McGinn: reconsider ‘ready-aim-fire’ approach
Editor, The Times:
I am writing about Mayor Mike McGinn’s proposed reduction of 200 employees in the strategic adviser, manager and executive classifications [“McGinn postponing job cuts to boost employee morale,” NWMonday, Feb. 1].
While I am concerned about my own position, I am also concerned about my colleagues and the valuable work we all do on behalf of the city. The majority of these positions are not “political appointees” as the mayor contended in his campaign, but are civil service [positions], hired competitively or legitimately reclassified. We perform a variety of distinct jobs to maintain and enhance the level and quality of Seattle’s services and programs and to keep the city running. There are many important programs and services that will be impacted by these reductions.
In November 2009, the Seattle City Council passed a balanced budget for 2010. This budget reflected a great deal of careful deliberation and analysis by the council and included thoughtful citizen input. It funded the programs and the positions that supported them, which Mayor McGinn is now targeting for layoffs. With the mayor’s process, there will be no opportunity for the City Council or citizens to have input regarding programs and services that will be adversely impacted by these reductions.
Instead of these arbitrary politically motivated and potentially discriminatory reductions, I am requesting that the council encourage the mayor to reconsider his “ready-aim-fire” approach to a more reasoned and broad-based one — which includes a broad assessment of all programs and their associated priorities, costs and value to the city as part of the 2011/2012 budget process. This allows for appropriate input and guidance from the council and the citizens.
— Sandi Fukumoto, city strategic adviser, Seattle
Pandering to morale humorous
You gotta admire the new mayor’s sense of humor in postponing Seattle city government job cuts because employee morale was being affected.
After all, the new hiring the last guy did had no positive effect, Seattle now struggles to meet payroll. But instead of worrying about his responsibilities to the overtaxed and underrepresented taxpayers of Seattle, McGinn worries about the morale and self-esteem of high-paid city executives and consultants.
Maybe if we get him a fiddle now, he’ll be practiced up by the time the city is in flames and ruin.
— Les Iwamasa, Seattle
If we build it, jobs will come
We need to do more than create jobs to revive our economy; We need to create specific kinds of jobs, jobs that rebuild our aged infrastructure, which includes our national road system, changing our existing rail system to a high-speed system, completely rebuilding our electrical grid and repairing our bridges nationwide [“State will get $590 million to speed up rail,” page one, Jan. 28].
Such jobs could conceivably last a long time into the future because by the time the rebuilding is completed, the parts that were repaired first will be due for an update.
We need a nationwide change in our energy industries and we need to retool our thinking about these subjects — so that we don’t just do a repair job or an upgrade and then forget about it until crisis is at hand again. This will create an ongoing management structure that will be in place at all times.
Survival of our society should be enough of an incentive to justify its costs.
— Kevin O’Morrison, Edmonds
The ‘new’ New Deal
High-speed rail across America is our next New Deal. We can rebuild the infrastructure of our country while we redesign our passenger-rail system.
First, this creates an efficient rail system that moves people in excess of 200 mph on an elevated track that doesn’t interfere with current freight trains or automobile traffic.
Second, this creates green jobs and offers an environmentally friendly way to travel using Mag-Lev technology rather than fuel.
Third, this creates many new jobs. Through government contracts, a company like Boeing could build the fuselages for the high-speed rail trains, a company like Microsoft could run the software used on board, American steel companies can build the rails that it will run on, and a company like Starbucks can provide the beverages on board.
This project will require urban planners, engineers, operators, managers, IT professionals, manufacturers, customer service agents, construction workers and others.
Let’s move beyond commuter rail and offer a real alternative to airplane travel in the U.S. It’s time to move America into the 21st century of train travel!
— Greg Font, Shoreline
Plagued by current travel options
I hope the good people of Washington and Oregon are happy about the latest federal dollars meant to improve rail travel in the region.
I lived in Oregon a few years ago and while there I very much enjoyed visiting jewel cities such as Seattle and Portland. But I did not relish the difficulties involved in trying to travel by train and then feeling bad about — too often — resorting to the car and dealing with the traffic and other problems that plague so much of I-5.
Better rail travel experiences might not only benefit Pacific Northwest residents but also those of us in the rest of the country who would love to see your cities, forests and coasts from the clean, well-lit seat of a swiftly moving, on-time train.
— Mary Stanik, Minneapolis