District: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
Register to vote in King County
Look, the fun City Council endorsements are over. Districts 5, 6 and 7 are each fairly disappointing by comparison to 2, 3, and 4. But Seattle Bike Blog is still going to endorse anyway.
Debora Juarez has not been a bold champion for biking. Even though 35th Ave NE is partially within her district, she did nothing to support a good, safe solution out of that big-budget repaving project. And the resulting project is awful. We needed leaders to stand up for the city’s Bike Master Plan and climate change goals. Juarez did not.
I hope Juarez learned something from the 35th debacle. Our city’s safe streets plans, including the Bicycle Master Plan, are bold and need her support. And when Seattle enacts them, they work. We would want to see some clear dedication to taking action on safe streets if we are going to support her next election.
In the end, her final votes have mostly been good, even if she tried at times to water down safe streets efforts. For example, she expressed that she would have supported Councilmember Herbold’s amendment to water down the bike safety ordinance had Herbold not pulled it from consideration. But she still voted yes on the final ordinance.
But all this is only nitpicking because her opponent would be truly terrible. Ann Davison Sattler wants to round up people experiencing homelessness and store them in warehouses. No, really. It’s disgusting and inhumane, and she and her ideas deserve to be defeated by an embarrassing margin this election.
Washington Bikes did not endorse anyone in District 5 this year. Seattle Subway (PDF), the Urbanist and the Transit Riders Union endorsed Juarez.
So reelect Juarez.
Comments
10 responses to “District 5 Endorsement: Debora Juarez”
[…] ← District 3 Endorsement: Kshama Sawant District 5 Endorsement: Debora Juarez → […]
[…] 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Register to vote in King […]
As a District 5 voter, I’m pretty disappointed by the choices.
It does seem you chose Juarez over Davison Sattler because of their non-bike-related positions, though.
If a candidate wants to round up human beings and putting them in warehouses, it doesn’t really matter how they feel about bike lanes.
Tom, I just want to say how much I appreciate that you consistently look at bike policy through a human lens. I don’t think there’s any transportation infrastructure plan that can be looked at outside of its impact on very poor/unhoused folks, and I agree that there are some positions that are dealbreakers no matter their relationship to bikes. Thanks as always for your big-picture analysis.
As someone who has already voted for Juarez, and enthusiastically supports her, I cut her some slack on the 35th debacle. That was not her doing, and she had nothing to gain from fighting the mayor on this one. Almost everyone involved — including bike advocate Mike O’Brien — was blindsided by that one. Up to the last minute, every experienced, sensible politician just assumed that the bike lanes would be built. Oh, there would much gnashing of teeth, and rubbing of hands. There might even be a little bit of compensation for a handful of struggling businesses (which really isn’t such a bad thing). But after all the endless debate, they would do the right thing, and build the damn lanes. But instead — to the surprise of everyone — they didn’t. That is completely, 100%, on the mayor.
I would like to see bike related policies here. So far, neither candidate looks like they have much to offer.
A FEMA style shelter may make for bad sound bites, but no worse than the “let people camp in their trash until we get annoyed and make them move elsewhere” de facto policy.
The biggest contrast between the two candidates is transit and zoning. Jaurez has worked very hard at getting the NE 130th Station, and will continue to work hard at getting it here sooner, as a new member of the Sound Transit board. She has supported increased density.
Just yesterday, Lee Brunch, the Greenways advocate had this to say: “I attended a meeting at The Lantern where Ann Davison-Sattler spoke. In response to some direct questions by me I understood her to (a) clearly and directly say that she was opposed to the 125th (130th) St Station, (b) indirectly imply she was opposed to most or all single family rezoning changes in that area, and (c) supportive of existing golf courses and parks in the area remaining as-is. She did not address the implications of the 145th St. station. ”
Side Note: Lee referred to the stations as “125th”, but it will actually be 130th (understandable, since 125th becomes 130th). Anyway, Davison-Sattler’s opposition to the station, upzoning and the like make her clearly the candidate for those who just “want Seattle like it used to be” (no bike lanes, few apartments, more parking, etc.). She has the support of the Seattle Times editorial board, and it is no wonder (they love candidates like that). Her core base of support are folks who don’t want change. If you think the mayor rolled over too quickly on 35th due to local opposition, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Imagine a city council member actively advocating against bike lanes the same way she is actively advocated against a light rail station.
About the best thing I can say about her is that she used to work for the Sonics. But even in that regard her web site is sloppy. How can you misspell Nate McMillan? That sort of bush league approach won’t work. This is a big city, and it requires mature, responsible solutions. Her approach to the homelessness situation (which is far more complicated than most people know) just won’t work, and will waste our time and money. The obvious choice is Jaurez.
[…] 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Register to vote in King […]
[…] 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Register to vote in King […]