Some bits of business…
Future Agendas is the closest thing the City currently has to a calendar of upcoming City Council topics. It’s not dynamic, ie. you have to click it every time you want to see a new version. And it’s not always accurate. But until we develop a genuine calendar, this can be very useful if there is a particular issue you don’t want to miss.
Important change: City Manager Caffrey has adopted a new format. Good news? Much more colourful! Bad news? Super short-term. However, thanks to moi, you can track each committee’s planning calendar here. 🙂
Call To Action: Port Packages!
The Governor’s proposed budget cuts the $1 million in funding that was secured last for fixing failed port packages, which were meant to insulate homes from airport noise but have deteriorated over time. Please mail key these legislators and let them know how important this funding is for our communities.
Call To Action: Save State Funding for Port Package Updates! – Sea-Tac Noise.Info
ADUs
Good article in Seattle Times on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). We’re redoing our zoning and building codes this year so if you’re interested, please let me know how we can help you make yours come true.
City Currents
There’s a new Spring 2025 City Currents Magazine. I collect the PDFs, which are easier for me to read, but also fun to look back at to see where the City has been.
City Manager Stuff
City Manager’s Report February 28, 2025
No recipe, but a reminder of the most excellent…
Indoor Tot Time!
This Week
Monday
SAO Audit Exit Conference. The State reports the results of its 2023 audit of our books.
Thursday
Finance Committee (Cancelled)

Wasn’t my idea. But you know I got yer back on some numbers, anyhoo. 🙂 February Sales Tax Report
I generally don’t follow month to month stuff like this, but if you haven’t seen it before, this is a good thing to browse to get a sense of the money we bring in from various businesses.
Public Safety Committee
Public Safety_Emergency Management Committee – 06 Mar 2025 – Agenda – Pdf No detail. But several items you should check out…
- Substation Closure
- BWC Upgrades And Grant
- 2023 Vs. 2024 Crime Statistics
- South King Fire 2024 Statistics
Study Session
Study Session – 06 Mar 2025 – Agenda – Pdf These are some biggee items and I have some (cough) concerns. 😀
Discussion on Developing a Strategic Plan. Examples from Other Cities
-
- Shoreline Vision 2029
- Bothell Road Map 2017-2018
- Cedar Park City Council Strategic Goals 2024-2026 Performance Dashboard
- Renton Business Plan 2024-2029 Goals
- Issaquah Strategic Plan 2024 Update & Performance Dashboard
- Richland Strategic Plan & Dashboard 2024-2026
- Sugar Land, TX Strategic Action Plan 2025-2027
Also, there’s this: none of these cities are much like Des Moines. Nor will we ever be. Why use them as our model?Finally, in 2023 we spent $75,000 on a Ccommunications Study which yielded nothing, but ‘looked like we were doing something’. A refreshing new strategy would be to ask for ‘return on investment’ statement before embarking on this. Frankly, I’m weary of doing things just to check off a box.
Discussion on City Council Committees and Appointive Committees.
This is really two discussions that should be separate.
-
- The end of Standing Council Committees in favour of a more ‘Burien’ style approach. Spoiler alert: I had no idea this was being proposed.
- Revisions to all the appointive (resident) committees
The packet lays out some valid problems with Current Council Committees: There is a ton of redundancy for both the Council and staff.
Recommended Changes to Council Committees:
- Modify the monthly Study Session (first Thursday) to begin at 5:00 PM. The first hour would act as a “Council of the Whole” where all Councilmembers receive staff reports on items typically handled by committees.
- Standing Council Committees would only meet when an issue requires more detailed discussion.
However, this can also be perceived as a power grab based on the never-ending theme “staff are over-worked!” That has gotten ooooooooooold. Not because it isn’t necessarily true, but rather because there has never been a way to quantify it. I’ve been hearing this since I started watching and no one ever lays out proof to demonstrate how changing would benefit the City. Sorry. Not sorry. But just giving people back a few hours is not the same thing.
Another downside is this: New Cms (and even not-so-new ones) are sometimes not exactly the most well-prepared people. And the City is so complicated, it’s not realistic to expect every elected to bone up on every area. Sorry. Not sorry. Committees give Cms a chance to ‘earn while you learn’ – to gain experience and specific expertise on various issues. As they say ‘practice makes perfect’. One ‘committee of the whole’ could end up with more ‘democracy’ from seven equally clueless people.
Appointive Committees
The City currently has seven citizen advisory committees, with plans to add two more (Airport Committee and Planning Commission). Again, there are valid problems: Infrequent meetings. Lack of agenda items. Unclear roles. Underutilization. Heavy staff workload. All true.
Recommended Changes:
- No changes to: Citizens Advisory Council, Civil Service Commission, Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, Police Advisory Committee
- Merge the Arts Commission, Human Services Advisory Board, and Senior Services Advisory Board into a new Community Enrichment Board. Existing members with unexpired terms would be offered positions on the new board.
Executive Session: Performance of a Public Employee RCW 42.30.110(1)(G) –30 Minutes
This is the second of a two-parter review of Ms. Caffrey’s first three months. Last week was 45 minutes of – I have no idea. But this one will be with Ms. Caffrey.
Last Week
Wednesday: StART (Agenda). The highlight was a report on the Port’s SIRRPP survey of Port Packages. As expected, it was a sham, claiming that none of the homes they tested seem to merit an update. Of course, they hand-picked 30 out of 9,400 for testing. Follow Sea-Tac Noise.Info (STNI) for coverage – and contact STNI, if you have bad sound insulation.
Thursday: Municipal Facilities Committee (cancelled)
Thursday: Economic Development – 27 Feb 2025 – Agenda
Economic Development Committee Meeting 02/27/2025
Highlights:
- Charm Factor. This is a beautify the downtown idea – it specifically mentions using decorative screens to cover ‘the Pit’ and the Des Moines Yacht Club boat storage on MVD and getting it done in time for FIFA 2026. Councilmember Nutting raised some concerns. In fact, he really went to town, so I urge you to watch just for that. 😀 We disagree on those reasons, but I too am concerned. His concerns seemed to be more about ‘money’. Fair point. Mine are more about strategy. We have this nasty tendency to promote trial ideas, which either waste a lot of money or turn into permanent features – whether they make sense or not. We use the plucky small town volunteerism as a substitute for doing something long term. Frankly, it’s the reason a trial project like the Quarterdeck can end up becoming the centrepiece of the entire waterfront. I am suspicious of anything ‘Let’s try something!’ because once it gets in? You ain’t never gettin’ rid of it.
- Woodmont Development. The City has received interest from a developer on the area that (in ancient times) was called ‘Rosie’s Diner’, but was last referred to as ‘Oh no, the drug rehab clinic!’. A primary reason I want the planning commission re-instated was to prevent that sort of blindsiding from recurring. In this case, I think the City will be able to daylight the developer’s proposal in a way the public will find acceptable, but it still puts the onus on one public hearing to obtain public engagement.
- Sound Code?: This topic was moved onto the next meeting. Call me what you will, but this indicated where the committee’s priorities are.
City Council Meeting Recap
Shortest. Meeting. Ever. 🙂 No public comment. No items of business beyond a short consent agenda. I picked the right meeting to telephone in sick. 🙂

Parenthetically, my first phone-in meeting was not a great experience, tech-wise. Ironically, I was able to Zoom in for the private Executive Session and that went great. Lesson learned? Let’s move City Council into the North Conference Room where all the plumbing works! 😀
City Council Regular Meeting – 27 Feb 2025 – Agenda Highlights:
City Manager presentation on Flag Triangle
- Apparently, we got no bites from the three expected bidders. But there is still time. Our DPW says he’s still aiming for a Memorial Day (May 26) completion and that the all-in cost will be $376k – a lot less than previously mentioned. I will not hold it against anyone if we don’t make that date and I’m still going with the previous estimate of $472k because:
- I love that can-do spirit (seriously)
- It’s local government. 🙂
Consent Agenda
There was an item to approve a grant to put a solar roof on the Senio… er… ‘Activity Center’. Woo hoo! If I had been IRL I would’ve put forward an item to see if we can’t redo the awning while we’re at it. The place was never ‘just’ the Senior Center. It’s the Des Moines Activity Center, not in name, but in terms of mission. It’s time to have that consistent brand throughout the City.
Executive Session
ES is supposed to be subject to the cone of silence. But again, again, the law requires us to mention the legal purpose. And whenever we do a ‘review of a public employee’ that means ‘City Manager’.
The following Executive Session was twice as long and it was the first of two evaluations of our new City Manager.
I said last week that I thought the review might be premature. Part of the reason is that the council does not have a unified view of what ‘success’ even means. I feel like we’re focusing too much on optics and not substance. For example, we’re doing two executive sessions just for her first three months. Woo hoo! But the second review, occurs the same night that Ms. Caffrey unveils two huge items (see above). Sure glad I have time to really take it all in!
The problem is this: the City Manager has a multi-layered fiduciary responsibility. She works for ‘the Council’ but she also works for ‘the City’. Those are the legal responsibilities and they are all about the present. But great leaders also represent ‘the future’, ie. not the people who live here now, but the people who will be here 10-15-20 years from now. That’s tricky. Shareholders… er… ‘voters’ only care about now. The law only cares about now. Councilmembers tend to only care about now. But the future is where the real opportunity happens.
Here’s the problem: the future doesn’t get a vote. I watched one previous city manager go on for years catering to the needs/wants/desires of councils that could not make up their minds. And another take exactly the opposite tack in order to manifest a grand vision we could not afford and that will be a boat anchor on the City for a decade.
At some point, any CEO has to establish their own destiny. Hopefully it is one that focuses on the people and businesses we want to be here for the future; because the people and businesses who do live here are not only not ‘enough’, time and again have chosen not to make room for that future.
Some bills passing through Olympia
As I wrote last week, this is lawmakin’ season in Olympia and there were/are a ton of bills that will affect us. Most of the goofy ones (redesigning the State flag) die the quick deaths they deserve, but many do not. And in the ones that affect us there is a recurring theme, which I keep bringing up: overspending. When the State was ‘flush’ (ie. last year?) it overspends. Then this year it’s cut, Cut, CUT! Sound familiar? 😀 What I object to is that it is cities which always seem to take it in the neck. And, ironically, it’s often the most ‘progressive’ lawmakers that are the worst in that regard. We’re given all kinds of mandates (most of which are great ideas, btw) but no money to pay for them. Or we’re offered the fabulous opportunity of taxing our residents without a vote in various ways. What we’re almost never offered is, you know, State money.
- HB1334 Almost every city, including Des Moines, officially supports giving City Councils the ability to raise property taxes up to 3% without a public vote. But don’t hate the playa, hate the game. Over time the State and County have reduced the amount of money they share with cities like Des Moines and keep more of it for their own needs and especially education. All worthy endeavours. However, as with housing, one could also see a system which kicks back more of existing State and County money to cities like Des Moines. But since that will never happen, cities like Des Moines are left to try anything they can to raise taxes — including this. Desperate times, and so on… Speaking as one person, I do not support these bills. I think most voters find anything like this (including the 2023 bonds) a bit sneaky. People like to have a vote. They like to be sold.
- SB5757 would take 50% of the speed camera revenue back to the State. Ouch. If this does not thrill you, click that link and comment. 🙂 Ironically, it was proposed by a Spokane representative whose city benefits from them. His objection – and he has support, is this: It’s a fugazi. All these automated speed enforcement cameras are supposed to be about ‘safety’ but they’re really about cash. He’s not wrong, of course. Every agency testifying against spoke about the hole it would cut in local budgets. No one spoke about how it would devastate public safety. We’ve had the Redondo cams for a year and frankly, if we knew this might be a possibility, I’m not sure we would have bent over backwards to installe them. It is about the money.
- SB7575 is one of two bills that would enable the City to increase our local sales tax .1 cent without a vote specifically for the purpose of increasing public safety. It also allows the County to add a similar tax. Normally, I would not be thrilled for the same reasons I always give: I try to avoid tax increases without giving voters a choice. But this one has a twist. If the law passes and we change our ordinance before the County does? They have to credit us back the amount with no out of pocket to you, the voter. 🙂
- HB1923 the Mosquito Fleet bill, ie. Passenger Ferries. In a win-win, the bill passed out of committee. But it was amended to remove the portion I objected to – ie. the possibility of dinky cities (like Des Moines) of creating their own ferry district. One of the speakers said, quite sensibly, he was getting a bit tired of offering cities more ways to tax themselves. Agreed! The thing I keep trying to say is this: Everyone wants a ferry. We never had to ‘sell’ anything. Let the people who actually need it, and can afford it, pay for it. When we’re ready, our great location will bring the ferry world to us.

The next ‘key date’ on all this is around March 12th when the Governor weighs in with his response to all these items. WA is somewhat unique in that we give the Guvernator a line-item veto. That power kinda acts as a check on legislation. Who wants to put in all the work to pass a bill the Governor can de-fang with a stroke of a pen?