Some bits of business…
Future Agendas
I’ll be posting the Future Agendas report for a while, as it’s 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. But until we develop a genuine calendar (like other cities already have), this can be useful.
City Manager Stuff
Despite Interim City Manager George’s obsession with ‘sports’ (actually, I’m always pleasantly surprised to see anyone under the age of AARP mention The Masters 🙂 ) they are often filled with very useful information–and this one even more so. In fact, too many to re-state here. But these are two items I’ll be referencing in this article:
- The Redondo Fishing Pier Replacement Project, for which the Council voted all that Bond Money last year, received one bid, and that bid is $5.5 million over expectations. That is not a typo, or ‘inflation’. It’s 112 percent over expectations. And to their credit, our engineers usually get these things within 10%.
- The Senior Activity Center is scheduled to re-open on May 1st. Apparently all the construction is complete, but restoration (carpets, etc.) is still in process. I am cautiously optimistic, but restoration work often takes longer than expected–as anyone who has dealt with water damage knows.
City Manager’s Report April 12, 2024
South End Transit
If you live in the south end please look at the South Link Connections Mobility Project which will “…address changing mobility needs and improve travel options for communities in South King County.” Blah, blah, blah. 😀 Basically, we need better east-west connectivity in the south end of town. If you live near 216th, you can take the 635 Shuttle from the Marina to the main Bus lines and the Light Rail. There is nothing equivalent for the rest of Des Moines–Kent Des Moines, 240th or 272nd. And there oughta be–especially with the upcoming Highline Light Rail Station.
- Take a survey about your transit needs – survey deadline is May 10th.
- Plan to attend one of three upcoming Virtual Community Engagement Sessions on:
- Apply to join the Mobility Board (a paid leadership opportunity) by May 10th and advise Metro on community engagement efforts and the best ways to update our transit network.
This Week
Tuesday Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) The main item of interest for us is their Land Stewardship Plan And Tree Replacement Standards, which sound nice in theory, but which is practice, will provide very little actual benefit to us. And on a somewhat topical note (and to give you a sense of scale between thems and us) their CEO will be getting this in his pay envelope starting next week. Schweet.
Last Week
Thursday: Regional Transit Committee briefing
I joined this ‘thing’, which contributes to planning and funding for King County Metro, to address the items I mention above in the mobility study. It’s a tough challenge for Des Moines, not only because we’re competing with so many other jurisdictions, but also because, as a small city, we have so little voting authority relative to either King County or Seattle. For example, on this committee, King County gets 50% of the power, Seattle gets 25% and the other 38 cities in King County get the other 25%. Woo hoo!
Thursday April 11, 2024 5:00pm Environment Committee (Agenda)
There were updates to the Comprehensive Plan (which has a detailed Environment Section) and, in a welcome bit of news, now references the airport and the Sea-Tac Airport Round Table. Pretty vague, but… wait for it… it’s a StART! 😀
There was an update on relevant capital projects, including Massey Creek and the Beach Park, which will need to be de-armoured. As I joked, if you can label any project ‘salmon-adjacent’ apparently you can get it funded.
And there was an update on our agreement with Suburban Sewer. This is of particular interest to me because many people in North Hill are still on (very old) septic systems and I would really like us to find ways to get everyone onto the grid.
In the mean time, there are rebates and grants from King County to most Des Moines homeowners on septic, including those of you in the Lakehaven and Midway districts.
Thursday April 11, 2024 City Council Meeting
(Agenda) Recap below…
April 11 City Council Meeting Recap
(Agenda)
Public Comment
There were nine public comments on a wide variety of topics. But beneath the surface, most referenced ‘the budget’… which is to say, the proposed ballot initiative.
A group of people from the Defenders Of Highline Forest showed up to push for increasing tree canopy in Des Moines. They mentioned the Green Cities Des Moines.
The Defenders (no, not these guys) began life to prevent the Port of Seattle from taking over portions of North Sea-Tac Park. Since then, they have expanded their mission to include protecting and enhancing tree canopy around the entire airport–including Des Moines, which has seen some of the worst tree cutting. I support that mission as that was the original intent of the Sea-Tac Communities Plan of 1976–which created NSTP. Imagine if all the areas around 216th had been converted to similar park land and forest–instead of industrial parks and asphalt?There was a very passionate demand for improved communications, while praising my colleagues. This has not been an isolated case, but I do find it ironic given that those same colleagues fought tooth and nail against it for years. Obviously, all of us are partisan to one degree or another–even at the City level. But if you want to make progress on issues, you can either try to work with people that actually agree with you, or… 😀
One commenter was extremely upset about a recent incident of street racing in Redondo. I remember the vote for that ordinance very well because the lengthy discussion exposed a glaring flaw in the law–namely that the burden of proof to arrest people would be crazy high in a scenario like Redondo.
I would liken the speed racing ordinance to our previous fireworks ordinance. That one had a super-high fine ($503!), which made us look ‘tough on crime!’. But it was, for all intents and purposes an unenforceable Dud (see what I did there? 😀 ) And that is why I pushed so hard for the recent change to make it easier for the police to actually write tickets!
Similarly, the street racing law was not designed to be effective in a tight environment like Redondo. The Council voted to do ‘something’ (and I include myself in this.) But doing that ‘something’ created unrealistic expectations that cannot be met. Perhaps the speed cameras will help. But in my view the long term solution has always been to increase the number of police available to patrol and to respond to events in Redondo more quickly. And that is why I have consistently supported providing the staffing necessary to meet residents’ expectations.
On rare occasions I find myself struggling to maintain good humour during public comment. We have failed to acknowledge that our government has not been running super great for a while. And the proof? All the disparate comments were really about the same thing (We don’t have the money, Lucy!) If the City had been functioning properly, there would not be quite so many pent up (and almost existential) complaints. Everyone has my empathy. It’s why I ran for office and have conducted myself as I have. I felt that a real change was necessary.
Currently, we don’t have the money to provide the policing, the environmental improvements, the communications, the roads, the restaurants, the nothing, people assume is somehow ‘right around the corner!’ And these are all programs we desperately need. We need to fix the core problem: the money.
My near term goals are to get the City to reform from the finance up. To paraphrase another Fictional Cuban Titan of Finance, “first you get the the money, then you get the power, then you get the communications director.” 😀
I’m asking people to trust that this is not some line to blow people off. If we can improve the management, we’ll get there. But we gotta stop kicking that work down the road in order to get the instant gratification.
City Manager Report
Legislative Update
We had a recap from our lobbyist and what happened in Olympia this year and what to expect next year. I took note of the fact that there were 1,200 bills submitted.
The key legislative win for the session was SB5955, the ‘Port Package Update’ bill; the first productive legislation on community airport issues in almost two decades. Because we had senior leadership on both sides of the legislature, we were able to get it passed. When Rep. Orwalls’ version stalled in the House? Senator Keiser’s version moved forward. I especially want to thank Senator Keiser for overcoming major obstacles, both from the Port of Seattle (and her colleagues) to get it over the line.
Automated traffic safety camera program update
The State legislature passed a rewrite of the law authorising speed and school zone cameras. There was a presentation from the City Attorney Matt Hutchins to explain the revised ordinance. The upshot is that we were rushing to get the ordinance done to get it reviewed and approved by the State ASAP so as to not have any break in coverage.
But there was a tiny detail I commented on which was not mentioned and should have been. The new law creates opportunities for three new speed cameras, based on a safety (not ‘speed’) analysis. Important detail! This opens up a lot of great possibilities for us.
New/Old Business
City manager recruitment
There were several glitches with the microphones, causing long echo, Echo, ECHOES! Like talking into Grand Canyon, Canyon, Canyon… 😀 As a former entertainer, I was not quite as tickled by this as some, because the net effect of having multiple ‘breaks’ ended up cutting into time time that was much needed for other items. Cleansing breath… 🙂
We were asked to choose a salary range to put on the job application for City Manager. The Council voted 6-1 to allow for a salary range from 218k to 276k.
I abstained, which counts as a ‘no’ in the record. Basically, I thought the salary floor was too high. I was not convinced that there is a strong correlation between salary and candidate quality. And–as unpopular as it may sound, this is one area I do not believe we can get a good read on outside of Executive Session. I don’t believe in ‘population’ is a good comparable–because our cities are all reaaaaaaally different. I know that sounds condescending, but I just passed the 1,000 mark in public meetings. Not. Kidding. Between the State, County, and various cities and school boards (including Des Moines) I’ve sat through over 1,000 meetings of elected government. I dunno if that merits a set of steak knives, or a prescription of some kind, but I’ve attended more different varietals of local government than most people.
We started this salary arms race through some fairly lavish (and automatic) salary increases and a special severance package. As you can see in the above video, our current Mayor was, if anything, the biggest proponent of that policy.
So now we have some of the highest salaries in the area. And a city our size has no business having some of the highest salaries in the area. It sent the wrong message–especially now when we’re trying to convince voters to give us more money.
And the awkward part: How do we say this to our staff (or the recruiter consultant)? Now that the horse has left the proverbial barn, how do we tell anyone that Des Moines is such a great place to work that we shouldn’t need to pay a ‘premium’. That used to be one of our selling points: we were a great city to work in.
And again, I am not sure the salary premium correlates with stunning performance. At the risk of rehashing, that was not the case last time.
I concluded by saying that, if after we see the candidates, we’re not absolutely thrilled, we should have the courage to to re-start the process, rather than do what we did in 2016–hire the fourth in line.
Property tax levy lid lift (2nd reading.)
And in a fairly unusual move, there will be a third reading after this, to continue making improvements on the ordinance. I have asked for what I consider to be meaningful tweaks, but given that the meeting was so rushed, there was no time to raise them. I hate, Hate, HATE that hard stop we have. Some meetings require more time.
Comprehensive Marina Master Plan Update
This was also cut for time and re-scheduled for the April 25 meeting. I continue to be deeply concerned and will likely vote no unless it is updated significantly for several reasons.
- It makes a major change to the task list, but without offering a budget or a timeline. And a budget without a timeline is just a wish list. And given the recent notice that the costs at Redondo Fishing Pier are so massive, this becomes even more important.
- That change is elevating the Dry Stack/Boat Launch re-build to Tier 1 (near-term), where it always should have been. A modern marina without a boat launch or dry stack is not a modern marina. And also, anyone who has visited a modern dry stack facility knows that they are major revenue sources. The one number I hope people will pay attention to in this plan: 1/sup>$1,200,000–the annual revenue from a dry stack system.
- Although it focuses on boating, which is great, it is not integrated into the rest of the Marina. For example, it makes no mention of the current Steps project or the 223rd Green Streets project. If it’s a ‘master plan’ it must include the entirety of the Marina floor, from Beach Park to 227th.
- And last (for now) we basically blew our wad on borrowing with the Marina Steps. If I had a magic wand, I would pull back on that, and reconsider this Master Plan, which now provisions for Dry Stack and the required negative lift boat launch. Again: without financing, I’m struggling.
In short, we need a real Marina Master Plan. One that tracks with the o/g plan from 2007 and considers the entire space. I do not understand the rush to do this. The City should be bringing forward the necessary permits to start working on the docks and do nothing else for now. Instead, we should be planning on another community meeting to discuss the changes this new plan represents–including the revenue opportunities of Dry Stack and the strategies we’re considering to pay for everything else.
Because it’s so large, I broke out the plan from the rest of the agenda: 2024 Des Moines Marina Master Plan
1See page 74.
How can the city managers salary range be justified? The govenor makes $198,257 a year. With the projected salary range how can you justify a city of our size making anywhere from $20 -$77 K more?
Redondo Pier – One bid 5.5M more than estimates. Umm someone got some explaining to do. Suppose you will hit taxpayers for the difference. Someone should be fired!
I am not saying I agree, but the justification has to do with what HR people call ‘compression’. If one examines the salaries of the various department heads, they are closing in on $200,000 a year. The theory is that it would not do to have a City Manager who isn’t making 20% more than those people. And that puts the lowest possible salary at prox. $218,000.
As I wrote, we helped create this and I don’t know what I can do about it other than to vote ‘no’.