The Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission has dismissed a complaintfiled by City Council member-elect Mike O’Brien in October. . . . Both Rosencrantz and Forward Seattle sent out thousands of mailers accusing O’Brien of wanting to “toll all city streets.” Both featured an unflattering image of O’Brien taken from the same Friends of Seattle video; both included images of toll booths on neighborhood streets; and both accused O’Brien of wanting tolls “everywhere.”
Robert Rosencrantz, candidate for Seattle City Council Pos. 8, told Friends of Seattle that he wants to “change the culture of Seattle.” And it's no wonder he does, because his values are out of step with Seattle on issues such as light rail, transit oriented communities, corporate tax cuts, Metro bus service, and abortion and choice.
“We can't have a future built by a man who doesn't believe in light rail or transit-oriented communities or increased funding for Metro,” said Gary Manca, President of Friends of Seattle.
We have created a video ad making sure that Seattle voters know that Rosencrantz has the wrong values for Seattle City Council:
“Robert Rosencrantz told us repeatedly that he would bring new priorities to City Hall,” said Manca. “But his priorities don’t reflect Seattle’s values. He is pro-highway and anti-transit, he wants to slash corporate taxes, and he opposes the right of Seattle women to make their own choices about their reproductive health.”
City council members are going to have to make tough choices about which areas in the budget to cut, and those decisions are based on values. Mr. Rosencrantz wants to be budget chair. We fear that he would write a budget based on his own personal values, cutting out the programs and services valued by the rest of Seattle.
WRONG VALUES ON TRANSIT:
Mr. Rosencrantz:
* supports the Stanton-Rice plan to gut Sound Transit of its planning authority[1]
* supports the plan to create a new regional highway-building agency[2]
* opposes a plan to expand light rail to Seattle’s westside neighborhoods[3]
* opposes any new tax revenue to close Metro’s budget gap[4]
Mike O'Brien's opponent, Robert Rosencrantz, sent an attack mailer to 100,000 voters making the breathless claim that Mike supports "tolling everywhere," and he cites Mike's endorsement interview video with Friends of Seattle to support his claim. See the mailer here
But at the same time that Robert Rosencrantz distorted Mike's statements about tolling of highways and city streets, Mr. Rosencrantz hid from voters that he himself has . . . yes, EXACTLY the same position on tolling.
When we interviewed Mr. Rosencrantz, his short answer on tolling:
"Tolls - great. Systemwide - yes."
In other words, Mr. Rosencrant is dishonest, and he's fighting dirty.
See Mr. Rosencrantz's entire toll-happy video statement to us at this link
Now Mr. Rosencrantz has friends. We learned today that a big-business political action committee spent $50,000 on a mailer lobbing another attack on Mike O'Brien.
You know as we do that Mike is exactly the kind of courageous, visionary leader we need on the Seattle City Council. And it doesn't hurt that he has the financial expertise -- an MBA and an economics degree -- to help the city through its budget crisis.
Mike will get elected if you help him.
If enough of us contribute $5, $20, $50, $100, $500, we can help Mike fight back.
We strongly recommend not voting for Robert Rosencrantz, who has campaigned dishonestly.
And we simply cannot accept his policy positions. He is anti-light rail. He opposes fixes to Metro's budget deficit.
He supports the tunnel to replace the Viaduct, and if the tunnel plan falls apart, he believes the existing Viaduct should be retrofitted. He rightly believes bus service should be increased, but he opposes investments in more streetcar lines. Mr. Rosencrantz told us he is an avid bicyclist but said he is not familiar enough with the Bicycle Master Plan or Pedestrian Master Plan to express any opinions on them. With respect to land use, Mr. Rosencrantz is stingy, opposing the backyard-cottages ordinance, the transit-oriented-communities bill proposed in the state legislature last year (as stated in his interview), and any rezone---ever---of a single-family-zoned parcel (as stated in his interview).
Of course, Mr. Rosencrantz is right to have a hard-nosed approach to budgeting (he thinks the City Council should do “zero based-budgeting”) and to preach the necessity of setting priorities. But he did not tell us enough about what his own priorities are, other than to say he doesn’t support two-way Mercer Street or the South Lake Union streetcar.
My goals for Seattle largely mirror those of Friends of Seattle; a green, livable city with great urban design, plenty of open and public spaces, and the highest environmental standards. I'm a founding member of Seattle Great Cities Initiative, which demonstrates an alignment of our interests and values.
Qualifications
Please describe any professional accomplishments that demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you are an incumbent) or would demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you have not yet held office).
My wife Terry and I own four apartment building totaling 36 units in Seattle. We bought our first building in 1986, and do all management ourselves. We know housing from the inside out.
I have been at the forefront of efforts to create housing that is affordable to working families. Over the past 20 years I've worked with King, Snohomish and Pierce counties on implementing purchasing policies that leverage market forces to increase stocks of low-income housing. In this and other roles, I've helped create or preserve over 1000 units of low-income housing. In 2005 I completed an assemblage of properties for King County Housing Authority that gives them ownership of 37 contiguous acres 1 1/2 miles from Microsoft Headquarters. Currently 550 units of affordable housing, someday it will be redeveloped to provide 1000's of units of affordable housing. I had the vision for this assemblage in 1991, and over the course of 14 years stuck with it until completion.
I've also used my knowledge of and advocacy for low-income housing to assist people living in rural Washington. In 2004 I served as Executive Director of Northwest Association for Housing Affordability, a state-wide non-profit organization. In just a year, I restructured the organization and expanded its acquisition program.
Active Volunteer and Community Leader
I've served many civic organizations and worked on many community efforts. Presently, I'm one of the key leaders of a group that is working with the State of Washington on a bold alternative to rebuilding 520 that would create a direct link between 520 and Sound Transit's Light Rail station at Husky Stadium. This proposal is steadily gaining support from key transportation leaders.
I served three years on the Boards of the Montlake Community Council, followed by two terms as President. I've been on the Board of the Thornton Creek Alliance, the Friends of the Cedar River Watershed, and Seattle Tilth, which promotes organic gardening.
Representing Seattle
Background: Seattle is the most populous city in Washington and is the state's economic engine. At the same time, Seattle cannot address many of its problems without working with King County, regional entities (Sound Transit and the PSRC), and the state government. Yet many observers believe that Seattle's interests are represented inadequately at those levels. For example, the Muni League has criticized the 40-20-40 rule for allocating new Metro transit funding. Further, transit advocates note that the state's current tax system disadvantages transit. And the Legislature refused to allocate federal stimulus dollars for road projects in Seattle.
As an elected official representing Seattle, how would you work with King County, regional governmental entities, the state legislature, and the governor to ensure their budgets and policies address Seattle's needs?
First, by building stronger relationships with elected officials outside of Seattle.
I have already improved relations between Seattle and the rest of the state. State Senator Steve Hobbs of the 44th Legislative wrote me the following on May 26, 2009, regarding legislation I proposed [since passed unanimously as Council Bill 116550 on June 15, 2009, with the Mayor supporting the legislation] by the Seattle City Council regarding giving Honorably Discharged Veterans the same protections under City of Seattle law that they have under State law: "My thanks to everyone in Seattle government who worked on this and to Mr. Rosencrantz who raised the issue. It makes me feel good for the vote I took on the tunnel and other issues Seattle loves but my constituents in east Snohomish County might cringe about."
On the Council I will continue to improve the relationship between Seattle and the rest of the State.
City Council Committees
If you are elected, which issues would you like included in your portfolio as a committee chair?
As Finance & Budget Committee Chair I would want funding for the tunnel included in my portfolio.
Issues
Waste Reduction
Background: Rather than build an expensive new transfer in Georgetown to handle the growing volume of trash generated in Seattle, the City of Seattle adopted a "Zero Waste Strategy" centered on reducing waste. As part of that strategy, the City Council adopteda 20-cent "green fee" for disposable shopping bags.
Do you support the green fee? Why or why not?
No, I don't support this fee. We should work to eliminate the need for landfills and for petroleum-based products by encouraging alternative means of production and disposal, such as plastic bags made from algae biomass [it's already happening right here in Seattle!].
Alaskan Way Viaduct
Background: Governor Gregoire signed a legislative bill ordering the Washington State Department of Transportation to design a bored tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This bill contains language allocating cost overruns to Seattle citizens, although some question whether the language has legal significance. Notwithstanding that provision, the City of Seattle committed $930 million and the Port of Seattle $300 million to finance the tunnel. Although the exact tax consequences of these commitments are not totally clear, it is safe to assume that the Port's contribution would result in higher property taxes for Seattle property owners, and the City's pledge would be funded with increases in property taxes, City Light utility rates, and possibly other taxes and fees.
Do you support the plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a bored tunnel? Why or why not?
If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?
If you oppose the tunnel, what would you do to prevent its implementation?
After discussing the bored with tunnel experts including Dick Robbins, Harvey Parker and engineers that are doing the test borings, I have come to conditionally support the tunnel. I support the bored tunnel only as long as payment for Seattle's portion of its cost is borne by those Central Business District developers and property owners who stand to most directly benefit from it. There's about 50,000,000 square feet of commercial [40mm] and residential space in the Central Business District [not including housing affordable to people with incomes less than Area Median Income, which would be exempt from the LID assessment described below]. That will increase over the next two decades to around 100,000,000 square feet. In order to raise one billion dollars, a Local Improvement District would need a twenty to twenty five-year assessment rate of about 5 cents per square foot per month [with a catch-up provision for properties that come on-line after the assessment goes into effect]. Two billion dollars would require an assessment rate of about 10 cents per square foot per month.
If the above-described funding doesn't happen, I'd go back to my 2003 position: a retrofit of the current Viaduct. In 2003 I said "I'd rather spend millions to repair something that already works rather than billions to build something that might not work".
Transit
Background: The City of Seattle already contributes to local transit. The City put together the financing package to construct the South Lake Union streetcar line, and the City and King County Metro share the ongoing operating costs for that line. Further, the Bridging the Gap tax package finances some Metro bus service within Seattle, and Bridging the Gap also pays for street improvements designed to expedite bus travel.
If elected, how do you intend to improve the in-city transit system?
By making sure our transit systems connect, such as at Husky stadium where light rail and bus can feed off each other. By putting money into expanding bus service instead of into additional trolley lines.
Bicycle Infrastructure
Background: The City of Seattle has adopted a Bicycle Master Plan, which provides a vision for improving bicycling facilities in Seattle.
Do you support the Bicycle Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]
Haven't studied it enough to say.
If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?
Yes, integrate it better with the streets design and maintenance plan.
If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
Do you support the Pedestrian Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]
Haven't studied it enough to say.
If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?
[Editor's note: No answer given]
If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
[Editor's note: No answer given]
Land Use and Multifamily Housing
Background: According to U.S. Census data cited in the Seattle Comprehensive Plan, about half of Seattle's households live in multifamily housing. Further, according to the Plan, approximately 40% of Seattle's total land area is set aside for residential use-35% for single-family residences but only 5% for multifamily dwellings. That 5% dedicated to multifamily housing tends to be concentrated in "urban villages" or along arterial streets, which are noisy and dirty. However, "backyard cottages" (also known as "detached accessory dwelling units) are also allowed in singe-family zones in Southeast Seattle.
Would you support legislation to allow backyard cottages to be built in all single-family zones? [Yes/No only please]
No.
Would you ever support a contract rezone or a broader rezone allowing for more housing to be built on a site? [Yes/No only please]
To broad a question.
If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?
Proximity to transit & not currently zoned Single Family Dwelling.
Many newly built townhouses in Seattle are architectural atrocities, and site plans tend to be car-dominated. Most townhouse developments are exempt from the City of Seattle's Design Review Program. It is also difficult to find attractive new condos and apartment buildings. To address some of these problems, the City Council is considering a package of revisions to the zoning code.
Do you support the proposed revisions to the multifamily housing zoning code? [Yes/No only please]
Most, but need to study it more.
If you support the revisions, do you have ideas for improving the proposed revisions?
If you have additional thoughts on how to improve Seattle's city government or to make Seattle a more livable and sustainable city, please note them here.
A stronger City Council will go a long way towards improving Seattle City Government.
I'm running for City Council to create opportunity, to rebuild a job-growing economy so everyone in Seattle can thrive. Opportunity abounds even in these tough times, but it's unrealized because our city government is out of balance. There's one dominant voice; the Mayor's. He roars, while the City Council whispers. It doesn't have to be that way; Seattle deserves a Council that's the people's voice and not the Mayor's echo. I'll restore the balance of power at City Hall.
The bottom line is this: I'll put the roar back in the City Council.
Recent comments
5 weeks 4 days ago
30 weeks 17 hours ago
30 weeks 2 days ago