Seattle Commons — The Case For

Why this is a win for Dan Strauss (D6 — Ballard, Fremont, Phinney Ridge)

city council
The Win

You're already on the Lid I-5 coalition. The Commons is the same logic applied to an existing building: a large civic space investment that makes Seattle more livable, more connected, and more itself. The difference is that the Arch is already built — the only question is whether it serves the public or sits empty.

Your district doesn't have a direct geographic stake, but you've demonstrated that you vote on civic infrastructure for the city, not just your neighborhood. That's the posture the Commons needs: a Council member willing to make the affirmative case that Seattle should own civic space in the heart of downtown.

Ask Your AI

Copy this prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, or any AI assistant.

I want to analyze this proposal from the perspective of Dan Strauss (D6 — Ballard, Fremont, Phinney Ridge). There's a civic proposal to convert the WSCC Arch building at 7th & Pike into a year-round public commons operated by Seattle Center. The case being made to Dan Strauss (D6 — Ballard, Fremont, Phinney Ridge): You're already on the Lid I-5 coalition. The Commons is the same logic applied to an existing building: a large civic space investment that makes Seattle more livable, more connected, and more itself. The difference is that the Arch is already built — the only question is whether it serves the public or sits empty. The full proposal: https://commons.conventioncityseattle.com What are the strongest arguments for and against, from Dan Strauss (D6 — Ballard, Fremont, Phinney Ridge)'s perspective?
Read the evidence
The civic infrastructure case → The fiscal responsibility case →