - do they care for them, do they exploit them? Very important to know. And so kudos to PubliCola for actually following up and talking to residents there in the building and uncovering some certainly newsworthy information. And I hope we continue to make sure that we don't only look at the perspective of employers or landlords and make sure that we're also talking to and considering the experiences of residents and employees.

And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, August 2nd - it's August, it's already August - Friday, August 2nd, 2024. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today was Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn. You can find Lex on Twitter at @AlexaVaughn. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter and most platform at @HacksWonks. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii on just about all platforms. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Please do not forget to vote by this Tuesday in the primary - it's consequential.

Thank you for tuning in and we will talk to you next time.