News for Seattle's Ballard neighborhood and beyond

My Ballard header image 2
 

Mayoral candidate hosts Town Hall meeting

Posted by Geeky Swedes on September 27th, 2009

Mayoral candidate Mike McGinn is hosting a Town Hall meeting Sunday in Ballard. Come meet the candidate, ask some questions and voice your concerns. The event will be held at the Leif Erickson Hall (2245 NW 57th) from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. If you can’t make it to today’s meeting, they’ll be tweeting updates.

Tags: Ballard   Share

22 reader comments so far ↓

  • 1 Idle activist // Sep 27, 2009 at 7:05 pm

    Will he let us drive to the event or will we have to bring bikes powered by fairy dust?

  • 2 GTS // Sep 27, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    Surface streets only!

    If you'd have to use the viaduct to come STAY HOME!

  • 3 Name // Sep 27, 2009 at 10:49 pm

    You're only welcome if you ride in on a rainbow-color unicorn.

  • 4 doug11 // Sep 28, 2009 at 12:20 am

    Are you the same person as GTS206 in the Forum?

  • 5 bb // Sep 28, 2009 at 1:48 am

    I went over on my own two feet: no fairy dust, unicorn, car, or bike required. Only about 15 people there: they had at least 100 chairs set up, I think hoping for some synergy with the ecofest outside. Maybe it was the Seahawks, maybe it was the sunshine. I wandered in at not quite 3, and everyone talked about transit and the tunnel. No real signs of McGinn trying to go beyond the no tunnel! image, though he may have talked about other things in his opening remarks.

  • 6 xaphaeod // Sep 28, 2009 at 3:15 am

    He is going to get beaten like a rented mule.

  • 7 lisa in seattle // Sep 28, 2009 at 7:31 am

    I was there with around 25+ attendees and another handful of volunteers. There were many great questions about the arts, transit, vioduct and afordable housing solutions. Mike ended the hour and a half with a big applause and many folks signed up to volunteer and shake his hand. He's got my vote and I was unsure.

  • 8 tikatika // Sep 28, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    Mallahan staffers: If Joe wants to have his own townhalls, you all can schedule them.

    Jason's 'fairy dust' would be put to better use on Joe, than trailing around behind Mike doing your darndest to make stuff up.

    Just sayin'.

  • 9 Idle activist // Sep 28, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    I was once 22 and idealistic….. thank god my candidates never won. Someday you'll grow up and understand why adults vote for Mallahan.

  • 10 Ballardmom // Sep 28, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    From the sound of your posts it makes me think self-righteous bullies vote for Mallahan.

    (off the record I haven't actually decided between McGinn and Mallahan but thankfully who supports them does not affect my decision)

  • 11 NoraBell // Sep 28, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    I know many cynical adults voting for McGinn. So, that argument is moot, anyway.

  • 12 JulianDavies // Sep 28, 2009 at 5:46 pm

    Well, I'm a grownup, and McGinn already had my vote, but seeing him in person made me sign up to volunteer.

    Too bad the deep-bore tunnel dominates the discussion in this race … but speaking as someone who's lived in a town (SF) that got rid of their waterfront freeway and survived, even thrived without it, and in a town (Boston) that makes me distrust anyone promising no cost over-runs on a project of this scale, I'm all the way behind McGinn on the I-5/surface streets option.

    If the tunnel goes through (it's such a shaky house of cards at this point that I doubt it will, regardless of who's elected … remember when the monorail was a “done deal”?), it almost doesn't matter who the Mayor will be – they won't have any money left to get anything done in this town. But I'd take McGinn's values and priorities over Mallahan's regardless.

    If anyone still has an open mind about the tunnel, see http://www.tunnelfacts.com for the goods …

  • 13 Ernie_98107 // Sep 28, 2009 at 6:55 pm

    Julian, you're not suggesting that tunnelfacts.com is presenting the “facts” as in an unbiased assessment of the tunnel issue are you?

    I'd say that if you already hate the tunnel idea, and you want more opinions to back up yours, you should go to that website for “the goods”

  • 14 JulianDavies // Sep 28, 2009 at 7:13 pm

    No, of course they're biased. But for folks getting their “news” from KIRO and the Seattle Times (not exactly what I'd call unbiased, either), it wouldn't hurt to read some opposing viewpoints. You can advocate for something and be right all at the same time.

  • 15 GTS // Sep 29, 2009 at 2:48 am

    Yes, not sure where my area code went, it says “Welcome GTS206″ when I open the page. And its the same computer I always use.

  • 16 notnewtoseattle // Sep 29, 2009 at 3:00 am

    McGinn is an unrealistic dreamer. Anyone who thinks the surface streets are an option is not facing reality. San Francisco has multiple other options such as 280 and 101 not to mention BART and Caltrain. We having nothing else but I-5 after the viaduct comes down. Not everyone can take the bus to work and there is no convenient way to get to the airport other than a car right now. Try living in a functional city like Chicago–gritty, yes, with an elevated train, but it is a piece of cake to get from the airport to downtown and only costs $2. Seattle is so far away from that. To expect everyone to ride bikes or take the bus is ridiculous. If McGinn wins I will seriously consider moving. Seattle has become too full of itself.

  • 17 xaphaeod // Sep 29, 2009 at 3:18 am

    NNTS, you're spot-on.

    I love how all the “surface option” boosters inevitably bring up the Embaracdero in San Francisco, completely ignoring the fact that the Embarcadero was never a critical through route carrying a major portion of the traffic transiting from one end of the city to another. They either are stunningly ignorant about how Highway 99 is actually used, dishonest, or just blinded by their wildly unrealistic vision of some utopian waterfront that will never be.

    Hey, kids, get a clue: you destroy 1/3 of the north-south highway capacity through this city, and everything – and I do mean EVERYTHING – comes to a grinding halt. No groceries arriving in Whole Foods, no UPS deliveries, no mail in your postal box, the entire economy will freeze up. And for what benefit? Why, for the next wave of million-dollar condos which would rise in place of the viaduct. And they will be tall – they have to be, to see over all the existing waterfront buildings that block the majority of any views of the water! The fools who think we're going to end up with some grand waterfront park should go down there and actually take a look at the views from where the viaduct is now. Guess what? You can only see the water (and what's beyond) from a few spots. You gonna tear down all the waterfront developments (old and new) so you can have a nice shoreline? In your dreams!

    Now I'm not convinced that the so-called deep-bore tunnel is a great idea, but anyone who thinks that simply wrecking the state highway that carries so much of the region's commerce without replacing it, and just telling people to “ride your bike or take the bus” is only a solution for the clueless or delusional.

    NNTS, don't start packing your bags. Personally, I plan to stick around, and I'm looking forward to watching McGridlock™ get beaten by 20+ points in the most lopsided election in Seattle history. Stock up on popcorn and enjoy the show.

  • 18 JulianDavies // Sep 29, 2009 at 4:20 am

    You're right, airport to downtown needs to be “a piece of cake” … so let's build a tunnel for that! Whoops, no downtown exits, not even for 4 billion dollars. So they'll take … I-5 or, wait for it … surface streets. Or transit.

    And those commuters, or shoppers, that need to drive downtown? Well, you can get out of the tunnel at the Mercer Mess or SoDo. Oops. But it'll be great for the crucial Shoreline to Alki commute.

    And the freight? Sorry about your lack of access, Ballard/Interbay. Besides, 99 isn't the freight lifeblood that you make it out to be.

    But don't worry, the Discovery Institute/Cascadia thinks the deep bore tunnel is an intelligent design. Just like the universe. I'm so glad we've got those guys working up the science on this project.

    Snark aside, all of the options are imperfect. All have their doomsayers. I'm an idiot for even wading in on this issue in a forum like this. I just don't think the world will end when the tunnel “done deal” collapses like a sinkhole on the other deep bore tunnel projects. Regardless of who's elected. That'll be my popcorn night.

  • 19 SPG // Sep 29, 2009 at 5:08 pm

    The viaduct southbound has exits at Western and Sodo. Northbound at Seneca? Otherwise it's a through route.

  • 20 SPG // Sep 29, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    I didn't attend, but for those who did, was there any mention of crime issues?

  • 21 notnewtoseattle // Sep 30, 2009 at 3:15 am

    I do agree the tunnel is imperfect, but the surface option is impossible. I would love a better tunnel design–I have lived in Ballard for 20 years and use 15th and the viaduct all the time. I get what the loss will mean. But, the tunnel is a done deal, so lets make the best of it. I am hopeful that people are wise enough to choose Mallahan. He is relatively inexperienced, but seems to be a good listener and a pragmatist with integrity. I like what he did at T-Mobile for his pre-paid users during the hurricane a few years ago. I love Seattle, but I do not like some of the eco-elitist that think everyone should be able to bike or bus to work like them. How do they think PCC is going to get their organic apple delivery with a surface option? What do they think McGinn is really going to do about Seattle Public Schools. We have an elected school board that is responsible for our schools. McGinn seems to want to focus on what he sees as popular hot-buttons that will gain him attention, yet there is really nothing he can do about them as mayor.

  • 22 bzzflkt // Sep 30, 2009 at 6:19 pm

    NNTS, I agree completely. The tunnel plan is certainly imperfect – and I'd happily revisit that – but simply wiping out 1/3 of the city's north-south capacity and pretending that things will be fine – AKA the “surface option” – is a recipe for disaster and misery. In the real world where most of us live, that's simply a fantasy.

    Don't like the current tunnel plan? Fine. Propose an alternative THAT PRESERVES THE EXISTING CAPACITY that highway 99 carries, and I'm all ears. Personally, I think the most reasonable solution was to rebuild the existing viaduct or just retrofit it, but starry-eyed dreamers just can't let go of the fantasy of a grand waterfront promenade, which is never going to be realized.

    Fortunately, I'm increasingly confident that we won't have McGinn to kick around for long. There's a small matter of the fact that Highway 99 is a state highway, not a lane owned by the city, and the governor seems to be enough of an adult to insist that the state's highway capacity not be gutted for McGinn's fairy dust dreams.

Leave a Comment (read our comment rules)






News from the Seattle Times