Olympia Time

History, politics, people of Oly WA

Category: civics (Page 3 of 6)

Not a lot of Open Space for Democracy in Olympia last night

October 3, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Open Space for Democracy is one of my favorite books of all time, which made me sad that I wasn’t able to go last night when Terry Tempest Williams was speaking downtown on climate change. Though, it seems I wouldn’t have been too happy if I had gone. I’m not too happy right now.

This is a forum?

After a series of written audience questions directed at the speakers and moderated by KPLU Radio reporter Liam Moriarity, attendees were asked to fill out commitment forms in their programs, pledging to help. The solutions included installing fluorescent light bulbs, buying recycled items and reducing car trips. The forms were collected in the lobby.

Second hand I heard that both Williams and the other speaker talked for a half hour and then combined they took three questions. Not too open forumy to me. Not much like a democracy either, it sounded more like a lecture.

I know the point of the “forum” was to spark action, but 1,000 people out of a city of 40,000 plus (and I’m assuming that some of the folks came from out of town), doesn’t sound very cost effective to me.

Bringing big time speakers in seems like more of the role of something like the

If, on the other hand, we’re talking about a local government trying to formulate policy, I think we need a different approach. The $25,000 we spent could have gone a lot further to bringing people together.

  • The city tried to put together an ad hoc committee of citizens to help guide the budget, but that fell apart. Maybe if we paid people for their participation in a group like that, much like we do with a criminal jury, we would have gotten a better response. The jury idea has already been talked about outside of the court arena.
  • If we spent $25,000 on building a city club (like in Portland, Tacoma or Eugene) that would go a lot further in building democracy here than bringing in high priced talent for a “forum.” Or maybe a something a little more active, like an English Civil Society group.
  • King County just approved a plan to bring together small discussion groups that will report back to the county auditor and then the county council. This system will cost about $130,000

a year for a county of over 1.5 million people. I wonder what we could get for $25,000 is a city of just over $40,000. There is even a bill that has been introduced for this on the state level.

No net loss of public space

September 8, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Pete Jackson (man, they make Jacksons in Everett like they make Barclifts in Olympia, I guess) has some good talk about public space. Really good talk:

We know that gathering places aren’t fungible: High-end condos are no substitute for bowling alleys, for Elks lodges, or for good taverns. … So why not employ a soft-power strategy and carrot our way to more gathering places?

Everett already embraces the Growth Management Act as well as the smart-growth rules it learned from Seattle, our rich uncle to the south. In fact, we embrace the rules with a vengeance, extending 10-year property-tax breaks to condos in the downtown core, all aimed at promoting densification.

With the demise of the Elks, we have a chance to magoozle a planning tool that will distinguish Everett and serve as an example to even Seattle: Adopt the goal of “no net loss” of gathering places and figure it as a kind of “communitarian capitalism.”

We can meet a communitarian-capitalist mission by cribbing from our approach to — and stay with me here — wetlands. Just like wetlands, gathering places have a tangible impact, and the solution is to identify meaningful ways to address net loss.

To achieve a no-net-loss objective, cities could offer developers density bonuses if they create gathering places in the downtown core. Put in 3,000 square feet for the people and you can build an additional floor. Simple, direct, practical.

I like Jackson’s idea, it would be great if developers started seeing the good of building into their development public space that could be used by Elk Clubs, local neighborhood groups. It would be even better for local government to build in incentives.

My worry is that the insentive would go the way of the “community room” at the mall, right next door to the toilet. Rather than putting the public space front and center, or even in the central third of any design, it would be shoved off to the side.

And, when talking about encouraging public use of public space, I’m sure we all have something in mind. Its one thing if we build public space, its another thing to actually have it used the way we intended (diverse, vibrant rather than stagnant, unattractive to most or even dangerous). We should build public space with an idea towards how we want it to be used.

“infiltrating” a public event and a Dear Abby public space note

August 21, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Mark Gardener points out that there will soon be more people infiltrating public events by a Washington State congressman.

How does one infiltrate a public event? Shouldn’t public events be open to anyone, even folks who live outside a particular district?

Anyway, there was an interesting piece in Dear Abby last week that got me thinking about public spaces, and especially the recent dependence of groups on restaraunts and coffee shops as meeting space.

Here:

I work at one of the nicer, upscale restaurants in our small community. We have been having an issue with groups or committees of anywhere from four to 15 people coming into the establishment to hold their meetings. These groups frequently arrive at normal evening dinner times and therefore take up a table, but the attendees don’t order anything.

Abby responds that the manager should set a minimum order policy and then take care of things, but that avoids the question about available space in their “small community.” If groups and committees are taking to this restaurant for their meetings, I’m assuming their is a shortage of otherwise free or cheap meeting space in that town.

A lot of the meetups I’ve been attending the last few years have been at restaurants. One particular uncomfortable one happened when the manager and staff clearly felt like the above letter writer.

Abby referred to these meeting folks as “freeloaders,” which is a bit unfair. They aren’t trying to get food for free, their just trying to meet in some place outside their home.

In Olympia, at least, there is a dearth of free (or very cheap) meeting space for folks to come together. Outside of commercial establishments, there is a lack of informal “third spaces” as well. That there are folks that still want to get together in most communities, this lack of other space is being forced upon restaurants.

Neighborhood meetings in Douglas County

August 17, 2007 / / 0 Comments

When residents butt heads with developers in Douglas County, local government may have a solution. Put everyone at the same table and get to work it out:

The building industry has been notorious for using “Private Property Rights” and
“A man should be able to do what ever he wants with his property” clichés. Usually these “Rights” pertain only to the building industry and they are very reluctant to give the same “Rights” to others. They are also Machiavellian in their development plans preferring to avoid any contact with or sharing of information with other property owners and concerned citizens. Apparently for fear that they may have to forfeit some of their precious private property rights while allowing others to assert theirs.

To now expect the building industry to not only communicate with surrounding property owners but also to even ponder the private property rights of others seem like a big jump. Quite possibly if this “Neighborhood Meeting” plan is put into action developers might find that being candid with surrounding property owners and respecting their private property rights will make things a lot easier on everybody.

One of the reasons for the making official of neighborhood associations in Olympia was this kind of push and pull between the city and developers and current residents. The NAs gives the city a one stop shop for where to send information new developments. A cynical person would say that folks who get involved in NAs would most likely be the ones that complain the most to the city, so keeping them involved in an easy way of disarming them and keeping them engaged in a positive way.

Supporter clubs, uncovered

August 15, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Pitch Invasion notes that media are beginning to wander into MLS stadiums, drawn by Beckham. But, they seem to be noticing, you guessed it, supporter clubs:

Meet the Empire Supporters Club. Though they appear to fill roughly 3 percent of the seats in Giants Stadium on any given game day, they are arguably responsible for the majority of the atmosphere and alcohol consumption. Members include students, construction workers and at least one manager at a Fortune 50 company. Drawing from a huge variety of ethnic soccer traditions, their fandom is a hybrid unlike any found in New York sports: the scarves, banners and cleverly insulting chants of Europe; the tireless dancing, chanting and smoke bombs of South America.

From the comments of the above story:

…the ESC makes a Red Bulls game the best sports ticket in town dollar for dollar.

The ESC is the heart and soul of the Red Bulls, without them, the games would be boring.

This Washington Post article that PI links to show the beautiful diversity that can happen between different supporter clubs like Barra Brava and Screaming Eagles. While Barra Brava is certainly the more raucous and free-wheeling, Screaming Eagles has a board of directors, assigned seating, ect. Honestly, I’d probably be more attracted to the SE model, but I greatly appreciate there being a BB around.

The anti-scalping Army (more fodder for my MLS community 2.0 theory)

August 6, 2007 / / 0 Comments

A few years back, the Mariners started fighting a war with scalpers who tried to make a few bucks on the winning record of the club. They hired off duty cops to bust scalpers, but ended up with a long legal battle from what seemed to be a straight forward case (here and here).

Anyway, imagine if an army of Mariner fans rose up and played interference for the Mariners against the scalpers. No way that would ever happen, that fans who bought their tickets fair and square would interfere with the labor of folks who are trying to make a buck on the team. I mean, I love the Mariners, but who do I care that they aren’t making all the money they can?

Well, the Red Patch boys care in Toronto:

Last week, members of the Red Patch Boys started to post links to tickets being sold on cragslist and EBay for the Galaxy match. The idea has been an attack on scalpers by making false claims on tickets and even posting on Craigslist to make it clear Beckham will not play in this game. Even now, as it has become increasing clear that if Beckham enters the game it will be short lived, scalpers are looking for upwards of $125 per ticket for what is normally a $15 seat. The scalpers have been fighting back with claims such as:

Contrary to the scare tactics that are going on on this site, LA Galaxy have confirmed that Beckham IS travelling to Toronto. He’s resting for tonight’s game, so should be revived for Sunday.Don’t believe the sour grapes of those that don’t have tickets!!!

We have no idea if these tactics are working but the Red Patch Boys are passionate about their club and the cry has been to have real fans in the stadium, not Beckham glory hunters. It’s also interesting to note that (while not to the extent of this game) this battle with scalpers has been an ongoing fixation for the Red Patch Boys. Toronto FC sold out every ticket for every game before a minute was played this season so scalpers have been out in force since April.

This is the kind of buy-in you get when you accept that there are going to be a certain percentage of fans who really really love the team you happen to own. When you allow them to be creative, take ownership of their passion, they start to actually help you out. They bring new folks into the fold and they protect the team.

MLS and community 2.0 brain dump

August 4, 2007 / / 0 Comments

I’ve been toying around with this idea for a week or so. I posted it at Big Soccer and got a bit of a response, but not really what I was looking for.

I’ve found threads of it here, here and here. But, I think I nailed it down tonight when I was mowing the lawn:

What is the most defining difference between professional sports in the United States and in the rest of the world?

It isn’t that most of the world plays soccer, while we play baseball and football. It isn’t that most of the world plays in relegation/promotion leagues while we play in closed leagues.

The defining difference is the connection to the fan and the community around the team.

In Ireland, the Cork City FC management gets together regularly with the team’s fan club. I’m not talking about a spokesperson or a giant stuffed Orca, but a real deal meeting between the chairman and manager of the soccer team and their fans. In the middle of the season.

This face to face relationship does have a parallel in American sports, but it only happens in so-called amateur ranks where college and high school coaches face their supporters in public and less than public forums. But, our professional organizations are often times distant from fans. Most coaches, manager and owners answer to their fans through the mediation of the media, sometimes.

In terms of ownership, fans have their hands in teams oversees in a manner that is not only largely unknown in the United States, but not even allowed. Cambridge United and FC United of Manchester (founded after American Malcom Glazer bought the original Manchester United) are only two of many directly fan owned teams.

The very idea of a Supporters Trust, which raises money specifically for a professional sports organization, to keep it afloat and competitive would be foreign in America. If the Mariners were going bankrupt, they would be sold and moved to Tampa Bay before a group of fans got together to raise money for them. The very concept of public funds for stadiums is a political battle that few politicians want to fight.

Even though many point to the Green Bay Packers as the best example of a fan owned team in North America, outside a handful of minor league baseball teams and Canadian football teams, the phenomena is largely unknown. In baseball its not allowed for corporations (fans would organize as a corporation) to own teams and non-profits can’t own teams in any leagues.

The one league that does allow corporate ownership, the NBA, has a few teams that actually sell stock. But, vast fan ownership of that stock and some sort of community building up from that ownership? I haven’t seen it.

So, this post is a spill over of thoughts I’ve had regarding what Major League Soccer should do differently. Screw Beckham, he’s great to get people to glance at soccer again, but to really get people connected to the sport, you have to get them connected in a way that no other league in the United States does.

So, know that I have this down, I’ll write some more later.

Civic republicanism and 2008 (part 2)

July 25, 2007 / / 0 Comments

After Democrats trot out the language, if not the actions, so says Gov. Mitt Romney:

“Hillary Clinton just gave a speech the other day about her view on the economy. She said we have been an on-your-own society. She said it’s time to get rid of that and replace that with shared responsibility and we’re-in-it-together society,” Romney told the crowd. “That’s out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx.”

I have to admit, for someone who has been blogging about one candidate in particular, I’ve paid very little attention to what’s been going on on the other side of the aisle in terms of rhetoric (short of the Ron Paul/Gualani dust-up). My impression had been that of any of the GOP candidates, that Romney was the one that would seem to stand out as a… pragmatist. Someone not willing to say really harsh things to win votes.

So, I was surprised that he basically said “Yes, we really are in this by ourselves. You can’t trust your neighbor, you can’t trust your government, you can’t trust anyone.”

For a republican, not very civic republican.

Thurston County Democrats: No longer elitist

June 26, 2007 / / 0 Comments

I never actually believed that the Thurston County Democrats were ever elitist, but now even Particle Man (who does things that particles can) can agree that the above statement is true.

After working since January to open our membership to non-Precinct Committee Officers, the central committee voted earlier tonight to give every member not only a voice, but a vote.

My favorite moments during this debate included Ivan Weiss’s talk last month on how open membership has really made a difference in his King County legislative district organization (I was thinking “Ivan for Governor” after his talk).

The other came tonight when uber-member Rhenda Strub talked about walking her precinct. Rhenda’s not a PCO, but she takes on that most common of PCO tasks. She said that no one asks her whether she’s a PCO, they don’t even ask what her name is, they know who she is, she’s that crazy Democratic woman. Nice.

Anyway, I’m glad this happened. We have a lot of work in Thurston County and the more folks that feel invested in our organization, the more work we can pile on to them.

Which brings me to a point that an opponent of the bylaw change made. There should be something in what we ask members for in terms of their commitment to our organization. Originally, I’d asked that we require members to volunteer before we give them the vote. But, taking into consideration the hours it would take to manage such a requirement, while also realizing you get more volunteers with an incentive rather than a requirement, changed my mind. Excellent point though.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑