The SunBreak
posted 04/23/10 05:10 PM | updated 04/23/10 05:10 PM
Featured Post! | Views: 0 | Comments : 0 | Politics

Mayor McGinn Vetoes Aggro Panhandling Bill, Stops Hiring Cops

By Michael van Baker
Editor
Recommend this story (0 votes)

Only one man can save us now.

The people at City Hall applauded Mayor McGinn's veto of Tim Burgess's anti-agressive panhandling bill, but of course, many more people weren't there, and they wouldn't have cheered even so. Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce SVP George Allen fired off this statement:

The mayor’s veto, plus his opposition to adding more police officers, raises serious concerns about public safety on Seattle streets and neighborhoods. Crime, fear and intimidation have no place in a progressive city like ours. Until the issue is resolved, local residents, visitors and businesses will continue to be impacted in unfavorable ways. And, our city will be marked by these negative impressions. 

A 5-4 Council vote in favor of the bill was close enough that the Mayor could veto it. The Council would need six votes to override the veto, but right now they're busy beating McGinn about the head and shoulders with his hiring freeze (Hizzoner says "deferral") of police officers. The Neighborhood Policing Plan called for the city to hire 20 new police officers this year; McGinn says, "Show me the money!" and says with a $15-million deficit, new hires of anything isn't in the cards.

Publicola says the Downtown Seattle Association is "outraged and appalled" by the news. 

The Seattle Times quotes McGinn as saying, "I do not believe this law would achieve its stated goals, nor do I believe it reflects Seattle's values." That's fair, but it would be nice to hear the Mayor's counter-proposal for what would make a difference, and reflect our values.

Tim Burgess crafted his bill in the hopes of sorting out more violent and intimidating offenders from among the homeless population, with the hypothetical benefit that this method would correct criminal behavior, rather than simply punish it. The Mayor has been against the bill the length of his administration--and as he's a lawyer, I give him his reasons--but I haven't seen what he's for, unless it's the status quo.

Save and Share this article
Tags:
savecancel
CommentsRSS Feed
Add Your Comment
Name:
Email:
(will not be displayed)
Subject:
Comment: