Spokane7
26°
October 16, 2009 in City
District 2 race a tight one
Snyder, Allen dispute Southgate land-use change
Mike Allen, left, and Jon Snyder are running for the south Spokane City Council seat.
(Full-size photo)
The fault line in the race for a City Council seat representing southern Spokane is at Palouse Highway and Regal Street.
Last year, Councilman Mike Allen voted to change rules to allow construction of big-box stores near the intersection.
That decision and development requirements approved with it are “an opportunity for the city to really have a great urban center with a very vibrant atmosphere,” Allen said recently.
But his opponent in the November election, Jon Snyder, describes the decision as “reckless” and says it will promote urban sprawl, create traffic headaches and drain opportunity from existing business centers.
If the primary vote is a hint about the competition in the contest, the race between Snyder and Allen will be close. In the August tally, Snyder topped a list of six candidates with 31 percent, compared with Allen’s 27 percent. Since then, Allen earned the endorsement of third-place finisher Kristina Sabestinas, while the fourth-place finisher, former City Councilman Steve Eugster, has backed Snyder.
Snyder also won the support of the Spokane County Democratic Party for the nonpartisan seat and has raised twice the money that Allen has. The Republican Party decided against making a recommendation in the race, a decision Allen said reflects his moderate views on social issues. Allen, like Snyder, supports domestic partner benefits for city employees, for example.
Allen was appointed in December 2007 to the District 2 seat vacated by Mary Verner when she became mayor. When he got the job, Allen said he likely wouldn’t run when the term ended. But earlier this year, he said he liked the work so much that he gave up his job as Eastern Washington University’s corporate and foundation relations director to focus on city duties and running for election.
Last year, Allen was one of two council members who voted against a contract with the city’s largest employee union. He said the city couldn’t afford 5 percent annual pay increases called for in the agreement. This summer he voted to support Verner’s plan to address an expected $7 million 2010 deficit. That strategy includes closing half the shortfall by securing concessions from labor unions representing city workers.
Snyder said he would have voted in favor of the labor contract last year but approves of Verner’s budget strategy. “She has the credibility with the unions to be the lead negotiator on the labor contracts and get them to produce the concessions when we need them,” Snyder said.
In May, Allen voted for Verner’s Sustainability Plan for reducing the city’s negative effect on climate change after inserting language stressing that the council was accepting a report, not adopting the measures.
Snyder said Allen’s insertion indicates he was trying to placate critics of the plan – some of whom cited the United Nations in their opposition.
“I will listen to the U.N. folks and then I will see that what they’re saying is ridiculous and move on and try to prepare the city for the future,” Snyder said.
Allen said he “listens very carefully to everyone’s input,” and that he inserted the language to make sure everyone understood that the plan was full of recommendations, not changes in law or city funding.
The addition was a signal to supporters “that they need to stay engaged,” Allen said.
While environmental and labor issues have surfaced in the contest, questions on development have caused the most passionate debate between the candidates.
In conversations about the Southgate big-box controversy, Allen points to efforts made to win concessions from developers and said the final agreement approved by the city ensures quality design, protects the neighborhood from problems with storm water and mandates that developers will help pay for traffic upgrades and a community plaza.
“The neighborhood was more involved during that six months leading up to the discussion of what was going to happen with Southgate than probably any other neighborhood potentially ever had,” he said.
But Snyder, the publisher of Out There Monthly, argues the city’s so-called “charettes” – planning negotiations held last year among city officials, neighbors and developers – was little more than window dressing to development that will change the character of Southgate for the worse.
“The neighborhood was promised a full planning process and what they got was a couple-day charette and then they got the rug pulled out from under them,” Snyder said. “I don’t know how we can look at this as a positive for Spokane.”
Snyder, who remodeled the former Cowley School into a three-unit apartment building where he and his family live, said he often shopped at Ace Hardware on Regal Street during construction and worries the business will be hurt by new big-box stores.
“I don’t know how you can go in there and tell them that we’re going to allow three 100,000-square-foot-plus big-box stores … and say, ‘Hey, we’re going to favor these new out-of-town big-box stores.’ ”
But Allen questioned why the city would protect Ace from competition when the city didn’t protect Miller’s Hardware – a longtime neighborhood institution – from competition from Ace.
Snyder said the new stores at Southgate “suck the lifeblood” out of neighborhood centers like South Perry and Manito Shopping Center.
“Those types of neighborhoods don’t get a chance when this kind of development happens,” Snyder said. The City Council is “reacting and not leading on these sorts of development issues.”
Allen said he strongly supports efforts to improve commerce in the smaller business districts but that barring construction of big-box stores in Southgate would have pushed developers and their tax dollars elsewhere – causing even more sprawl.
“Just saying no, I don’t think, was part of the solution,” Allen said. “I try to find solutions that are business friendly, yet still add services and help our community and neighborhoods.”
Trio charged in Bonner County homicide 
Enter to win tickets to see Adam Carolla at the Knitting Factory 
WSU Text-to-Win Contest 
EWU Text-to-Win Contest 
Rifleman__Dodd on October 16 at 12:32 a.m.
Snyder is somewhat clueless. Just review some of the debates.
Where as Allen is educated, erudite and quit his job to perform his council duties.
jonbsnyder on October 16 at 9:20 a.m.
Mr. Brunt did a fine job reporting but I have two corrections: My family and I live in a triplex apartment building not a duplex. The hardware store we used throughout our remodel was Miller’s not Ace. Throughout my campaign I have mentioned Miller’s and I misspoke during one of my interview’s with Mr. Brunt and mentioned Ace instead. Ace on Regal had not yet opened when we were doing our remodel in early 2002. We had a great experience with Miller’s when we needed hardware during our remodel project. My apologies for any confusion.
jsinisterra on October 16 at 9:32 a.m.
I have reviewed the debates and Snyder is the most informed, well-versed candidate on all of the issues. He does not waffle, he does not placate to whomever happens to be in the audience, he is direct, clear and thoughtful.
Jon Snyder makes the time to listen to all of his constituents, as evidenced by his campaign, and makes informed decisions. He will provide leadership for Spokane, not ambiguity.
Citizen on October 16 at 11:52 a.m.
Jon Snyder’s campaign is grass roots with very many volunteers and many small contributions. His opponent is financed by a few developers that well may need variances from the City Council at some time over the next four years. That alone speaks volumes.
He has impressed me with his deep understanding of the issues. He has been working with these issues in the neighborhoods and with the business community for the past six years and it shows.
Snyder runs several, successful small businesses, where he has to exercise fiscal restraint every month in meeting his payrolls. He knows what it is like owning a business in Spokane and what the business community needs.
The appointment of Michael Allen was seemed to be orchestrated at the time by Al French, put forward by Nancy McLaughlin, and voted upon by Steve Corker, none of whom are in District 2. Outgoing Councilman Brad Stark also voted for that appointment, although he said earlier that he would not cast a vote. Stark had already been voted out of office, and this was just before the new Councilman Richard Rush could be seated. None of that smelled right, especially since Allen had shown no interest or participation in the issues of the neighborhoods or the workings of the city, until his appointment.
Doesn’t District 2 deserve to choose and elect its own representative? He is the only candidate that has credibility with both the neighborhoods and the business community. Jon Snyder has my vote.
stephina on October 16 at 1:35 p.m.
It’s about time we had someone who isn’t afraid to call it like it is—a champion for the small business owners who have taken a hit in this town since the big-box stores came to town.
There’s a reason Jon Snyder uses the term “sucking the lifeblood” out of places like Manito shopping center. It’s because it’s true.
I’m looking forward to voting for Jon Snyder this election!
Verbal on October 16 at 1:41 p.m.
I’ve also listened and seen several debates between these two. The South Hill is lucky to have these two candidates to choose from.
Of the two, Mike Allen is the better candidate. He has smarts, and he has experience that Jon just doesn’t have. Mike’s overriding goal, as he’s stated, is to implement more fiscal responsibility, and transparency from our city government. He also stated that he will work to improve the efficiency of city government to avoid raising taxes.
After all of the debates I’ve attended and heard, I’m still not sure what Jon would do in the council. He has grand visions (mixed-use, pedestrian friendly clusters around town), but even when he’s questioned on the specifics of that, he has no answer.
During the pre-primary debates, Jon stated several times that Mike as done a great job as councilman. Seems that the heat of the campaign has compromised that bit of impartiality.
I also like that Mike Allen is an independent and isn’t so far left or right (which it seems you have to be these days in order to get consideration from either party (with all the big money and organizational infrastructure that comes with it)).
Mike won’t be in a position where he must choose between party ideology and what best for the city.
Some might call Jon’s campaign “grass roots”, but it could more accurately be described as the Democratic Party Donor list. “Grass roots” implies many people from both sides of the political spectrum. Jon does not have that.
Rifleman__Dodd on October 16 at 5:16 p.m.
jsinisterra
“I have reviewed the debates and Snyder is the most informed, well-versed candidate on all of the issues.”
Jon Snyder
“… I misspoke during one of my interview’s with Mr. Brunt and mentioned Ace instead. Ace on Regal had not yet opened when we were doing our remodel in early 2002. My apologies for any confusion.”
jsinsterra should have read Snyders posting prior to commenting. a “Well versed candidate” would NOT make so simple a faux pax and admits to being confused.
Spok on October 17 at 11:34 a.m.
It is great having a candidate that know the issues as well as Jon Snyder does. I am impressed with his knowledge and vision for solutions. He has a proven ability to complete large projects and REALLY LISTEN to people. Snyder is the best possible choice.
Lindy on October 18 at 7:33 p.m.
RiflemanDodd - So…….am I to discern from your comment above that Jon Snyder does not possess the qualifications of a good councilman because he misspoke concerning concerning the hardware store he used on a remodel? Pretty weak argument I’d say……..looks like the “rifleman” is shootin’ blanks.
Spokanechick73 on October 19 at 4:31 p.m.
Originally posted in response to the article on the debate between Mr. Allen and Mr. Snyder. Re-posted below by request.
Spokanechick73 on October 16 at 1:04 p.m.
I was undecided about which of these 2 candidates best deserves my vote in the upcoming election until I watched the debates last night. Thank you, Mike Allen, for making the decision so easy for me. Listening to Mr. Snyder’s attempts to carefully phrase his answers in a way that would not convey any opinion, distinct leaning, or even a credible grasp on the topic in question was a exasperating. I have no concern about political party endorsements or affiliations - and it appears that Mr. Allen isn’t one to cling to party lines either which goes a long way toward making decisions that are not dependant on a specific partisan agenda. With the challenging times we face going forward, I feel a lot better about lending my support to someone who “gets it” and isn’t afraid of communicating his thoughts and ideas to the citizens he intends to continue serving.
10/19/09 ** I would like to propose the following for additional consideration : Electing an individual who does not appear to be prepared to take on the extensive amount of research required to participate on the City Council effectively, would be counterproductive to say the least. Having an open mind to fresh new experimental forms of making policy and interpreting the intent of legislation, as well as the use of popular phrases and buzzwords may be entertaining - but I don’t think the City Council exists to entertain us.
Spok on October 22 at 1:53 p.m.
I have listened to several of the forums live and on TV, I am impressed by how clearly Jon Snyder takes a position and articulates his reasons.
His opponent is trying so hard to not take any positions that it is hard to tell what he stands for, other than voting with French and McLaughlin,who APPOINTED him.
I will be happy when this election season is over and Snyder can join the council and help move us forward.
Schrauf on October 22 at 9:49 p.m.
“Rifleman” on 10/16 at 5:16 - Really? That is the best you have? If so you must think quite highly of Jon Snyder. Thank you for supporting positive change!
Verbal on October 22 at 10:43 p.m.
Wow Spok- You must be having a mind-meld with Snyder because there are many folks who can’t tell what he stands for except ethereal things that would be next to impossible to put into practice. That’s why he doesn’t answer when questioned on details (or just refuses to answer the question that was asked - maybe he learned debating techniques from watching Sarah Palin last year).
Allen isn’t the arch-conservative boogeyman Snyder supporters are desperate to make him out to be. Maybe they feel they have to because they’re afraid its the only way they can win. They cannot talk about any issues, because Snyder won’t take any concrete positions, as demonstrated in the article (and the debates) we’re all commenting on.
Spok on October 23 at 12:12 a.m.
You have that exactly backwards, Verbal. He tries so desperately to be a centrist, it is hard to tell where Allen stands on any issue.
No one could even tell where he was on I-1033 through this campaign. He was asked many times and evaded an answer every time. Eyman-Fagan were sure they had his support, until, much to their chagrin, he voted with a unanimous city council against I-1033 only a week or two ago. That is not leadership.
You wouldn’t happen to be a former city councilman and/or his campaign manager, would you? If so, I can understand why you are trying so hard. That silk purse really is just a sow’s ear.
Verbal on October 23 at 7:57 a.m.
LOL. I’m not either a city councilman (current or former) nor his campaign manager. I promise you. I speak for myself and the impressions I got from the debates and talking with Allen over the years.
Thanks for proving my point above, though. In order to get party backing, you have to prove yourself to be much further left or right than most people. Snyder has party backing. Allen doesn’t. The extremes seem to run the parties in this town. What’s wrong with being centrist, anyway?
I’ve never met Eyman (thank God) or Fagan, but I don’t believe they were pinning their hopes for 1033 passage on Allen’s endorsement. But again, you prove my point. Snyder supporters don’t talk about what their candidate will do, but spend their time trying to ‘define’ Allen.
BillBill on October 23 at 10:04 a.m.
Though the looking glass much? Verbal plays fast and loose with the spurious allegations, as he does exactly what he accuses others of doing.
JON SNYDER is a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE. He has successfully created and still runs three going-businesses. He was previously the VP of a $20 Million mail-order business.
He listens to people. He is collaborative. He is giving back to this community where he was raised. That is why both business and sustainability groups are supporting him.
Additionally JON SNYDER has the foresight to plan for our commuunity’s future, rather than be in constant reactive mode. He headed up the efforts to bring us from thin air to a vibrant KYRScommunity radio, and many other similar community-oriented projects.
JON SNYDER raised his money for this campaign locally without the Westsider special interest groups that are trying to control and influence the outcome of our local elections.
Verbal on October 26 at 9:56 p.m.
BillBill, “Fast and loose”? I beg to differ.
If you know specifically what Mr. Snyder would do regarding the planning of Spokane’s future, please let us know. He seems to go out of his way to avoid any questions regarding specifics.
Wow! What three businesses is he currently running? Because by “running”, I’m assuming you mean day-to-day operations. Will he have time to be a councilman, too? That’s certainly a lot of responsibility - running three businesses AND going to all the meetings required of a city counciman. What was that mail order business, anyway?
If you look at the PDC, plenty of Mr. Snyder’s campaign contributions come from the west side of the state. If you are talking about the Independent Expenditures for Mr. Allen, I suggest you first look up the RCW which defines “Independent Expenditures” before you make your own “spurious allegations”.
Some looking glass you’ve got there, BillBill. :)