Most Recent Article [more articles below]

Unfortunately, this is yet another one of those situations where the public tends to think, “I don’t care who’s right or wrong. I just want you to stop arguing!” But it matters. There has been a slow, drip, drip break down in the proper functioning of our government, by every Council, over the past 20 years. And now it’s become so bad that most people (including candidates and colleagues) honestly have no idea how things are supposed to work. They just assume that if we elect the ‘right’ people, good things will happen. Many of us cannot imagine that their friends, the very nice people we elect, also do not know how things are supposed to work. Or we don’t care.

As an informed voter, I urge you to read this carefully.

Mayor Mahoney,

I am in receipt of your 14 June letter. Your letter is timely because I was already preparing a letter to you regarding the troubling discussion at the end of the 9 June Transportation Committee Meeting you chaired. For your convenience, I attach a link to that video as well as transcript (generated by Youtube.)

Background

As you know, last November I asked the WSDOT communications consultant for a briefing on the SR-509 project, with an emphasis on Stage 2. I explained that I had watched the City of SeaTac receive several briefings on the planning. They informed me that they were happy to grant my request because they had tried engaging with the City of Des Moines and not been able to schedule something similar.

The meeting included several members of their team. We all completely understood that the meeting was strictly informational. The meeting concluded with them asking to present to our City Council as soon as convenient. I conveyed all this, especially their request to present to the full Council, both to last year’s Transportation Committee and to the full City Council. I heard absolutely no objections from our Transportation Committee or the full Council at that time.

The entire substance of the meeting was their showing me a ‘fly over’ animation of Stage 2. Their software allowed them to move back and forth at will along the project. They would stop at various points to discussed each section in detail. Portions of that animation are what the public now sees in their Open House video.

In December of 2021, I was informed by their consultant that he was moving onto other projects and introduced me to his successor. I was invited by both to continue our discussion and the new consultant expressed the same eagerness to present to our City Council.

Subsequently the new consultant offered me a preview of that Stage 2 video. I agreed to not comment on it publicly until it was officially released on May 23rd, which I did. However I was asked for my feedback, which I gave.

And that feedback was simply this: provide more detail on the section of greatest concern to Des Moines: 200th S. from 24th Ave. to the Blueberry Lane community and the connection to 188th and do it as soon as possible.

It may be simply an unfortunate coincidence, but the only area that is not shown in any detail on that video is exactly that stretch: from 24th Ave along 200th S. to the Blueberry Lane community and 188th. Oops.

The 9 June committee meeting

After the scheduled business of the Committee concluded, at 48:10 COO Dan Brewer begins an unscheduled discussion, accusing an unnamed ‘Councilmember’ (obviously me) of “providing comment and quasi direction” to WSDOT staff. Both he and DPW Andrew Merges strongly imply that I might have done something that might somehow jeopardise the City’s relationship with WSDOT, going all the way up to the Secretary of the Department of Transportation.

To mitigate this unspecified ‘damage’ and prevent any further problems, Dan Brewer states that he has already contacted WSDOT, in effect, warning them against speaking to me. He also engages in a side conversation with you and Deputy Mayor Buxton which leads to you saying you will initiate a follow-on call with ‘leadership’, ostensibly to decide on some form of further group action between the administration and the City Council against me.

DPW Andrew Merges implies that there are some delicate negotiations between the City and WSDOT (an RFP regarding the Barnes Creek Mitigation?) which could somehow be negatively impacted and stresses the importance of maintaining a ‘cordial’ relationship between the City and WSDOT.

You, the Deputy Mayor and staff all agree that ‘consistency’ is key. Deputy Mayor Buxton summarises the discussion by saying:

… if we receive questions it would be good to refer those for information to the city clerk so that whatever ends up going out into the public is approved by WSDOT’s public outreach teams.

And then COO Dan Brewer replies:

Or if you have questions those can be submitted to the WSDOT team direct or you can ask myself andrew or tommy and we can work with with the staff to get materials or whatever we need to answer questions on the project

There is then a one minute pause where Deputy Mayor Buxton attempts to find the link on the City web site to that Open House. COO Brewer finally guide her to the correct landing page.

Your letter of 14 June

By ‘reinsulation’ I assume you mean updates to Port Packages, a policy which the City of Des Moines has had on its legislative agenda since I first proposed the idea to Rep. Orwall and Sen. Keiser in 2019. If you recall, that became law in 2020 with the passage of HB2315.

I did indeed write to the Port Commission’s Aviation Committee concerning how to implement such a program–at the written suggestion of one of their fellow Commissioners in order to follow their protocols.

With all that said, your allegations sound quite serious, so of course I want to address them fully. To so I, may I receive answers to the following?

Who at WSDOT has expressed concerns?
What are their specific concerns?
How were they conveyed to the City of Des Moines?
And to whom?
What are the specific risks COO Brewer and DPW Merges mention in your 9 June conversation? I’m trying to understand: how does a Councilmember attending an information-only meeting (which any CM could also do) create difficulties for our City?
Who at the Port of Seattle has expressed concerns over any communications I may have had with my fellow electeds? What are their specific allegations? How were they conveyed? And to whom?
What is/are the specific policies, either in our Council Rules of Procedure or DMMC or RCW or anywhere else that I am supposed to have violated?
What is the specific policy, either in our Council Rules of Procedure or DMMC or employee handbook that describes the proper use of “city resources”, by which I assume you mean my desmoineswa.gov email address?
In the specific allegation re. the Port Commissioners, are you implying that an elected writing to another elected, on a subject that is a part of the City’s legislative agenda, must first obtain approval? If so, from what authority?
Why are you the messenger? Why now? And why did whoever has these concerns not express them to me directly in a timely manner?
What exact authority do you feel that you may have in judging the appropriateness of any of the items in your letter?
What exact authority do you feel that you may have in enforcing any of the items in your letter?

I am eager to get your responses to the above as quickly as possible so that I can address these serious concerns in the manner they deserve. Please do not delay.

My message to you

Switching gears, this in response to what I saw at the 9 June Transportation Meeting. If the situation were indeed as serious as COO Brewer indicated he, through the City Manager and City Attorney should have contacted me. Not you. Me.

Instead, apparently Dan and Andrew went directly to WSDOT to obstruct a legitimate request for information by an elected official and then misrepresented my conduct to your committee as “quasi-direction.”

Their action and that untrue characterisation are completely inappropriate and frankly I am surprised that people of such deep experience and expertise would not understand. Staff members have no business interfering with an elected in performing research and attempting to convince staff members in other agencies to avoid legitimate engagement is obstruction.

You and the Deputy Mayor then agree that you will have a private follow-on discussion with ‘leadership’, presumably to decide on some form of collective action against a fellow elected (me.)

That is also highly unethical for all concerned. I will remind you that you are one co-equal member of the legislative branch. Under Rule 5, your title as Mayor gives you no authority concerning the conduct of an elected colleague.

The administration had no business discussing the matter with you apart from me or attempting to influence my relationship(s) with others and you have no business attempting to intervene as if you have some authority over the Council or any of its individual members. You do not.

Further, your actions had nothing to do with the business of the Committee. No motion was made, no proper discussion occurred and no vote was taken approving any specific action, valid or otherwise. It was just “people talking” and then you deciding to “make a phone call”. That is not only invalid parliamentary procedure; it is not how ethical government works.

I therefore demand that you cease any such action immediately and for every participant of that meeting to disavow the entire discussion.

Because here’s the punchline. After all that nonsense, Dan Brewer negates all of it by telling you that you (members of the City Council) can indeed reach out to WSDOT directly if you have questions.

Which is exactly what I did.

Deputy Mayor Buxton’s struggle even to find the proper link to the SR-509 Open House speaks for itself concerning ‘outreach’ and ‘public engagement’. In addition to the above witch hunt, I object to these ongoing attacks because they prevent residents from receiving the information they also have a legitimate right to. May I remind you that your briefing on the SR-509 Open House’ comes less than two weeks before it closes on June 22nd?

As one of my colleagues, I would like to assure you that my conduct with WSDOT was not only appropriate, it was (and is) helping to do some things the City and WSDOT could be doing much better: maximising public engagement, and providing easy to access, thorough, and objective information about SR-509.

Everyone in your meeting room would be better served focusing on those activities. Because apart from everything else, this ongoing harassment is a colossal waste of time. For everyone.

With regard to ‘reinsulation’, my advice would be to refer to such programs as “Port Package Updates” or a “Second Chance program.” It is harder to sound sincere and credible on an issue our City claims to support if one does not know the correct term of art.

But as to your allegation, you are saying that a member of the City Council, using their City email address, to email fellow electeds, at the suggestion of one of their own body, to explore a policy opportunity endorsed by both Legislative Agendas, is an inappropriate use of “city resources”. You may wanna re-think that one as well, sir.

I urge you to stop. All this. None of it is supported by law, parliamentary procedure or best practice. But apart from small details like ‘right and wrong’, all the chronic stonewalling, bullying, intimidation and harassment have practical consequences. Far from preventing undefined ‘bad things’ from happening, they waste valuable City resources and lead to ongoing and unnecessary conflict and embarrassment.

Worst of all in my opinion, enabling all this ongoing misconduct sets a terrible example for both new colleagues and the next generation of candidates. Almost no one has the time necessary to make informed judgments. They assume that whatever they is somehow ‘normal’. Even when it’s not. For that reason alone I urge both you and all my colleagues to start setting a better example.

I am trying to handle this quietly so as to avoid public embarrassment for the City, but unlike all this “hearsay” I am more than happy to go as loud and as public as anyone likes because you are wrong. Not merely in terms of procedure, but basic decency.

And for any of our colleagues, and most importantly members of the public who have questions, I am always happy to respond to sincere inquiries with specific examples from MRSC, Jurassic Parliament and the Association of Washington Cities, from which I have earned their Certificate of Municipal Leadership. I am the only current member of our City Council to have done so and I look forward to having company soon. All their trainings are very useful.

—JC

History

Both the discussion at the end of that meeting and the Mayor’s letter promulgate a series of tired fibs which the administration and the majority have aggressively promoted since even before my election:

Electeds may only speak to electeds. Not true.
Electeds must ask for permission from City staff before speaking to any agency. Not true.
Electeds should obtain permission from the Council before performing almost any activity. Not true.
Electeds who speak to any of the above are automatically somehow ‘representing the City Council’. So not true.

None of these are true. They may be staff’s preference. They may be the majority’s preference. But they are not true. There is no law or rule against any of the above. And just because people keep repeating them, does not make them so.

And the biggest fib? “We’ve tried again and again to educate Councilmember Harris.”

Again, no one from the City contacted me. No one ever does. Both the majority and staff simply run around behind my back and try to spread all sorts of rubbish because it is inconvenient to have a Councilmember who disagrees with the administration’s policies. Obstruction via gaslighting.

The Mayor knows that I have not had a conversation with the City Manager since March 2020. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of phone calls I’ve received from any of my colleagues. And none of them had anything to do with (cough) ‘education’. Quite the contrary, I now have a list of over 100 questions I have submitted to the Administration which have gone unanswered. Mayor Mahoney has countered that with even more falsity. Saying that I am constantly ‘wasting staff time with ₂meaningless questions’.

This narrative of how so many people have patiently tried to ‘educate’ that obstreperous Councilmember Harris is beyond laughable.

We are, in fact, the only nearby City that has no mechanism to insure that Councilmembers get legitimate inquiries of any kind answered. (I shouldn’t say that. Many cities have no official mechanism because they don’t need it. It’s a social norm.)

The City Manager allows for no questioning during the meetings apart from his topics.
There is no open discussion as the Mayor indulged in at the end of the Transportation Committee Meeting.
And even when the City Manager or staff promise on the dais to provide me with follow-up information? They simply do not keep their word.

The City Manager frequently invokes Rule 17 and RCW 35A,13.120 to accuse me of breaking state law by asking even the simplest questions of staff:

“The Council and its members shall deal with the administrative branch solely through the City Manager…”

But in fact the passage reads

“Except for the purpose of inquiry, the Council and its members shall deal
with the administrative branch solely through the City Manager…

Details, details.

During City Council Meetings, the City Manager, on the other hand, is given free reign by our Mayor to present unannounced ad hoc presentations, often the sole purpose of which is to scold Councilmembers for public statements he finds objectionable. A few recent examples:

His days at Hogwarts (er… ‘disposable income’)
The wonders of Pacific Ridge
The City Council has no role in oversight
Why he will never permit a Detroit Skyline at the Des Moines Marina!

Mayor Mahoney decided (by fiat) that the New Items For Consideration section of the meeting (also created by fiat by Matt Pina) may only consist of ‘new legislative proposals.’ It is not a place to ask questions because all questions can submitted off-line for a response by the City Manager. When the Mayor knows full well Mr. Matthias will not respond to those questions, unless he wants to of course.

The current system is tantamount to my memories of trips to the Soviet Union–a government which, on paper, was the soul of ‘democracy’.

My preparation

I knew I was headed into the lion’s den after my election. So I attend as many trainings as possible. I reach out to the training sources the City relies on: Jurassic Parliament, MRSC, AWC, before I do anything. I’m the only member of the City Council to have obtained a Certificate of Municipal Leadership from the Association of Washington Cities.

I was attending our City Council Meetings almost a decade before our current Mayor even moved here. I attend every Port of Seattle public meeting and routinely attend City Council meetings in every nearby community. I have relationships with ex-CMs from our city and all the airport communities going back to the 90’s.

I am far from perfect. I make mistakes all the time. But I am happy to match my understanding of the proper role of Councilmember with those of my colleagues any day of the week. And anyone who knows me knows I respond to constructive criticism quite well.

Ironically, it is the constant obstruction and gaslighting that provides the necessity of preparation. If my colleagues had provided even the slightest bit of cooperation, I would have to study a whole lot less.

6/14/2022 9:27 AM
Matt MahoneyCouncilmember Harris,

It has been brought to my attention you continue to exercise actions outside your authority as a councilmember by contacting outside agencies and inferring you are representing the interests of our city and it’s council. The first instance, over several months, you reached out directly to the Washington Dept. of Transportation requesting actions concerning Highway 509, this created confusion amongst WADOT personnel and our city staff. You had no designation nor authorization to do so. Des Moines City Staff are the only authorized city representatives regarding this matter. The second, recently using city email, you contacted Commissioners Cho and Mohamed concerning matters on reinsulating issues. While you may have interest in this regard, using official city resources is inappropriate and must stop. Both agencies have been contacted and have been informed your requests are not council directed actions and must be treated as citizen requests and that further contact is to be handled in the same manner. While you do have the right to contact agencies as a citizen, but by no means as designation from council or under the guise of official city business. This is to inform you that despite repeated efforts to call out these inappropriate actions you continue to ignore those warnings. If it continues, I will be asking our fellow councilmembers to consider public reprimands and/or censure.

Regards,MattMatt Mahoney
425-941-0090
Mayor
Des Moines City Council

Meeting Video

(transcript auto-generated by Youtube)

Chief of Operations (COO) Dan Brewer
48:08 Just a couple other things to add they currently have a online open house
48:09 That's going on for the stage 2 project we worked with bonnie we've got that
48:15 information on our website so anybody that's interested can go and participate in that and provide comment
48:23 um on the project as they get ready to go out to issue the rfp
48:29 um but that has led to some challenges for us as well as the washdot team and
48:37 just being a bit careful here and to be respectful
48:43 but we have a council member who is reaching out to the wash dot staff
48:50 and providing comment and quasi direction as a council member
48:56 with no from from my understanding no authority or direction to do that
49:01 and it's causing a lot of confusion between the the washdot staff and their consultants
49:07 and us and potentially harming our our relationship with
49:13 the secretary at the d.o.t and things like that so it's become it's really become awkward
49:21 in what's going on i had to kind of step in and provide some direction this week to basically say when
49:27 this council members reaching out they are reaching out as a an ordinary citizen
49:32 and you can respond to them as you would any other ordinary citizen no more or no less
49:39 just treat them like a citizen because they're not they're not acting with the authority of the council when they reach out to you

Mayor Matt Mahoney
49:44 so that is disappointing
49:50 i uh i think i (should) probably have a discussion with the city manager and the city
49:55 attorney about some direction should be sent to the council regarding that matter, okay?

COO Dan Brewer
50:00 Okay.

Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
50:07 Or if any i mean so you are i was just going to ask if you feel like you need a
50:07 council action in regard to that or do you feel like it's been handled sufficiently?

COO Dan Brewer
50:13 Hopefully we've tried to clear the air with the staff as to how to deal with it
50:19 it just it puts him (Adam Granato?) in an awkward spot because normally as a council you'd reach out elected to
50:25 elected so when an elected is reaching out directly to not just the staff but
50:30 the staff's consulting and uh team that gets really awkward
50:37 for folks so i think i think

Mayor Matt Mahoney
I think we have a discussion with staff leadership and uh

Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
OK.

Mayor Matt Mahoney
I'll take it from there. (inaudible)

Director of Public Works Andrew Merges
50:46 one follow-up on that as well just to kind of set an expectation as well what you'll notice on some of these slides
50:52 they have the wash dot name on them so generally for the 509 project city staff
50:58 will be working with washdot and allowing their public relations and communications team
51:03 to prepare the public outreach i'll i'll work with washdot on revisions
51:09 of slides but i won't create a presentation
51:14 outside of anything that they present to the public as well just because they've got a huge website they've got a lot of
51:20 outreach folks managing that and like what dan was saying is there's
51:25 there's information that's been requested that could confuse the picture to the public
51:32 so even for the future if you've got questions from washdot's website they should mimic everything that you see at
51:37 a city level from staff as well to try to maintain that consistency

Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
51:42 In other words if we receive questions it would be good to refer
51:48 those for information to the city clerk so that
51:54 whatever ends up going out into the public is approved by washdot's
52:00 public outreach teams

COO Dan Brewer
52:15 Or if you have questions those can be submitted to the washdot team direct or you can ask myself andrew or tommy and we can work with
52:23 with the staff to get materials or whatever we need to answer questions on the project

Director of Public Works Andrew Merges
52:31 yeah and washdot's going to be start pushing pretty heavily into public outreach as well too
52:36 so i kind of just want to maintain a cordial and very consistent
52:41 discussion between what staff's working on being collaborative and washdot's showing uh the public on their end yeah
52:48 it's tough enough getting the correct information to the public right a mixed message is very problematic
52:55

Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
52:55 so where is the link on the city website? or can somebody just email that to the
53:00 committee if you go to uh if it's open?

COO Dan Brewer
53:08 it's under new what's new
53:08 yes out there now here


Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
53:18 so i'm on the website i'm i don't need it to be bonnie's tracking down at the same time

Dan Brewer
53:24 right there's the what's new see all and the thing will pop up with uh


Mayor Matt Mahoney
53:46 rock it fast   {?)

Director of Public Works Andrew Merges
53:55 yeah another note on communication generally washdot's communication team will
54:00 shoot me an update or an advanced notice of something they publish so the city team has a chance to
54:08 review it in case it affects des moines and the citizens as well so any updates will always be posted to
54:15 the city website then is what you're seeing when washdot says we have a public open
54:21 house or here's some public information we're going to release generally staff will work with bonnie to to try to get
54:26 that news feed out there to try to keep up with washout on that okay
54:46 there it is so see all
54:52 what's new go back to the city site bonnie really
54:57 quick so it's under you go back to oh and then see all again
55:18 on the various social media pages and so forth

Mayor Matt Mahoney
55:31 thank you appreciate that

Deputy Mayor Traci Buxton
55:39 i just want to complement all of your work i mean that just
55:44 uh that's a lot of people to coordinate with and to keep up on and you've got you know even though keyword has both in
55:51 those projects i mean it's so nice in my opinion that one company is doing both of those but
55:57 just to keep all that straight and then report out good work and i'm so thankful
56:02 for all the work on the the des moines creek uh the barnes creek trail to keep that in the city and under our
56:10 control and to add that beautiful component into the middle of our city that's really to preserve that it's
56:16 amazing so yeah so really
56:23 thankful yeah excellent excellent


Mayor Matt Mahoney
56:36 yeah thank you

*Emphasis, mine.

₂Meaningless questions such as Farmers Market financials (as required by our agreement.) Comcast customer complaint log (as required by our agreement.) Financial projection for hotel proposal. Graphic depicting geographic boundary of Redondo Aquatic Land Lease.

Neighborhoods

Flag Day 2022

Today I was very happy to see the City of Des Moines flying not only our nation’s flag, but also those celebrating Pride Month and Juneteenth.

A dear friend of mine is going under the knife today. (People my age don’t have surgery. We go under the knife.)

Another expression people of my age have is, “it’s as serious as a heart attack.” My friend didn’t have a heart attack. He’s having his aorta replaced to avoid the heart attack.

He’ll make it. But it is truly serious. It’s not like one of these namby pamby heart attacks guys our age all seem to have these days–you know, the thread a wire up yer groin over and around the tastee-freeze, then down into yer heart for a quintuple bypass and then back to work ye get in two days with some blood thinner, boy-o procedure. No sirree. This is old school heart surgery. The big carapace crab cracker. La Zipper Grande.

He and I have things in common. We’re of the same era and from kinda/sorta the ‘British Isles’. So we’re men who experience a good round of golf like four hours of porn. 😀

Another thing we have in common is that neither of us have any relatives who made it past seventy. Seventy was a fine run. We discussed his upcoming his surgery not with trepidation so much as with wonder. Because where and when we grew up, life was simple. You didn’t need aorta surgery. You got a box and some very nice flowers.

(I know what yer thinking. But this is not going to be another tired “With all it’s problems. Be thankful kids. America is still the greatest nation on earth” post.)

Anyhoo, we have things in common. But not too much in common. He and I, and a lot of people I know, have opinions and beliefs and stuff going on that I do not want to know about.

Indoor flags

When I ran for office I doorbelled a lot of homes. I saw a surprising number of flags proudly displayed inside. US Flags. Pride flags. BLM flags. Mexican flags. Confederate flags. The Don’t Tread On Me snake thing. And many others. That is who we are. All of them. After hitting 6,000 doors I learned a lot about Des Moines. And in some cases, more than I wanted to.

But it was good training for elected office–which is basically a customer service job. I have to find a way to listen to and respect everybody. Otherwise, I don’t think I properly Des Moines.

The secret to friendship

Back to my friend. Outwardly, I suppose our relationship seems superficial. He goes ape for dogs. We play golf. But as with most of my friends we do talk about other things. And now, after many years, we often come to the same endpoints, albeit via completely different routes.

I’ve come to realise that at least part of what made that possible is not stressing too much about the rest of each other’s lives. I am certain things would not have gone nearly as well if we had first been given some form of ‘briefing’. Golf now, talk later. 😀

Notably, he and I have never interacted electronically. Our entire relationship was built on the fact that we kept running into each other over and over again. (Which is also the reason my wife and I got together come to think of it. :D)

Meanwhile at City Hall…

The constant tension on our City Council, in our community, and most likely on planet earth, stems at least partially from the fact that we never played golf. 😀 Actually it stems from the fact that we never got to know each other first. We got on each other’s nerves, people developed their opinions, and now there seems to be no going back.

Notably, we’re the only area City Council that never engages in retreats. We’re the only City Council that never engages as a group without the City Manager. We’re the only City Council that creates no opportunities for CMs and staff to interact with or learn from one another. Hell, we’re the only City Council without a group photo.

From my vantage point, whoever decides such things has done everything possible to avoid us getting to know one another, learn from one another, or value one another. And with the benefit of hindsight that now seems intentional. Perhaps because if we actually got to know one another a bit better, someone might occasionally change their mind.

All of which sounds an awful lot like social media these days.

In a Rom-Com, these kinds of relationship problems are easily solved. Some couple, who hate each others guts, get trapped in an elevator for twelve hours. After a certain period of embarrassment and shared suffering, romance ensues. Sadly, Des Moines City Hall has only a single floor. 😀

Now what?

I hear people in the community discuss the absolute need to overcome the long standing challenges symbolised by the Pride and Juneteenth flags. Others see the world quite differently. Personally, I am thrilled to see these flags flying. But still, as with our City Council and our nation writ large I have to ask: We raised the flags, great. OK, now what?

What I took from seeing all the flags I’ve seen throughout Des Moines gave me the following perspective. It may seem stupid or wrong or mundane or even irrelevant to you, but regardless, it’s all I got at the moment.

You have to nag people.

Seriously, that’s it. You have to constantly find (nice) ways to get in front of a wider a swath of humanity; whether they like it or not. As my friend and I did. You can’t assume people know anything. And you can’t rely on charm or wait for people to invite you over for drinks. All those strategies will only ever reach the same (and very small) subset of Des Moines we’ve always done. That’s not the job.

And it’s also not my job to lecture people about how they should live their lives–unless there is some risk to the public welfare of course. My job is to meet people where they are, whenever possible, and encourage them to engage with me, whether I agree with their current choices or not.

Peace in our time…

Obviously I’m aware of all the various ‘divides’ in Des Moines and I really am trying to do what little I can to address them. Which basically comes down to a lot of walking around looking for excuses to run into people. 😀

That may seem like a pretty naive approach to achieving Peace In Our Time or whatever. But let me tell you one other thing my friend and I have in common. We grew up in places where one could not afford the luxury of avoiding one another.

And that is quite a luxury. Truthfully, fewer and fewer people seem to want to engage. Many people will say that conversation isn’t worth their time. I believe that a lot of it comes down to the fact that it’s so damned easy to avoid one another.

Hell, we’re just grateful we now live in a place where we can choose the aorta replacement surgery, instead of a box with some very nice flowers.

OK, I did do one of those kinds of posts. 🙂

Neighborhoods, Policy, Public Safety, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 06/12/2022

Leave a comment

This Week

Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda)

Wednesday: Puget Sound Regional Council Comprehensive Plan Workshop

Wednesday: Mt. Rainier High School Graduation at ShoWare Center

Thursday: King County Flood Control District

Friday: South King County Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP)

All throughout the week:

Tree Tours! To help explain the upcoming expansion of SR-509 and the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) I’ve developed a one hour walking/driving presentation.

Two thirds of our residents have flipped since the Great Recession–which coincided with the opening of the Third Runway in 2008. So most of you do not understand what’s coming. You will see separate presentations from WSDOT on SR-509 and the Port of Seattle on the SAMP, and that will make these impacts seem far less significant than they are. The two are basically one massive regional plan.The SAMP/SR-509 will have the same impact on air traffic as the Third Runway and it will re-shape northern Des Moines as dramatically as the Third Runway did Burien and the Second Runway did SeaTac.

The Tree Tour is a way to make this all simple by seeing what happened to Des Moines after the Second and Third runway projects and what’s coming next–from the ground level.

If you live in the area, if you care about things like tree canopy or airport issues in general, please get your friends together and let’s schedule a Tree Tour!

Port Package site visits: SeaTacNoise.Info keeps working on getting relief for home owners with Port Package Problems. If that’s you, please contact them, with your address and Parcel ID and schedule a visit.

Last Week

This was one of the most challenging week’s of my time on the Council. There was a shameful incident regarding something that should be routine, then a disturbing situation where I watched my colleagues collaborating with the administration about me. And finally, there was the City Council Meeting.

Tuesday: ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Seminar. This is something I’m fairly passionate about. Over the past two decades there have been two trends in ‘housing’, the McMansion and the government subsidised apartments. There’s been an ongoing argument that the public only wants 3,000 ft. homes, which is simply not true. Most of Des Moines consists of homes like mine, under 2,000 sq ft. and they have always sold like hot cakes. Town Homes provide much greater opportunities for ownership and greatly increased density.

Wednesday: Des Moines Marina Association. I listened to their concerns, which was awkward. The fact is that they have refused to support any of my attempts to reform our City Council’s process, frankly because for several years they had the City’s ear exclusively and have actually enabled things to get so far with no accountability.

It is especially unsettling to hear everyone in the room casually discussing the upcoming Ferry Pilot as a done deal, because if you recall, the Council only voted to approve $975,000 for the City Manager to do a (cough) ‘search’ for a vendor–and then the Council could weigh in on the details of the agreement. In movies, we often see scenes where characters talk about how “the fix is in”. It’s different when yer actually in that movie, playing the role of the patsy.

Thursday: 4:00 Transportation Committee Meeting (Agenda) There was a presentation on WSDOT on Stage 2 of the SR-509 project. But at the tail end there was a discussion that was so troubling I had to write about it.

Thursday: 5:00 Environment Committee Meeting (Agenda)

Thursday: 6:00 City Council Meeting (Agenda) (Video)

City Council Meeting 06/09/2022

City Manager Report

Mr. Matthias canceled his scheduled update on Summer Events. As I’ve said, the Fireworks are a go for July 4th at the Marina and the Waterland Festival will also occur the July 23-25th

Emergency Management Director Shannon Kirchberg gave a briefing on the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.

Then, the City Manager, switching hats to become our Economic Development Director gave an unscheduled presentation on the topic of Disposable Income. This was in response to a comment Councilmember Steinmetz made on social media which Mr. Matthias claimed reflected poorly on the image of the city he was trying to project to a potential business investor. Councilmember Steinmetz became upset but was overruled by the Mayor.

I honestly have no idea what the presentation was about–something to do with his days in Jolly Ol’ England and John Maynard Keynes. But I do know this: CM Steinmetz was simply getting his initiation spanking. The kind a lot of people seem to like (or so I’ve been told. 😀 )

A few months ago, CM Achziger was treated to a similar presentation on the wonders of Pacific Ridge after making a comment the City Manager felt was unflattering on that topic.

Me? When I dared to criticise his extremely questionable plan for a hotel at the Marina last year, I received a technicolour beat down, “The City Of Des Moines will never have a skyline like Detroit!” (What a relief!)

I tried to address this in my closing comments, but hearing his name mentioned CM Steinmetz snapped at me.

But for what it’s worth,

Dear Colleague

All those silly presentations are prepared Powerpoints. They take staff time to prepare and our valuable Council Meeting time to sit through. It wastes public money and taxes what little good humour remains on our Council. And I do not appreciate wasting either.
For some reason, a great number of people do not seem to find bullying all that problematic. Until it happens to them, of course.
Bear in mind that I’ve been putting up with this crap for many years–looong before I was elected. You took about fifteen seconds to become incensed.
Over the course of your professional career, how many people have you worked with who would do such things? Me neither. I think it says something important.
Remember that it is the Council’s meeting, not Michael’s or the Mayor’s. The City Manager is, in fact, merely an invited guest. And if you are not happy with your invited guest, you can, at any time, ask him to leave, either for twenty minutes or the evening. You may not get three more votes, but you’ll get at least one, and that’s a start. And I would hope you’d afford me the same courtesy.

Consent Agenda

Now remember that the Consent Agenda is defined as “Items that are considered routine…” They are presented as a slate because they do not merit discussion or debate or amendment. Remember, the Mayor and City Manager set the Agenda, not the Council. The Agenda sends their message as to what is ‘routine’.

Every Councilmember may ‘pull’ an item; ie. asked that it be set aside for a separate vote. It is not unusual for that to occur on one item. Here’s was the list of items on that Consent Agenda…

Approval of Vouchers: $5,757,623.05
Approval of minutes from past three months
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Disposal of two abandoned vessels (routine)
Redondo Aquatic Lands Agreement
Wesley Senior Services Contract
Animal Control Officer outsource to Burien C.A.R.E.S.
Farmers Market agreement + 20k grant
Minor Home Repairs project
216th Street Undergrounding PSE payment $220,000
Housing Plan Consultant contract $75,000
LBGTQ Pride Month proclamation
Juneteenth Proclamation

Only the four emboldened items were voted on as a slate. Note to self: find out if Guinness tracks City Council Meetings. This may be the World Record that puts Des Moines on the map! 😀

In fact, it was not I who pulled the majority of these items but rather Councilmember Steinmetz. If the circumstances had been different, I would have pulled the Juneteenth Proclamation. The end of slavery is the second most important event in American History and as such deserves the appropriate recognition by our City. I wrote the Mayor saying as much and he refused. But seeing that all the ‘pulling’, I realised that the meeting was going to tax everyone’s patience so there would be no point in trying.

The Pulled Items

I pulled the approval of Vouchers: $5,757,623.05. I was bullied and harassed by the administration.

I also pulled the disposal of two abandoned vessels item after not receiving a response to a question I had about the item. My question was “Why does the City Council need to approve the sale of vessel abandoned in our Marina?” To which the City Attorney gave me a flip, but accurate answer, “because a prior City Council decided to change the code.” But that was 1993 and in reading that ordinance it just looks like the Council of that time cut’n’pasted a huge swath of general purpose language. My hope was to find out if we could tweak that bit of code so that the Council never has to screw with that sort of thing again. It’s a Harbormaster job, not a Council job. But noooooooo. 😀

CM Steinmetz asked to pull the Redondo Aquatic Lands Agreement. He wanted the item set aside for a future meeting accompanied by a full staff briefing. CM Nutting objected calling the item “as routine as it gets” which is true–from a certain point of view. I went along to try once again to make a point.

The complexity of the material you’re presented with every two weeks is nuts. And nobody comes to the job prepared for all the background material one needs. The material in every packet already assumes one knows a shit ton about ‘aquatic lands’. CM Steinmetz was essentially asking for on the job training, when instead, there should be an on-line repository new CMs can go to which gives one that kind of info one needs to get up to speed without taking the Council’s time. That’s why I keep pushing the concept of a Councilmember Information Request, so that any CM can ask a question, get a good answer and then it’s on file so every future CM can refer to it.

CM Steinmetz asked to pull the Wesley Senior Services Contract, again asking for a postponement and a full briefing. I’m honestly not sure what he wanted on that briefing. I know that I have wanted a community survey of our entire suite of senior services programs and gotten nowhere.

CM Steinmetz asked to pull the Animal Control Officer outsource to Burien C.A.R.E.S., again asking for a postponement and a full briefing. I voted no on the proposal, not only because I think it’s bad policy, but because the PSEM Committee, of which CM Steinmetz is a member, allowed it to go to the full Council without seeing the contract or obtaining any assurance as to how we will gauge the quality of service.

CM Steinmetz asked to pull the Farmers Market agreement, again asking for a postponement and a full briefing. I didn’t need a postponement or a briefing. I know people love them and they have always had my full support. I voted no because a) they are required to provide their financials to the City and I haven’t seem them. b) For the third year in a row, the City waived their rental fee, in effect a $20,000 grant, without being asked. According to all reports, their opening day was record-breaking. If they are doing well, that $20,000 should be made available to other (perhaps new) groups. But under no circumstances should the City give money to anyone who does not submit a request which can be evaluated just like every other organisation.

CM Steinmetz asked to pull the Minor Home Repairs project, again asking for a postponement and a full briefing. I supported this simply to highlight the fact that the program needs to be promoted a lot better. As with the Farmers Market, the program itself is great. And as such, the City should be getting the word out so that more people can take advantage of it!

I pulled the Housing Plan Consultant contract for a reason that seems ‘normal’ to everyone in government but to you will probably sound like it came out of a Dilbert cartoon. The contract states that the consultant will not be doing their own research. Instead, they will be creating a series of recommendations based on an analysis derived from contemporaneous sources. OK here’s the thing: there are no contemporaneous sources. There is simply no good data on anything concerning ‘housing’ or ‘homelessness’. Swear to God. Nobody can tell you how many homeless people are in Des Moines, how they got here or why they’re in their current predicament or what is the appropriate intervention. SKHHP (which Deputy Mayor Buxton and I attend) is doing an ‘inventory of available housing’ this year but it won’t be completed until after the consultant submits their report.

And just to be clear, I am not engaging in some stunt. My colleagues will roll their eyes because, again, this is a grant, it’s free money, so why are you stressing, Harris? Just take the money and shut up.

My point is that I actually do want to do something about the problems. Residents tell me all the time “nobody knows what to do about homelessness.” That is not true. There are good solutions. But we’ve made so many mistakes and done so much to obstruct the process, it just looks like it to the outside world.

This really stings for me because, in 2017, the same Commerce Dept. created a $600,000 study of the community impacts from Sea-Tac Airport, which Des Moines kicked in a few bucks on. And the consultants relied on existing studies, which were, in several cases from 1997 when the airport was half what it is today. So the final report was about as useful as [metaphor goes here].

Neighborhoods, Policy, Public Safety, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 06/05/2022

Leave a comment

This Week

Wednesday: Des Moines Marina Association

Thursday: 4:00 Transportation Committee Meeting (Agenda) There will be a presentation from WSDOT on Stage 2 of the SR-509 project.

Thursday: 5:00 Environment Committee Meeting (Agenda)

Thursday: 6:00 City Council Meeting (Agenda) The City Manager has scheduled an update on Summer Events, which I assume includes announcing that the Fireworks are a go for July 4th at the Marina. As for my part of the show, there will be thirteen items on the Consent Agenda but nothing on New Business.

OK, the City Manager typically spends 20 minutes on his thing. And assuming it takes five minutes to read two proclamations. And assuming we voted on all that stuff without objection. Total elapsed time? 30 minutes. Now that is efficient government, my friend.

Here’s the list of items on that Consent Agenda…

Approval of Vouchers: $5,757,623.05
Approval of minutes from past three months
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Disposal of two abandoned vessels (routine)
Redondo Aquatic Lands Agreement
Wesley Senior Services Contract
Animal Control Officer outsource to Burien C.A.R.E.S.
Farmers Market agreement + 20k grant
Minor Home Repairs project
216th Street Undergrounding PSE payment $220,000
Housing Plan Consultant contract $75,000
LBGTQ Pride Month proclamation
Juneteenth Proclamation

Do all those seem routine to you? And one last thing, concerning what should be the least controversial part of any Consent Agenda. We’re being asked to vote for $5.7M in spending. The Council gets this list (which is a public document, but which you don’t see, probably because it also includes people’s pay rates–which I edited out for this post.) Since we haven’t met for a long time, there are well over 400 items. I simply asked to see the invoices for about ten. And… it’s a fight.

If you can deny any Councilmember information as basic as the bills we are legally required to approve? We’re onto an entirely new level.

Friday: Mt. Rainier High School Graduation at ShoWare Center

Last Week

Wednesday: Highline School Board Meeting. I was there to witness the swearing in of District #5 Director Azeb Hagos.

“Welcome. My neighbour Ibrahim is from Addis and he was gonna join me, but at the last minute he had to take care of his kids. My point is: people care. A lot. They may not show up, but they do care. But it’s easy to forget that after a while when you work
in an empty room. Don’t.

–HSD has a -district- based board. None of our cities have district-based councils. The Port does not—and it’s an even larger government. Some very smart people made this choice very intentionally. In contrast, almost everything you vote on will be HSD-wide. Almost every staff presentation will talk about what is best for HSD as a whole. And of course, you always want to work with your colleagues. But…. you represent District 5.

–One of Ibrahim’s kids is at Midway. The other is at Bezos. A lot of families are like that. It’s not a closed system and I hope you will learn from all those experiences.

–Always return everybody’s phone call.

–Always read the entire packet. The front will have a staff summary and a recommendation, which is fine. But read the whole thing.

Congratulations

Thursday: Public Safety and Emergency Management Committee Meeting (Agenda) (Video) This ties into my comments about Thursday’s upcoming meeting.

All throughout the week:

Tree Tours! To help explain the upcoming expansion of SR-509 and the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) I’ve developed a one hour walking/driving presentation.

The SAMP/SR-509 will have the same impact on air traffic as the Third Runway and it will re-shape northern Des Moines as dramatically as the Third Runway did Burien and the Second Runway did SeaTac.

The Tree Tour is a way to make this all simple by seeing what happened to Des Moines after the Second and Third runway projects and what’s coming next–from the ground level.

If you live in the area, if you care about things like tree canopy or airport issues in general, please get your friends together and let’s schedule a Tree Tour!

Public Safety Committee Meeting

I struggled to not publish this. I ran for office in 2019 to improve transparency and reduce the rubber stamping. But after almost two and a half years, I gotta say, things may actually be getting worse. But this has become truly alarming. Perhaps my colleagues are simply unaware of how business is supposed to be conducted. I urge both the public, potential candidates, and my colleagues to attend other city meetings and judge for themselves. We have become true outliers.

Today’s Publice Safety/Emergency Management Committee Meeting was the first in-person Council meeting of any kind since 2020. So hopefully you can forgive whoever forgot to activate some of my colleagues’ microphones. Getting back to ‘normal’ takes some practice. (If you’re having trouble hearing, I added subtitles.)

Although committee meetings are probably more important to the decision making process than the full meetings, I don’t usually write about them in detail because it’s just too much detail for most people. (Eg. there was a very important discussion regarding Flock Cameras which will soon be deployed to constantly scan people’s license plates in key areas.) But the process for both the issues I’ll cover was terrible. I’ve had people tell me they do not understand exactly what I mean by that and why it matters. These are two issues people care about a lot so it seemed like a good way to make the idea of ‘bad process’ concrete.

Animal Control

Background

The City and Police Chief have wanted to move from an Animal Control Officer to outsourcing the process to Burien C.A.R.E.S. The public has been unaware of this, but the Chief has been selling this hard internally for at least two years. As my predecessor said, “it was always a luxury and one we can no longer afford.”

Another reason this has been so quiet is that the administration had asked the Council not to respond to public concerns about the proposal because it might impact contract negotiations with the Police Guild. Somehow. During the update w learned that had not turned out to be problematic after all.

Lucky break.

The Chief did brief the Council on the proposal at the last full meeting. He provided a Powerpoint of cost savings and benefits, but no supporting evidence. That’s the problem before the problem: He bypassed the committee and went straight to the Council. And the Committee let him. In a better world, any of the committee members would have moved to stop him and remand his presentation to the committee–where it belonged in the first place.

Mistake #1: Never bypass the committee.

Presentation

Speaking for the Police Department was not the Chief, but rather Commander Patti Richards. And that right there is politics. Our Council rarely gives leadership a hard time. But no elected wants to be ‘that guy’ and grill a subordinate. Which is why I object to anyone but the Chief or City Manager presenting anything that might be controversial.

Mistake #2: Never bypass the committee.

So the Committee asked some perfunctory questions, but did not address the much more substantial concerns I heard from residents. I’m not sure whether or not my colleagues heard those same concerns.

The Commander indicated that the City had already worked with Legal, PD and Burien C.A.R.E.S to prepare a draft contract, but did not have that contract for review. Instead, she assured the committee that all their concerns had been addressed. The draft contract would be sent to the full Council for approval.

Mistake #3: Never bypass the committee.

In past years, the Committee would normally see that draft contract, provide notes, which the City Attorney would take back for polishing, come back for final committee approval and then send it fully baked to the Council for a vote. Despite their obvious differences, Councilmembers Bangs and Martinelli did just that on at least two PSEM ordinances in 2021.

Towing Ordinance

The committee spent a few minutes talking over Councilmember Steinmetz’s concerns over the recent 72 Hour Towing Ordinance. I voted against that ordinance for that reason and because it lacked a zoning provision which would have offered a good revenue stream and safety on certain streets. These tweaks could have easily been added and done right the first time.

Mistake #1: There is almost nothing that can’t wait a couple of weeks.

Instead, CM Steinmetz voted for it and *afterwards met privately with the Asst. City Attorney, hoping to work out some new language.

Mistake #2: Get it in writing. It’s a public process. If you want the committee to consider your idea, have an actual amendment. And print copies for the audience while yer at it. 🙂

But at the committee meeting, City Attorney Tim George told the committee that in his mind, the ordinance the Council approved was fine as is. And the other members of the committee agreed. Chair Traci Buxton suggested that we should wait and see if there is a public outcry and then it would surely be easy to fix.

Mistake #3: Nothing in government is easy to fix.

Measure twice, cut once…

Governments rarely re-visit legislation unless something is really wrong. Nor should they. It’s always onto the next thing. Think about it: we get a couple of hours twice a month. And this year? We’re four months behind schedule.

That is why I never vote to invoke ₂Rule 26a and approve any ordinance in one night.

You wanna make sure it’s right the first time for at least two reasons:

Assuming everyone is willing to stop and re-visit your pet issue again, you’re creating more work for everybody than doing it proper the first time.
We owe it to future Councils to leave things as tidy as possible for them. Because they will surely have plenty of their own messes to deal with.

If we had simply waited two weeks until the next meeting, we could have made the tweaks both CM Steinmetz and I wanted and we’d never have to worry about it again. It would be done. And in fact the ‘urgency’ is almost always artificial. We’d waited years without an ordinance, what was two more weeks?

Takeaways…

Council

This is the second time this year that the PSEM has allowed the administration to take an ordinance directly to the full Council. And both times have been a mistake. Other cities do not take these shortcuts. And in previous years, neither did we.

The whole point of having committees is to provide the hard review (and yes oversight) so that legislation is fully baked before it goes to the full Council. It is not supposed to be a rubber stamp before another rubber stamp.

Public

Over the past several months I’ve spoken to about a dozen residents who told me passionately how very much wanted to retain our own Animal Control Officer (ACO). I gave them my thoughts on how to make it happen and, as usual, they listened politely and then did something else. 😀

I love you Des Moines, but you also have to stop trying to do things in private. It’s a PITA, but you gotta start speaking up. Because every time you yell at me and then act so ‘chill’ to the majority, you send a message to the Council that they can listen to your polite complaints, do whatever they want and pay no price. And you’re making me not want to listen to your complaining either frankly. 😀

City

These committee meetings are OPMA public meetings. First the Council was told the meetings would be in the North Conference Room. (The Agenda says so.) Then we’re told it’s via Zoom, but I see no public notice. Then I get an email saying it’s in the Council Chambers and on Channel 21. But it’s not. I did find it on Youtube but it took a day for it to appear without a deep search. Then I watch it and find the mics aren’t on and there are no captions for our large number of hearing impaired residents. Come on.

Postscript

I’m sorry, but this strikes me as pretend government at the moment. We’re all so used to ‘just working things out’, we can’t even run a meeting as if it matters. Because frankly? It doesn’t.

Luke 16:10

*Something I am not permitted to do, by the way. Also known as straight up corruption.

₂Ordinances are required two separate readings (votes) in order to become law. Rule 26a is a motion that can be used to override that and pass a law in one vote. I never vote for it, not only for the above reason, but also because it gives the public almost no chance to engage on the issue.

Engagement, Public SafetyAnimal Control, Flock Cameras, Surveillance, Towing

PSEM Committee Meeting June 2, 2022

Animal Control

Background

Lucky break.

Mistake #1: Never bypass the committee.

Presentation

Mistake #2: Never bypass the committee.

Mistake #3: Never bypass the committee.

Towing Ordinance

Mistake #1: There is almost nothing that can’t wait a couple of weeks.

Instead, CM Steinmetz voted for it and *afterwards met privately with the Asst. City Attorney, hoping to work out some new language.

Mistake #2: Get it in writing. It’s a public process. If you want the committee to consider your idea, have an actual amendment. And print copies for the audience while yer at it. 🙂

Mistake #3: Nothing in government is easy to fix.

Measure twice, cut once…

That is why I never vote to invoke ₂Rule 26a and approve any ordinance in one night.

You wanna make sure it’s right the first time for at least two reasons:

Assuming everyone is willing to stop and re-visit your pet issue again, you’re creating more work for everybody than doing it proper the first time.
We owe it to future Councils to leave things as tidy as possible for them. Because they will surely have plenty of their own messes to deal with.

Takeaways…

Council

Public

City

Postscript

Luke 16:10

*Something I am not permitted to do, by the way. Also known as straight up corruption.

Neighborhoods, Policy, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 05/08/2022

Leave a comment

This Week

Wednesday: State Archives. I don’t often talk about this, but aside from all the time I spend at various city meetings, I’m embarrassed to tell you all the time I spend at various ‘archive’ spots in Bellevue, Olympia and Port 69. There’s no other way to obtain any number of records.

I’ve gone into this a bit before but there was a seismic shift in government record keeping–or rather a tsunami. It started in the 90’s with the notion of moving warehouses of data onto CD-Rs and then really hit hard in 2006 as every city began sending all their records to the State Archives. I call this ‘the black hole’. There is this block of time (2006-2013 or so) during some of the most important events in Des Moines history–where large swaths of records (paper, video, audio) are simply gone. Or rather, they’re probably somewhere. But they’re buried in some warehouse like the end of that Indiana Jones movie. Why bother? Because if you don’t have a piece of paper, you’re just telling a folk tale.

Thursday: Transportation Committee (Agenda)

Thursday: Environment Committee (Agenda)

NPDES Program Overview (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) staff update
Source Control Program Update
CIP Updates Staff will provide an update on the 2022 SWM Projects

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda)

Saturday: The big Holi Festival at Saltwater State Park!

Last Week

Tuesday: Distributing flyers for the big Holi Festival on the May 14 at Saltwater State Park!

Thursday: Meeting with Congressman Adam Smith. Mr. Smith has been working hard to obtain EPA grants to help with aviation studies. My interest is (as always) finding ways to reduce the noise and pollution and providing meaningful compensation to our City.

Thursday: 4:00PM Public Safety Committee (Agenda) (Video) This is why we need a guaranteed research. Shannon Kirchberg gave an update on our EM Plan.

Thursday: 5:00PM City Council Meeting (Agenda) (Video)

City Manager’s Report

The opening was a presentation on how to participate in the Masonic Home demolition EIS public comment period:

Consent Agenda

Councilmember Achziger pulled an item from the Consent Agenda, confirming a new appointment to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. It was one of those things I used to do to make a point. And it’s a good point to make: the whole ‘advisory committee’ thing has gotsta go. Every one of them is opaque and lacks proper accountability. But the reason you can’t change them is because even mentioning that sort of thing invokes defensiveness and pearl-clutching.

But if you watched and heard the name Peter Philips again, your hearing aids were not malfunctioning. Mr. Philips is also the publisher of our City Currents and our ferry consultant and our StART representative.

And the administration would argue that this creates a “synergy” which “enhances economic development.”

New Business

The one item of new business was a proposal from the City Manager to move in-person meetings to 6:00PM. Traditionally these have occurred at 7PM, but the City Manager used his “Emergency Powers”? to change them during the pandemic, basically to make things more convenient for staff. I didn’t understand this because other cities did not adjust their schedules.

Council Meeting Schedules

City Council Schedules

Burien	Monday	7:00	1st & 3rd	1990	Council/Manager
Federal Way	Tuesday	6:30	1st & 3rd	1990	*Mayor/Council
Des Moines	Thursday	7:00	1st & 3rd	1959	Council/Manager
Normandy Park	Tuesday	7:00	2nd & 4th	1953	Council/Manager
SeaTac	Tuesday	6:00	2nd & 4th	1990	Council/Manager
Tukwila	Monday	7:00	1st & 3rd	1909	Mayor/Council

*Federal Way has had a long road towards its current government. It took four attempts to incorporate, finally getting there in 1990 as Council/Manager. Voters then opted for a 'strong mayor' system in November 2009.

City Manager Matthias rightly pointed out that the Port of Seattle meets at noon (Tuesdays), King County Metro Council and of course Seattle also meet during the day. But ya know… those electeds are full time gigs running squillion dollar corporations–with multiple full-time staff to do their bidding. These are decidedly not citizen-elected positions.

What kills me is that my colleagues voted to (cough) research those start times. And I was thinking back to this scolding I received back in April when I proposed that the Council develop a research process.

If ever there was a frivolous request, that was it. Because ya know what, ladies and gentleman. Even if I had not already attended meetings in every nearby city and committed these times to memory, all anyone had to do was this:

Hey Siri! When’s the next Burien City Council Meeting?

Here are two of my recent ‘frivolous’ questions that have never gotten answered:

Has the City prepared a cost estimate on correcting the ongoing flooded area in Barnes Creek Trail? (Yes/No)
What have been the annual collections from Pet Licenses (which are not included in our budget.)

New Items For Consideration

I proposed that the City research a formal proposal for offering hybrid meetings–both for the full Council and committees. That ‘passed’. I guess? 😀

If that sounds snippy, the entire New Items for Consideration remains sloppy. It was created by fiat by former Mayor Pina as a response to my constant complaining that there was no opportunity to get new items on any agenda. But at the time, none of my colleagues would support doing it the right way (ie. creating a new item in the Rules of Procedure.) So a sloppy implementation leads to a sloppy product.

Our Rules of Procedure state that it takes three CMs to move an idea onto an Agenda. What Mayor Pina (and now Mahoney) do is survey the field and say, “OK, I see we have agreement” rather than taking a formal vote. You want a vote so that it’s in the record. Just as you may have seven votes on an item, but you only note the one second of the motion. You want it on the record: CM (x) proposed the idea. CM (y) and (z) supported the proposal and the agreement was to do (z) with it. It’s more than just a formality. If later on the item is not handled as expected, you want to be able to go back to the two others who supported the idea and say, “Hey, is that what we agreed to?” Every decision the Council makes has to have that kind of accountability.

Friday: Sound Cities Association Legislation Debrief. The 38 participating Cities got an update on the major legislation passed in the last sixty day session.

And the Spirit Of Des Moines Award goes to…

The City of Des Moines has a Spirit Of Des Moines Award for people who have made big contributions to our community. (It’s described in Appendix A of our Rules of Procedure.) There’s a “person of the year” version and a “lifetime achievement” version. It’s supposed to be given out every year? Or two years? Here is video of the last one in November 2019.

I had a bad week in a sense. I talked with at least half a dozen residents, all with real and longstanding issues. I sound like a Cassandra all the time (a really old Cassandra since who studies Greek myths, right?) but my biggest frustration thus far in elected land is in convincing residents of a few things:

You can change things.
It’s not that hard.
But there’s a right way and a wrong way to do go about it.

I’m gonna give you an example of how to do things right–a person who should get that Spirit of Des Moines Award. Then I’m gonna tell ya all things you’re doing wrong. 😀

This is what change looks like

This week, I said goodbye to a resident who is moving from DM and though I don’t know him well, I will miss him dearly.

In 2019, at the 11th hour, he learned (from somebody 😀 ) that a developer was proposing a miserably inappropriate mega-apartment complex (replete with ingress and egress of over 500 cars a day) into his neighbourhood–a quiet street where a dozen children play on any given day.

So… he organised a mailing list and got eighteen (18) people to show up to two City Council Meetings wherein the arcana of zoning is discussed. Since the usual amount of human beings who attend such decisions is typically zero, the members of the City Council a that time, seeing a genuine public will, voted down that re-zone and the developer backed out.

Two weeks ago, it was my pleasure to approve a new zoning proposal for twenty three (23) market rate beautiful town homes on the same spot. It will provide six times the home ownership opportunities and provide a ton more city revenue.

That guy changed Des Moines for the better and forever. (And the funny thing is… I’m not even sure he showed up for the meetings. 😃)

I stopped by to tell him that in my 13 years watching our Council that was one of maybe five similar events I’d seen in all that time. He seemed surprised because for him it was so straightforward.

Project Summary:
Organisation: 2hrs.
Work labour: 18 people show up for meeting @ 1hr each.
Other Expenses: $0

That’s what it took to flip a $20M transaction and change a neighbourhood for the better and forever. 18. 2. 0.

He succeeded for several reasons

He was naive to the process. The guy is super smart. It’s just that no one had told him how “impossible” it is to change zoning or fight “the City” or “developers” or whatever. He had no axes to grind.
He had someone who had watched our City Council provided him with a very simple process: “Do a, b, c.”
And he just followed the instructions. He had no one on social media talking him out of it. He wasn’t trying to be a Karen “I’ll just speak to the manager about this!”

The issue bugged him. He had a couple of spare hours. Done. Now maybe he was willing to do that because he has an involved job and didn’t have a lot of time, or maybe it was because he trusted someone who sounded like they knew what they were talking about.

But for whatever reason, he didn’t improvise. He didn’t “reach out to the City” or try to “schedule a meeting with whoever“, or do anything other than a, b, c.

And it worked.

So now he is thrice blessed:

He got to make a huge and positive difference in his community,
It was easy, and best of all…
He leaves here with a positive sense of how to change government.

From a civics standpoint that’s about as good as it gets. So if anyone ever deserved a Spirit Of Des Moines Award, it would be him.

The Moral

If you look at that video, the winners are business owners and Boy Scouts and one activist. The one activist did not get the things she wanted. So the plastic arrow looked (to me) like some sort of a consolation prize.

Which means:

No one gets a Spirit of Des Moines Award for getting the government to do something it does not want to do.
All the procedures the City has in place to help you are fantastic. But, they only apply if you want the government to do something it wants to do.
In fact, all those rules are meant to help you do things the City wants you to do. Which means that if you want the City to do something else, following their advice will actually prevent you from getting anywhere. So ignore them. If they lead to success it will only be a coincidence.

It’s not rocket surgery…

It’s that last part that totally blows residents’ minds–they simply refuse to believe it. But consider this: Why on earth would any organisation help you to do something that is contrary to its plans?

As I wrote, at our last City Council Meeting my colleagues voted for the City to ‘research’ the start times of our neighbouring cities. By the time I was elected I had already attended hundreds of our City Council meetings. In person. In addition to learning when meetings begin from Mukilteo to Auburn, I’ve gotten to see hundreds of people either get (or not get) what they wanted from local government.

And I’m here to tell ya, what it takes to get the City to do something it doesn’t want to do is not rocket surgery. If you sit by the shore as long as I have, even a complete idiot will learn how to catch a fish.

That’s the one really great thing about spending so much time watching local government–you learn what works.

But on the other hand, it’s also something of a downer watching hundreds and hundreds of people fail in the same ways. Over and over and over. And over. And over.

You can do it!

I’ll occasionally get some snippy comment about ‘not accomplishing more’ over the past 2.4 years. Look, we’ve had crappy government here for 20+ years. I didn’t expect to change people’s minds on the dais and I don’t sweat any of those votes.

My challenge has been changing your mind. If I have any regret it’s all the times residents like you could have (and should have) gotten what you wanted, but didn’t.

So at the risk of repeating myself, I’ll close by saying the same thing I opened with–in a slightly different way:

You can change things.
It’s not that hard.
But if you want to do something the City doesn’t already want to do, you’ll likely need to do something different in order to succeed. And that is where I can help.

And in the next year and a half, I hope you we can work together to help you obtain the change you would like to see.

Engagement, Neighborhoods

And the Spirit Of Des Moines Award goes to…

1 Comment

You can change things.
It’s not that hard.
But there’s a right way and a wrong way to do go about it.

I’m gonna give you an example of how to do things right–a person who should get that Spirit of Des Moines Award. Then I’m gonna tell ya all things you’re doing wrong. 😀

This is what change looks like

This week, I said goodbye to a resident who is moving from DM and though I don’t know him well, I will miss him dearly.

That guy changed Des Moines for the better and forever. (And the funny thing is… I’m not even sure he showed up for the meetings. 😃)

Project Summary:
Organisation: 2hrs.
Work labour: 18 people show up for meeting @ 1hr each.
Other Expenses: $0

That’s what it took to flip a $20M transaction and change a neighbourhood for the better and forever. 18. 2. 0.

He succeeded for several reasons

He was naive to the process. The guy is super smart. It’s just that no one had told him how “impossible” it is to change zoning or fight “the City” or “developers” or whatever. He had no axes to grind.
He had someone who had watched our City Council provided him with a very simple process: “Do a, b, c.”
And he just followed the instructions. He had no one on social media talking him out of it. He wasn’t trying to be a Karen “I’ll just speak to the manager about this!”

But for whatever reason, he didn’t improvise. He didn’t “reach out to the City” or try to “schedule a meeting with whoever“, or do anything other than a, b, c.

And it worked.

So now he is thrice blessed:

He got to make a huge and positive difference in his community,
It was easy, and best of all…
He leaves here with a positive sense of how to change government.

From a civics standpoint that’s about as good as it gets. So if anyone ever deserved a Spirit Of Des Moines Award, it would be him.

The Moral

Which means:

No one gets a Spirit of Des Moines Award for getting the government to do something it does not want to do.
All the procedures the City has in place to help you are fantastic. But, they only apply if you want the government to do something it wants to do.
In fact, all those rules are meant to help you do things the City wants you to do. Which means that if you want the City to do something else, following their advice will actually prevent you from getting anywhere. So ignore them. If they lead to success it will only be a coincidence.

It’s not rocket surgery…

That’s the one really great thing about spending so much time watching local government–you learn what works.

But on the other hand, it’s also something of a downer watching hundreds and hundreds of people fail in the same ways. Over and over and over. And over. And over.

You can do it!

My challenge has been changing your mind. If I have any regret it’s all the times residents like you could have (and should have) gotten what you wanted, but didn’t.

So at the risk of repeating myself, I’ll close by saying the same thing I opened with–in a slightly different way:

You can change things.
It’s not that hard.
But if you want to do something the City doesn’t already want to do, you’ll likely need to do something different in order to succeed. And that is where I can help.

And in the next year and a half, I hope you we can work together to help you obtain the change you would like to see.

Neighborhoods, Policy, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 05/01/2022

Leave a comment

As you can see, I’m making a few changes to the pages–hopefully it will make the site more useful. The PSAs are now on the right side of every page, along instructions on how to provide public comment. Also, there is a feed from the Official City Calendar. It’s good for seeing the dates, but the City is still not putting links to the content (agendas, instructions, etc.) so please continue to use the links I provide which do take you there.

This Week

Tuesday: Distributing flyers for the big Holi Festival on the May 14 at Saltwater State Park!

Thursday: 4:00PM Public Safety Committee (Agenda)

Thursday: 5:00PM City Council Meeting (Agenda) The highlight is a proposal from the City Manager to move in-person meetings to 6:00PM. Traditionally these have occurred at 7PM, but were changed during the pandemic, basically to make things more convenient for staff. I didn’t quite get this because other cities did not adjust their schedules.

I object to one Whereas which states that there have been no public complaints about the earlier start times. Not true. I’ve heard tons of complaints about it from working people.

That said, SeaTac meetings start at 6:00. Burien at 6:30. I understand why staff prefer the earlier time but apart from any tradition, my preferences would be to return to the 7:00PM because I think the later time is easier for working residents to come to City Hall. But I’m not sure. So…

It’s also probably a good time to once again mention Rule 26a. Normally ordinances require two meetings to became law. Often, however, the Council will use Rule 26a to override this and pass the final ordinance in a single night. This is exactly the kind of no-brainer for which Rule 26a should not be used. Since the start time is a key in getting people to attend, we should give them both weeks to weigh in.

Last Week

Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) the big highlight is wass their return to in-person (and hybrid) meetings at Sea-Tac. Other items:

As with the Third Runway, there are a number of signs the Port is moving ahead with the SAMP. The Commission voted to issue $1.1 billion dollars in intermediate bonds.
On a somewhat more positive note, the Commission approved a test plan to determine the safety of large-scale hydrogen storage. There is a growing consensus that hydrogen cells are the only practical method for powering commercial aircraft at any point in the next 40 years. Battery development just isn’t moving ahead fast enough. There are currently hydrogen auto fueling stations, but Sea-Tac Airport measures its storage tanks for Jet-A (kerosene) in the millions of gallons.

The thing about gasoline is that it’s a wonderful energy storage device. Compared to batteries, it’s not only far more energy dense, it’s much lighter in weight. And despite what you might think, it’s not nearly as explosive as most other fuels, like… well, liquified hydrogen! 😀

Wednesday: Sea-Tac Airport Roundtable (StART) Meeting (Agenda). Different day, say ol’… The thing I keep saying over and over about StART is that all the Cities seem to have decided to team up with the Port to achieve a shared policy agenda. The practical effect has been to simply avoid any local action.

It’s all relative.

The most notable feature of every StART meeting now is the presence of at least thirty (30) commenters. However twenty nine of them will be Vashon Island residents demanding to be allowed to join the group (which is currently limited only to fence line communities.) I kinda have to smile at this because it’s like people demanding to get into a club that has nothing good to do.

Thursday: SCORE Jail. Director Devon Schrum gave me a tour and I was impressed with everything I saw. She also wanted me to know that they are hiring–and from what I can tell, for the right person, these are good jobs most people would never think to consider. But I left some brochures at City Hall or you can call them for more info

The City of Des Moines is a part owner of the facility as part of an ILA with several other near by cities. So the City Council has a particular interest in how the place is managed. (Until 2020, the City Council had a liaison who attended their meetings and reported at Council Meetings; that role has since been taken up by City Manager Matthias.)

Unfortunately, SCORE is where a lot of people finally get the services they need to tackle addiction and mental health issues and their staff spend a lot of effort on those aspects of their mission. They have a lot of skills that could be applied to people who need help outside of the court/jail system and it would be interesting to think about how that might work.

Thursday: Economic Development Committee (Agenda) (Video). Their first meeting of year, CM Nutting returns as chair with two new members: Deputy Mayor Buxton and Vic Pennington. Key item: a discussion of the Masonic Home EIS.

Thursday: Municipal Facilities Committee (Agenda) (Video) , CM Nutting returns as chair with new member: Harry Steinmetz and returning Mayor Mahoney. City Manager Matthias complimented the Committee for its wisdom in “continuity of leadership.” The group acknowledged that because the group was basically four months behind, they should stick with the staff’s recommended plan. The Mayor also acknowledged that at least two summer meetings would be cancelled in order to accommodate staff holidays. The Mayor was concerned that, being new to the committee, CM Steinmetz had not received a copy of the Capital Improvements Plan. This struck me as a bit odd considering that, like the TIP, the CIP is a public document and available 24/7/365 on the City web site? The meeting lasted eleven minutes and there were compliments as to how well it was run.

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) (Video) Perhaps the most important item was not on the Agenda. The City Manager provided the first update on the ARPA Stimulus spending since September 16 where we spent all $9M. I’ll have more on that in another article but I think the most notable item was that the business grant program seems to be ready to go.

There was also an item to accept a Port of Seattle grant to help promote that business grant program. I voted no on it for the same reason I always vote no on these. There is a sentence in there which indicates we support the Century Agenda. Saying so is not a requirement for obtaining the grant so either they just keep cutting/pasting every year or the City really does support the Century Agenda–and if so, they should find work elsewhere.

Standard Equipment

At Thursday’s meeting, I introduced an item of New Business. Basically an ‘undo key’ on Ordinance 1539 from 2012. Or to put it another way, to re-instate Ordinance 1407 from 2007.

To be less confusing: We used to have a section in our building code (Ordinance 1407 from 2007) which required sound insulation in all new construction. We repealed that in 2012 (Ordinance #1539). The operative language was as simple as this:

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby repealed.

That is all it took to remove the requirement for sound insulation.

I want to bring back what we had before: sound insulation for new construction.

My proposal is simply this:

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby reinstated.

Get it? Just put back what was taken out in 2012. Hopefully, it doesn’t require any ‘study’ or ‘analysis’. It requires no coordination with the Port or the FAA. If it worked before, it will work now. How am I so sure? Because it’s the same code that is currently in use in both Burien and SeaTac.

But before we get rolling, it never ceases to amaze me how one can be criticised for doing the right thing. In this case, I was told by three people “Dude. Know when to stop talking. They said Yes, already!” Like so many things in Des Moines these days, I fear that our love of (cough) ‘few words’ has led to an abnormally short attention span. Please note:

That discussion, which seemed so interminable, lasted a whopping ten minutes. We talk about anything airport-related about… oh… once in a blue moon. Even though it is the single most significant impact to our community.
And even with my ‘windiness’ our meeting was still able to conclude in a very crisp 1:15.

The good ol’ days…

When people talk about how great things used to be, they aren’t kidding. There was a sweet spot in the 1970’s where flights were plentiful enough to keep property values super-cheap but not so many flights as to drive people insane-o. But there had been enough community resentment after the second runway (primarily in the Sea-Tac Area) that when the Puget Sound Regional Council approved funding for a third runway in 1996, they mandated that 11,000 housing units gets those Port Packages. That’s an important detail. That happened before all the lawsuits.

(What kills me is that we all yearn for the days of flights which were “three to five minutes apart.” The people on Vashon Island show up at community meetings and their first words will always be: “The flights are now insane. They’re three to five minutes apart!”)

There were other strings attached to those Port Packages. The Avigation Easement was one (homeowners give perpetual license to fly over their property in exchange for the one-time Port Package.) That one really sucks.

But another was that each city receiving Port Packages (Des Moines, Burien and SeaTac should add a section to their building codes requiring new construction to provide sound reduction equivalent to what the Port Packages provide. In our case that was Ordinance 1407. The logic is simple: The Federal government was being asked to pay to mitigate homes that were there before the new runway. Fine. But it would not be fair to let developers continue to build homes without sound insulation and then later ask taxpayers to foot the bill for it. That would be like allowing builders to continue to build without the appropriate design upgrades after an area is identified as an earthquake risk.

I was against it… before I voted for it…

Last week I enthusiastically supported a new housing development on 216th and 12th-ish. They are the first new units in the area in a very long time and the first to use the kind of middle-market approach that makes for 23 really nice homes on a footprint where once there were four. The only fly in the ointment? No sound code. Those homes are uniquely positioned to get a double-dose of noise: landings on 34L (third runway) and take-offs on 16C. If any development should have sound insulation? That’s the one.

This is equity

How do I know it sucks? I’ve been brow beating the Port Commission to finally insulate all the remaining apartment buildings from that 1996 agreement. Because the strategy the Port employed in deploying Port packages was to begin with all the single family homes. They left the apartments for last. But in 2008, basically the moment the Third Runway was completed? They stopped the Port Package program. For the next ten years they averaged about eight new installs a year and did nothing about over 1,100 remaining multi-family buildings. Because there was no one to say “make me.”

Funny thing about apartments: that’s where a very large portion of the BIPOC community live. Not to mention lower income people of all types–but especially women with children. One may call it ‘coincidence’ but the demography is striking: the overwhelmingly white single-family homes got Port Packages and all the predominantly not-so-white multi-family homes did not.

That is what structural racism looks like today.

To their credit, the 2020 Port of Seattle Commission voted to correct that inequity. So the Villa Enzian Apartments are now being retro-fitted with high quality sound reduction; as are hundreds of similar apartments along Kent Des Moines Road. But not too much credit. Because it took 20 years for the apartment dwellers along Kent Des Moines Road to obtain the same basic quality of life as the predominantly white single family homes only two blocks away.

And one other ‘inside baseball’ politics detail: I did not support Stephanie Bowman’s bid for re-election as Port Commissioner. It was, hands down, the toughest ‘politics’ call I’ve made, because the fact is that she was, hands down, the most sincere advocate on the Commission for sound insulation–including getting those apartments done. This is what political courage looks like. Let’s be honest. Port Commissioners tend to get re-elected by doing projects about photogenic Orcas and High Schools. There is no photo-op in providing sound insulation for old apartments. Pushing that issue got her zero votes. But giving every resident the same opportunity to have some peace and quiet? That is what equity really looks like, in my opinion. And if she ran for any other office, I’d have to give her strong consideration.

You can’t fool me. I know what year it is!

Now, something may have occurred to you: If we repealed our sound ordinance in 2012, what about all those new homes built since then? Exactamundo.

It is hard to report on ‘untruth’. Using “the L word” offends people. But if one reads the “Whereases”, the Ordinance makes three main points and all of them are whoppers.

“Developers have told us we cannot build here with all these regulations!” Any yet? Both Burien and Sea-Tac residents got Port Packages, neither city repealed their sound code. And both have built lots of nice homes since 2012.
“Off the shelf products and generally accepted construction standards have improved to where one does not need any of those damned regulations!” And yet, area developers offered “optional” sound insulation packages in areas such as Blueberry Lane. Which is like having optional seat belts.
“Foregoing sound code will not prevent home owners from seeking noise mitigation in the future.” OK, that one is true–if by “homeowner” you mean Marty McFly and by “the future” you mean 1986. Because that’s the cut-off date for FAA eligibility. Every home built in Des Moines since we repealed our sound code in 2012 will never be eligible for a Port Package.

And I could not agree more with that policy.

You’re a Senator or the FAA Administrator. Your constituency is “America”, not “Des Moines”. If Des Moines comes to you in 2022 and says, “Please give us $300M in new Port Package money for new houses inside the DNL65. Here’s the conversation:

FED: Didn’t you used to have a sound code? We gave you money for every home inside that area. And you agreed to add sound to your building code.”

DM: “Well, yes we did. And gosh we tried. Really we did. But the developers said they wouldn’t come here anymore if we did that. So really, it’s their fault.”

FED: OK, but then how come Burien and SeaTac didn’t do that?”

DM: Well……. we weren’t working here then. So it’s not our fault either.”

You’re asking the Federal Government to give a retroactive gift to developers for lobbying the City to go against the whole intent of the Third Runway mitigation. In fact, you’re actually rewarding the City for circumventing the will of Congress.

It’s so annoying…

Mitigating airport impacts is hard. Since the emissions from jet engines are so different from those of automobiles, they haven’t (until recently) even begun to be understood. And noise? The idea that it is simply a matter of sensitivity is so baked into us that the technical term for the harm it causes is ‘annoyance’. It’s not annoying. It’s harmful to human health and we should start talking about it like that. It’s harmful. Not annoying.

Now, try walking into Federal Court to argue the potential community harms of airport expansion. You start whipping out decades of public health studies about the negative effects on human health of excessive noise. It’s a lock, right?

Then the smartly dressed FAA lawyer on the other table simply whips out that one single sheet of paper, Ordinance 1539, and calmly reads…

“WHEREAS, continuing improvements in State building and
energy codes are resulting in quieter homes…”

You simply cannot expect judges or electeds to believe that you care about noise impacts if you create an ordinance with the express purpose of contravening the will of the Federal Government. Your only argument becomes, “Well, yes but now it’s much, much worse.”

Uh huh.

It’s a feature…

That is why I proposed that we immediately re-instate the sound code–and why I objected to being cut-off while speaking. The Council must understand what is at stake. The issue is not as simple as “remand it to the committee.”

We must have that sound code in place in order to expand the Port Package program to every part of Des Moines. Because no way the FAA pays for it otherwise.

And everyone should celebrate–especially developers. Because if every new home really is being built with the same (or better) sound reduction as a Port Package? Developers should have no problem. If they’re already doing it, they should actually welcome it as a sales tool. From that perspective, the sound code is not a hindrance, but rather a sales feature. And proof that they really are providing a safe, quiet product.

Airport, Economic Development, Engagement, History

Sound insulation should be standard equipment

May 1, 2022November 14, 2023

3 Comments

At Thursday’s meeting, I introduced an item of New Business. Basically an ‘undo key’ on Ordinance 1539 from 2012. Or to put it another way, to re-instate Ordinance 1407 from 2007.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby repealed.

That is all it took to remove the requirement for sound insulation.

I want to bring back what we had before: sound insulation for new construction.

My proposal is simply this:

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby reinstated.

That discussion, which seemed so interminable, lasted a whopping ten minutes. We talk about anything airport-related about… oh… once in a blue moon. Even though it is the single most significant impact to our community.
And even with my ‘windiness’ our meeting was still able to conclude in a very crisp 1:15.

The good ol’ days…

I was against it… before I voted for it…

This is equity

That is what structural racism looks like today.

You can’t fool me. I know what year it is!

Now, something may have occurred to you: If we repealed our sound ordinance in 2012, what about all those new homes built since then? Exactamundo.

It is hard to report on ‘untruth’. Using “the L word” offends people. But if one reads the “Whereases”, the Ordinance makes three main points and all of them are whoppers.

“Developers have told us we cannot build here with all these regulations!” Any yet? Both Burien and Sea-Tac residents got Port Packages, neither city repealed their sound code. And both have built lots of nice homes since 2012.
“Off the shelf products and generally accepted construction standards have improved to where one does not need any of those damned regulations!” And yet, area developers offered “optional” sound insulation packages in areas such as Blueberry Lane. Which is like having optional seat belts.
“Foregoing sound code will not prevent home owners from seeking noise mitigation in the future.” OK, that one is true–if by “homeowner” you mean Marty McFly and by “the future” you mean 1986. Because that’s the cut-off date for FAA eligibility. Every home built in Des Moines since we repealed our sound code in 2012 will never be eligible for a Port Package.

And I could not agree more with that policy.

FED: Didn’t you used to have a sound code? We gave you money for every home inside that area. And you agreed to add sound to your building code.”

DM: “Well, yes we did. And gosh we tried. Really we did. But the developers said they wouldn’t come here anymore if we did that. So really, it’s their fault.”

FED: OK, but then how come Burien and SeaTac didn’t do that?”

DM: Well……. we weren’t working here then. So it’s not our fault either.”

It’s so annoying…

Then the smartly dressed FAA lawyer on the other table simply whips out that one single sheet of paper, Ordinance 1539, and calmly reads…

“WHEREAS, continuing improvements in State building and
energy codes are resulting in quieter homes…”

Uh huh.

It’s a feature…

We must have that sound code in place in order to expand the Port Package program to every part of Des Moines. Because no way the FAA pays for it otherwise.

Economic Development, Environment, Policy, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 04/24/2022

Leave a comment

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) the big highlight is that this is their return to in-person (and hybrid) meetings at Sea-Tac. Other items:

As with the Third Runway, there are a number of signs the Port is moving ahead with the SAMP. Today, the Commission will vote to issue $1.1 billion dollars in intermediate bonds.
On a somewhat more positive note, the Commission will also approve a test plan to determine the safety of large-scale hydrogen storage. There is a growing consensus that hydrogen cells are the only practical method for powering commercial aircraft at any point in the next 40 years. Battery development just isn’t moving ahead fast enough. There are currently hydrogen auto fueling stations, but Sea-Tac Airport measures its storage tanks for Jet-A (kerosene) in the millions of gallons.

The thing about gasoline is that it’s not a fuel, it’s also a wonderfully convenient fuel/energy storage device. Compared to batteries, it’s not only far more energy dense, it’s much lighter in weight. And despite what you might think, it’s not nearly as explosive as most other fuels like… well, liquified hydrogen! 😀

Wednesday: Sea-Tac Airport Roundtable (StART) Meeting (Agenda) the big highlight is that this is their return to in-person (and hybrid) meetings at Sea-Tac.

Thursday: Economic Development Committee (Agenda). Their first meeting of year) Key item: a discussion of the Masonic Home EIS.

Thursday: Municipal Facilities Committee (Agenda) Their first meeting of year)

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) Perhaps the most important item is not on the Agenda. The City Manager will provide the first update on the ARPA Stimulus spending since September 16 where we spent all $9M.

There is an item to accept a Port of Seattle grant to help promote that business grant program. Two things:

I will vote no on it for the same reason I always vote no on these. There is a sentence in there which indicates we support the Century Agenda. Saying so is not a requirement for obtaining the grant so either they just keep cutting/pasting every year or the City really does support the Century Agenda–and if so, they should find work elsewhere.
On a more pleasant note, the narration seems to indicate that program is ready to go now, which would be great news. But my understanding was that we’d be using a third party consultant to set up the program. So… as usual… I have questions. 😀

City Council Meetings are scheduled for Thursdays at 6:00PM at City Hall 21630 11th Avenue S., Suite #C Des Moines WA 98198. They can also be viewed live on Comcast Channel 21/321 or on the City’s YouTube channel. Committee Meetings are either at 4:00PM or 5:00PM, also on Thursdays.

You do not have to sign in to attend a meeting!
The sign-in sheet is only for people wishing to make a Public Comment.

There are three ways to provide Public Comment:

In person: Show up a few minutes before the meeting and sign the sheet. Public Comment is usually conducted at the beginning of the meeting.
By e-mail: All e-mails sent to citycouncil@desmoineswa.gov are considered public comment. They are instantly available to all members of the City Council and the City Clerk who includes them into the record of public comments at the next meeting.
By US Mail: Attn: City Clerk Office, 21630 11th Avenue S., Des Moines WA 98198 no later than 4:00 p.m. day of the meeting. Please provide us with your first and last name and the city in which you live.

All letters or e-mails requesting a specific action are referred by the City Clerk to the appropriate City department.

If you would like a follow up from me, personally please indicate that or call me (206) 878-0578.

The Clerk does not read e-mails to the Council in full; only the subject line. However, we do see them as soon as you send them. Your comments are added to the Agenda Packet available on the City web site following each meeting.

Last Week

Monday: I spoke with Senator Keiser about air quality monitors and how to reduce flights.

Monday: Destination Des Moines. They’ve finalised their calendar and it’s looking good. There will be an Art/Wine Walk and a Holi Festival at Saltwater State Park May 14 and it only gets better from there.

Thursday: I met with Justin Taillon, head of the Hospitality program at Highline College and a board member of Destination Des Moines. He is an interesting person and as a former small restaurant owner I was interested in hearing his thoughts.

Thursday: I want to acknowledge the 100th birthday of Judson Park resident Alene Huntsman. Some friends of hers had hoped to have a birthday party, but it had to be postponed by COVID.

Saturday: I participated in a couple of Earth Day events, including a demonstration project on waste reduction. Waste reduction has become a big ‘thing’ with me. Dealing with ‘trash’ uses at least 3% of C02 emissions, plus the breakdown of plastics into particulates so fine they can’t be seen with the naked eye has begun to be found in everything. I’ve caught sea bass off of West Port and they’re loaded with it.

Numbers and goals

A common story I hear is that “Our downtown was always terrible! All the construction cranes since 2016? That means we’re (finally) moving forward!”

But OTOH, here are a couple of budget numbers from 2008–right before the bottom dropped out. Note the Sales Tax revenue:

Remember: that represents the money that people spend here. It’s as good an indicator as any as to the health of our business community.

OK, now here’s the 2019 Budget.

Just wait a cotton-pickin’ minute! In 2018 we generated pretty much the same sales tax as 2008. Now think about that for a secy-poo. After all the construction cranes, the new hotel, the FAA building, the big additions to Wesley. And still, people do not spend any more money here than they did before the Great Recession.

You can look at this at least two ways

I can see a certain number of saying, “You just proved our point, JC! This is exactly why we need to re-develop that Marina into “the magnet!” Because no matter what we’ve tried, we’ve never been able to get that downtown to earn for us!”

Maybe.

Or, maybe back in 2007, Marine View Drive hosted a surprising variety of interesting small business you’ve forgotten or did not know about which had things people liked to spend money on–even though the buildings were just as funky. One can bemoan “the death of retail” and speak about how “QFC couldn’t make it”. But the fact is, people were happy to use a nice local wine shop. And they were just as happy to visit Tyrone’s Rib Shack then for the same reason they enjoy Dat Creole Soul now: you can’t beat a good plate of southern cooking.

Aside from all the vast macro-economic stuff, maybe if you put out a good product and you get some basic skills at running a business, you draw customers and make money.

But the real message I want to send in this post is this: we should find out for sure, like any for realz business would, rather than just gambling with other people’s money (meaning yours, by the way) which has been our modus operandi since I’ve lived here. And since we just spent $1M on a ferry pilot project, there’s never a better time to start.

It’ll bring tens of thousands…

I keep beating on this one clip of then Deputy Mayor Mahoney because I’ve heard that same hyperbole so many times over the years. Here’s Mayor Sheckler betting Deputy Mayor Kaplan a lunch that the hotel will get built. Perhaps the reason the bet was so low-stakes is because by that point it was no longer about making a ton of money. Success had been reduced and re-defined as getting it built.

Magnetism…

The central premise of “economic development” here seems to have always had something to do with that ‘magnetism’. What has been said over and over is some variation on this:

We should build (x) because

In the short term, it will create a big ol’ bag o’ one-time money and some great construction jobs.
But in the long term, the project will be a magnet. It will draw people (and their wallets) inexorably towards the downtown. Now, if said project turns out to generate ongoing revenues? Super Green, baby. But even if it doesn’t, that does not matter. It’s the drawing power that matters.

That’s been the story here. Over and over…

We heard that with Sheckler and the hotel.
We heard that with the FAA building.
We heard that with SR3.

And now I’m hearing it with all the Marina Redevelopment. But the innovation this time is that it’s not based on a single draw, but rather it’s a team-up:

The ferry will be the magnet
The hotel will be the magnet
The Adaptive Purpose Building will be the magnet
The Stairs will be the magnet
And SR3 will be the magnet

And even if any one of them is individually is not… er… ‘attractive’ enough?

No Matter Puny Earth Man. The combined force of all those powers will generate a super-magnet that no mortal consumer can resist! Muwhahahaaa!

Sorry, I got carried away.

Because the one thing all these projects have had in common with an *Avengers Movie? That magnetism was all based on fantasy, not on any business case.

Misdirection…

In none of those projects was there a legit plan describing what the project would do for the City and how it would get us there. It was always just “Hotel on Pac Highway? Great idea, Bob!”

The only thing that actually panned out was the one-time money. And if something happens over and over, ya gotta start wondering if that wasn’t the whole point in the first place: the temporary construction jobs, the one fat check and… the photo op with the shovels.

I left my crystal ball at home…

At our recent planning meeting I beat on the idea of a sales tax by geography report. For years I’ve been told that it was illegal. It’s not illegal. Other cities have been doing it for a long time.

It’s not just the chronic misinformation, it’s the fact that we’re do damned uncurious. If you don’t want to know how much each part of the City earns, it tells me you don’t really care about how anything performs.

When anyone presents a business plan for a new restaurant or a hotel, or even an entire shopping center, they are expected to show investors (that would be you, dear voter) some revenue projections and an explanation of how they’ll get there.

Those are things we’ve never had here. We’ve never treated economic development like (wait for it…) a business; something with goals.

And that’s sad, because finance people are really good at forecasting various numbers, even highly variable items such as sales tax or red light cameras. You don’t need some ‘crystal ball’ as our City Manager is fond of saying. Most of the Finance Directors we’ve had have come very close in their projections–even during times when we were on a big rollercoaster. Well done to them.

It’s time to get serious…

My colleagues seem to have decided that we should change the entire purpose of the Marina from being primarily a place for recreation to being exactly that tourism magnet–the economic driver of our City for the next generation.

And if that’s the case? I expect it to be managed like our lives depend on it. If we’re going into the hospitality and tourism businesses, I expect to know how much money are we going to make, and how we’re going to make it. Especially if that money has to hit $50M to pay for dock replacement. This is serious. We are literally betting our future on it.

But at that strategy meeting what you did not hear is anything like, “Our goal is that by 2030 our General Fund will be at ($n) million dollars, because we want to be able to do (x,y,z). OK gang, that’s the destination. Now: how do we get there?”

I have literally never seen our City set any targets, monitor them and change direction along the way in order to make sure we hit those targets.

We have a fiduciary responsibility to maximise the return of your investment in Des Moines. That doesn’t mean, “That ferry sure looks nice.” No. If we decide that we want to get into the tourism and hospitality business, then our job is to implement proposals with the best possible earning potential. The best.

Another possibility…

Now, I have 30 years of reasons to be skeptical about any development projects here. And the current Marina plans are no different–because they have no numbers and no goals.

And that sales tax by zone report that was ‘impossible’? I’ve run across that sort of impossibility many times. Maybe we could do a lot more to improve our downtown without selling off the Marina or gambling on a ferry. Yes, even with the landlords and the funky buildings. But again, it’s impossible to say without… numbers and goals.

This is a matter of equity and justice. We don’t have enough money to do a lot of things we should be doing. Pick an area: public safety, health, education, parks, seniors, roads, transit. We have an obligation to earn the money to get there and with that comes an even more sober obligation to make economic development decisions based on hard data.

_*I know. That the magnetism thing is actually from another Marvel franchise. I just couldn’t find a shot of all the X-Men doing that combo-attack thing you see at the climax of every superhero movie. More fake news.