PODCAST: Armed man causes lockdowns; purse snatcher; Jack Mayne & more

Here’s episode #77 of our SoKing News Podcast Weekly Recap, which is sponsored by a generous grant from J-Lab’s Encore Media Entrepreneurs program, supported with funding from the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation, and the Nicholas B. Ottaway Foundation:

SoKing News Weekly Recap for Dec. 2-5, 2016: Armed man on Burien rooftop causes lockdowns; Normandy Park purse snatcher caught on video; Highline Public Schools receives grant to increase graduation rates; Port revises airport tree removal proposal; Jack Mayne on what SeaTac can and can’t do to help displaced mobile home residents; ‘The Final Take’ and more… (click the ‘Play’ button below to view podcast):

Please share this Podcast – just press the Menu button above and elect ‘Share’! You can also subscribe, hear previous episodes and rate us on iTunes here!


3 Responses to “PODCAST: Armed man causes lockdowns; purse snatcher; Jack Mayne & more”
  1. Vicki Lockwood says:

    Jack Mayne is correct regarding the Firs Mobile Home Park. Mia Gregerson has been nothing more than an agitator in their situation. She has done nothing constructively to help these people. She is following in the footsteps of Seattle Councilmember Sawant who also does nothing to solve problems but excels at organizing and sensationalizing disruptive protests. Ms. Gregerson has the title and responsibility to represent her constituents at the State Level and she should be exercising her energy at the State Level if she wishes to help people in adverse situations that are dictated by state law.

    Ms. Gregerson, agitators are destroyers … leaders are builders. Which do you you choose to be?

    There has been no legal transgressions that occurred at the Firs. The residents there all knew when they bought their homes that they did not own the land that their home sat on, and every year they willfully signed a one-year lease for the property. Why should they feel entitled to the same rights that someone has when that person purhases the property that their home sits on? They should not. They are not victims of any clandestine business dealing. They entered in to contracts that were clearly written and those contracts have been fulfilled. They have received what they were entitled to … the use of the land for the duration of their lease. End of story.

    I am personally sorry that the residents of the Firs will need to move, but their situation is a result of a choice they made. We must all accept responsibility for the choices we make.

    The only bad actor in this situation that I see is Ms. Gregerson’s divisive stirring of the pot.

  2. Scott Schaefer says:

    Comment from Sen. Karen Keiser:

    Both I and Rep. Gregerson recently participated in a meeting of the Firs residents and the Seattle Tenants Union, and we are all looking for a few options. Personally, I am very unhappy at the current unfair situation, and will work to ensure that if the park owner refuses our overtures to negotiate a better outcome for the Firs residents, that we maximize state assistance to the families. For normal mobile home park closures, the state Department of Commerce manages the program that provides relocation assistance that amounts to around $7,000-$12,000 per family. We have also contacted the King County Housing Authority but have so far not come up with an option that keeps the entire community at Firs Mobile Home Park together. This is an awful, frustrating situation and I appreciate you writing about it to inform our community!

    Senator Karen Keiser
    33rd District of Washington

  3. Vicki Lockwood says:

    Representatives Keiser and Gregerson believe that you should pay to keep the entire community at Firs Mobile Home Park together?????

    People who purchase a residence at greatly discounted price because of the precarious situation of owning a residence that sits on property they didn’t own assume the risk when they make such a purchase. It is virtually impossible to get a commercial loan to purchase such residences because the lender understands that the home becomes worthless should the landowner decide to not renew the land use agreement. The purchaser of such a residence assumes the risk of future eviction when they purchase such discounted residences. The situation these people are in today is not a fault of citizens who scrimped and saved their money and bought the land that their homes sit on. The latter group paid a premium NOT to be in such a precarious situation with their housing. Those who chose to take the rist must now assume the cost of their choice. .