Video: Protests split Seattle Housing Authority rent-increase meeting into two gatherings

FIRST REPORT, 7:18 PM: We’re at High Point Community Center along with a crowd we’d estimate to number at least 200, at what was supposed to be an informational/Q-A meeting about the Seattle Housing Authority‘s controversial Stepping Forward” rent-increase proposal.

SHA executive director Andrew Lofton barely got through the pre-planned slide deck, with chants and shouts between almost every line.

After a few attempts at Q/A – really, just Q, because SHA said it would not answer any of the questions – one man shouted that those in attendance were being insulted and should walk out.

Many did, and went into the gym, where they and protesters rallied, with City Councilmember Kshama Sawant on hand.

(Added 9:26 pm – here’s our video of what Sawant told them, amplified via “human mike”:)

Others, meantime, stayed behind, and some spoke about the “stepped” rent increase proposal, which could take a subsidized household now paying $50 in rent, up to $1,000 in the fifth year. Even those who said they supported the concept of encouraging self-sufficiency said unemployment is high and there’s no guarantee anyone can get work, no matter how hard they try.

There were declarations that while SHA is calling for tenant accountability, no one is calling for developer accountability to provide more low-income housing.

The meeting is now in an “open house” phase at which those with questions are seeking answers in one-on-one conversations.

9:26 PM: Above, we’ve added our video of what Councilmember Sawant said after “the other meeting” convened in the Community Center’s gym – we had one crew in each room.

Our full video of the meeting in the original room, including all of the protests and the presentation they punctuated, will be added after we get it uploaded later tonight. (Added: Here it is:)

Meantime, Sawant told those gathered in the gym that the SHA meeting was “a joke” and called for “a big action in City Hall” on October 15th.

Opponents of “Stepping Forward” have a petition, and details of their position and objections, online here.

Meantime, the “next steps” slide in the official presentation said a possible “workforce pilot” would begin late this year, and that the proposal would be revised, more public comment taken, a recommendation made to SHA’s Board of Commissioners, then a phase-in with about 4 years from Board approval to full implementation, “rent changes no earlier than 2016.”

“We don’t want it revised!” someone yelled. “We want it gone!”

64 Replies to "Video: Protests split Seattle Housing Authority rent-increase meeting into two gatherings"

  • M September 29, 2014 (7:49 pm)

    Stepping Forward is a great idea. Housing support should be about helping people support themselves. 5 years is plenty of time. And with $15 min wage they can find something to support themselves.

  • DW September 29, 2014 (8:16 pm)

    So much for civil discourse. What exactly is gained by shouting and interrupting the forum? These protester are only embarrassing themselves.

  • Mike September 29, 2014 (8:25 pm)

    There’s no perfect answer that will make everyone happy. However, there are a ton of jobs in this area, more than almost anywhere else in the nation right now. The problem is are people looking for jobs in this area qualified for the open positions? 5 years is more than enough time. I recommend that anyone not finding something here should look to other areas outside of Seattle, even this state, to find positions that do match their skillset and probably have a much lower cost of living. Kshama Sawant would do more by actually starting a business to employee people rather than perpetual rants, obstructing meetings and shouting at people. As the saying goes, put up or shut up.

  • steve September 29, 2014 (8:26 pm)

    Seems reasonable to me, and it also opens up opportunity for others waiting for assistance.

  • jayjayb74 September 29, 2014 (8:33 pm)

    As someone that lived at the new High Point for 6 years I can say that I agree with this plan. This should not be permanent solution. If people take advantage and follow through with what they offer the in regards to the proposed training and support there should be no complaint. Even after 5 years the rents are far below market rate in the West Seattle area. Take advantage of the programs offered and you will be successful. If not, someone else will fill your spot. This is the way the business world works. It will never be fair, be accountable and improve your skills.

  • witchyseattle September 29, 2014 (8:44 pm)

    Even at $15 per hour wage it still is not enough to pay for the rent the seattle housing authority is proposing. They should move away… ahh now its abundantly clear. You just don’t want low income people having housing. Let them go to the shelters, or wallow in the gutter. Nice and very compassionate.

  • J September 29, 2014 (8:57 pm)

    @witchyseattle $15/hr isn’t enough????! At this moment I make just a little more than that, and my expenses include $700/month in student loans, rent (NOT in low income housing), food, car payment, gas, and insurance. I get along just fine, and can bet most of those opposed don’t share my student loan expense.

  • dsa September 29, 2014 (8:59 pm)

    They start at 50/per month? That seems like an over the top fair helping hand. The question is it an offer of help to get one on one’s own two feet or something to squander.

  • Carlton September 29, 2014 (8:59 pm)

    Oh sure.. they all should get a job and pay market rent even those who cant walk or have some permanent disability force them to make a living on their own. I’m guessing its easy to work when disabled. I’ve never tried it though..

  • BookEmDano September 29, 2014 (9:10 pm)

    This is a radical restructuring of the rate system which is going to drive poor people out. The old system tied someone’s rent to their income. This new way will set a fixed price increasing rates by as much as 500%.

    Seattle has the money to prevent these rate increases. For every dollar Seattle sends out to Olympia, we only get 62 cents. We have enough money to prevent these rate increases and it’s time we did.

  • Citizen Sane September 29, 2014 (9:12 pm)

    The City is should not be in the business of providing long-term subsidised housing to the otherwise able-bodied. Taxpayers are willing to provide a helping hand, but not a hammock. This sounds like a fair program that makes reasonable expectations of people.

    Long-term subsidised housing that fails to provide an ‘exit strategy’ for it’s clients will inevitably become a ghetto. Those who oppose this program seem to have some rather exaggerated feelings of entitlement. News flash: you’re not entitled to indefinite largesse from those of us who are paying full freight. Move up or move on.

  • G September 29, 2014 (9:21 pm)

    I spent the first 7 years of my life in SHA housing, my parents saved, and we moved out and up the economic ladder – and this was before the myriad of tax credits (like the EIC) and other subsidizes that are available now. Sorry, ain’t getting any sympathy from me. There are people waiting behind them that need the housing. This is supposed to be a step up, not permanent subsidy. Averaged out the rent for a 4 bdrm over five years is $476, VERY reasonable.

  • Diane September 29, 2014 (9:25 pm)

    people with disabilities and seniors are exempt

  • Neighbor in High Point September 29, 2014 (9:38 pm)

    I see the caption about “unemployment is high” and how can people find self-sufficiency??? The unemployment rate in Washington state, Seattle particularly, is approximately 4.4%, one of the lowest rates we have historically seen. At the same time, new job growth continues. Our strong economy AND the advent of a $15 living wage should set people up well to earn a good living and be able to “step forward” and pay a higher rent.

    I’ve lived in High Point since the redevelopment and have friends all across the community. Affordable housing is an important offering within a community to help people get back on their feet (“witchyseattle” – keep your assumptions to yourself) but why not include an accountability element to motivate people to work towards something better?

  • G September 29, 2014 (9:45 pm)

    Tying rents to income encourages people to hide financial resources, which is partially understandable because people want to accrue sufficient financial resources before moving out. It’s the old social engineer’s conundrum, subsidizing and incentivizing at the same time.

  • newnative September 29, 2014 (10:07 pm)

    I am tired of hearing people throwing around the $15 minimum wage. It is not in effect. I am still quite under $15, subjected to 2% annual raises yet rent has gone up about 24% in two years.

    • WSB September 29, 2014 (10:18 pm)

      Also, one of the SHA slides – I haven’t found the actual deck so far, or else I would add it to the story – said that one rent level after four years would require the rent-payer to be making $16 to $19/hour.

  • BookEmDano September 29, 2014 (11:29 pm)

    Yeah, the $15/hour minimum wage won’t be fully enacted until 2024. We’re basically expecting people’s incomes to multiply in less than 5 years when every macro-economic indicator is saying that won’t happen. We need to build more affordable housing and fill the backlog. Seattle has the money to do this.

  • cj September 30, 2014 (2:25 am)

    Some companies have not raised salaries in years around here. Also I don’t really understand where SHA is coming from. Their rent is supposed to be based on a percentage of what you have to work with and I dont see employers just volunteering to pay out the money that we need for a more viable society.

  • M September 30, 2014 (6:19 am)

    When is the next election when we get to vote Sawant out?

  • DML September 30, 2014 (7:01 am)

    Some forward countries are taking a real step for their citizens. Why Not Us?

  • V September 30, 2014 (7:33 am)

    As G stated above, “This is supposed to be a step up, not permanent subsidy.” Bingo!

    I have a friend that has lived in the same subsidized apartment in Seattle for 15 years. Crazy.

  • Ivan September 30, 2014 (8:02 am)

    I appreciate your coverage, Tracy and Patrick.

  • Shawn September 30, 2014 (8:04 am)

    I have to say that I agree with SPH on this. $50 a month is ridiculous. There are training programs and work incentives available. And like another commenter pointed out Seattle has a 4.4% unemployment rate. Seriously how long does it take to get on your feet? You could work at mcdonalds and be able to afford the $1000 a month rent. And yes I feel like the up or out system is what it should be, give them incentive to actually get on their feet, the more we coddle these people going through hard times the more they’ll just not want to work. There are plenty of jobs out there. Yes they aren’t 40k a year jobs but thy aren’t being asked to pay market rates, even after the “500%” increase, Considering without assistance the average 1 bedroom apartment is over 1200$ a month.

  • Rick September 30, 2014 (8:26 am)

    Why would anyone “step up” when they can “slide along”,pretty much for life?

  • T Rex September 30, 2014 (8:42 am)

    Love the “Tax the Rich” sign. Yep, that will solve everyone’s problems.

    Get a job, get yourself some education and live where you can afford to live. Work two jobs if you have two. Stay a year or so at Highpoint and work your way out of there. It should not be permanent housing.

    Some of these people are having hard times, some are disabled but I would guess many of them came to our city KNOWING they could live here and the government would help them FOREVER.

  • M September 30, 2014 (8:55 am)

    I’m pretty sure one of the residents of the SHA apartment across the street from me who sells drugs and drives a luxury car isn’t really “low income.” I realize that individual is part of the extreme minority but I’d bet illegal, and/or unreported income is not uncommon with a few people qualifying as “low income”

  • s September 30, 2014 (8:58 am)

    If I paid $50/month in rent, I would fight to keep that too. But it would not be right.

  • witchyseattle September 30, 2014 (9:08 am)

    These apartments are not meant to be temporary housing or transition housing, but permament housing. The disabled are exempt but what about the folks who are still trying to get their SSI? The whole point is that they should get it because they can’t work. This program would totally undermind their efforts. The elderly are also exempt as long as you are 61. Old enough for AARP? Then you should be exempt from this program.

  • Shelly September 30, 2014 (10:07 am)

    I live in housing & I have a good job where I work in Medical Billing I work closely with Dr. and Nurses .. Scheduling intake its a very detail oriented job .But guess what at the end of the day I make more than the new minimum wage and I still struggle to take care of my kids I get no assistance I work no we don’t have cable or expensive things or habits im just a hard working woman and still I cant make it ..Hmmm.. no one has a issue with this program raiseing rents but its quickly put together never been tested… that’s the point of low income its not high income housing….

  • alkiobserver September 30, 2014 (10:14 am)

    This plan finally shows me that SHA is starting to get a clue. Something K Sawant doesn’t have. Man, is she just a slamming door of bad information and terrible ideas. Anyway, I think this plan is a great step in the right direction. These “protesters” just embarrassed themselves in my eyes. Too much exploitation of a temporary subsidy system. A handout never works like a hand up does. These ultra-low, subsidized rents need to be temporary as in around a year for all but the permanently disabled and elderly. No sympathy from me after that when it starts to STEP UP over time. Just hope SHA finds the resolve to stand up to Sawant and the naysayers’ bully tactics and follow through with it.

  • dj September 30, 2014 (10:19 am)

    I work VERY hard for SHA to allow these people to live in a better house than I do. They should somehow be held accountable for what tax payers are giving them. They should be given random drug test for one. In order for me to be employed to pay for THEIR housing, I need to be drug tested. The system is so messed up.

  • shelly September 30, 2014 (11:39 am)

    This is really sad and comical at the same time.. so let me get this right people are so worried about ..low income people they go out there way to assume all of us are trying to get over and take advantage of the system.. newsflash.. people are still struggling making above minimum wage kids eat alot grocers are not cheap. Fyi I dont get food stamps or wic.. I went to college got my degree Im s aveing for a house but dont push me down and eliminate programs that can assist me y should my tax money support these people this ideology based in fear. That somehow we r taken from u please!! Those wall street bankers took way more from you what about the ferry workers useing tak money to live in vacation houses .. your focus is on the wrong peope.. I plan to own my home and travel but I refuse to stand by and watch while essential programs are eliminated no one wants to live in low income forever trust

  • BookEmDano September 30, 2014 (12:18 pm)

    This issue can be solved by raising taxes on the rich and subsidizing housing. Seattle is a rich city and getting wealthier. We continue get announcements about new large companies coming in every few months. This is supposedly in spite of the fact that we will have the highest minimum wage in the country in a decade. This is supposedly in spite of the fact that we supposedly have such a liberal city council. It’s time for the companies coming in to pay their fair share so that the poor in this city are not pushed out.

  • JoB September 30, 2014 (12:38 pm)

    when you price affordable housing out of the reach of those it is intended to help..
    you simply drive people with jobs and housing to the streets where they quickly lose their ability to keep working.
    is this what we call progress?

  • herm September 30, 2014 (1:12 pm)

    Seems like most folks posting here just hate both poor people and Sawant. Why?

    There is a simple fact that you people just don’t seem to be able to grasp: there aren’t enough jobs that pay high enough wages for everyone to pay market rate rents. It’s a very simple empirical truth, and squeezing people to pay more rent isn’t going to change it.

    So with this one simple fact in mind one has to wonder, who at SHA thought this was a good idea? And what are they really trying to accomplish, because it seems more like they are just trying to push poor people out of the city than anything else.

    And quite frankly, I think that is shameful, disgraceful, and whomever is pushing this agenda should be out. This is progressive Seattle, not some deep south backwater run by ol’ Boss Hogg and his pals.

  • Demian September 30, 2014 (1:33 pm)

    The demand for affordable housing is going up. Rather than address this issue, this “Stepping Up” plan moving the deck chairs around. I’m amazed at all the misdirected anger at the protests in these comments – with many sounding like Republicans in the 90s blaming “welfare queens” for our troubles. Taking away welfare hasn’t helped poor people and neither will pricing them out of their houses.

  • shelly September 30, 2014 (1:46 pm)

    Ohh and when they push all us low income people out .. you guys will have no one to turn on but each other.. why should I have to choose between medicine for my child or grocery?? Untill u actually reach in your wallet and hand me some money directly ..than you can dictate my life the government doesn’t actually have the best track record when it comes to managing our tax money you really don’t know what they’re blamedoing with your cash smoke and mirrors Graham all the poor people by the rich people get richerthat’s as a scapegoat

  • herm September 30, 2014 (2:57 pm)

    To the person who works at SHA: quit your job right now! If you are too bitter over poor people getting help to work at a place where that is your JOB then you should be doing something else entirely. Quit, and do it yesterday!

  • M September 30, 2014 (2:58 pm)

    I don’t live on Mercer Island, or in Broadmoor because I can’t afford it. Nor do I live in Ballard, or Queen Anne. Can’t afford it. Living where you WANT is a luxury, not a RIGHT. Seattle in an expensive city to live in. So is San Francisco, so is NY. There’s some pretty reasonable rents in Burien, Kent, Federal Way. Many people live in those areas because they CAN afford it there but not in Seattle.

  • herm September 30, 2014 (3:10 pm)

    The thing about Broadmoor and Mercer Island, M, is they don’t already have subsidized housing that they are pushing poor people OUT of.

    Now SHA may not be willing to admit that they are actively trying to push poor people out of the city, but at least you are. Perhaps you should go to SHA as to convince them to make public their real intentions, and then we can finally have a real public debate out SHA’s true goal of removing poor people from the city of Seattle.

  • G September 30, 2014 (4:15 pm)

    Come do a few tax returns of “poor” people with me, and some of you might change your tune. Refundable tax credits (as much as $6,000), food stamps, subsidized housing, subsidized utilities, subsidized education, you name it. And now they’re complaining about an increase from $50/month with indignant entitlement. Some of these are multi-generational families with multiple streams of income. Save it for the judge. The people who are getting hammered are the lower middle-class.

  • Kayleigh September 30, 2014 (4:17 pm)

    I don’t think the stepping plan is horrible or unreasonable, actually. But I also hate to see anything that makes life harder for people already on the edges. And I don’t want to see Seattle become a city of only well-off people, which is what’s happening in some ways.
    It’s easy-breezy to tell people to live in outlying areas where it’s cheaper…but then they have to drive into the city or take transit—transit which was just cut, remember? And then they add to traffic woes, pollution…
    It’s not simple. Nor is it a matter of working harder and getting a high-paying job–we’ll still need baristas, artists, heck even firefighters and teachers need affordable housing. We need people of all income levels to make a city work.

  • West Seattle Hipster September 30, 2014 (4:24 pm)

    Thank you WSB for publishing such an enlightening article, it is distressing to see how many folks are exploiting the system.

  • residents September 30, 2014 (4:34 pm)

    Its awesome how liberal bastions like seattle , nyc and san francisco do such a nice job of driving out the poor with building, environmental and business regulations that drive the cost of living through the roof. i mean who was the idiot that let poor blacks dominate primo real estate like the central district in the first place? luckily for us the powers-that-be are on the case. there’s always kent, right?

  • csw September 30, 2014 (4:50 pm)

    I could only watch a few minutes of this video because I couldn’t stand the rude people yelling and over talking the speaker. I heard someone in the crowd yell, “this is America!” That’s right, it’s where you have the opportunity to work and raise your standard of living. You aren’t going to do that by being handed everything free/easy. I’ve been less than prosperous. . . . .I didn’t like it and I got myself out of that situation, on my own. I completely agree with dj, if you are getting any type of public assistance, drug testing should be required, and assistance limited to -5 years. 10 years ago I could afford to live in West Seattle, so I didn’t, I lived in Burien. It appears that common sense is non-existent in 2014.

  • sundun September 30, 2014 (4:58 pm)

    LOL, residents. I would love to see some proof of your assertion that environmental/business regulations drive the COL through the roof. Even if that were true, Seattle is a place that prides itself on clean air and water. We have enough toxins in the air, water and ground in our area with the regulations we have, and to cut them would turn us into an open air sewer. Nobody wants that (well, except you apparently). And the same with business regulations. It’s about quality of life that we all share in common, and helping those who are priced out of our city. What we have instead looks like an effort to push some of the poor out of the city, and now you who apparently want to turn the city into a libertarian “paradise”, ha.

  • hermes September 30, 2014 (5:00 pm)

    “It appears that common sense is non-existent in 2014.”

    And so with human compassion, completely gone (and replaced by dollar signs).

  • My two cents ... September 30, 2014 (5:57 pm)

    This is a complex issue … There isn’t a right or wrong, there isn’t a black or white. This is a situation of fairness for all. As a community, as the city we should provide a safety net… but to do so at the expense of the “wealthy” individual or corporation is not realistic or fair. A safety net is there in case you fall you would smashed to bits… but you are not expected to stay there continuously. Elements of cost-sharing and market rate adjustments are not unrealistic.

    IMO Ms. Sawant seems to focus on one slice of the pie while ignoring all of the others… Thanks for representing all citizens of the city*

    * insert sarcasm

  • residents September 30, 2014 (7:31 pm)

    Like I said, awesome. We do it for our environment! We do it for our quality of life! Kicking out the poor is just an (ahem) undesirable effect since they can’t afford a clean environment or a high quality of life!

    “…helping out those who are priced out of our city”.

    Helping them out how? Past the city limits?

    I can admit what a lot of these regulations are about, and can admit that given the choice I much prefer to live among the not-poor.

    I have no problem with Chicago dynamiting the Cabrini Green projects when it dawned on the developers and mayors office that that real estate was awfully well positioned in the heart of that city. Kinda like the CD, where I lived for many years, which happens to be minutes from downtown.

    But I don’t try to pretend its anything other than what it is – the relatively rich driving out the relatively poor.

  • Mike September 30, 2014 (7:32 pm)

    “we’ll still need baristas, artists”
    1st world problems right there. Wow.

  • herm September 30, 2014 (8:35 pm)

    Providing a safety net at the expense of the wealthy and their corporations is certainly realistic, and more than fair. Who are the rich and their corporations to talk about fairness? The rich are getting ever more wealthy at the expense of everyone else. It is they who have taken 95% of the productivity gains that everyone has contributed to since the downturn, meanwhile everyone else falls behind.

    If the wealthy want to talk about fairness when they earn some 300% more than the average worker, they need to come back to earth first.

    We have tried welfare reform, and the poor are still reeling from that one (meanwhile the rich grow ever fatter, and always wanting more). No more sticking it to the poor to fatten your pockets, time to put an end to this nonsense. SHA does not kick the poor out of the city.

    Oh yeah and “*thanks for representing all the city.” Sawant is the only person representing the poor in this town. They are the ones getting screwed here, and that it isn’t harder and faster is obviously irksome to some quarters here.

  • BMC September 30, 2014 (10:07 pm)

    $50 rent? Really?? I wonder what they get for that – a garage? I am not a poor hater. My sister is on medicare disability in Kitsap County and pays approx 30% of her income in low-income federal housing – which is around $250 for a small, but decent 1 bedroom apt.

    That is just too low. Now SHA is making up for its flaws by potentially overcharging in the future.

    $50? can that be right? gee in 1976, my first studio apt on Cap Hill was $150.

  • JoB October 1, 2014 (7:49 am)

    So much outrage.
    My understanding is that the $50 rent is generally for people who are on limited public assistance… generally because they are working through a disability claim that is considered medically viable by their case workers.
    FYI.. after paying rent those people generally have somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple hundred dollars and maybe another $50 in food stamps to live on.
    The alternative for most people currently living in subsidized housing that is that low is the streets.
    And Mayor Murray’s plan for the homeless on our streets is to “clean out” encampments anywhere he finds them without providing shelter.
    isn’t it time we got real here?

  • JoB October 1, 2014 (8:46 am)

    interesting article that is surprisingly on topic

  • Lynn October 1, 2014 (10:28 am)

    If not this then what? I went to the meeting on Monday, and it couldn’t hear a thing because of the protesters. These meetings are to have a discussion and if not this proposal than what? If we just yell and refuse to dialogue change is going to happen without input. Budget cuts are real, and across the nation public housing units are being demolished. Or improvements are financed via private loans where then Banks control who gets a unit and defaults can result in public housing being converted to private units.

    This is what happens when all we offer is discord instead of discourse. Eventually units will just be lost and not replaced because its easier to just do that path via regulations or budget short falls. Look at Chicago..there is no “public meetings” on how to help more people via more units and funding. They just are tearing down units.

    Instead of Yelling, come up with real counter solutions for funding and helping more people… because change will happen. But there has to be give and take on both side….yelling tax the rich is about as productive/ realistic as rich people saying kick all poor people out of their houses and the city.

  • Moreah October 1, 2014 (4:02 pm)

    I especially resonated with Lynn–we need discourse, not discord, and real counter solutions. I teach a “Dealing with Difficult Conversations” workshop, based on Nonviolent Communication, which is about connecting with feelings and needs. I’m offering it free on Nov. 12 from 12-2, and would be happy to share it with people who want to work together with SHA for a solution that can work for everyone. I’d also be happy to send a free monthly Compassion Practice to anyone who emails me,

  • au October 2, 2014 (9:24 am)

    why? are some of you jealous of people getting help with their housing expense? coming on here with made up scenarios about what life must be like for ‘those people’. here’s a clue, a bit of reality, i get sec 8, have for almost six years, i haven’t had a vacation since my kid was born 15 plus years ago, a day off? hmmm not much of that either really, nope. it’s how it is. i’ve worked two plus jobs just to survive and that’s with sec 8. there are only so many hours in a day and the human body NEEDS to rest, it NEEDS to know it is safe and secure. A parent NEEDS to tend to them self and the child has NEEDS too. If these NEEDS aren’t met the stress will break, kill or damage the body and potentially the psyche as well. This is happening. This is what happens when human NEEDS are commodified and sold for profit. does one really think that more and more people aren’t being able to afford to survive that its because they are lazy or just too stupid? do you really think that?

    do you imagine yourself so different?

    i read a very interesting piece of american urban planning past the other day,
    in a landscape history book.
    a city planner, clarence perry worked to create a city ‘based on financial management structured to maintain low rents and turn profits back into community improvements. it was such a good idea that it caught the attention of some congressmen who felt that this government sponsored development reflected badly upon the nation’s private housing industry. As a result congress passed legislation…’
    hmmm legislation passed favoring the private housing industry.

    understand. this country was founded, the rules created for one demographic and one demographic only, the white male landowner. its only changed enough to placate the masses and its changing again, now its seems to enslave the masses,

  • cookieb October 2, 2014 (9:45 am)

    give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime….

  • au October 2, 2014 (10:53 am)

    i know how to fish but it seems that the sharks have decimated the supply…

    And because inequity shall abound the love of many shall wax cold. Matthew 24:12 KJV

  • West Seattle Hipster October 2, 2014 (5:26 pm)

    I find it ironic that we demand our seafood be sustainable but we don’t expect the same of our fellow community members.

  • m Howell October 2, 2014 (6:13 pm)

    Lol everyone jump on the I hate poor people bandwagon..cracking up your so distracted haseing us you don’t even see your Congress man and lawmakers take your money right out your pocket. so you say that you should live where you can afford toI was born in Seattle Washington raised in Seattle I’m not going anywhere I have as much a right to live here in West Seattle and highpoint Is anybody rent was low at one point but then I started making real money so they gradually raise
    it let’s really just being realistic here if you make 17 or 18 dollars a month that equals about 1200 every two lets figure in kids who do extra

  • au October 2, 2014 (9:51 pm)

    which community members would that be, the ones sucking us dry or the ones being sucked dry? who should be sustainable? let’s check carbon foot prints or resource amounts consumed if you want to talk sustainability. i mean who consumes more, me and my family who pretty much doesn’t go very far, often buys used and barely consumes enough to get by or the family that has access to private jets, yachts, homes all over the world?
    or maybe your referencing our corporate community members, the ones that while making record profits asked its workers to make concessions? or the corporate community member that got in trouble for skimming time off their employee’s pay?
    what’s this you say about learning to be a sustaining member of society? explain to me who needs to learn this

Sorry, comment time is over.