There are also a host of important ballot initiatives, from campaign finance reform to transportation funding. We believe each of the four considered measures embodies our values of creating vibrant, healthy, and equitable communities.

Position 1 (District 1): Shannon Braddock

Shannon Braddock will bring political experience to this West Seattle race that has not seen any incumbent contenders. She is Chief of Staff for King County Council Member Joe McDermott and holds a Masters in Public Administration from the University of Washington. She strongly supports planning ahead for future populations by ensuring infrastructure is prepared for new development and by breaking down barriers between city departments. She supports the urban village land use strategy and is open to the whole toolbox of of affordable housing options, particularly accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in single-family areas. On transportation, she is supportive of multi-modal and safety projects, such as increased bus service on the popular Route 120, a road rechannelization on 35th Avenue SW, and a Ballard-West Seattle route in the Sound Transit 3 package.

Along with being supportive of family and child issues, such as childcare subsidies and closing the technology divide in schools, she is motivated by the needs of economically displaced people and Seattle’s homeless population. She supports policies that provide greater services and opportunities to marginalized people. She also wants to foster better relations between neighborhoods and the Seattle Police Department.

We believe Shannon has the community experience and vision for West Seattle that will benefit both her constituents and the city as a whole. We support her for District 1.

Read our original interview with Shannon Braddock.

Position 2 (District 2): Tammy Morales

Tammy Morales will provide a unique voice for urban issues in Southeast Seattle. As an advocate on food access, she championed policies that give residents healthier, fairer, and wider access to quality food choices. On land use and development, she wants to see a broader set of choices for housing and building types. Tammy thinks that the City should reevaluate the urban village strategy, particularly in Southeast Seattle, so that it can better align with the infrastructure investments like light rail.

As a fighter for working families, she will work to bring more family-sized units to the housing market. She’s also concerned about the welfare of renters, supporting policies that give them greater stability. She’s an unabashed supporter for the City’s Vision Zero program, calling for bold action on a safety redesign of Rainier Avenue. She wants to expand transit and Pronto bike share throughout the city, including a new light rail station at Graham Street.

Tammy is also a total planning wonk; she’s a planner by trade with a degree in Community and Regional Planning from the University of Texas, Austin. We think that will work to her benefit in dialogue and advocacy on a wide range of social, environmental, and economic issues.

Read our original interview with Tammy Morales.

Position 3 (District 3): Kshama Sawant

Kshama Sawant is well known for her successful campaign to raise Seattle’s minimum wage to $15 per hour, and her urbanist credentials are no less impressive. She believes solutions for affordable housing must meet the scale of the problem before us. To that end, she supports the maximum linkage fee, using the city’s bonding capacity to build high quality, affordable units, and, central to her campaign, rent stabilization measures. Building on her principles of standing up for working people, she believes the City needs a strong tenant’s bill of rights. She also appreciates the way marginalized communities, like LGBTQ folks and people of color, are especially impacted.

Kshama understands the strong connection between housing and transit, and the need to accommodate growth without causing excessive displacement. She understands a successful transit system serves trips beyond rush-hour work commutes. She is as committed to Vision Zero as anyone we talked to, asserting that the City should not tolerate traffic deaths any more than we would accept them in our own life.

We love that Kshama is unafraid to propose big, urbanist changes, and after 15 Now, we believe she can make them happen.

Read our original interview with Kshama Sawant.

Position 4 (District 4): Michael Maddux

Michael Maddux is a renter, a bike-commuter, the only openly gay candidate, and a true-blue urbanist. A long-time local activist and organizer, Michael knows how to achieve large policy goals, like establishing the Seattle Park District. His current goals are even more ambitious and just as admirable. He wants to turn parking lots into affordable housing. He wants the elimination of traffic deaths on municipal roads to be the city’s highest priority. He wants to investigate new progressive revenue options, including a capital gains tax on property transfers to target property speculators. He supports a new LGBT community center to address growing community needs, including a spike in hate crimes. He wants to invest in infrastructure, like safer road design and high-capacity transit. And he wants to invest in people, too, by funding apprenticeship programs (like the one at South Seattle College) that can help to give young people a way out of poverty.

Though he’s running for a district seat, Michael rejects parochialism. He wants what’s best for the city, and especially for its most vulnerable residents, regardless of where they live. We heartily endorse that sentiment — and we heartily endorse Michael’s candidacy.

Read our original interview with Michael Maddux.

Position 5 (District 5): Debora Juarez

Debora Juarez has spent her life’s work fighting for the little guy. Her experience in the legal field has focused on bringing justice to marginalized groups. She’ll continue in that spirit on the City Council by championing programs that deliver equity.

One way that she plans to do that is through community development policies. She has a vision for the city future where whole communities are built — places that provide for every income and household type, contain all of the amenities needed to live, work, and play, and meet community-wide sustainability goals. Debora also wants to provide opportunity in every sense of the word. She believes that people should have the tools to innovate, learn, and get ahead. 

Debora recognizes that her district in particular has serious transportation issues, which in many ways is the result of late annexation to the City. She staunchly supports measures that will create safer streets, provide better facilities for people on foot and bike, and enhance local transit. Debora will fight hard to bring a new light rail station at 130th St.

Debora embodies the best values of her district and will bring a thoughtful and sensible voice to the City Council.

Read our original interview with Debora Juarez.

Position 6 (District 6): Mike O’Brien

Mike O’Brien understands inclusionary zoning and spearheaded the linkage fee policy, for which he received considerable pushback. He could have limited his efforts to accessory dwelling unit and detached accessory dwelling unit reform but instead committed to solving the real problem: raising revenue to expand access to urban benefits. It is clear he understands the intersection of land use and inequality. He doesn’t gloss over issues with ‘growth is good’ talking points, but rather aims to make growth work for everyone. Mike is chair of the Select Committee on Housing Affordability and has actively implemented Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA) advisory committee proposals, recently introducing legislation with Mayor Murray, to deliver 6,000 affordable homes through a commercial linkage fee and Mandatory Inclusionary Housing for new multifamily developments. As chair of the Council’s Planning, Land Use, and Sustainability Committee, Mike has shown a dedication to keep growth equitable and circumvent reactive opposition by community members.

On transportation issues, Mike is equally strong. He’s been a strong advocate on the Sound Transit Board, supporting transit oriented development and equity. But more importantly, as a person who bikes, he understands the urgency of walking and biking issues.

The city that The Urbanist wants in the future is the city that Mike O’Brien is working to shape. His knowledge, experience, strategy, and tone are invaluable.

Read our original interview with Mike O’Brien.

Position 7 (District 7): Sally Bagshaw

Sally Bagshaw represents both the ultra-dense urban living of downtown and the car dependent single-family neighborhood of Magnolia, giving her a moderated vision of urbanism. As a bike commuter, she depends on protected bike lanes for her commute, noting how much time the new 2nd Avenue lanes save her. She’s the local representative for Seattle’s “Downtown interests,” but displayed a willingness to push back where she anticipated backlash — pointing, for example, to the positive impacts bike lanes have on nearby businesses.

On growth, she noted there’s “no silver bullet, but there is a silver buckshot,” including a range of social investments from pre-K to nursing services for new parents. Sally fought for and won the right for 20 mph speed limits on city streets — a crucial component for our Vision Zero plan. With an eye towards equity, she wants to create a one-stop shop for low-income programs from the ORCA low-income fare to Seattle City Light’s utility discount. Paired with her recent votes against a series of anti-density amendments on low-rise development, she’s shown herself to be a vote we can count on.

Read our original interview with Sally Bagshaw.

Position 8 (At-Large): Tim Burgess

Tim Burgess has been a leading voice on the City Council since he was first elected in 2008. He led the way on the voter-approved pre-K education initiative and currently serves as City Council President. His diverse job history, including stints as a journalist and detective for the Seattle Police Department, has given him a grounded and moderate perspective on city politics. Throughout his tenure on Council, he has supported numerous urbanist policies, including: two recent tenant protections policies giving renters 90 days notice before eviction, a remodeled employee head tax to lessen congestion, a business development incentive for local small music venues, and the HALA “Grand Bargain.”

Tim is a strong supporter of density, upzones, and progressive taxation. He’s shown an authentic willingness to reconsider past policies — from the employee hours tax to micro housing. Tim is a leader, he shares our values, and he will continue to be a voice for our issues on the City Council.

Read our original interview with Tim Burgess.

Position 9 (At-Large): Lorena González

Lorena González is a tried and true leader with life and work experience that will provide wisdom and a needed perspective to the City Council. Raised as a migrant farmworker in the Yakima Valley, she worked her way through college to become a civil rights attorney, President Emeritus of OneAmerica, and President of the Latina/o Bar Association of Washington. She displays an understanding of and dedication to social justice principles and has a pragmatic eye for how to implement those principles city-wide.

Lorena will be an aggressive advocate in obtaining state and federal funds to build more low-income housing while searching for progressive and reliable revenue tools to ensure the City can fund its priorities. She supports mandatory inclusionary zoning, transit-oriented development, tenant protections, and accessory dwelling units. She believes that the City should aspire towards Vision Zero and challenges the primacy given to neighborhood aesthetics at the cost of greater housing.

She’s as comfortable in the weeds of wonky policy as she is giving a 30,000-foot values-based analysis of her political priorities. She’s a fighter, a tested and proven advocate, and a grade-A urbanist.

Read our original interview with Lorena Gonzáles.

Honest Elections (I-122): Vote Yes

Initiative 122, also known as Honest Elections, is a thorough and pragmatic attempt to limit wealthy influence in Seattle elections and amplify the influence of individual citizens. The initiative would trigger a number of changes like prohibiting politicians from lobbying the City shortly after leaving office and preventing donations to elected officials from businesses that win City contracts.

Honest Elections goes further than most election reform laws. The signature change is a policy called Democracy Vouchers. This portion of the initiative would provide a $100 in vouchers to every voter in the city. The vouchers can be given to any candidates they choose, allowing individual citizens (including people who don’t have money to spend on politics) to become more engaged in the political process. Further, even if a small number of citizens used their vouchers, it will reduce the marginal benefit of money from special interests, likely reducing the incentive for special interests to spend enormous sums on elections.

You can read a more detailed take on the proposal from the Sightline Institute, including their entire coverage, addressing inaccurate criticisms and additional benefits. Overall, this initiative has the potential to spark a change in the way elections are managed across the country. Seattle would be the first city to enact Democracy Vouchers. A small increase in property taxes could transform elections.

We encourage a “yes” vote on Honest Elections initiative.

Transportation Levy to Move Seattle (Proposition 1): Vote Yes

The Levy to Move Seattle is a $930 million, nine-year measure to fund essential transportation investments across our city. As our city grows, our infrastructure must keep up.

The measure funds a host of new transit choices, including seven RapidRide+ corridor projects and improved light rail connections, like a new stop at Graham St in Southeast Seattle. It offers more options for people who bike and walk. Over 50 miles of protected bike lanes, 60 miles of Neighborhood Greenways, new Safe Routes to Schools, and a pedestrian bridge across I-5 at Northgate will be funded by the package. It also addresses our growing maintenance backlog by repairing 225 blocks of sidewalks and seismically reinforcing vulnerable infrastructure including 16 bridges — to name just a handful of projects.

Some naysayers have decried the price tag and raised concerns about accountability. We say those concerns don’t match the facts. To start, this levy represents a mere $12 per month increase for the average homeowner. The real cost comes from hours spent sitting in traffic and lives lost due to unreliable infrastructure and unsafe intersections, which this measure will mitigate. But even if the price tag is large, we believe big problems require big solutions. Regarding accountability, City’s transportation department has a track record of over-delivering. The Bridging the Gap Levy, which this measure would replace, met or exceeded nearly every goal, including: 48 new Safe Routes to School (goal of 30), six bridges replaced or rehabilitated (goal of three to five), 90,000 replaced street/regulatory signs (goal of 50,000), and 50,000 hours of new Metro service (goal of 45,000). Paired with an oversight committee and annual reporting metrics, we have every reason to believe this measure will be another success.

Passing this levy is essential to keep our city moving. Vote “yes.”

Best Starts for Kids (Proposition 1): Vote Yes

On the King County ballot, Best Starts for Kids (Proposition 1) is one of the first initiatives of its kind in the nation to comprehensively address early childhood development. The proposition will fund early intervention and prevention programs to improve health and well-being outcomes.

Although much of King County is prosperous, geographic inequalities including higher incidences of poverty and infant mortality impact child development. Best Starts for Kids is informed by evidence that brain development is most critical from ages 0 to 3, with early intervention being the most effective and economical approach for addressing serious health and social problems. Proposition 1 is critical for enhancing educational, social and economic opportunities for children regardless of geographical location or socio-economic background. Presently, 75% of King County’s General Fund is dedicated to the criminal justice system to deal with the negative outcomes of mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, incarceration and homelessness, through law enforcement, courts and jails. This proposition aims to focus investment on preventing these negative outcomes and reduce the costs and consequences of treating people later in life.

To boost services to support the cognitive, emotional and social development of children, King County is asking for $65 million per year, funded through a property levy of 14 cents per $1,000 assessed value, over six years. The levy would support a range of health and educational programs, particularly for children under 5, including nurse home visits for new parents and babies, prenatal support, mental health and developmental screenings. Funds would also be directed to prevention of child and youth depression, substance abuse, developmental disabilities and homelessness. Place-focused interventions include increasing access to healthy and affordable food, and expanding economic opportunities and affordable housing. 

We recommend a “yes” vote for Best Starts for Kids.

Community Transit Now (Proposition 1): Vote Yes

Transit in Snohomish County could be radically transformed for first time in nearly a decade if voters approve Proposition 1. The measure is slated to increase transit funding by 25% and transit service by roughly 100,000 hours annually, all for a new 0.3% sales tax. Proposition 1 is built upon two fundamental pillars: making existing transit services better and creating brand new service where there is strong demand. Community Transit has always been a good steward of taxpayer resources and made tough choices during the economic crisis by eliminating over 37% of service. Since then, the agency has made targeted investments through fleet upgrades, improved route efficiency and reliability, and increased service by more than 47,000 hours — with another 21,000 hours programmed for addition — all without asking for more funding.

Proposition 1 will deliver immediate and longer-term investments that increase daily trip frequencies–particularly during midday and evening hours — across the local bus network, restore more Saturday, Sunday, and holiday service, introduce late night service, and boost service on in-demand commuter routes to Downtown Seattle and the University District. Wasting no time in implementing enhanced transit improvements, the first round of changes would begin in early 2016 with continued service expansion at least through 2018. But the good news doesn’t stop there.

Community Transit will introduce brand new routes, too. Building upon the massive success of Swift, a bus rapid transit service, at least two new corridors will receive similar high quality service treatments. The first new Swift line is planned from Paine Field to Bothell via Mill Creek; three other corridors are contenders for the other new Swift line. High on the list for new local bus service is a Marysville-to-McCollum Park route, which will roughly follow SR-9 and SR-96 to offer more neighborhood-to-neighborhood connections in suburban communities. Community Transit will also invest heavily in the popular vanpool program that provides alternative access for commuters and commit to even better DART service for those with accessibility challenges.

Proposition 1 investments will undoubtedly position Snohomish County on a stronger social, environmental, and economic footing by allowing people to get to work, school, and other places, often without ever having to use a car. We recognize that transit is imperative to creating healthier, walkable, and sustainable communities. We give our strongest possible endorsement for this sensible and comprehensive approach to local transit.

Vote “yes” on Proposition 1.

The Urbanist Editorial Board consists of Owen Pickford, Stephen Fesler, Ben Crowther, Sarah Oberklaid, and Scott Bonjukian.

The post 2015 General Election Endorsements first appeared on The Urbanist.

Deborah Zech-Artis is running for Council in District 7 against incumbent Sally Bagshaw. A lifelong Seattleite, she works for Boeing as a supply chain manager and recently received her PhD in Organization Behavior Towards Leadership with a dissertation focusing on women in leadership. Twenty-two years ago she ran for Seattle School Board and, though she didn’t win, she says the race taught her a lot about how to win this campaign. She wants to end “business as usual” and believes mismanagement could make Seattle another Detroit in 10 years. Her goal, if elected, is to be accessible to her constituents.

What would you do to make housing affordable for everyone in Seattle?
“I would not do rent control,” she started, “And there is no way to build yourself out of insufficient housing because lenders won’t loan if they see a glut of production.”

Her central proposal was a linkage fee. Unlike the existing proposal in which the funds raised are used directly to fund affordable housing, she wants the fee to fund a principal account. The interest on the account would become a stable, long-term revenue source immune to the up-and-downs of the housing market.

Zech Artis also supports one-for-one replacement of affordable housing. If a unit with 100 affordable market-rate units is torn down for a 500-unit tower, for example, that tower should be required to provide 100 affordable units.

Finally, she supported the expansion of single room occupancy (SRO) development, saying “there are some areas where they are absolutely appropriate and they’re healthy for the community.” They promote a mix of income levels and cultures, which she believes will help low-income people become more self-confident and personally successful.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social, and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Deborah started by addressing the history of redlining — a practice of excluding people of color from certain neighborhoods by denying them services like loans. She then pointed to today’s zoning, which she feels is being “mandated by the developers.”

She spoke against upzoning in single-family neighborhoods, saying they increase property taxes and put “density where it doesn’t need to be.” When land is upzoned, land values increase, property taxes increase, home values drop, and families are forced to sell to developers. Instead of selling to developers, she’d rather sell to a family so kids can have the open space they need. She spoke of friends who raise kids in apartments, saying “it’s tough.” Keeping single-family zoning would allow homeowners to be independent, work with their neighbors to keep each other safe, and allows for more diversity.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

Deborah doesn’t believe Vision Zero is achievable.

The problem, she said, is that people don’t pay attention. Pedestrians look at their phones while crossing the street and drivers are zoned out or blinded by bad weather. So the only way to reduce deaths and injuries is to teach people to pay attention.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

A twenty-year plan isn’t thinking far enough ahead, she proclaimed. Instead, we should be looking 50-75 years in the future. She noted some new technology in transportation as reason to look further ahead.

As for what we can do now, she wants to: get developers under control, take our city back, stop doing business as usual, and watch our money. She proposed bringing the State Auditor’s office in to do performance and financial audits of all city agencies. If we spend our money wisely, she said, we’ll have more than enough money for social services to care of the homeless, seniors, and disabled residents.

When asked about the four alternatives in the Comprehensive Plan (i.e., Seattle 2035), she spoke against plans that would upzone single-family neighborhoods. Growth should happen near light rail stations, which should have park-and-rides and commercial space built in.

Regarding urban centers like downtown, she spoke of the need to lessen the wind tunnels and altered weather patterns caused by downtown skyscrapers by increasing open space, requiring setbacks, and expanding sidewalks.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

District 7 is home to four large transportation projects: the tunnel, the viaduct, the waterfront, and the Mercer mess. “I’m extremely angry about all of them,” she said, and so are most of the people she’s talked to in her district.

The most important of those four is the Viaduct — the demolition of which she believes will cause crippling congestion (citing that 110,000 daily trips will need to be redistributed), repel cruise ship tourism, and send maritime business north to Canada. She said there’s no law on the books that mandates the demolition, and so we ought to reconsider.

Read our interview with other District 7 candidate, Sally Bagshaw.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 7: Deborah Zech-Artis Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

Seattle is on the cusp of a major election that will change the face of the Seattle City Council and perhaps city politics altogether. In 2016, we will see the results of district elections. Seven City Council positions will be elected at the district level and two positions will be elected at the citywide level. All nine City Council positions are up for grabs in the 2015 General Election, and only six of the sitting councilmembers are running for reelection–meaning that whatever the case, at least three new members would join the City Council.

The first step, however, is the August Primary where at least 47 candidates will appear on the ballot across all nine open City Council positions. In advance of this, staff from The Urbanist sat down with 25 of the candidates over the course of four grueling weekends in May and June to hear their perspectives on a wide spectrum of urban issues. The form of these interviews were simple: we asked the same basic set of questions from each candidate. In the following weeks, we shared the content of those interviews through near-daily publication.

Today, we are sharing our endorsements for each City Council position; the decisions were incredibly difficult with universally, highly qualified candidates. All of the candidates showed a strong desire to advance positive policies on land use, transportation, public safety, economic justice, the environment, and a range of other key urban policy realms. Before we get to our endorsements, we want to offer our personal gratitude to each of them. It was a humbling experience to speak with each candidate to hear their story and their vision for this great city. And, regardless of our endorsements, we hope to work with all of the candidates in the future in whatever capacity that may be. Thank you all for the robust and critical discussions on the future of Seattle. 

And, without much more ado, here are the endorsements of the The Urbanist Editorial Board.

Position 1 (District 1): Brianna Thomas

Brianna Thomas is a breath of fresh air–she’s a renter, she rides the bus, and she tells it as it is. She’s a resident of Delridge, a notable community of color that lacks many of the urban benefits shared in wealthier parts of Seattle.

On land use, she thinks Seattle needs to have a come-to-Jesus moment on the fact that two-thirds of the city is blocked from development by single-family zoning. She supports building more family-sized units, additional growth in the city’s urban villages, and expanding development options (like townhouses) in single-family areas. Brianna will work for a transportation system that puts people on foot first. She supports street safety redesigns, the deployment of bike lanes and sidewalks, and a comprehensive frequent network of rail and bus that links all parts of the city and region.

Brianna will also fight for stronger labor rules. She led the successful campaign for $15 per hour in SeaTac and she’ll bring that same enthusiasm for social equity to her very economically diverse district. Importantly, she also rejects the notion of parochialism; instead she will act as a fair voice to the city and her district. We urge you to give your support to Brianna in District 1.

Read our original interview with Brianna Thomas.

Position 2 (District 2): Tammy Morales

Tammy Morales will provide a unique voice for urban issues in Southeast Seattle. As an advocate on food access, she championed policies that give residents healthier, fairer, and wider access to quality food choices. On land use and development, she wants to see a broader set of choices for housing and building types. Tammy thinks that the City should reevaluate the Urban Village strategy, particularly in Southeast Seattle, so that it can better align with the infrastructure investments like light rail.

As a fighter for working families, she will work to bring more family-sized units to the housing market. She’s also concerned about the welfare of renters, supporting policies that give them greater stability.  She’s an unabashed supporter for the City’s Vision Zero program calling for bold action on a safety redesign to Rainier Avenue. She wants to expand Pronto! bike-share and transit throughout the city, including a new light rail station at Graham Street.

Tammy is also a total planning wonk; she’s a planner by trade with a degree in Community and Regional Planning from the University of Texas, Austin. We think that will work to her benefit in dialogue and advocacy on a wide range of social, environmental, and economic issues.

Read our original interview with Tammy Morales.

Position 3 (District 3): Kshama Sawant

Kshama Sawant is well known for her successful campaign to raise Seattle’s minimum wage to $15 per hour, and her urbanist credentials are no less impressive. She believes solutions for affordable housing must meet the scale of the problem before us. To that end, she supports the maximum linkage fee, using the city’s bonding capacity to build high quality, affordable units, and, central to her campaign, rent control. Building on her principles of standing up for working people, she believes the City needs a strong tenant’s bill of rights. She also appreciated the way marginalized communities, like LGBTQ folks and people of color, are especially impacted.

Kshama understands the strong connection between housing and transit, and the need to accommodate growth without causing excessive displacement. She understands a successful transit system serves trips beyond rush-hour work commutes. She is as committed to Vision Zero as anyone we talked to, asserting that the City should not tolerate traffic deaths any more than we would accept them in our own life.

We love that Kshama is unafraid to propose big, urbanist changes, and after 15 Now, we believe she can make them happen.

Read our original interview with Kshama Sawant.

Position 4 (District 4): Michael Maddux

Michael Maddux is a renter, a bike-commuter, one of just two openly gay candidates, and a true-blue urbanist. A long-time local activist and organizer, Michael knows how to achieve large policy goals, like establishing the Seattle Park District. His current goals are even more ambitious and just as admirable. He wants to turn parking lots into affordable housing. He wants the elimination of traffic deaths on municipal roads to be the city’s highest priority. He wants to investigate new progressive revenue options, including a capital gains tax on property transfers to target property speculators. He supports a new LGBT community center to address growing community needs, including a spike in hate crimes. He wants to invest in infrastructure, like safer road design and high-capacity transit. He wants to invest in people, too, by funding apprenticeship programs (like the one at South Seattle College) that can help to give young people a way out of poverty.

Though he’s running for a district seat, Michael rejects parochialism. He wants what’s best for the city, and especially for its most vulnerable residents, regardless of where they live. We heartily endorse that sentiment — and we heartily endorse Michael’s candidacy.

(Note: Jean Godden is also running in District 4. She was the only current member of the Seattle City Council up for election who did not respond to our requests for an interview, making her ineligible for our endorsement.)

Read our original interview with Michael Maddux.

Position 5 (District 5): Halei Watkins

Halei Watkins confidently supports urbanism. Her first point on housing affordability was that we need to build a lot more. She then segued from bluntness to nuance, advocating for mixed-income neighborhoods with a wonky understanding of policy details. She supports increasing the housing levy and linkage fees, revenue that would subsidize housing needed to achieve mixed-income communities. Yet, she understood the private market as well. She criticized setback and parking requirements for accessory dwelling units and detached accessory dwelling units, wants an expansion of the Multifamily Tax Exemption program, defended micro-housing, and suggested a new urban village at NE 130th Street. As a renter, Watkins would bring a needed perspective to the City Council.

On transportation, her priorities were in the right place. Watkins intuitively understood the importance of walkability and named the Northgate Pedestrian and Bicycle Bridge as the most important project in her district. She also connected the Move Seattle levy to achieving Vision Zero. Lastly, she knows light rail will be transformative for her district and that is a critical element for improving access to urban benefits.

Halei Watkins would be a champion of urbanist goals, even in the face of opposition. We endorse her candidacy in District 5.

Read our original interview with Halei Watkins.

Position 6 (District 6): Mike O’Brien

Mike O’Brien understands inclusionary zoning and spearheaded the linkage fee policy, for which he received considerable pushback. He could have limited his efforts to accessory dwelling unit and detached accessory dwelling unit reform but instead committed to solving the real problem: raising revenue to expand access to urban benefits. It is clear he understands the intersection of land use and inequality. He doesn’t gloss over issues with ‘growth is good’ talking points, but rather aims to make growth work for everyone. As chair of the Council’s Planning, Land Use, and Sustainability Committee, Mike has shown a dedication keep growth equitable and circumvent reactive NIMBYism.

On transportation issues, Mike is equally strong. He’s been a strong advocate on the Sound Transit Board, supporting transit oriented development and equity. But more importantly, as a person who bikes, he understands the urgency of walking and biking issues.

The city that The Urbanist wants in the future is the city that Mike O’Brien is working to shape. His knowledge, experience, strategy, and tone are invaluable.

Read our original interview with Mike O’Brien.

Position 7 (District 7): Sally Bagshaw

Sally Bagshaw represents both the ultra-dense urban living of downtown and the car dependent single-family neighborhood of Magnolia, giving her a moderated vision of urbanism. As a bike commuter, she depends on protected bike lanes for her commute, noting how much time the new 2nd Avenue lanes save her. She’s the local representative for Seattle’s “Downtown interests,” but displayed a willingness to push back where she anticipated backlash–pointing, for example, to the positive impacts bike lanes have on nearby businesses.

On growth, she noted there’s “no silver bullet, but there is a silver buckshot,” including a range of social investments from pre-K to nursing services for new parents. Sally fought for and won the right for 20 mph speed limits on city streets–a crucial component for our Vision Zero plan. With an eye towards equity, she wants to create a one-stop shop for low-income programs from the ORCA low-income fare to Seattle City Light’s utility discount. Paired with her recent votes against a series of anti-density amendments on low-rise development, she’s shown herself to be a vote we can count on.

Read our original interview with Sally Bagshaw.

Position 8 (At-Large): Tim Burgess

Tim Burgess has been a leading voice on the City Council since he was first elected in 2008. He led the way on the voter-approved pre-K education initiative and currently serves as City Council President. His diverse job history, including stints as a journalist and detective for the Seattle Police Department, has given him a grounded and moderate perspective on city politics. He related almost every issue to one of his primary values: safety. He wants the first four stories of a building to be active and welcoming to create feelings of security among pedestrians. He supports Vision Zero with a strong emphasis on enforcement and education. And, he believes that creating economic security is key to the vibrancy of a neighborhood and success of young kids.

Tim is a strong supporter of linkage fees, density, upzones, and progressive taxation. He supports a reincarnation of the employee hours tax as a dynamic congestion fee–priced higher in areas of high congestion to encourage employees to walk, bike, and bus. He’s shown an authentic willingness to reconsider past policies–from the employee hours tax to micro housing. Tim is a leader, he shares our values, and he will continue to be a voice for our issues on the City Council.

Read our original interview with Tim Burgess.

Position 9 (At-Large): Lorena González

Lorena González is a tried and true leader with life and work experience that will provide wisdom and a needed perspective to the City Council. Raised as a migrant farmworker in the Yakima Valley, she worked her way through college to become a civil rights attorney, President Emeritus of OneAmerica, and President of the Latina/o Bar Association of Washington. She displays an understanding of and dedication to social justice principles and has a pragmatic eye for how to implement those principles city-wide.

Lorena will be an aggressive advocate in obtaining state and federal funds to build more low-income housing while searching for progressive and reliable revenue tools to ensure the City can fund its priorities. She supports linkage fees, mandatory inclusionary zoning, transit-oriented development, tenant protections, and accessory dwelling units. She believes that the City should aspire towards Vision Zero and challenges the primacy given to neighborhood aesthetics at the cost of greater housing.

She’s as comfortable in the weeds of wonky policy as she is giving a 30,000-foot values-based analysis of her political priorities. She’s a fighter, a tested and proven advocate, and a grade-A urbanist.

Read our original interview with Lorena Gonzáles.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election: Primary Endorsements first appeared on The Urbanist.

Over the past four weeks, we have profiled a huge list of candidates running for the City of Seattle’s nine coveted council positions, all of which are up for election this year. The City’s council elections are seeing a big change with the introduction of districts. Of the nine positions, seven will be elected on a district-basis. They’ll each serve for four years before running for re-election again in 2019. The remaining two positions will serve citywide and be elected at-large for two years, and thereafter be elected every four years in the same election as Mayor and City Attorney. The top two vote-getters in the August Primary will proceed to the November General election.

Here’s who we interviewed for each of the 9 positions:

• District 1 (Position 1): Shannon Braddock, Lisa Herbold, and Brianna Thomas
• District 2 (Position 2): Bruce Harrell and Tammy Morales
• District 3 (Position 3): Pamela Banks, Morgan Beach, Rod Hearne, and Kshama Sawant
• District 4 (Position 4): Rob Johnson, Michael Maddux, and Abel Pachecho
• District 5 (Position 5): Sandy Brown, Debora Juarez, and Halei Watkins
• District 6 (Position 6): Mike O’Brien and Catherine Weatbrook
• District 7 (Position 7): Sally Bagshaw and Gus Hartmann
• At-Large 1 (Position 8): Tim Burgess, Jon Grant, and John Roderick
• At-Large 2 (Position 9): Alon Bassok, Bill Bradburd, and Lorena Gonzalez

We extended interview offers to 26 of the 47 candidates running; sitting Councilmember Jean Godden was the only candidate to decline an opportunity to speak with us. Therefore, we will not consider her for an endorsement. We intend to release our official endorsements for the Primary next week. In the meantime, you can click on each of the candidates to see their interviews or see all of them in order starting with the most recently published interview.

UPDATE: The Urbanist endorsements are now out.

The post ICYMI: We Profiled 25 Candidates for Seattle City Council first appeared on The Urbanist.

Abel Pacheco (aged 28) is one of the two youngest candidates running for Seattle City Council with hopes of capturing a position in the newly formed District 4. Pacheco originally grew up in California, but found himself in Seattle to pursue his educational aspirations in public administration at the Evans School of Public Affairs. He has very strong ties in District 4 having previously served on the Wallingford Community Council and the U-District Partnership (he still is an active member for both organizations). He now works in higher education as Assistant Director for External Affairs at the University of Washington and Adjunct Professor for North and Central Seattle Colleges.

Pacheco boasts a platform focused on housing, public safety, and innovative technology issues to improve our infrastructure like transit and broadband. As a person of color, he understands the challenges that people face when it comes to policing. He wants to improve partnerships to drive better outcomes. He also thinks that the key to success in government is harnessing technology. He wants to help the City find ways to implement technology so that departments become even more responsive, smarter, and reinvent how infrastructure is used. On housing, Pacheco can identify with those struggling to find affordable housing. Since moving to Seattle, he’s been a mother-in-law renter; he wants to find solutions so that more Seattleites can attain quality, affordable housing options.

What would you do to make housing affordable for everyone in Seattle?

Pacheco’s take on housing affordability is mostly centered on planning and transportation. He looks toward neighborhoods as an opportunity to support growth. Pacheco wants to work with them to meet their goals, but with a renewed spirit of charity by the City. He thinks that the City should put tools in front of them to help them determine what approaches to use. Pacheco mentioned changing zoning (including single-family areas where warranted), changing regulation around allowing accessory dwelling units, and modifying development regulations as examples of this. Pacheco also reflected on past planning efforts in neighborhoods as somewhat prefunctory; going forward, he wants a more collegial planning process that hears the desires of local resdients.

Pacheco placed an emphasis on people living where they work and supporting public transportation. He wants to focus on getting people to live closer to where they work, but also thinks that good transit goes hand-in-hand with new urban development. Going further, he suggested that new development is a much better fit when located in transit-rich areas. At the same time, the availability of high quality transit can get people to work and elsewhere very effectively.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social, and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Pacheco jumped right in and said that Seattle is leading the way on wage equity. He noted that a $15 per hour minimum represents a huge step forward. Increasing wage for low-income earners could really help them up, but only if the city can get housing affordability and transit right. He’s deeply concerned about current trend of rising costs for housing and transportation. Pacheco thinks these are still serious liabilities that need to be tackled by the City to ensure the success of the new minimum wage rules.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

Pacheco is a big supporter of Vision Zero. “I think it’s a very noble goal and we should strive to achieve it,” he told us. He realizes how challenging life can be for vulnerable users like bicyclists and pedestrians on city streets. He shared a personal story to explain that point.

Pacheco, a resident of Wallingford, works in the University District. He once decided to ride his bike to work along 45th Street, but found it so unsafe and terrifying that he now walks most days and occasionally hops on the bus. He understands why people are frustrated with our infrastructure and thinks people shouldn’t have to make that choice.

Pacheco thinks that the new Move Seattle program will be a big leap forward in realizing the goals of Vision Zero. He says that the loss of “one life is one life too many.” He wants to play a big role in helping implement Vision Zero policies and programs, particularly for the neighborhoods of his district. Pacheco proposed a new lid on top of I-5 that he argued could be a positive project for his district and help make progress on Vision Zero–as well as with housing. Stretching from 43rd Street to 50th Street, the lid would heal a deep wound between Wallingford and the University District. Pedestrians and bicyclists would be able to traverse safer connections, particularly along a new path stitching 47th Street back together. Meanwhile, it could help the city realize housing, environmental, and park space goals. 14 acres of new park could be created while added tree canopy would contribute to positive environmental outcomes.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth? 

“Growth is coming and I want to make sure we do it in a way that is environmentally sustainable.” He used the Bullitt Center as an example of this. One of the reasons that the Bullitt Center was built, he said, was to challenge current building and land use codes. At the same time, it was constructed to show that it was possible to use the cleanest and most sustainable technologies in new buildings. He thinks that we can build sustainably and sufficiently to accommodate growth by funneling it in proximity to light rail stations.

When asked what 20-year growth alternative approach would be best align with his vision for Seattle, he identified Seattle 2035 Alternative 4 (the urban village, transit-oriented growth alternative) as a similar approach that he would favor. He reiterated that development must happen where transit is accessible.This can also help relieve the pressure of parking, or lack thereof, from neighborhoods. Part of his reasoning was that the old ways of auto-oriented growth aren’t the best long-term option. “Our streets aren’t going to get any wider”. Moving people on transit gives the city much higher and efficient throughput while helping to better maintain the city’s character that people value.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

Pacheco said that his district would be home to the three new light rail stations over the coming decade. With this new piece of infrastructure in place, it will offer tremendous opportunity for his district and sustain growth in an equitable, sustainable fashion. Pacheco linked the district’s light rail investments to the future University District rezone. He supports the overall rezone and thinks that it will bolster the prominence of the neighborhood because it would increase housing.

He recognizes the concerns that residents and businesses have about the impacts resulting from investments in new development. Despite that, he thinks that there is a bigger struggle for many residents, often students, when it comes to housing choices. For them, it’s usually a choice of living further from campus or living three to a room closer to college. With more capacity for housing, and presumably the delivery of new units, current and future residents could take advantage of the new housing offerings closer to where they want to be.

Another point he raised was social equity elsewhere in his district. He sees the eastern portion of the district as transit-poor, particularly in Sand Point and Wedgwood. At the same time, prominent senior centers and social welfare organizations like Solid Ground operate in these areas. He thinks that the opening of light rail will offer a huge chance for the district to re-evaluate transit service patterns.

Read our interviews with other District 4 candidates, Rob Johnson and Michael Maddux.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 4: Abel Pacheco Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

John Roderick is running for Position 8. Roderick is a professional musician and has been politically engaged as an advocate for the Seattle music and arts community since the 1990’s, a time when Seattle local government and the music community were at odds over issues such as the Teen Dance Ordinance and the postering ban. Roderick was a founding member of the Seattle Music Commission. He lives in Rainier Beach.

What would you do to make housing affordable for everyone in Seattle?

Roderick believes that Seattle has historically been a middle-class city and that lack of affordability only became an issue in the last eight to ten years because explosive growth occurred in conjunction with bad planning. He referred to South Lake Union as an example of an area with “thousands of ‘ghost’ units” that were not built due to poor implementation of incentive zoning.

Roderick supports creating more housing in Seattle by building density at transit hubs and by freeing up underutilized space. On way he would do this is by easing restrictions on mother-in-law units. He would also like to see the City build housing. He thinks that micro-housing is “good” but would like to see more larger family-sized units built (e.g. three-bedroom units).

Musicians are a “canary in the coal mine” to Roderick: musicians cannot afford to live in Seattle now and if they can’t afford to live somewhere, soon many others won’t be able to.

Roderick would like to see all possible housing solutions pursued. He wants housing units built that are both suitable and affordable; however, he does not like punitive solutions. He believes that there is a better solution than: “If you want __, you must __.”  He referred to South Lake Union again and to the incentive zoning rules that tied increased height to payments or on-site implementation of low-income housing. Vulcan chose not to take advantage of the incentive zoning opportunity. Roderick’s perspective is that it was assumed that Vulcan could be coerced rather than encouraged.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social, and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Roderick explained that he sees social justice as a framework for looking at all issues. He believes that transit systems have traditionally underserved communities of color and he would like to see a plan that recognizes that people in Seattle need to move within Seattle. He believes that transportation systems in Seattle have focused on getting people to and from the core of the city and that east-west travel is difficult.

Seattle was built around a system of trolleys and, Roderick explained, he would like to reconnect transportation and neighborhood “sinews.” He would like to reinvigorate neighborhood cores so that people can make shorter trips and take part in their vitality. He sees reinvigoration of neighborhoods and transportation within and between neighborhoods as a way to bring “new equity” to the city. “Centralization is the opposite of equity.”

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

“I do think it is achievable.” Roderick believes that new technology, such as autonomously piloted vehicles, will create a new style of transportation network. One that will replace single-occupant, internal-combustion vehicles. He sees that traffic deaths are a result of operator error and that after a transition period to new technology, most traffic deaths will end. Roderick believes that the City needs to be engaged in planning how new technology is utilized so that the companies bringing the new technology do not alone decide how it is implemented, particularly around issues of social justice.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

“The growth is going to come.” Roderick believes that Seattle needs to have a “master plan” for growth because because our process is “politically and culturally timid.” He believes that 40 years from now, Seattle will have grown one of two ways: ad hoc, or through a vision. The vision of Seattle growth he advocates is one that is “interconnected, carbon neutral, then a carbon sink” and one that ”remains affordability and that remains equitable throughout the town.” Roderick argued that it is less expensive to plan upfront than to make changes after something has been built. Roderick also believes that Seattle needs a plan in which all residents are included in the process and stated that “we need everyone’s investment in it.”

Roderick believes that traditional Seattle planning has focused on livability and on keeping out density. He says, “If we want equality, density and transportation, it has to happen in our backyards.” Roderick believes that investments should not be paid for just by “taxing the big developers,” but that single-family homeowners also need to make sacrifices.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

“Reconnecting our neighborhoods with trolleys.” Roderick is an “enthusiastic supporter of Sound Transit 3,” but he sees that “it may or may not be built and is a long way out.” He hopes that a neighborhood transit system is already built before Sound Transit 3 would be complete. Roderick would like to create “a connected and diverse network that serves the city” and that interacts with systems that serve the county and region.

Roderick said that he is “agnostic on mode.” He is not “against buses” and sees them as a component of the neighborhood transportation system. He also supports separate lanes for buses and trains.

Read our interview with other District 8 candidates, Jon Grant and Tim Burgess.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 8: John Roderick Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

Lorena González is running city-wide in District 9. She grew in central Washington as a migrant farmworker, earning her first paycheck at age 8. She was among the first in her family to go to college, ultimately going on the law school to become an attorney practicing civil rights law with a focus on police misconduct and employment discrimination.

What would you do to make housing affordable to everyone in Seattle?

González said there are two buckets: the first is the “hard cost of renting or a mortgage,” the second is everything else (e.g., utilities, transportation, food, parking, etc.). Combined, these hard costs result in making the city inaccessible and unaffordable to folks living paycheck to paycheck (60-80% AMI) and those making under 30% AMI. There’s a supply issue with the current market. Some people think the answer is to slow down new housing and give primacy to neighborhood aesthetics–but that perspective concerns her because it has the potential to exacerbate the affordable housing crisis. Insatiable demand for housing bumps up the market rate, and some people can afford to pay those higher prices so it keeps going up.

Shifting to solutions, she said we need to “aggressively advocate” for federal and state funding mechanisms for the state housing fund; we need less regressive tools for steady revenue to build new units (e.g., linkage fees); we need to encourage transit oriented development; we need to pursue land use code amendments to make sure developers are building a minimum amount of affordable housing units (e.g., mandatory inclusionary zoning); we need to increase tenant protections to minimize displacement (e.g., increase notices for no fault evictions, increase notifications when affordable units convert to non-affordable); and lift restrictions on ADUs.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

She believes that each of the three effects inequalities and focused on people of color in particular because they “are at the intersection of racial, social, and economic inequalities.” She acknowledged the city’s history around intentional policy making to limit areas where people of color were allowed to live (i.e., redlining). As the only person of color running city-wide, she intends to be a deliberate policy maker around these issues.

To do this, she wants to implement equitable development, which is being explored by the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) and the Office of Civil Rights. She wants to empower communities that are the most impacted so the City can fashion what they need for safe, healthy, affordable communities. To do that, we have to know how to empower these communities in a way that isn’t patronizing or formulaic. The City hasn’t historically been good at collecting input from a broader base because many people don’t have the luxury, opportunity, or knowledge of how to engage City Hall. She pointed to the Equity in the Environment plan as a model of engagement.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

González said there can be an “appreciable impact on preventing otherwise preventable deaths and serious injuries”. We need to aspire to the goal of Vision Zero. As an attorney, she represented people who were injured by negligent people on the road. But she recognized a limit to our ability to control other’s behavior. What the City can focus on is the design of roadways, bike infrastructure, and pedestrian infrastructure to increase safety.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

When we talk about growth, we can’t build on I-5, the lakes, or the sound–”the only answer is to grow upwards.” We need to mitigate the wealth gap, traffic, and safety concerns. The City should be focusing on policies that funnel growth into urban centers/villages, but we need to revisit the definitions of these spaces to look at areas with high-frequency transit. We also need to have conversations about when and where it’s appropriate to have higher density in single-family zones.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

She is excited to see the impacts of expanded transit funding from Proposition 1, but she voiced frustration with the City focusing on particular projects instead of “periscoping up to a 30,000ft level to see how holistically we can get people from Point A to Point B.” She believes we need an “interconnected and intermodal” transportation system. She believes people are ok with density when it’s coupled with good transit that’s affordable, accessible, and efficient.

Read our interview with another District 9 candidates, Alon Bassok and Bill Bradburd.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 9: Lorena González Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

Alon Bassok is running as a candidate for Position 9, one of the two citywide council positions. He has lived in the city for some twenty years and has resided in the Delridge neighborhood of West Seattle for ten. Currently Bassok, PhD, is an instructor of urban planning at the University of Washington. His planning background, he argues, makes him uniquely qualified to help solve Seattle’s most immediate and acute problems: housing and transportation.

What would you do to make housing affordable for everyone in Seattle?

Seattle is going to have to increase housing supply and to grow in height, “to lift the lid.” He offers, as a solution, inclusionary zoning–or as he would like to call it, “inclusionary up-zoning”, because such a policy would increase heights around the city to accommodate growth. Specifically, for every five units created he would like to see one unit set aside for affordable housing at the level of the minimum wage. Mandatory inclusionary zoning, he notes, is legal and could be passed immediately. Additionally, he is adamant that amenities need to be provided in exchange for all the increased development potential: “density without amenities is worse than sprawl.” Therefore, transit must be included with increased housing densities. He cites Ballard as a cautionary tale. In single-family zones, he would like to lift covenants requiring living in ADUs. Lastly, on the demand side, he supports a type of municipal voucher system to alleviate the immediate crisis in affordability “from seniors to working families.”

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social, and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Bassok notes that de facto racial segregation continues in the city through personal income, neighborhood land values, and schools. Where the city can make inroads to address the historical inequalities is around light rail stations. Otherwise “there will only be pockets of affordability” without any other services. He notes that the policy of inclusionary zoning, were it to be baked into the zoning around light rail stations, would produce an income mix “to really raise all boats.” In general, he says, “we have to believe in ourselves as a big city,” to make decisions about what we want out of our major infrastructure investments to fix the problems of inequality.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

“You can’t engineer out bad behavior,” or “a drunk driver,” he says. Still, no death on any right of way is acceptable and therefore he supports engineering for slower speeds. Narrow lanes make people go slower, he adds. He would like to see the Bike Master Plan fully funded and implemented in the next ten years to improve travel for all modes, with an emphasis on safe bike and pedestrian facilities to schools. He also notes that police enforcement has a crucial role to play in making roadways safer.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

The urban villages have gotten the short end of the stick in the last twenty years of planning. They have seen very little transit infrastructure improvements while still absorbing a lot of the city’s growth. To avoid that dilemma from recurring, he supports investing in the urban centers because the infrastructure is already there. Places like the U-District, Lower Queen Anne, Capitol Hill, and Downtown can support increases in height with “an eye to inclusionary zoning.” He is astounded that there is no development atop light rail stations. Lastly, he supports alternative 2 of the draft Comprehensive Master Plan, because of its very emphasis of siting growth around the urban centers where the most activity and services already are.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

Sound Transit light rail to Ballard would be his most important project, if ST3 were not a decade or more away from completion. Therefore, he would like to speed the process with a Seattle focused, neighborhood high capacity transit system. “We need to solve transit now. And we have to go it alone.” Though he released a plan for a municipal fixed rail system, jointly with candidate John Roderick, at large Position 8, on May 27th, he says that he is mode agnostic. As proof of his agnosticism, he adds that the streetcars could easily become BRT lines without compromising their plan. So long as the BRT is engineered to resemble something like what Bogotá, Colombia, has built rather than what Seattle currently calls BRT, it would be all good.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 9: Alon Bassok Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

Kshama Sawant is the incumbent candidate running in District 3. She has a PhD in economics from North Carolina State University and was a professor at Seattle Central Community College before running for council. She was elected in 2013, running a campaign largely focused on raising the minimum wage. She was a key sponsor of the legislation ultimately increasing Seattle’s minimum wage to $15 per hour. She serves on a number of committees, including the Housing Affordability, Human Services and Economic Resiliency Committee.

What would you do to make housing affordable for everyone in Seattle?

Sawant began her answer by emphasizing that the solution must be at the scale of the problem and the problem is overwhelming. From that framing, she went on to state specific support for a number of policies. She would like to see the maximum linkage fee implemented but acknowledged this would not be enough to solve the affordability crisis. An even more powerful tool would be using the city’s bonding capacity in order to build high quality, affordable units.

Beyond efforts to increase affordable housing revenue, she emphasized renter protections. She thinks the city needs a strong tenant’s bill of rights and rent control. She believes rent control ‘has been a lifeline’ for people in many places and at the end of the interview she passed along a literature review of the policy. The review indicated that severe zoning restrictions caused most of the problems attributed to rent control.

Describing her strategy on rent control, she said that the city council members should take the lead on pressuring Olympia. Her focus on this problem is due to the urgency felt by regular people facing unaffordable housing costs.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social, and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Sawant described housing and transit as ‘inextricably linked,’ we can’t talk about one without the other. She blamed the current housing crisis for pushing people further and further out of the city, while most of the jobs remained in the center of the city. This problem creates a dynamic that requires people to commute long distances. Since Seattle doesn’t yet have a mass transit system, everyone experiences gridlock.

During multiple points in the interview Sawant described herself as a strong supporter of mass transit and believes it will serve a critical role solving both housing and transportation problems. Overall these problems are exacerbated by rents that rise faster than wages and things are bad enough that even middle class people are being affected. With that said, it’s clear these issues are not class neutral. The most affected are marginalized communities.  People of color and LGBT communities face discrimination and obstacles their entire life that are further compounded by housing and transportation problems.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

Sawant described Vision Zero as the only goal we can have. She thinks that with any policy we should ask if the outcome is what we would want in our own life. The truly social, compassionate and just action is to raise people’s standards to meet this goal, saying “How can we not strive for this.”

After praising the policy, she stepped back and spoke more personally.  She described an important part of her childhood, telling us about when her father was killed by a drunk driver. It was very clear this traffic violence was devastating for her family.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

Sawant began this answer by noting the growth rate of Seattle exceeds that of the US. She said, “There is no question we need to – the city as a whole–must transform itself to meet those needs.” The focus of this transformation needs to be on housing and transit. She sees buses as an extremely efficient mode for quickly achieving much needed transit service but she also fully supports light rail. While a city-wide expansion of light rail is necessary, it’s primary obstacles are political. She asked, “how can we make mass transit a viable option” for regular people with regular lives and provided the example of a single mother shepherding kids while running errands during all times of the day. Her solution to this problem would involve taxing corporations to build out most of the light rail system. Then she would ensure the bus system quickly and frequently served neighborhoods around rail stations.

When asked about the four options on the comprehensive plan she said she was not yet ready to endorse a specific option but noted she wanted to see growth around transit. This growth could also solve some the city’s transit need by making neighborhoods more walkable.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

Sawant provided a concise answer to this question, quickly pointing to the Capitol Hill light rail station. She thinks it’s definitely the most important transportation project in her district and expressed excitement that it’s nearing completion.

Read our interviews with other District 3 candidates, Rod Hearne, Pamela Banks and Morgan Beach.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 3: Kshama Sawant Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.

Sally Bagshaw is an incumbent Seattle City Council member running in the new district 7. She was first elected in 2009 and is now running in the district that covers Downtown (including Belltown and Pioneer Square), South Lake Union, Queen Anne, and Magnolia. She attended Stanford University and earned a degree in law at the University of Idaho Law School. She has lived in Seattle since 1978 and is a downtown resident. She worked for the King County Prosecuting Attorney for 13 years, with eight of those as Chief of the Civil Division. She believes the district system will allow neighborhood interests to be balanced with regional concerns, especially those of King County and the Port of Seattle.

What would you do to make housing affordable to everyone in Seattle?

Baghsaw started by saying making housing affordable for “everyone” is a big statement. She emphasized that people moving to Seattle and contributing to rising housing costs are not evil, as they will be our children and grandchildren. She said continued growth in the urban villages is a starting point. She supports micro housing and, for single family zones, accessory dwelling units (ADUs). She also said inclusionary zoning is an option. She expects to support the recommendations of the mayor’s ongoing committee on affordable housing.

How does planning, transit policy, and development affect racial, social and economic inequalities in our city? What policies and efforts can we make to combat these inequalities?

Next to housing, transit is Bagshaw’s top priority. She referred to failed efforts to build regional rail in the 1960s, and said she supports the passage of the Sound Transit 3 funding measure. She also said the city needs better east-west transit connections and RapidRide style routes, along with true bus rapid transit (BRT). She said the Rainier Valley has great infill development opportunities around the Link light rail line.

She noted that the ORCA Lift project gained 9,000 users over a 90 day period, but believes it can be greatly expanded. She pointed to Seattle’s utility discount program with 18,000 participants. She envisions a “one stop shop” of low-income programs, including healthcare services.

Seattle’s Vision Zero plan aims to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030. Do you think that this target is achievable? Why or why not?

Bagshaw is supportive of the plan and believes the city should strive for it, but said some people will always exhibit bad behavior. She said speed is the biggest factor, and said 20 mile per hour speed limits on some streets is acceptable. Saying “I am the poster child for Cascade Bicycle Club’s ‘all ages and abilities’ biking”, Bagshaw voiced her support for separate bicycle facilities and protected bike lanes.

How best should the city accommodate the next 20 years of growth?

Bagshaw said when it comes to growth, there is “no silver bullet, but there is silver buckshot”. She described a number of ways to ensure the city is family-friendly: nursing services for new parents; continuing to develop universal pre-kindergarten to help kids get interested in school; and family planning services at the high school level. She said that the best crime prevention is a family with a home, healthcare, good jobs, and kids in school.

When asked specifically about the comprehensive plan, Bagshaw questioned whether the city’s urban villages and urban centers can accommodate all of the new housing that is needed. She also said only focusing growth in these areas doesn’t invest in schools that are outside of village boundaries. She also said all four of the Seattle 2035 growth alternatives are worth pursuing. Emphasizing the need for good urban design, she suggested streamlining the design review process that takes a long time and relies on volunteers. She suggested the Portland model of providing  architectural templates to developers to help hasten review.

What is the most important transportation project in your district?

Bagshaw said the transportation network in general is important, and referred specifically to moving freight. She noted the Magnolia and Queen Anne neighborhoods in her district are heavily car-dependent, but reiterated that more sidewalks, protected bike lanes, and RapidRide routes are needed. She suggested allowing carpools to use the RapidRide bus lanes. She said bicycling is the fastest way to get around downtown; anticipating backlash from businesses, she said that data from New York City shows that business revenues increase as much as two or three times when protected bike lanes are installed.

Asked whether she wants to comment on the Highway 99 tunnel project, Bagshaw at first said “no” but went on to note the north and south portals are done. She said the cutterhead repairs need to be finished quickly, and that the main contractor on the tunnel needs to finish before being able to start work on several other international projects.

Read our interview with other District 7 candidate, Gus Hartmann.

The post 2015 Seattle City Council Election, District 7: Sally Bagshaw Interview first appeared on The Urbanist.