ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Swank Living

Dear ETS!

As someone who lives in Nick Licata's "swank house," I want to explain the Evergreen Land Trust and the institution of Prag House to the Ostrom campaign and anyone who's read Suzanne Carlson's letter.

A land trust is a way to own property and keep it out of the hands of speculators and developers whose only interest is profit. When property is placed into a trust a legally binding promise to not sell the property is made. Prag was purchased more than 20 years ago for about $45,000. It is now worth nearly one million dollars. None of the more than one hundred people and dozens of families Prag has been an affordable home to will profit from its increased property value. Prag will continue, for the next 75 years, to be a warm place for people like me, a low-income single mom, and my four-year-old son, Leroy, to call home.

The Evergreen Land Trust owns five other houses and one farm. Land trusts are an innovative mechanism to preserve rural and urban land for sustainable development and affordable housing. I wouldn't exchange living at Prag for paying rent to a landlord for anything!

--Lisa Lou Gogal, Seattle

ETS!,

Just got the latest ETS!, and I have to comment on something Ms. Doglio said about Nick Licata living in a "swank" house and "taking money from rich people." [Actually, those comments appeared in Suzanne Carlson's letter--ed.]

Her comments reflect hers and Aaron's problem far better than I could ever articulate. Why? Simple. As someone who has worked as a finance director on several major campaigns, I can tell you that it isn't the size of the contribution that is always important; it's the intent.

So Nick has a few $400 contributions from such individuals as Alan Rabinowitz. If Ms. Doglio had bothered to take her head out of the downtown business trough for a few minutes, she might find out that Alan and his wife are longtime liberal donors who give mostly to causes (Heart of America NW is one) and really have a committment to liberal issues.

Guys like William Justen or Herman Sarkowsky give to Drago & Co. for another reason. They will make money if their people toe their line. So it's really a matter of investing a piddly little $400 to make millions in land use decisions.

As for the Prag House being a swanky condo a la Belltown, well obviously once again she doesn't understand the history of the Prag house, or the fact that people who live there, live there, and aren't living in an investment property as so many of the urban elites do.

As someone who has been on more than a few campaign staffs and has seen first hand the goings on of the Greater Seattle political scene, I have to say that your column in the Stranger and on the web is one of the best sources of information and certainly one of the few useful pieces of info I have found to date.

The dailies don't report, the local TV would much rather cover previews of the primetime lineup for their respective networks, and the public suffers because no one really has an idea about what the heck is going on. This leads to expensive campaigns, as candidates have to buy TV, radio, or mail pieces to try and tell people they even exist, much less what they stand for.

If Aaron Ostrom thinks that all those Nice, Big Business types are giving because they want to "build coalitions" or "support an up and coming young man," he needs to spend a few years as a staffer and learn the cold realities of politics, then run for office. As it stands, I'm not paying 78k for a kid to have a "really cool internship" running the major city of Seattle.

--Greg Dewar, Seattle

Ed. footnote: Last weekend, an ETS! parody attacking Nick Licata, called "Eat The Eat The State!," showed up around town. Everyone should see it. It's kinda funny in some places, vicious in others. Judging from its use of opposition research-style material on Licata, its producers are either part of or very close to Aaron Ostrom's campaign.

As a parody, it would be amusing, albeit infantile, in an election for student government. As a time-consuming, mid-campaign effort from a major, business-backed candidate for Seattle City Council--and in response to one critical article in a small alternative publication produced by volunteers--it's astounding. And alarming. Is this any indication of how council member Ostrom will respond to media critics or political opponents?

Ostrom & Co. still haven't substantively answered the widely held concerns about his new corporate buddies. Every time they try, as with last week's evasive letters and now ETETS!, they seem to put their foot in it further. Indeed, while his campaign loudly defends him as a grass roots guy, Ostrom has been making appearances at events like last week's big-business Unity Breakfast, where, accompanied by Jan Drago and Martha Choe, he was the sole non-incumbent council candidate present.

A month ago, I was wondering how Aaron Ostrom would actually vote if elected. With this petty, adolescent stunt, I'm wondering whether he's fit for office at all.--G.P.