Oppose proposed SeaTac legislative agenda

February 6, 2010

I believe that some council members would disagree with portions of the Legislative agenda for the City of SeaTac as proposed by the city manager and SeaTac staff and spending our tax dollars to promote things that are contrary to property rights and open government is not what the citizens and businesses want.

Please see page 3, Eminent Domain and Executive Sessions.

It is my opinion that these two issues, at a minimum, would not have majority support if the electorate was aware that this is what our lobbyist (Joe Daniels) is being paid to do. The use of our tax money to oppose open government and support the ease of taking your property is not something in our best interest.

I ask that you contact our council members and legislators to voice your opinion, even if it is contrary to mine.

Our Attorney General, Rob McKenna, has proposed House Bills 2423/2425 and Senate Bills 6199/6200 to strengthen our property rights. I support him on this issue.

I do not care about Republican or Democrat slant/bias. My simple opinion--if something proves to not work, stop doing that!

Earl Gipson
SeaTac

Vicki Lockwood wrote 29 weeks 4 days ago

SeaTac Legislative Agenda Not My Agenda

I have read the SeaTac Legislative Agenda, and it's not my agenda.

SeaTac will oppose legislation limiting activities needed for developing our station areas (this includes condemnation, folks). I want the State Law clarified to protect the sanctity of private property ownership!

SeaTac opposes legislation that would require local governments to tape executive sessions. I want transparency in my local government!

SeaTac supports adding TIF including sales tax to the list of financing options to provide public incentives for private development. This was declared unconstitutional in our state in 1982. Since then, our legislators have been continually re-writing the proposal, tweaking it here and there and wordsmithing it, trying to get some sort of proposal passed that accidentally doesn’t get opposed or challenged in court. I see this as just one more attempt to “fool” the citizens.

Shouldn't your city's Agenda reflect the citizens' agenda? SeaTac doesn't seem to think so.

Doris Cassan wrote 29 weeks 3 days ago

SeaTac Legislative Agenda

Thank you Mr. Gibson and Ms. Lockwood. What appears to happen in the City of SeaTac is the agenda of staff. Most staff do not live in the city nor do they own property in the city. Their agenda is more concerned about propping up their own resume. Staff come and go.

Those of us who live here and buy property here have a long term vested interest. Council should be representing those values and desires rather than the desires of staff.

Guest wrote 29 weeks 3 days ago

SeaTac Legislative Agenda

Those of us who live here and buy property here have a long term vested interest. Council should be representing those values and desires rather than the desires of staff.

Guest wrote 23 weeks 20 hours ago

the city purchasing/owning seatac center?

I don't think it's illegal for local cities to own private land for profit (regardless of what tenants are there), but isn't there supposed to be a process that a local government goes through in order to acquire retail property for private financial benefit? The eminent domain attempt was just a small piece of a larger scheme that is all apparently being done in the name of economic development. Even if the city bought the property all secret like, the funds they used and the revenue coming in should be for public benefit, shouldn't it? maybe it's a moot point and there's nothing secretive about it, or maybe the city has property it just buys with taxpayer money for its own benefit and then uses the money however it best suits the leaders. who knows?

Letters to the Editor