Meet In CommonNews

Local

Katie Wilson’s RV Ban Veto Survives!

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: The Stranger

On Thursday, the Seattle City Council officially declined to override Mayor Katie Wilson’s veto, killing the effective RV ban it passed last month. Bill sponsor Dan Strauss, who was very upset about the whole thing, garnered only five votes for the override, failing to meet the two-thirds threshold he needed to override a mayoral veto. Everyone saw this coming after Councilmember Rob Saka’s last-minute change of position on the ordinance last week. It puts an end to a bruising political fight between Wilson and Strauss, who is also the council’s budget chair. The vote ensures hundreds of homeless Seattleites who live in RVs and other large vehicles won’t have to enroll in a specialized permitting system to retain the right to park for 72 hours on city streets. Advocates said the proposed system—which would have only allowed people surveyed in a one-time census to obtain a permit—wouldn’t work for most RV residents who are transient and may lack other forms of paperwork.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at The Stranger

Featured places to meet in Seattle, WA

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

Cortina

Cortina 621 Union Street Seattle, WA, USA

¡Que Chimba!

¡Que Chimba! 9601 16th Avenue Southwest Seattle, WA, 98106 US

City guide for Seattle, WA

Community Poll

A study's methods should be available before its findings influence public policy.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

A $300 package lands at your door by mistake. Do you keep it?

A package containing expensive headphones arrives with your address but another person's name. The retailer says it has already replaced the order and does not ask you to return it.

If no one appears to lose, what still makes keeping it right or wrong?

Explore this quandary