Last night chrisz and I went to the Recording Academy's Music Community City Council Candidates Forum at Neumo's (were you there? I didn't see you!). First of all it was such an awesome education in the idea that political forum doesn't have to mean a handful of frumpy oldsters drinking coffee and eating cookies in a church basement. It can mean beer & smokey clubs & DJs. Dear Political Leaders: If you are so sincere about wanting more younger people participating in "the process," why don't you take "the process" out of "the basement" more often? Drop me a line and we'll talk about it.

Anyway. So the point was for city council candidates (incumbents and challengers alike-- I'll give you a full line-up of who's running for which seat after the jump) to prove to the artists, producers, and consumers of local music that they are with us, not against us. There were three panelists-- Josh Feit, Kate Becker, and Glenn Lorbecki-- who each had one question for all ten candidates to answer. I was super proud of the candidates because most of them held out from abject campaigning all the way until the second question. Ahem.

The basic problem for the music industry in Seattle can, it seems, be broken down thusly: the awesome culture of Seattle has grown the city and made it too expensive for the creators of said culture to live and do business here... plus the city only figured out five minutes ago how much money music brings to the economy-- it's on par with stuff, like tourism, that the city doesn't think twice about subsidizing (or "incentivizing," if you like Policy Speak. Eeeeew). The basic problem in this forum was that there really wasn't a whole lot said that made any one candidate stand out that much. They all support music, culture, small businesses, affordable housing. A number of candidates had a plan or two in mind (get yer skivvies out o' yer rear; I'll get to the specifics in a minute), but no one truly said "Not only will I vote for this legislation, but I'll be the one to propose it."

Now for the highlights. This gets pretty long, 'cause it's 10 candidates... but consider bookmarking this page. It might be pretty useful to you in about a month.

Linda Averill: Candidate for Position #4. Linda is such a socialist. Right away she was talking about rent control, raising the minimum wage, and subsidizing venues to lower the price of concert tickets.

Angel Bolanos: Candidate for Position #4. If anyone is tired of corporate welfare, it is this man. Very strong supporter of small business, but not so strong on understanding the nitty-gritty of taxing and funding. Not a complete barrier to election-- just keep him away from budget committees.

Richard Conlin: Incumbent, Position #2. Most commonly uttered phrase: "That's something we need to look at more closely." Some might cry Process Paralysis, but informed decisionmaking is charming, don't you think? Conlin had actual real answers for how all the subsidies and work-live housing for artists could be funded-- through the real estate excise tax, changing the business & operations tax rates for venues, and "trusting the voters" to pass a levy to support the arts similar to the levies we've passed to support libraries and parks. What do you know-- being informed might actually get some shit done!

Casey Corr: Candidate for Position #4. I get the feeling that music is not really a priority for him, but good for him for showing up (better than Paige Miller and Mike Thompson!). He really just wants the city to find a way to fix the Seattle Schools. Also he sort of said something about having an entertainment district, which I think is icky.

Jan Drago: Incumbent, Position #4. What had me screaming to myself in my head (okay, and a little bit to Chris also), was the revelation that permits to film a movie in Seattle cost $25, while it can cost thousands to permit a music festival-- and the fact that none of the candidate bothered to say that this needs to change... except for Jan. And then she went on to talk about her record as a council member. But still. She's using her good head.

Nick Licata: Incumbent, Position #6. It's so hard to even fake objectivity when I have such a hot steamy progressive urbanist crush on this man. He wants studio space for musicians right in City Hall, he wants money for outdoor music festivals to come out of mitigation funds (like, when the city lets a developer build fewer parking spaces than normal, the developer has to pay), low-interest loan funds to support small businesses, he's working on starting a mixed-use advisory committee... my heart, it flutters.

Darlene Madenwald: Candidate for Position #2. She seems like a lovely human being, and quite earnest, and I'm sure that if elected she would do everything she could to help small businesses. But she really should have done a little more research and known ahead of time that there's already a committee that advises the Mayor's Office of Film and Music... instead of proposing that one be created. Small business is more her thing than the music community, but props to Darlene for showing up.

Richard McIver: Incumbent, Position #8. When asked if he agreed or disagreed with the smoking ban initiative, Richard McIver held up his pack of Camels... that's my kind of man. Also my kind of man because he wants to expand the One Percent for Arts law to cover music, fund some live-work lofts for musicians, and look into having a Public Development Authority that would raise up some funds to support music (it's a PDA that's keeping the Pike Place Market afloat, by the way).

Dwight Pelz: Candidate for Position #8. Blame Dwight for this one-- it's his fault that the word "incentivize" got used last night. But it's because he wants to provide economic incentives to the local music industry, because it's the smart thing to do for such a big part of our economy. He's also in favor of mediating disputes (like, between clubs and neighbors) instead of always resorting to one more law. PS I'm really glad he's not running against Conlin anymore.

Robert Rosencrantz: Candidate for Postion #8. Robert-- despite The Stranger's habit of labeling him "landlord" and thus anti-tenant-- seems like a lovely, sincere human being who is committed to affordable housing. He also thinks broadband internet should be a public utility, and he is so right.

Paige Miller: Candidate for Position #2. She didn't show up, she doesn't have a website that I can find, and I've said plenty about her before.

Mike Thompson: Candidate for Position #8. What can I say? He wasn't there. At least he's got a website.

If you were there and got a different impression of things than I, please please comment. And if you're a candidate, and you think I'm totally misrepresenting your ideas, you are welcome and encouraged to defend yourself right here on the blog.