Now that Greg Nickels is exposed as too incompetent to clear the city's streets, where are the Councilmembers? Someone from the Council should be trying to fill the void of the leadership left by the Mayor's collapse. Speak for the frustrated public? Offer a reasonable plan to get Seattle moving again?
But no, the only relevant public statement that I can find from a Councilmember is this:
City Councilwoman Jan Drago said she was unaware that the city had stopped using salt, but said that ecologically and environmentally it makes sense. Drago said she was getting around well in a four-wheel-drive vehicle and noted that there was plenty of traffic on some main streets.I blame the at-large Council elections for giving us the 9 indistinguishable lotus-eaters who can't be counted on to actually run the city.
District elections would produce a more diverse and responsive Council. This would be the opportunity to move on it.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 26, 2008 06:33 PM | Email ThisAs to the "void of leadership," I don't see it. A mistake was made regarding whether or not to use salt based on the amount of snow that Seattle would usually get, not on the amount of snow that Seattle would get in a once-a-decade storm system that lasts for over a week. I wish his decision had been better, but I understand where it came from. A poor decision doesn't necessarily mean that there is suddenly a gaping void in leadership. Neither, for that matter, does disagreeing with you.
Posted by: Robby on December 26, 2008 07:12 PMYes, but an entire Mayoral term of enumerable poor decision-making does. Nickels sitting with his hands planted under his ample backside for the last week and a half while his constituents battle ice covered roads, hills and impassable areas of his city and then assigning himself a "B" for handling it would certainly qualify in my book as an enormous gap in leadership. Wouldn't you agree?
Posted by: Rick D. on December 26, 2008 07:58 PM1) Over $5 million for automated toilet that had to be sold for junk at less than 30K each.
2) Over 8 years to even decide to decide to do anything on the viaduct. SF has a similar viaduct collapse in the Loma Prieta quake in 1989. It didn't take them 8 years just to get around to making a decision.
3) Silly diversionary "issues" like plastic bags, plastic bottles and faux global warming. The first two are merely oppotunities to tax under the guise of feeling good. And the the third is another case where the mayor of one single city puts priority on changing the entire planet when he cannot even manage a city.
So Robby, it isn't just the salt and no this isn't such a once in a lifetime occurance it couldn't have been planned for. It is the culmination of yet another indication of how poorly the city is run.
If this was the only blemish in a stellar term of leadership, that would be different. But this is the coup de gra in a series of missteps by the mayor.
He is not even sure if he is going to get salt now. The first thing he should do is order some salt and have a plan for removing ice off the critical roadways necessary for infratructure things like delivery of gasoline and groceries. You know, the bread and butter items government is supposed to do.
Posted by: No Leadership on December 26, 2008 08:08 PMIf the solar panels were really going to save money, why doesn't he make the economic case to the Council? Why go to the feds?
Could it be because it is a show project for all the greenies in the world, and won't save a dime? He is now using the federal government to further his ambitious goals to make the next Vanity Fair cover about the movers and shakers in the Global Warming myth. I bet he thinks there is a job waiting for him, if only he spends enough of everyone else's money putting together his green resume.
Seattle deserves what they got, icy streets, car accidents, loss of tax revenue, all of it. You voted for this bunch, now you can suffer the consequences. Just don't ask the rest of us to bail you out of your stupid decisions.
Posted by: Janet s on December 26, 2008 08:56 PMYea....suddenly does not feel so good does it?
You think this company won't remember this when it comes time to renew its lease? You think they may look at some other cities that actually give a damn about commerce?
There are long term ramifications here, It is not so much that there was a "once a decade storm" but rather the attitude of city leadership, the I don't give a damn attitude!
Seattle is buried under ice because of poor decisions. Nickels gambled that the snow would melt long before the need for the city to do widespread plowing. That is a decision made over the years of his tenure, not something he woke up last week and decided.
He spent money on sand, not on salt. That was another decision made, not to the betterment of the citizens of Seattle, but to the advancement of his green credentials. Just as there is no proof to global warming, the science of salt vs sand was really quite different than Nickels and the SDOT were professing. Belief over fact. Of course, it is Christmas time.
Do you really believe that salting the roads once in a ten year period will cause 500 extinctions a day? Wow.
Posted by: janet s on December 26, 2008 10:22 PMHappy new year.
Al Gore failed, but he did become more than super wealthy
Posted by: tollen on December 26, 2008 10:34 PMHappy new year.
Al Gore failed, but he did become more than super wealthy
Posted by: tollen on December 26, 2008 10:35 PMSEA voters have short memories; all will be reelected in the haze of apathy as the coffee shops buzz again; problems, what problems? Denial, thy name is Seattle; maybe a blue ribbon commission can study this for 6 years and get a "consensus"--our favorite NW "c-word"
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on December 27, 2008 05:53 AMYou call Nichols incompetent, but you are afraid of what I have to say....
Pathetic.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on December 27, 2008 06:50 AMAnd jimmy-howya-doin @ 14 nails it. No matter how incompetent and stupid urban Democrat politicians are, their lunatic constituents will dutifully re-elect them. I'm quite certain even Nickels laughs at the idiocy of the sheeple who vote for him.
Posted by: Saltherring on December 27, 2008 08:01 AMThe madness of it all.
That's leadership baby! LOL
Posted by: Medic/Vet on December 27, 2008 08:29 AMThat was from an initiative by then-Councilmember Tina Podlodowski, after downtown business interests blocked us from having a "downtown rest-stop" of toilets and showers in the city center. She was a Microsoft millionaire, so maybe she had too great an expectation of employing technology to solve social problems.
Oh, and guys? Rain pours down outside. The snowstorm is over. Nobody cares anymore. You can turn off the outrage-manufacturing machine, and get it lubed up for whatever Mr. Limbaugh, The UnDiscovery Destitute, or whomever tells you to scream about next. This storm won't be an issue in the next elections, because we liberals in Seattle won't care about some minor inconvenience we once suffered. (I won't even try to get you to understand that, so don't get all defensive.)
Posted by: tensor on December 27, 2008 08:45 AMBut then again, I suspect if it was being run by Republicans, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.
Posted by: jimg on December 27, 2008 09:07 AMMississippi (where the storm actually hit), Alabama and Florida had no such problems during that storm.
Posted by: jimg on December 27, 2008 09:10 AMThat discussion would have begun with, "No one could have foreseen...", just like every other discussion about Republican "leadership" over the past eight years.
Posted by: tensor on December 27, 2008 09:12 AMSad, because Seattle is the city of my birth. It still has that magic glow that I took all over the world under some pretty "interesting" circumstances and in some somewhat questionable living conditions (30 years in the AF). But the mental picture of the glow of the city lights in the early evening coming over Beacon or First hill or from the south along I-5 is what kept me grounded and focused.
The Emerald City, she is beautiful.
But the city seems to have added a Nickel(s) to the city budget and come up with only nonsense and three cents in change.
As I said in response to the TNT:
Perhaps Hizzoner forgets the curious case of Jane Byrne. Jane was a Chicago Mayoral appointed Consumer Affairs Director who was fired by her boss, then Mayor Bilandic. In a fit of pique she ran against him in the primary in 1979 but was given not a snowball's hellish chances. But Bilandic didn't clear the snow in the city (and Chicago occasionally has snow) during several freak snowstorms that winter and was accused, rightly, of being ineffectual. Jane won and became mayor for a term.
Hizzoner should recall the story and even if he uses political correctness to cover political ineptness, he should also recall that a plugged nickel is not too small a coin from which to exact political change.
We aren't going to get a Republican mayor, it's a non-partisan job anyway. But can't we at least get someone competent and who will recall that the city's first and foremost job is public safety - which includes getting the hills salted and cleared so that the cops, firefighters and paramedics can do their job. Or so that we can get to work to pay the taxes - oh, and feed a family?
Where is that guy Mark Sidran when you need him. He at least comes from the prosecutorial side and has a frigging clue what public safety is all about and may even have some leadership skills.
Perhaps the city lights have blinded me to her faults, but I hate it when Washington's premiere city is lampooned from self-inflicted stupidity.
Besides, where do you get salt anyway? Answer: salt mines (former oceans) or salt farms (current oceans). The common word seems to be oceans and returning the salt to the sea, via the roads, seems the essence of recycling.
We need to recycle Nickels - in Chicago its called Bilandicking the mayor. (Ain't Wikipedia great?)
Deryl McCarty
South Hill - Puyallup
Also, there used to be a strategy of getting the bus routes cleared ASAP so service disruptions are at a minimum. But, no attention has been given at all to the bus route in front of my house, where a bus hasn't been seen in 10 days.
Posted by: Seabecker on December 27, 2008 10:03 AMWhile this may temporarily satisfy your endless need for ad hominem attacks upon your vast and growing pantheon of hate-objects, it does not follow that at-large elections had anything to do with the city's response to our recent snowstorm. If you knew anything about American politics, you'd know that the executive administrates ("runs") the government, while the legislature (Council) makes our laws, and appropriates funds for the executive. (Maybe the next time your boy brings home some civics homework, you could learn a thing or two.) Here's a hint: the Mayor is elected at-large.
District elections would produce a more diverse and responsive Council. This would be the opportunity to move on it.
While none of this follows from anything else in the post, districts are, in my view, a good idea. Sadly, a previous attempt, in 1995, was tainted by Republican criminality. (This is one reason why we liberals in Seattle never listen to right-wing bleating about so-called "electoral fraud": when Republican Thomas Stewart actually did it in Seattle, his fellow Republicans promptly excused him.) Now might indeed be a good time to try districts, but not for any of the reasons given in this post.
Where is that guy Mark Sidran when you need him. He at least comes from the prosecutorial side and has a frigging clue what public safety is all about and may even have some leadership skills.
Then-City Attorney Mark Sidran stood for Mayor in 2001, strongly supported with money from business, and endorsements from our local MSM. Nickels beat him easily. Good riddance!
Posted by: tensor on December 27, 2008 10:16 AMOh the horror!
I can't remember who said it but I love the quote, "liberals love jobs, but they hate employers".
Amazing the phobia liberals have about commerce. I guess it's understandable in that liberals tend to work for government, or they are laywers which somehow in their twisted view is not "business".
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 10:24 AMNow in the age of the liberal compassion Nazi and big government the tax resources that used to do these tasks are being diverted ever more to feel good drunk hotels, seat belt emphasis patrols, low income housing and other vote buying scams leaving no money to do the things that a city should do for ALL its residents. Mix in the incompetence of "leadership" (for lack of a better term), an SDOT that is unprepared for this volume of snow and overwrought eco-concerns (doesn't salt come from the ocean in the first place?) and you have a city paralyzed by a few inches of snow.
I kinda wonder why anybody is surprised by this. The level of service dispensed for tax payers has been going down for decades. Why is any of this a surprise? Why do these people keep getting elected?
Posted by: G Jiggy on December 27, 2008 10:43 AMhttp://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/33713_toileted.shtml
Beautiful Lake City is probably less looney liberal than most of the city but folks here vote lockstep Democrat. Older voters still think Democrats are the same party of JFK, Scoop Jackson, and Albert Rosellini. The younger ones are brainwashed by their schools, the media, and Hollywood. It's not Republican youths that tag every building within reach on weekend nights.
Seattle always has leaned Democrat, but for years there was a mix of Republican and Democrats in both the Council and the Mayor's office. It hasn't been that way since 1969.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 10:51 AMI'm just glad I moved out of the Seattle cesspool 9 years ago and found a home in Edmonds, where the adults that run the city appear to be in charge and more than capable of handling a crisis.
Posted by: Rick D. on December 27, 2008 11:09 AMShe is also the laughingstock of the country.
The gist of most emails from far-flug family and freinds is 'What's the amtter with you people out there?'... I quickly disavow them of the notion that I am in any way one of those incompetent lefty loonies who comprise Seattle's 'you people'.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 27, 2008 11:45 AM"In days long gone by, clearing the streets, picking up litter and other municipal acts were done as a matter of course. It was the city's job after all and that is what your taxes were for."
Has Seattle EVER salted and plowed all it's streets? Did it used to work better in the "old" days? I've been in Seattle since 1978 - I don't remember it working ANY better back then. It just melted out sooner - 'cept for the snow in 1990.
Now in the age of the liberal compassion Nazi and big government the tax resources that used to do these tasks are being diverted ever more to feel good drunk hotels, seat belt emphasis patrols, low income housing and other vote buying scams leaving no money to do the things that a city should do for ALL its residents"
Liberal and Nazi don't go together - but I guess you have not figured that out. Seattle chooses not to waste its money on snow removal equipment like the liberal cities of Chicago, Boston and NY (that remove snow just fine it seems).
Ooops, try having a FEW facts before you spout total nonsense.
Here are people blaming the city for not plowing every street within hours of a big snowfall. That doesn't happen anywhere.
Good grief people, we just had a big bunch of snow. And don't kid yourselves. A big snow like this shuts down cities like Denver and Boston all the time. It's a silly urban myth that only Seattle gets paralyzed by a winter snowstorm.
Growing up I never remember the sort of whining I've heard during this storm. We never expected someone to come plow our street. We did what my wife and I did this week. We checked to make sure our elderly neighbor had what she needed to make it through, and fended for ourselves. We didn't sit around wondering when the snowplows would come.
I think it has a lot to do with how liberals have literally taken over how people think. In the process they've turned everyone into crybabies.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 01:25 PMNot 'all the time'. Heavy snowfalls do temporarily interrupt traffic and commerce in those cities, but if 'temporary' gets extended by Mayorial indifference to 'all the time', the Mayor gets dumped. Cases in point: Chicago (Bilandic out) and Denver (Hickenlooper dumped on). Those cities do have plans for snow removal, and usually execute them.
Despite the airy indifference of the political class to the mobility and business activity of mere citizens, many of said citizens think mobility is important. And political elites who won't keep resources prepared for snow removal, in climates that create a need for it from time to time, are naively sticking out their pampered necks come next election.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on December 27, 2008 02:01 PMI do wonder as well at the general uptightness of people who have a total cow when we have a snowfall. It goes away in a few days. It's pretty. It can be enjoyable. Lighten up!
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 02:21 PMI didn't say that, you did. It is silly, and unreasonable. But enough arterials and primary collectors, and yes some residential streets, should be cleared, and kept cleared, to maintain most bus service and otherwise maintain the ability of most ordinary autos to make necessary trips.
That has not happened in Seattle over the last week, despite the easiness of the task - rendered easy by the relatively light snowfall. As for the ice, salt it, the frequency of snowfall here is so low that very small quantities, cumulatively, would be required.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on December 27, 2008 02:34 PMHis street must have been salted.
Posted by: LCRW on December 27, 2008 02:35 PMLike specifically the ones you rely on?
Like I was saying, we've become a bunch of spoiled crybabies. I used to have to get up in the middle of the night when it snowed because I had to show up before the people that worked for me and we had to figure out snow plans, etc. I didn't whine about it, and I didn't figure the city or county had to clear my route before I could go to work. I just did it, and so did everyone else.
Yet another example of an out of touch liberal Democrat millionaire who has zero idea of reality.
Oh and apparently that wasn't the only liberal who voted for the toilets. Accodring to new accounts Lacato and Jan "4x4" Drago were "vocal supporters" or the toilets.
They all voted for it over the objection of Shell, who I give credit for opposing at the time.
Posted by: No Leadership From Democrats on December 27, 2008 02:47 PMThat's not what we are talking about. We are talking about keeping enough main aterials open so gasoline and grocery trucks can make deliveries. No gas stations closed in Spokane for lack of gas. And please don't tell me Spokane has no hills, Their South Hill region has hills steeper that anything you can find in Seattle.
Posted by: No Leadership in Seattle on December 27, 2008 03:03 PMIt reminds me of medieval royalty that chomp down on their mutton leg after proclaiming "what hunger crisis? I got plenty of food!"
Posted by: Got Mutton? on December 27, 2008 03:09 PMYou know, coming from a firefighter. That info may mean something. To Seattle & it's lib defenders, it means zip.
Hope your never the one who needs us when the city can't do it's job.
What's the matter lib's, having a hard time defending this mess.
Come on guys... tell us again how WELL gov works!
Posted by: Medic/Vet on December 27, 2008 03:59 PMWhat businesses had to close, or ran out of inventory? What main arterials were closed?
For crying out loud. It snowed. It happens every once in a while, particularly in the winter. Even in Seattle.
I can't believe I'm in the position of somewhat defending Mayor Nickels here.
I think some conservatives are acting like liberals, whining and crying and enjoying the chance to blame Nickels for his alledged "failure" the same way liberals blamed Bush for Katrina.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 04:00 PMThe point is, by deliberate inaction of City authorities, too many streets were kept impassible for almost a week. In world-class cities, that's too long, and even in lesser cities where the populations do human things like eat and go shopping and see the doctor, that's too long too.
Not everyone in Seattle is a construction worker, and if Joe Average can't do those human things for a week on end, the mayor had better tell his people to gin up some explanations. Because next election, the other candidates' people will graphically remind the voters of the mess, and 'sucking it up' won't serve as a defense.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on December 27, 2008 04:15 PMThat's a bunch of garbage. You and other commentors here are in my opinion blowing this winter storm out of all porportion.
You're doing what liberals do. It's an infectious disease.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 04:24 PMI need a drink.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 04:39 PMGive me strength.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 04:47 PMAbsolutely correct. Nazi and socialism make a better comparison.
Posted by: Morton Salt on December 27, 2008 04:56 PMSilly me.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 05:00 PMMeanwhile, we're still waiting on the death toll, tales of inconvenienced patients, and economic damage. Perhaps the persons claiming these effects will cite some sources? (/snicker/)
Posted by: tensor on December 27, 2008 05:06 PMYou're off in fantasy land. We had a snowstorm. Big deal.
Saying that we could have handled it better is the same nyah, nyah stuff liberals do to us all the time. I don't want to travel on that road.
And I still don't think there would be all those snow plows.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 05:35 PM"Employees at two stations on Rainier Avenue South in South Seattle said they were out of gas."
"A Shell station further north on Rainier near South Dearborn Street was out of unleaded gasoline, but was still selling diesel."
Some gas stations running out of fuel
Posted by: These Stations Bill on December 27, 2008 05:52 PMListen. A big snowstorm is an inconvenience. It's part of something we call winter. Here we get a big snow like this maybe once every 5 years.
It's hardly the end of the world. It's a joke to pretend snow doesn't have the same effect on other cities that actually experience snowstorms more than we do. Spokane was virtually shut down during this storm. They get lots of snow. Every year.
We really need to sit back and relax.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 05:52 PMBill, please provide the link to the story on the stations that had no gas in Spokane. You see, they do get lots of snow, more than Seattle. ANd yes they have hills too. And they do better at managing for it. Did you know the mayor of Spokane called in private plows to help the city? That is called leadership.
So once again, please tell me what stations in Spokane ran out of gas because they couldn't deliver due to the crappy condition of the roads.
Posted by: Show Me Bill on December 27, 2008 05:57 PMWell, try this for an example:
I sure hope I can come. I was iced into my own place for 8 days. Then, on Thurs. at noontime, a friend with chains on his car finally was able to get through and take me, two days late, to where I'm working.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on December 27, 2008 06:04 PMMaybe I'm getting old but I don't think I said any such thing. You might want to note that the Mayor of Spokane declared a "state of emergency" on Christmas Eve.
http://www.kxly.com/Global/story.asp?S=9578416
It proves my point. It isn't just Seattle that has difficulties in a snow dump like we just had. People that think so are just plain wrong. Look at Spokane, a city that gets significant snow every winter.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 06:07 PMUnemployment call centers closed due to snow
Posted by: Here you go Bill on December 27, 2008 06:10 PMWhat exactly is wrong with you people?
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 06:12 PMOf course you didn't because none in Spokane ran out of gas, unlike in Seattle. And as you stated, it was so bad in Spokane they declared a state of emergency. Apparently they know how to plow in order to keep the gas stations supplied with gas - even under emergency conditions. That was the point you conveniently tried to avoid.
Seattle never had it as bad as Spokane yet Seattle did such a poor job of managing the situation that gas stations ran out of gas because they couldn't be supplied due to the poor response to the snow.
It begs the question, if a small town like Spokane, under EMERGENCY conditions, can manage to keep the gas flowing to stations, why can't Seattle? And don't tell me Seattle has hills. Spokane's South Hill area has hills many times steeper and teacherous in winter conditions than Seattle.
Posted by: Bill Proves My Point on December 27, 2008 06:20 PMYou entirely miss my point which is that Seattle responded to this winter snow as well as we who live here might expect. We didn't have some sort of city-wide gas shortage. Arterials were open. Stores operated fairly normally. It was just a frikkin winter snow. Big deal.
Getting all bent out of shape and blaming the dumb liberals who run Seattle might make us feel good but I think we're way off the mark here. And we look really, really silly.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 27, 2008 06:28 PM
Spokane had it worse and by comparision, Seattle looked like hick town. We are not talking about wanting them to launch a man into space here, just clear the damn roads sufficiently for commerce to happen. When gas stations run out of gas and cannot be replentished, that is an indicator of mismanagement, especially given the excess wastage on things like million dollar automated toilets and lifetime wet housing for drunks. Perhaps is hizzonor would worrry more about the basics instead of lofty things like Global Warming, then maybe the response would have been adequate.
No Bill, you are the one way off the mark. Defending the incompetence of the Seattle power structure makes you the one looking silly.
Posted by: Now Bill, Stop with the Bull on December 27, 2008 06:44 PMHINT: A lib troll doesn't disparage other libs. I know you're and old feller Bill, so I thought I'd point that out.
Posted by: Bill's Conscience on December 27, 2008 06:56 PMwhy, they are collecting their direct deposit salaries "...and 'being there' for YOU, the Taxpayer!" (sez an IL adamant-still-Governor)
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on December 27, 2008 10:21 PMWe gut evereee thang weee need dude. Duuuude only needs a bong doritos and some patchouli oil.
Posted by: Flower child smacker on December 27, 2008 11:05 PMSince "luck is when preparation meets opportunity," yes, my cold-weather gear and careful attitude did help. Also, the city had not scraped the streets bare for black ice to form, which helped me immensely -- without costing me a penny of my tax dollars. (Keeping the repaving costs down helps too.)
Of course, you won't hear much about the auto accidents and personal injuries due to unplowed or unsalted streets, sidewalks, and parking lots.
Yeah, no driver is ever responsible for what happens to his vehicle. I'm sure that's like a mantra in your industry, right?
However,I work in in the insurance field, and within a month or so, I should be hearing about the claims. The cost will be enormous, both to insurance companies and the people who suffered losses and/or injuries.
Not to mention the court costs, as your bosses fight tooth and nail to prevent payouts. Please tell me when I can view a resulting lawsuit; I want to enter a "friend of the court" brief, transmitting your belief that drivers have no responsibility for their actions. I'm sure your bosses will appreciate your candor on this point.
Posted by: tensor on December 28, 2008 01:43 AMI never swallow anything you say, Crusader. You should know that by now.
Posted by: tensor on December 28, 2008 01:55 AMWhy does the "World Class" city have fewer plows per capita than these other places? Apparently the other cities see the occasional use of snow removal equipment as a necessary function of city Government, and worth at least a few bucks thrown towards that. It's not like you can't use those trucks for other things during the year (take the plow off, and you have a nice big dump truck).
Seattle's just a reactionary - rather than visionary - Government. A bunch of me-too wannabes...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on December 28, 2008 08:31 AMI don't expect my cul-de-sac to get plowed, ever. Right now we're 6" deep in slushy muck, and it is impassible without chains. 1/8 mile away, the main arterial is bare and wet.
Posted by: Angela in Bothell on December 28, 2008 11:27 AMI don't expect my cul-de-sac to get plowed, ever. Right now we're 6" deep in slushy muck, and it is impassible without chains. 1/8 mile away, the main arterial is bare and wet.
Posted by: Angela in Bothell on December 28, 2008 11:28 AMWhat are the salinity levels of Lake Union, Portage Bay, and Lake Washington? (In case you have not heard, these bodies of water also receive runoff from Seattle's streets.) If you cannot count that high, have a small child (educated in pubic school) tell you.
I was out and about in Seattle every day this month except Xmas. More plowing would have made things worse. Salt would have washed away, damaging the pavement as it do so, then (even more) black ice would have accreted. The city did the right thing, and I support what was done. If you don't like it, either move into town and vote, or stop complaining.
Posted by: tensor on December 28, 2008 04:23 PMYeah, I base my decisions on the evidence I collect myself. I give little credit to the MSM, global-warming deniers, or out-of-town whiners. As a result, I can go about my business and pleasure whilst you snivel about the "impassable" streets I easily cross. This is what self-sufficiency looks like; maybe you can break yourself free from your nanny-state fantasies long enough to care for yourself.
Posted by: tensor on December 28, 2008 04:31 PMSalinity of Lake Washington and Lake Union is rather high, being around 8-12 PPT in pore salinity. I learned this 15 years ago when doing SONAR research testing on these lakes, as salinity will affect the speed of sound and thus the calibration of research SONAR systems.
In fact, it's not a consistent number even - the closer you get to the Cedar River, the lower the salinity; conversely, the Ship Canal, Fisherman's Terminal, and western edge of Lake Union are considerably higher in salt content than SE Lake Washington.
Now, a question for you - how much outflow does the Sammamish Slough and the Cedar River provide to the Lake Washington/Lake Union bodies of water, relative to the outflow from the direct-discharge drainage of Seattle?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on December 28, 2008 06:11 PMRather than apply cold logic to the issue, they replace logic w/ feel good, political correctness.
It may well be true that the best/cheapest plan for a city w/ infrequent snow is to do nothing (or little), BUT that is not what they have said....instead they tell us that they reject salt because it might hurt the saltwater ocean
Then they also fail to acknowledge that even if salt into the ocean might be factually bad...it still might be worth doing,...if the alternative is to shut down a city and its occupants for a week+.
like the other poster said, "you can't make this stuff up" (the PC drivel that seattle/KC/state are capable of generating..
Posted by: righton on December 28, 2008 06:28 PMWell tensor, considering the salt water that gets mixed into Lake Union via the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks opening and closing all day long, I imagine they are quite high and any additional salt via road runoffs once a year would be inconsequential.
Posted by: The Facts on December 28, 2008 06:38 PMUm, no. The locks are a method for controlled discharge of the higher-level water (in the lakes) to the lower-level water (in the Sound). Therefore, fresh water flows to the Sound via the locks. Thanks for playing!
Now, a question for you - how much outflow does the Sammamish Slough and the Cedar River provide to the Lake Washington/Lake Union bodies of water, relative to the outflow from the direct-discharge drainage of Seattle?
Who cares? The salinity level of the lakes will be lower if we don't dump salt into them (duh). Dumping salt on Seattle's streets would have not done much for road traction, as the freeze/melt cycles would have rendered salt useless. Why do you people want to (a) spend taxpayer money on (b) a useless effort, which will (c) pollute Lake Washington?
Posted by: tensor on December 28, 2008 11:44 PMUm so it is preferable to destroy sea life in Shilshole Bay by reducing the salinity of the bay? Yet another unintended consequence of liberal idiocy.
Posted by: Facts on December 29, 2008 01:36 PMLOL, did I really read this. Another lib who woke up! Being a responsible for YOUR actions!
Remember what lib's "always" say, it's someone else's fault. Not me.
Now what's that saying about being mugged.
Posted by: Medic/Vet on December 29, 2008 03:17 PMEngineering has a well-known liberal bias!
Being a [sic] responsible for YOUR actions!
Yep, that's why I went about my business, instead of making whiny blog posts about how there was still snow on the streets after a Winter storm.
Posted by: tensor on December 29, 2008 03:44 PMWho cares? The salinity level of the lakes will be lower if we don't dump salt into them (duh).
Appreciably, that is the issue. Otherwise I suspect you should consider exercising your self-euthanasia rights since you obviously increase the pollution on the Earth.
Now, if you knew the actual outflow of the rivers and streams feeding Lake Washington, you'd know that it is multiple orders of magnitude larger than the drainage from Seattle's storm drains. Meaning the salinity change would be less than 0.01% of the current salinity, which changes that much throughout the year based upon the flow rates of those same streams and the evaporation from the lake.
Dumping salt on Seattle's streets would have not done much for road traction, as the freeze/melt cycles would have rendered salt useless.
Road salt becomes ineffective below 20 degrees; we never reached that temperature. The salt would stay effective until it washed away (along with the snow and ice it melted).
However, we should take notice of what Everett does - an 8:1 ratio of sand to salt. The salt melts the ice, and leave sand so that if more snow falls, or ice starts to build up, it is sand-bearing thereby increasing traction.
Why do you people want to (a) spend taxpayer money on (b) a useless effort, which will (c) pollute Lake Washington?
Because both your claims are false; it is neither useless nor polluting. Unless you happen to be scientifically ignorant, which may in fact be the case (as it is with most of the electorate and those elected).
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on December 29, 2008 07:15 PMThat was my point exactly. The air temperature was above 32 degrees F during the afternoon and evening, but below 32 degrees F in the night and morning. Plowing (and scraping) the pavement, then salting it, would have degraded the surface. The salt water would have washed away, replaced by black ice during the night. Morning drivers would have slid helplessly on this slick surface. For my morning commutes, I had to don my heavy, waterproof boots, and crunch on the untrodden snow; had i walked upon the "bare" pavement, I might have fallen on the black ice.
Why did you want Seattle's city government to (a) spend money to (b) increase our future repaving bills to (c) make things more dangerous? Isn't that what conservatives always claim: that liberals want to spend taxpayer dollars on harmful non-solutions?
Posted by: tensor on December 30, 2008 01:44 AMYou really are ignorant, aren't you? You use salt IN CONJUNCTION with sand! Then when the salt melts away the ice, any re-freeze has sand embedded in it giving you much better traction than the thick layer of ice that would have been there in the first place.
You just show your own ignorance with your repeat-of-Nickels talking points. Go talk to any DOT from any of the midwest states about how to deal with ice and icing-over roads...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on December 30, 2008 07:13 AMYou mean like the lib engineering in bridges in minneapolis? The ones that collapse killing people?
"Yep, that's why I went about my business, instead of making whiny blog posts about how there was still snow on the streets after a Winter storm."
If you don't want the government delivering service, then stop whining about wanting to collect taxes.