Most Recent Article [more articles below]

Previous Articles

Mid-Weekly Update: 06/30/2021

Leave a comment on Mid-Weekly Update: 06/30/2021

Heat? Too many appointments? Yeah, I got a lot of excuses for being late. Again. One excuse: I spent a few hours on Sunday handing out about 90 cold packs to residents. Normally, no one has any interest, but I get these all the time and if you’d like to have a few on hand for fishing, picnics, general cooling functions, just let me know.

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Wednesday: Burien Climate Action Plan. This is something that every City should be working on: ways that we can reduce our climate footprint, both as a City and to give residents some tools to work as well.

Wednesday: Des Moines Historical Society. This may be their first formal meeting in almost two years. Now that the pandemic is over, I hope to hear how they are moving forward with their plans to remodel and build a better web site. I cannot tell you how important I think this is. Des Moines has an absolutely fascinating history–it was actually one of the first white settlements in the entire region. If we could present this information properly, it would be a tremendous asset, not just in terms of education and civic pride, but also in terms of marketing the City.

Thursday: Puget Sound Regional Council Growth Management Policy Board. The PSRC is releasing an update on their housing strategy.

Thursday: Meeting with HealthPoint Midway management. HealthPoint is a fantastic community resource that has been under-utilised. (For example, did you know you could walk over there right now and get your COVID vaccine whether you’re a member or not? I’m talking to you Woodmont.) We’ll discuss ways they and the City could potentially partner up to educate residents in the South end of town on their community programs.

If you get the impression that regional leaders have housing on the brain these days, you’re not wrong.  Long-time homeowners and people in Senior Living have been somewhat shielded from the issue here, but a lack of housing is a huge deal in Des Moines. Rents are crazy high and waiting lists are super-long. And all that makes it very difficult for young families trying to get started here. The problem, as I see it, is that all very different words are getting conflated “affordable”, “housing”, “homelessness”. They’re not the same thing. But by lumping them together, they all get demonised so as not to build anything.

Last Week

Monday: I attended a seminar on Chronic Homelessness hosted by former Governor Christine Gregoire. Here is the presentation. I’ve been studying this for a good while now and I asked a question that I can never seem to get an answer to: “How many?” The chart below is the only thing I could find and vague is a word that comes to mind. 😀 (I spent part of this week researching why we don’t get accurate counts. More to follow.)

Monday: Destination Des Moines meeting. A kerfuffle over what can and can’t be scheduled. No fireworks, but there are some cool events coming and there will be the Blues And Brews in August.

Tuesday-Thursday: Association Of Washington Cities (AWC) Annual Conference.  A get-together of local electeds from all over Washington. There were seminars on all sorts of governance topics. You’re supposed to get credit towards something called a “Certificate Of Municipal…” … er… something. Councilmember Rob Back had one.

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) Many of you are objecting to the parking lot project which would eliminate North SeaTac Park. The advocates don’t particularly need my help, but I commented because I felt like I needed to emphasize for those activists that the Port’s standard line “we’ll address this fully in the environmental review process” is simply disingenuous and they should not be distracted by that. I urge everyone to sign up to help Save North SeaTac Park.

Thursday: South King County Housing Homelessness Partners Executive Committee. My comments re. Governor Gregoire’s Webinar would apply here as well.

I hope you’ve survived the heat. And if you haven’t? Well, you’re not reading this anyway, so… 😀

Is it just me, or does it feel like these low-rent ’emergencies’ are basically coming somewhat constantly now? I ask because I’ve had this *bee in my bonnet for a long time about the topic of Emergency Management. It was one of the original things that made my colleagues and the administration love me so much, but the reason I gave them a bit of a hard time goes back several years…

Thanks for the heads up…

In September 2013, Water District 54 took one of their routine readings, got a positive for E-Coli and issued a Boil Water Notice. As prescribed by law, they then took a second reading, got a negative and that was that as far as the *immediate public health issue.

The thing that nagged at  me was that there was no mechanism for notifying the public. I went door to door that evening alerting my neighbours. Thankfully, WD54 is a very small water district (1,500 homes) and it turned out that there was no actual health problem. But what killed me was that, three days later, I received a letter in the mail notifying me of the Boil Water Notice.

So I emailed then Mayor Dave and we got into this whole thing about what the City’s responsibility is in these situations. (Now say what you want about Dave–and I do–but the guy always returned my phone calls and emails.) My feeling was, then and now, that I don’t give two shits whose ‘responsibility’ it is, I would want the public notified. I asked him if he might contact Comcast and see if they could do for us what they do with Amber Alerts (throw up emergency messages) and he told me no way. (I brought up the same idea at the Comcast Renewal vote last fall and my colleagues looked at me like… you know that look dogs give you when they cock their head? :D)

Another day, another spill…

As most of you know, we had another spill at Midway Sewer on June 16th which closed the beach. And again, it wasn’t ‘our fault’. And again, I don’t care. What I do care about is that so many agencies–including the City Of Des Moines–were notified almost immediately, but for some reason, the public wasn’t notified until June 22nd.

Since I started doing this Weekly Update, I’ve been bugging about our infra-structure. It’s boring, expensive and the public expresses reluctance to pay for it. But this is like the fifth such incident since I was elected and I keep trying to tell ya: it’s gonna keep happening. OK, maybe not that thing, but some other thing. These ‘100 year events’ keep happening like every year now.

In the meantime, I believe it is the City’s responsibility to have a system to inform all residents as soon as we know about any possible threat to public health and safety and currently we do not.

See all these different agencies are independent governments and agencies. Water Districts, Sewer, Utilities. And the fact is, they don’t have the budget for comprehensive warning systems. And why should they? When anything happens, one of the first things they do is to alert the City.

So if another agency doesn’t have the capacity to reach the entire community, we must find a way. There can be no excuse for any delay.

Now, we do have programs like CodeRed (which you should all sign up for). But the fact is that you probably haven’t signed up for it. And besides, I think this is too important to leave to some opt-in deal like that. I think it is the government’s responsibility to figure out how to get the word out when it comes to matters of public health.

One last thing…

Hero of the Left Jon Stewart was on TV the other night with a skit that would’ve been unthinkable even a few months ago.

The thing that’s frustrating about politics is that a certain amount of the time there are things that you just can’t talk about. The Left frequently bashes the Right for closed-mindedness, but in this case, because the message was coming from Trump, the perfectly reasonable notion that the virus might have emanated from a lab designed to study corona virii was out of bounds.

Since the day at that Joint Emergency Operations Meeting last March, I’ve been branded by some of my colleagues as somehow ‘down on police’, when all I asked for was to focus a little less on the morale building and give the public some basic information on how the program works. The administration thought I was snippy and unsupportive, but the fact is that I had shown a genuine interest in emergency response years before I joined the City Council.

This is my worldview: We cheer when the City pulls off a Cooling Center at the last minute. Thank you. Really. But a fair question should also be: Given our demographic of elderly and low income residents, why don’t we have that kind of thing ready to go in advance?

And again, I’m not picking on WD54 or Midway Sewer or Police or anyone. I just want to know so we can do better next time.

Now, let’s get real girlfriend: even if the makeup of the Council was radically different, I’m not sure I could get attention on these sorts of things. They are technical, boring and there always seem to be more immediate passions. Part of the reason I come off as cranky to so many people is because I want everyone to focus on these  nuts and bolts long-game issues. And I want everyone to be able to look at how we’re doing without defensiveness and partisanship. They’re just too important.

Because, †all bullshit aside, we keep dodging these bullets. In fact, we’re not even realising that they are bullets. But sooner or later, one is going to land.


*this is me using my family-friendly-filter. 🙂

†My wife’s fave expression of all time. No filter.

Yes, but it’s a dry heat…

1 Comment on Yes, but it’s a dry heat…

I hope you’ve survived the heat. And if you haven’t? Well, you’re not reading this anyway, so… 😀

Is it just me, or does it feel like these low-rent ’emergencies’ are basically coming somewhat constantly now? I ask because I’ve had this *bee in my bonnet for a long time about the topic of Emergency Management. It was one of the original things that made my colleagues and the administration love me so much, but the reason I gave them a bit of a hard time goes back several years…

Thanks for the heads up…

In September 2013, Water District 54 took one of their routine readings, got a positive for E-Coli and issued a Boil Water Notice. As prescribed by law, they then took a second reading, got a negative and that was that as far as the *immediate public health issue.

The thing that nagged at  me was that there was no mechanism for notifying the public. I went door to door that evening alerting my neighbours. Thankfully, WD54 is a very small water district (1,500 homes) and it turned out that there was no actual health problem. But what killed me was that, three days later, I received a letter in the mail notifying me of the Boil Water Notice.

So I emailed then Mayor Dave and we got into this whole thing about what the City’s responsibility is in these situations. (Now say what you want about Dave–and I do–but the guy always returned my phone calls and emails.) My feeling was, then and now, that I don’t give two shits whose ‘responsibility’ it is, I would want the public notified. I asked him if he might contact Comcast and see if they could do for us what they do with Amber Alerts (throw up emergency messages) and he told me no way. (I brought up the same idea at the Comcast Renewal vote last fall and my colleagues looked at me like… you know that look dogs give you when they cock their head? :D)

Another day, another spill…

As most of you know, we had another spill at Midway Sewer on June 16th which closed the beach. And again, it wasn’t ‘our fault’. And again, I don’t care. What I do care about is that so many agencies–including the City Of Des Moines–were notified almost immediately, but for some reason, the public wasn’t notified until June 22nd.

Since I started doing this Weekly Update, I’ve been bugging about our infra-structure. It’s boring, expensive and the public expresses reluctance to pay for it. But this is like the fifth such incident since I was elected and I keep trying to tell ya: it’s gonna keep happening. OK, maybe not that thing, but some other thing. These ‘100 year events’ keep happening like every year now.

In the meantime, I believe it is the City’s responsibility to have a system to inform all residents as soon as we know about any possible threat to public health and safety and currently we do not.

See all these different agencies are independent governments and agencies. Water Districts, Sewer, Utilities. And the fact is, they don’t have the budget for comprehensive warning systems. And why should they? When anything happens, one of the first things they do is to alert the City.

So if another agency doesn’t have the capacity to reach the entire community, we must find a way. There can be no excuse for any delay.

Now, we do have programs like CodeRed (which you should all sign up for). But the fact is that you probably haven’t signed up for it. And besides, I think this is too important to leave to some opt-in deal like that. I think it is the government’s responsibility to figure out how to get the word out when it comes to matters of public health.

One last thing…

Hero of the Left Jon Stewart was on TV the other night with a skit that would’ve been unthinkable even a few months ago.

The thing that’s frustrating about politics is that a certain amount of the time there are things that you just can’t talk about. The Left frequently bashes the Right for closed-mindedness, but in this case, because the message was coming from Trump, the perfectly reasonable notion that the virus might have emanated from a lab designed to study corona virii was out of bounds.

Since the day at that Joint Emergency Operations Meeting last March, I’ve been branded by some of my colleagues as somehow ‘down on police’, when all I asked for was to focus a little less on the morale building and give the public some basic information on how the program works. The administration thought I was snippy and unsupportive, but the fact is that I had shown a genuine interest in emergency response years before I joined the City Council.

This is my worldview: We cheer when the City pulls off a Cooling Center at the last minute. Thank you. Really. But a fair question should also be: Given our demographic of elderly and low income residents, why don’t we have that kind of thing ready to go in advance?

And again, I’m not picking on WD54 or Midway Sewer or Police or anyone. I just want to know so we can do better next time.

Now, let’s get real girlfriend: even if the makeup of the Council was radically different, I’m not sure I could get attention on these sorts of things. They are technical, boring and there always seem to be more immediate passions. Part of the reason I come off as cranky to so many people is because I want everyone to focus on these  nuts and bolts long-game issues. And I want everyone to be able to look at how we’re doing without defensiveness and partisanship. They’re just too important.

Because, †all bullshit aside, we keep dodging these bullets. In fact, we’re not even realising that they are bullets. But sooner or later, one is going to land.


*this is me using my family-friendly-filter. 🙂

†My wife’s fave expression of all time. No filter.

Categories Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 06/20/2021

2 Comments on Weekly Update: 06/20/2021

Happy Fathers Day!

The world seems to be getting back to normal. Ish. I was honored to attend the first unmasked event I’ve been to in over a year: a combo Fathers Day/Graduation party for the son of one our residents. This is a real American success story. The father immigrated here, started a business, bought a house in Des Moines that had been a code enforcement problem for years and transformed it into something you’d see in the Seattle Times Sunday Magazine. So to celebrate the first member of his family graduating college, he did it right: He hosted a full-on Banda–a traditional Mexican group with tuba, accordion, mariachis. It’s gonna take me a bit of work to get used to hearing people celebrate in public like that.

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Monday: I attended a seminar on Chronic Homelessness hosted by former Governor Christine Gregoire. Here is the presentation. I’ve been studying this for a good while now and I asked a question that I can never seem to get an answer to: “How many?” How many homeless people are there specifically in Des Moines? The only data anyone ever points to is this ‘one night count’ the County does every year. It is wildly inaccurate but no one ever proposes anything more rigorous. At the risk of being my usual cranky pants, this is obviously intentional. People in the field seem not to want to do such detailed mapping because they don’t want NIMBYism to get into the discussion. They’re terrified of the common resident complaint against any affordable housing “If you build it they will come.” ie. that we should never do anything because all that would do would be to act as a magnet for homeless people from all over. I strenuously disagree. I think that the public is deeply cynical about the entire issue. They see how much money has already been spent, without great results, and that lack of transparency only feeds into their skepticism. At some point, we need to get public buy-in and we need the same analytics to this issue as we would demand from any other public policy.

Monday: Destination Des Moines meeting. Apparently, the Fireworks are canceled. Now: this was the first time I’ve actually said anything since I’ve been attending. I brought up the notion of printing restaurant flyers to distribute to Wesley, Judson and the FAA people. That was the whole point of creating TakeOutDesMoines last year. But for a bunch of stupid reasons, the flyers never got distributed. I hope the group makes that happen this year because I keep trying to tell people that there are a lot of people in these three places who have no idea about our restaurants but who are potential lunch customers. 🙂

Tuesday-Thursday: Association Of Washington Cities (AWC) Annual Conference. I love this thing. It’s a get-together of local electeds from all over Washington. What always puzzles me is how very few people attend from around here. Some attend their first year just to see what’s what, but every year there are a gazillion seminars on local government that are extremely helpful. When you hear me talk about ‘how other cities do things’, this is the value. You learn that every city is facing similar challenges and its fascinating to see how many different ways there are to tackle them.

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) Many of you are objecting to the parking lot project which would eliminate North SeaTac Park. The advocates don’t particularly need my help, but I commented because I felt like I needed to emphasize for those activists that the Port’s standard line “we’ll address this fully in the environmental review process” is simply disingenuous and they should not be distracted by that. I know it  seems counter-intuitive, but the NEPA/SEPA process is not meant to save that park. If the Commission does not act pro-actively, the likely outcome would still be a parking lot–but with some doodads to make it more ‘environmentally friendly’.

Thursday: South King County Housing Homelessness Partners Executive Committee. My comments re. Governor Gregoire’s Webinar would apply here as well. SKHHP has been at this now for almost two years and I honestly can’t see anyone, you know, building any housing any time soon: market-rate or otherwise. I’m no rocket scientist, but my guess is that, if you want to deal with a chronic shortage of affordable housing, you’re gonna have to actually start building some affordable housing. (Actually even before that, you gotta stop making ‘affordable’ a dog whistle for “crappy”.)

I’m cranky about it because, as the pandemic comes to an end, we’re about to see a whole lotta disruption. Eviction bans will end. The utility districts will come looking for all their back due money. Average rent in DM is now pushing $1,600. In Kent, it’s over $2,000. You’re starting to see these signs now, right? I saw them in 2008 and I am concerned.

You should care about this, because instability in any neighborhood makes every neighborhood less safe.

Last Week

Tuesday: South County Transportation Board (SCATBd). There was a presentation on the national legislative agenda of the Biden administration on transportation planning. It’s fascinating at a macro-level.

Tuesday: Burien Airport Committee Meeting I’m continuing to pitch the SeatacNoise.Info Remote Works Better proposal to all the airport communities. Basically, let’s get every government to start thinking about remote work and reducing the number of flights by continuing to use Zoom.

Thursday: Both the Environment Committee and Transportation Committee meetings were cancelled with no explanation. For those new to the show, although these are labeled as ‘Council’ Committees, the staff actually runs the show. So staff can (and do) cancel meetings. Or the Chair will do so without asking fellow Committee members. And if a Committee member asks, “Why?” the response will be, “Well, the staff had better things to do.”  Add this to the list of things that will change.

So, JC, why does that bug you so much?

Glad you asked: These meetings are max forty five minutes. A new Councilmember comes into any of these committees and struggles to learn the material. The meetings are a venue to learn about the nuts and bolts. And I don’t think asking staff to spend 45 minutes a month educating the Council (their bosses, mind you) is a lot to ask. Long time City watchers (you know, all three of you 😀 ) will recall that immediately upon leaving City Council in 2017, Dave Kaplan was hired by the City Manager as a transportation consultant. CM Kaplan had been the CM assigned to SCATbd. And the explanation given for his consultant contract was that the City “needed Mr. Kaplan’s transportation experience at a critical time in the SR-509 process. New Councilmember Mahoney was  “not ready”. Uh huh. So, if committee experience is so danged valuable, we should do everything possible to get CMs trained up as quickly as possible.

Also, committee meetings are the time when CMs can bring forward new business. We’re supposed to legislate from time to time. So when staff cancels a meeting, it cuts off any CM from an opportunity to present their ideas.

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) (Video)  See below.(you can sign up to watch or comment from the Agenda.) There’s some Consent Agenda stuff that actually mattered–we’re moving ahead with the bulkhead replacement.

Saturday: I attended a candidate forum at Wesley Terrace with Gene Achziger and Soleil Lewis and about a dozen residents. The residents asked some great questions and what struck me was the fact that all of them were about things not having to do with Wesley. They asked about homelessness, public safety, programs for kids, the downtown and a lot of nuts and bolts about how Council-Manager government works.

I have railed many times about how difficult it was for me to campaign at Wesley and Judson in 2019 (I was constantly being ordered of the property by management, even when invited by residents.) The fact that the residents of Wesley were able to do this with the blessing of management is a very positive step! Seniors vote in the highest percentage in Des Moines so it’s critical that candidates get to know them.

Council Meeting Recap

Bulkhead replacement

We voted to approve the Marina North Seawall replacement on the Consent Agenda. Candidate pro-tip: One of the many procedural things I hope to change is that we do this weird thing where we have items on our Consent Agenda, but still have a full presentation and discussion. My feeling is that, if an item of business has a presentation and a discussion, it should not be on the Consent Agenda.

Anyhoo, there were several rhetorical questions from my colleagues and I had one myself: I bothered the City Engineer to note that four items from our Capital Budget, totally about $350,000 were being pushed off into the future in order to fund this project. I did this to make a point: We’re strapped!

Thank you. 🙂

Seriously, one of the ongoing disagreements I have with my colleagues is how to characterize the state of the City’s financial health. Yes, the City was on the edge of bankruptcy six years ago. Yes, we pay the bills now and have the proper reserves. Great. But we struggle to do anything more than that. Even with a generous grant from the State, we still had to stop work on things like playground equipment and Barnes Creek Trail and a road improvement project in North Hill that people have been waiting on since for-ehhhver. I want the public (and candidates) to understand where we’re really at. Candidates tend to promise stuff, not realizing the money has to come from somewhere. And the public often gets confused–they hear the City saying how ‘well’ we’re doing, then wonder why more things don’t get fixed.

Farmers Market Kerfuffle

I pulled the Farmers Market rental agreement item from the Consent Agenda. It was yet another one of those, “The City Manager won’t answer my question” deals. The City Manager decided to reduce their annual rent from $35,000 down to $100 for the second year in a row. I simply asked,

“Did the FM Board request this or did you offer it?”

And the reply I got was basically “Why do you want to know?” (sigh). So CM Buxton then replies with, “I talked with their board. I know the answer. But I won’t tell you until you first tell me why you want to know.”

I replied to both as follows:

It. Doesn't. Matter.

If -you-, or any other CM, asked a question of the administration (and
-especially- if it concerned an agenda item), I would expect that you
receive a full and cheerful response. 'Why do you want to know?' got
nothing to do with it.

If a CM wants to know? Don’t argue. Just answer the question. When I’m filling out my taxes or some other government form I can’t put “Why do you want to know?” on line #29.

But how’s this: We’re effectively giving them a $34,999 grant. I’m not used to giving people organizations money unless they ask for it. And if they ask for it, I then want to know, “Why do you need it?” That’s not a nosy question. It’s your tax dollars. There’s supposed to be an application and a process.

And then there’s this: A lot of the public has a natural curiosity as to how well the FM is doing. Last year, it was obvious that they needed a break. This year? I have no idea. So my hope was to gain some general sense of how they expect to do this summer.

Plus, remember that a big part of the sales pitch for the Marina Redevelopment is “Year Round Farmers Market!” Which sounds pretty fab, right? But the other part of that sales pitch is that the Adaptive Purpose Building is meant to be a primary revenue generator for rebuild the docks. That being the case, we need to know the realistic cash flow potential of all potential tenants.

Now: everyone loves the Farmers Market. Including moi. I shouldn’t even have to say that. But one of the things I truly resent is the fact that every time I as perfectly reasonable questions regarding your tax dollars, I get push back like, “Oh, you must really hate the Farmers Market.”

LGBTQ Pride Month

The City read a proclamation declaring June LGBTQ Pride Month. I kinda wish we had members of the public show up and give us some ideas on how to do more to celebrate. If you have some thoughts, please let me know. I’ll just mention again, on my auto-play rant on ‘volunteerism’ that, if you want some other form of celebration (parade, etc.) you gotta show up to make it happen. 🙂

Police Update

Chief Of Police Ken Thomas did a presentation called ‘Police Update’. Ahead of the meeting I asked our City Manager: “Can you give me a one sentence preview of what this will be about?”

To which he replied:

Not sure what value a quick preview will provide to you prior to City Council hearing this Police report.

Ignoring the rank insubordination, I’ll tell you, Dear Reader the ‘value’. In the past two weeks the City Council received more letters concerning public safety than at any time I have served. If the public knows the general subjects to be covered, they are more likely to tune in and feel like they are being heard. Add this to the list of things that need to change.

Salmon Recovery

There was a presentation on WRIA 9, salmon habitat recovery, which for you, largely concerns ‘de-armoring’–getting rid of hard seawalls near places where salmon spawn. Salmon are seriously picky when it comes to procreation. They hate seawalls. If we had tried to build a Marina today, I doubt we could get permitting because any man-made barrier lowers fish counts. The only good news is that, by participating in these programs, we are eligible for all sorts of grants to redevelop areas like Massey Creek at the south end of the Yacht Club.

Committee Recordings

Under New Business, I proposed that the recordings of Committee Meetings should be made public. As I’ve been saying for a while, everyone would see the little red ‘recording’ light on the Zoom window, but the City would insist “Nope, we’re not recording ’em. No sir.”

This is another flavour of the kind of routine frustration I just mentioned with the Farmers Market. The job of Councilmember is at least ninety percent oversight. You gotta be able to ask reasonable questions about everything without having to worry that you’re being insensitive or unsupportive.

Now just as a review, New Business items are not votes to take action. They are decisions to put a proposal on a future City Council Meeting Agenda. You propose something and, if you get the support of two other CMs (DM Mahoney and CM Martinelli in this case), it moves forward. The entire discussion consists of making the Agenda item specific enough so that the administration can research the particulars of cost and language.

We decided to move forward on two related but separate items:

  1. We will vote to make any existing Committee Meeting recordings public and also to make any future Committee recordings public. I was a bit of a stickler for language on this because, as you can tell if you watch the Mayor’s comments, the Council still does not know exactly when the City began recording Committee Meetings. (See above frustration. 😀 )
  2. The administration will come forward with a budget and technical requirements to record future meetings when we go back to conducting committee meetings ‘in real life’. One objection to doing this was always that the North Conference Room (where meetings are held) is kinda small and the IT guys said it was challenging to set up video gear. Not sure I always bought that 100%, but we’ll see. 🙂

My Comments

The rest of my comments were basically to encourage the public to get organised. I make comments like this all the time, I know they annoy staff (as an engineer, they would annoy me) but… tough noogies. 🙂

At bottom, a City is a customer service operation: We respond to customer requests for police, transportation, permitting and on and on.

Every week the City Council gets complaints/suggestions about various neighbourhood problems–often traffic or public safety. We seem to be getting them a lot more these days for various reasons.

Most of the time these letters read to me like the resident is trying to inform the City of something they assume it doesn’t already know.

I dunno if this will be comforting or annoying but, NEWSFLASH! 99.99% of the time, whatever you’re reporting or wherever you’re reporting about, it’s something the City has already heard about between one and four squillion times. 😀

City engineers periodically take an inventory of roads, accident reports, traffic data, etc. They use a data-driven scoring system to prioritise what/when/how to address these things based on how much money we have to spend every year. It’s technocratic and fair.

But, let’s be real girlfriend. If you look at the Transportation Improvements Project sheet or any ‘analytics driven’  City service, there are a lot of projects that score similarly. So there is absolutely no reason why, if your neighbourhood is more engaged, that you shouldn’t get your project done first. And in fact, that is exactly what happens here on Planet Des Moines.

The neighbourhoods that are better organized get more attention. You can call it ‘democracy’, ‘the squeaky wheel’, but if you care about your neighbourhood, you should pay attention.

DPW Carver was right to say that ‘this is not a popularity contest’. But this is democracy. If your neighbourhood wants something enough, all things being equal, it deserves a bump on the priority list.

Redondo is getting attention now, frankly not based 100% on ‘analytics’. I love y’all, but if you think Redondo is objectively ‘worse’ in some regards than any of a number of DM neighbourhoods? That’s because you don’t get around as much as I do. 😀 And that’s fine. Again: that’s democracy.

Reporting is not complaining

That said, the City (including policing) has a fixed number of resources. We have to know what’s going on in order to allocate properly.

What concerns me is when residents say, “I don’t like to complain.”

This whole notion of ‘complaining’ has gotsta go! The word ‘complaint’ has become code to shut down perfectly reasonable discussions. Stop saying “complain”. Instead, say “report”. Every time you have an issue? Report it. You’re not ‘complaining’. You’re providing the raw data, the police or the engineer needs to move your issue to the top of the stack.

When people tell me, “JC you complain so much.”, I politely tell them to stop complaining so much. 🙂

It’s your neighbourhood

And one last thing: I’m trying to get you to build your neighbourhood. I first got involved in local politics because my street was going downhill. I bought my house because I loved my neighbours. But after the Great Recession one guy sold his house to some no account landlord–who rented it to a copper-thieving tweaker. And all it took was that one guy to ruin the entire street. One by one, all my long term neighbours moved. It’s taken a decade for my street to recover. Sound familiar?

Your issues are probably quite different. Doesn’t matter. I want you to report and advocate for your street because I want you invested in your neighbours and your neighbourhood. This is as essential to securing the future of Des Moines as any City service we might provide.

Categories Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 06/13/2021

2 Comments on Weekly Update: 06/13/2021

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Tuesday: South County Transportation Board (SCATBd)

Tuesday: Burien Airport Committee Meeting I’m continuing to pitch the SeatacNoise.Info Remote Works Better proposal to all the airport communities. Basically, let’s get every government to start thinking about remote work and reducing the number of flights by continuing to use Zoom.

Thursday: Both the Environment Committee and Transportation Committee meetings were cancelled with no explanation. For those new to the show, the notion that these meetings get cancelled by who knows who, without explanation or input, has gotta stop at some point.

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) (you can sign up to watch or comment from the Agenda.) There’s some Consent Agenda stuff that actually matters–we’re moving ahead with the bulkhead replacement. But among the things that will actually be discussed:
1. The City will read a proclamation declaring June LGBTQ Pride Month.

2. The City Manager will do a presentation called ‘Police Update’. No idea what that means, however there has been a flurry of resident complaints about noise and disruption from cars–in both Redondo and other neighborhoods, including the Marina District.

3. There will be a presentation on WRIA 9, which means salmon habitat recovery. This is (yet another) one of those things where it’s easy to be cynical. I hope by now you understand my sincere concern for environmental issues. However, the most practical aspect of a lot of these projects is that they afford the City really significant monetary opportunities to develop the affected areas (under the guise of salmon recovery). So far, actual improvement of salmon returns has not been achieved here. I’m not it’s not worth it to keep trying and the money is definitely nice to have. I’m just trying to be clear that, as a State we are spending an unbelievable amount of money on these fish–and so far, they just aren’t showing proper appreciation, by, you know, surviving.

Friday: UW Aviation Solutions Summit (sign up!)

Saturday: Destination Des Moines sponsored Downtown Cleanup (sign up!)

Last Week

Monday: Meeting with 33rd State Representative Tina Orwall. I’m pitching something pretty mundane sounding called Remote Works Better. This may be the only good idea I ever have for immediately reducing noise and pollution around Sea-Tac Airport. The notion is pretty simple: with Zoom we were able painlessly reduce a whole lot of flights and car traffic and we just keep doing that whenever possible. A lot of air travel is simply unnecessary. We just have to realize that in 2020, we proved it.

Monday: I spoke with Noemie Maxwell, who is organizing to stop the removal of the North SeaTac Park in order to build an airport parking lot. The loss of tree cover has been brutal for all the communities surrounding the airport. Please sign her petition: https://www.kctreeequity.org/

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Meeting. (Agenda) The notable thing here was a presentation on their 2021 Legislative Agenda. You can tell how a government really feels based on two things: their budget (what they spend money on) and their LA (what they are lobbying for.) And frankly, it’s not looking good. After several years of some minor optimism, I have to tell it like it is: the Port is becoming steadily more entrenched against the environmental interests of all airport communities. It has done an absolutely magnificent job of appearing to care about environmental issues, but doing almost nothing material. The pandemic has given the Port the perfect excuse to be even less aggressive (if that was possible) on these issues and leadership in all the fence line communities seem perfectly fine with the notion that “this is as good as it gets.”

Wednesday: Meeting with King County Councilmember Dave Upthegrove on the County Climate Action Plan—see Monday. :D. Same topic.

Wednesday: Des Moines Marina Association Meeting. Most of the time was spent discussing ‘dry stack storage’ which we gotta get into at some point. I guess the main stat I want to mention is that the total paid membership is less than 40–so there are, what, seven hundred freeloaders? 😀 But more seriously, the total attendance at these meetings tends to be less than ten–which includes two Councilmembers (the Deputy Mayor and I) and two City Staff. Usually zero members of any Condo association and certainly none of the general public. All I’m getting at is that what is driving a lot of the Marina Redevelopment–is truly only a handful of people. Because oftenn when the discussion seems only of interest to boaters, a lot of the time there is crossover. More soon.

Sunday: I attended the ribbon cutting for the new Organic Blend restaurant off of Marine View Drive and 225th. (I gotta be honest, the address on Google says 22341 but that’s a bit confusing.)

2003 Furniture Store Guy

Another old guy reference: There’s this moment in the movie Amadeus, where the Emperor walks in on a rehearsal of Mozart’s newest music and he sees something so obviously wrong he’s rendered speechless with confusion.

My ‘fix the web site’ proposal

At last week’s City Council Meeting, I felt a lot like this guy (not like an Emperor 😀 ). You have an issue you care about and you can’t understand why other people don’t see what you see. It’s just obvious. 😀

That’s how I feel about our City’s web site. So I made one of the the stupider speeches of my relatively short career–basically along the lines of

“um… er… could… um… er… somebody… um… you know… please… er… uh…  well… fix it?’)

Really productive.

I’ve been thinking about this because, at the end of the day, you get elected to convince people to do things, not to be ‘right’. If neither your colleagues  (or the public) sees what you see, you’re kind of a failure.

Two other issues…

Beyond the transparency and public engagement issues there are two other problems that I thought were kinda obvious for both my colleagues and the public. They are not and I guess that’s also on me. I’ll summarize here and then, if you give a crap, some details below.

  • The current web site is challenging for a significant percentage of our community–many seniors, but also people with disabilities and ESL. That is a not small number of residents (Have I mentioned recently that seniors vote upwards of 90% in some neighborhoods? For a City that prides itself on a commitment to seniors that’s not great.)
  • Our digital presence does not properly promote the City’s image and values. It does not look like the web site of a $100 million corporation that wants to attract entrepreneurs and growth.

These are not separate deals. They demonstrate a mindset that goes way beyond a web site. At my old company we had a nickname for it, we called it “Furniture Store Guy”.

Ah, the good ol’ days…

At the dawn of history, when many organizations still had either no or terrible web sites (you know, 2003 😀 ), my company would have a fairly regular argument with skeptical clients about ‘good enough’. How much dough did they really need to put into their digital presence? Here’s a quote from a client who owned a chain of furniture stores (the kind that used to advertise every week in newspapers.)

“Nobody visits the web site, so why are you telling me to spend money on the web site?”

Now I have some problems with this logic, but this guy was no dummy. He had built a successful business. He felt that it was the best use of his resources to put money into things that had been working for decades. However, he didn’t see that the world about to shift from newspapers to smartphones. And he didn’t see how the rest of the world was starting to see his stores as kinda long in the tooth. So he made the decision to have a digital presence that he considered ‘good enough’.

This is democracy…

It took me a while to grasp that the City’s digital presence is really my problem. It’s not only OK with my colleagues and the administration, it’s also just fine with a lot of our businesses and residents.It never dawned on me (really) that so many people don’t see what I see.

I think there are two reasons for this:

  • For some, it’s likely because they already have the digital literacy to navigate the site as it is. They don’t recognize how much of a struggle it is for others.
  • And for a lot of people and businesses, they just don’t seen the value of the City’s digital presence for them. They don’t see a good digital presence as being the business card, the branding of the City Of Des Moines for the outside world and for our future.

City response…

Early this week I sent an email to the administration with a laundry list of things I see as important fixes. This was totally cringey for many reasons, not the least of which being that I’m sure it comes off as the worst kind of ‘back seat driving’ to staff. But if yer asking people to work on something they don’t see, you gotta be specific.

On Friday, I received a detailed  and thoughtful reply from our IT department to each item, which I will over-simplify as “We were already working on it–we had planned to get this done over the summer.”

Which is good and bad. I am glad that some of the major (not all) issues I raised  will be addressed. But it’s bad because the City felt like these issues were just not that urgent.

My takeaway:

  1. Our digital presence is just not a high priority, either to my colleagues or the administration or a good deal of the public. It’s good enough.
  2. This is exactly the kind of thing that could (and should) be handled in private. But because the relationship between Council and the administration is so verkachte, the only way for me to raise this sort of issue (even to get an update as to what is going on) is to raise it from the dais.

Everything comes down to marketing…

Look, I did a terrible job of explaining why people should care about our City’s digital presence, but this is not about ‘fix the web site’. One of my main goals is to market Des Moines. When people perpetually ask “Why hasn’t Des Moines reached its ‘potential’?”, it hasn’t just been a money issue. It’s also been a marketing issue. A large portion of our residents wanted (and still want) to stay a ‘hidden gem’. For a long time, I was one of those people. We never properly marketed the City. That has to change.

My colleagues often talk about promoting business. The first thing interaction most of the world will have with Des Moines is through some form of digital presence–likely our web site. That’s the first impression, the chance to show a potential resident or business owner or developer who we are and what we value. We can look relatively sophisticated and innovative, or… you know… not.

The best way to look sophisticated and innovative is, you know, to actually do something sophisticated and innovative. 😀 Great marketing tends to be very expensive and time consuming. A decent web site is a cheap way to show the world (and our residents) the kind of community we are and the entrepreneurs we want to attract. At the end of the day, all this jazz about ‘transparency’ and ‘engagement’ and ‘accessibility’ and ‘branding’ is just good marketing. And marketing is what this city has always needed as much as any new building project.

At the risk of sounding passive aggressive, I misunderstood how much selling there is to do here. It’s my fault. At my old company, we turned Furniture Store Guy into a running joke for being stuck in the past. But again, he was not a joke. He rationally chose to stay on a path that had always worked for him. We failed. It was our job to show him that times were changing and that it would be in his best interest to invest in his digital presence.

Because here’s the thing: by the time it became obvious to him that he needed a better digital presence, it was too late. Someone else, more savvy, came into his market and became dominant. He didn’t go out of business. He just never reached his potential.

A specific use case

Since I have so many bitches, and I’ve already traveled deep into cringey back seat driving, I figured, what the hell? I should give you at least one specific example of what ‘better’ looks like. This is a modest City web site that punches above its weight… and it’s right next door: https://normandyparkwa.gov/  🙂

It’s not just that it’s more accessible. Or that it actually invites feedback from visitors on how better to serve. What catches my eye is that their government had the very sensible notion to hire a for realz marketing agency to develop and project an image and a message. They took their branding and image seriously. It’s not the specific image or branding or message that matters. Or even the fact that they hired an outside company.  What matters is that any visitor (whether they are conscious of it or not) immediately sees that the City Of Normandy Park really cares about the image they’re trying to project.

Footnote: Some previous rants I’ve had about the site’s lack of accessibility:

  1. Apart from any of the other shortcomings of the web site, at least a portion of this discussion trivialises the lack of accessibility for a very large number of our residents.Using any performance metric such as the number of people watching Council meetings or searching for information is not only irrelevant it’s just plain wrong. By such logic, ADA ramps would never have been mandated.

    If the site isn’t easy to use for seniors, the disabled and the large number of people who speak other languages, we cannot call ourselves an ‘inclusive’ community.

    Inclusion means fair access for everyone, not just the people lucky enough to own an iPhone, have no disabilities, read English fluently–and already possess a level of digital literacy that is apparently taken for granted by people here. Maybe that’s still the majority in Des Moines, but even if it is I could care less.

    The web site is a cue as to what the City values, not just in terms of transparency, but in terms of which types of people.

    If it cost a million dollars to have a proper web site, I wouldn’t squawk. It doesn’t–it’s actually less than putting in a single ADA ramp.

  2. An explainer about Section 508 and making the digital world more accessible.
  3. Shortly after my election, before I was banned any communication with staff, I inquired as to when/if/how the City web site might be updated. I was told that there was no specific plan. However I was also told that in the past, when the City had previously done web site updates, they had requested input from residents and Councilmembers as to how it might be improved–and that such a process would be employed when/if any update would occur. The new site was rolled out with no prior notice and no opportunity for either public or Councilmember input.

2003 Furniture Store Guy

Another old guy reference: There’s this moment in the movie Amadeus, where the Emperor walks in on a rehearsal of Mozart’s newest music and he sees something so obviously wrong he’s rendered speechless with confusion.

My ‘fix the web site’ proposal

At last week’s City Council Meeting, I felt a lot like this guy (not like an Emperor 😀 ). You have an issue you care about and you can’t understand why other people don’t see what you see. It’s just obvious. 😀

That’s how I feel about our City’s web site. So I made one of the the stupider speeches of my relatively short career–basically along the lines of

“um… er… could… um… er… somebody… um… you know… please… er… uh…  well… fix it?’)

Really productive.

I’ve been thinking about this because, at the end of the day, you get elected to convince people to do things, not to be ‘right’. If neither your colleagues  (or the public) sees what you see, you’re kind of a failure.

Two other issues…

Beyond the transparency and public engagement issues there are two other problems that I thought were kinda obvious for both my colleagues and the public. They are not and I guess that’s also on me. I’ll summarize here and then, if you give a crap, some details below.

  • The current web site is challenging for a significant percentage of our community–many seniors, but also people with disabilities and ESL. That is a not small number of residents (Have I mentioned recently that seniors vote upwards of 90% in some neighborhoods? For a City that prides itself on a commitment to seniors that’s not great.)
  • Our digital presence does not properly promote the City’s image and values. It does not look like the web site of a $100 million corporation that wants to attract entrepreneurs and growth.

These are not separate deals. They demonstrate a mindset that goes way beyond a web site. At my old company we had a nickname for it, we called it “Furniture Store Guy”.

Ah, the good ol’ days…

At the dawn of history, when many organizations still had either no or terrible web sites (you know, 2003 😀 ), my company would have a fairly regular argument with skeptical clients about ‘good enough’. How much dough did they really need to put into their digital presence? Here’s a quote from a client who owned a chain of furniture stores (the kind that used to advertise every week in newspapers.)

“Nobody visits the web site, so why are you telling me to spend money on the web site?”

Now I have some problems with this logic, but this guy was no dummy. He had built a successful business. He felt that it was the best use of his resources to put money into things that had been working for decades. However, he didn’t see that the world about to shift from newspapers to smartphones. And he didn’t see how the rest of the world was starting to see his stores as kinda long in the tooth. So he made the decision to have a digital presence that he considered ‘good enough’.

This is democracy…

It took me a while to grasp that the City’s digital presence is really my problem. It’s not only OK with my colleagues and the administration, it’s also just fine with a lot of our businesses and residents.It never dawned on me (really) that so many people don’t see what I see.

I think there are two reasons for this:

  • For some, it’s likely because they already have the digital literacy to navigate the site as it is. They don’t recognize how much of a struggle it is for others.
  • And for a lot of people and businesses, they just don’t seen the value of the City’s digital presence for them. They don’t see a good digital presence as being the business card, the branding of the City Of Des Moines for the outside world and for our future.

City response…

Early this week I sent an email to the administration with a laundry list of things I see as important fixes. This was totally cringey for many reasons, not the least of which being that I’m sure it comes off as the worst kind of ‘back seat driving’ to staff. But if yer asking people to work on something they don’t see, you gotta be specific.

On Friday, I received a detailed  and thoughtful reply from our IT department to each item, which I will over-simplify as “We were already working on it–we had planned to get this done over the summer.”

Which is good and bad. I am glad that some of the major (not all) issues I raised  will be addressed. But it’s bad because the City felt like these issues were just not that urgent.

My takeaway:

  1. Our digital presence is just not a high priority, either to my colleagues or the administration or a good deal of the public. It’s good enough.
  2. This is exactly the kind of thing that could (and should) be handled in private. But because the relationship between Council and the administration is so verkachte, the only way for me to raise this sort of issue (even to get an update as to what is going on) is to raise it from the dais.

Everything comes down to marketing…

Look, I did a terrible job of explaining why people should care about our City’s digital presence, but this is not about ‘fix the web site’. One of my main goals is to market Des Moines. When people perpetually ask “Why hasn’t Des Moines reached its ‘potential’?”, it hasn’t just been a money issue. It’s also been a marketing issue. A large portion of our residents wanted (and still want) to stay a ‘hidden gem’. For a long time, I was one of those people. We never properly marketed the City. That has to change.

My colleagues often talk about promoting business. The first thing interaction most of the world will have with Des Moines is through some form of digital presence–likely our web site. That’s the first impression, the chance to show a potential resident or business owner or developer who we are and what we value. We can look relatively sophisticated and innovative, or… you know… not.

The best way to look sophisticated and innovative is, you know, to actually do something sophisticated and innovative. 😀 Great marketing tends to be very expensive and time consuming. A decent web site is a cheap way to show the world (and our residents) the kind of community we are and the entrepreneurs we want to attract. At the end of the day, all this jazz about ‘transparency’ and ‘engagement’ and ‘accessibility’ and ‘branding’ is just good marketing. And marketing is what this city has always needed as much as any new building project.

At the risk of sounding passive aggressive, I misunderstood how much selling there is to do here. It’s my fault. At my old company, we turned Furniture Store Guy into a running joke for being stuck in the past. But again, he was not a joke. He rationally chose to stay on a path that had always worked for him. We failed. It was our job to show him that times were changing and that it would be in his best interest to invest in his digital presence.

Because here’s the thing: by the time it became obvious to him that he needed a better digital presence, it was too late. Someone else, more savvy, came into his market and became dominant. He didn’t go out of business. He just never reached his potential.

A specific use case

Since I have so many bitches, and I’ve already traveled deep into cringey back seat driving, I figured, what the hell? I should give you at least one specific example of what ‘better’ looks like. This is a modest City web site that punches above its weight… and it’s right next door: https://normandyparkwa.gov/  🙂

It’s not just that it’s more accessible. Or that it actually invites feedback from visitors on how better to serve. What catches my eye is that their government had the very sensible notion to hire a for realz marketing agency to develop and project an image and a message. They took their branding and image seriously. It’s not the specific image or branding or message that matters. Or even the fact that they hired an outside company.  What matters is that any visitor (whether they are conscious of it or not) immediately sees that the City Of Normandy Park really cares about the image they’re trying to project.

Footnote: Some previous rants I’ve had about the site’s lack of accessibility:

  1. Apart from any of the other shortcomings of the web site, at least a portion of this discussion trivialises the lack of accessibility for a very large number of our residents.Using any performance metric such as the number of people watching Council meetings or searching for information is not only irrelevant it’s just plain wrong. By such logic, ADA ramps would never have been mandated.

    If the site isn’t easy to use for seniors, the disabled and the large number of people who speak other languages, we cannot call ourselves an ‘inclusive’ community.

    Inclusion means fair access for everyone, not just the people lucky enough to own an iPhone, have no disabilities, read English fluently–and already possess a level of digital literacy that is apparently taken for granted by people here. Maybe that’s still the majority in Des Moines, but even if it is I could care less.

    The web site is a cue as to what the City values, not just in terms of transparency, but in terms of which types of people.

    If it cost a million dollars to have a proper web site, I wouldn’t squawk. It doesn’t–it’s actually less than putting in a single ADA ramp.

  2. An explainer about Section 508 and making the digital world more accessible.
  3. Shortly after my election, before I was banned any communication with staff, I inquired as to when/if/how the City web site might be updated. I was told that there was no specific plan. However I was also told that in the past, when the City had previously done web site updates, they had requested input from residents and Councilmembers as to how it might be improved–and that such a process would be employed when/if any update would occur. The new site was rolled out with no prior notice and no opportunity for either public or Councilmember input.

Mid-Weekly Update: 06/09/2021

Leave a comment on Mid-Weekly Update: 06/09/2021

Again, again, running a bit late. Having an ongoing battle with my  web hosting system. 🙂

I was informed by readers that in my last Weekly Update, the ‘This Week’ portion was empty. A little geeky detail: these articles are actually several independent bits that (somehow) get mashed together into the ‘Weekly Update’ you see by a team of highly trained hamsters. Apparently the guy in charge of that portion wasn’t cooperating for a while there. I regret the error.

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Monday: Meeting with 33rd State Representative Tina Orwall. I’m pitching something pretty mundane sounding called Remote Works Better. This may be the only good idea I ever have for immediately reducing noise and pollution around Sea-Tac Airport. The notion is pretty simple: with Zoom we were able painlessly reduce a whole lot of flights and car traffic and we just keep doing that whenever possible. A lot of air travel is simply unnecessary. We just have to realize that in 2020, we proved it.

Monday: I spoke with Noemie Maxwell, who is organizing to stop the removal of the North SeaTac Park in order to build an airport parking lot. The loss of tree cover has been brutal for all the communities surrounding the airport. Please sign her petition: https://www.kctreeequity.org/

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Meeting. (Agenda) The notable thing here was a presentation on their 2021 Legislative Agenda. You can tell how a government really feels based on two things: their budget (what they spend money on) and their LA (what they are lobbying for.) And frankly, it’s not looking good. After several years of some minor optimism, I have to tell it like it is: the Port is becoming steadily more entrenched against the environmental interests of all airport communities. It has done an absolutely magnificent job of appearing to care about environmental issues, but doing almost nothing material. The pandemic has given the Port the perfect excuse to be even less aggressive (if that was possible) on these issues and leadership in all the fence line communities seem perfectly fine with the notion that “this is as good as it gets.”

Wednesday: Meeting with King County Councilmember Dave Upthegrove on the County Climate Action Plan—see Monday. :D. Same topic.

Wednesday: Des Moines Marina Association Meeting. Most of the time was spent discussing ‘dry stack storage’ which we gotta get into at some point. I guess the main stat I want to mention is that the total paid membership is less than 40–so there are, what, seven hundred freeloaders? 😀 But more seriously, the total attendance at these meetings tends to be less than ten–which includes two Councilmembers (the Deputy Mayor and I) and two City Staff. Usually zero members of any Condo association and certainly none of the general public. All I’m getting at is that what is driving a lot of the Marina Redevelopment–is truly only a handful of people. Because oftenn when the discussion seems only of interest to boaters, a lot of the time there is crossover. More soon.

Thursday: Dentist. (just wanted to see if you were paying attention.) 😀

Saturday: 9:00AM Ribbon cutting for the new Organic Blend restaurant off of Marine View Drive and 225th. (I gotta be honest, the address on Google says 22341 but that’s a bit confusing.)  Hope it’s where I think it is–and hope to see you there! 😀

Last Week

Tuesday: Talking with airport community activists all over America. 🙂 The thing I’m trying to get to is what do activists actually want? Obviously, if you asked the average person who lives under any airport flight path, what they mainly want is for the planes to go somewhere else! But the moment you start to go into “how”, there just isn’t agreement. at the moment That’s the problem: a lack of shared strategy.

Thursday: Public Safety Committee (Agenda) The were three of things of note:

  • First off, I gotta let the cat outta the bag here: Committee Meetings are recorded. Not 100% on this, but I’m pretty sure they’ve been recorded since the City first began using Zoom last year. I can’t say exactly why I feel this way. OK, maybe it’s because every time one would attend a meeting the little red light ‘Recording’ left at the top left of the screen would blink? 😀 What is frustrating is that these meetings always include issues the public does care about. But if there’s no recording you’re stuck with my ‘reporting’.  Maybe that upsetting thought along might move the City to start throwing them up on Youtube? 😀
  • Second, the Committee continued work on a Street Racing ordinance that is designed to help with various issues in Redondo. You can see the draft version in the Packet. The only disagreement seemed to be about how severe to make the punishment. So it will likely be approved by the Committee at their 8 July meeting then be voted on by the Council at the following meeting. And no I’m not saying that is ‘the solution’.
  • Finally, there was a verbal-only presentation on the Bodycam Beta-Test which was deemed a success. There were a number of details that caught my.. er… ear.
    1. I guess the batteries need to be changed a lot.
    2. The PD has still not published a policy as to when the officer can turn the thing on and off.
    3. I heard no specifics as to redaction or storage policy. We saw that the video can be pixelated to protect privacy.
    4. However, because it was deemed a success, apparently full deployment is now moving forward– it does seem to require a final vote by the Council.

    Those last three do bug me… especially if we don’t get a vote without all that information. I want all those policies and procedures in public before we proceed. See that’s the thing about open government: it’s slightly inconvenient. I get that there is now apparent enthusiasm for body cameras by all my colleagues as well as the public on the right as well as by many on the left (but for very different reasons.) And that matters: Just saying you have body cameras, may look great. But until there are clear policies in place, I don’t think you can say that they actually provide real trust. No matter how popular, the City should never go ahead with an idea before the Council has all the important information.

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) (Video) (No Clerk Recap)

We passed a resolution and a proclamation, making Juneteenth a  paid employee holiday. I asked that this book recommendation be put into the packet. This part of American history is amazing: On Juneteenth Annette Gordon-Reed

Under New Business, I asked that the City fix the web site because, honestly, it’s worse than before. Now it used to be that many organizations would have a crappy commercial web site because a lot of old-school business people just didn’t think it mattered (“We should spend money on real things.”) I now realize that, for some people in Des Moines there’s something almost a fatalism along the lines of “Hey, nobody attends meetings so what’s even the point? And the following is my official line on this:

Apart from any of the other shortcomings of the web site, at least a portion of this discussion trivialises the lack of accessibility for a very large number of our residents.

Using any performance metric such as the number of people watching Council meetings or searching for information is not only irrelevant it’s just plain wrong. By such logic, ADA ramps would never have been mandated.

If the site isn’t easy to use for seniors, the disabled and the large number of people who speak other languages, we cannot call ourselves an ‘inclusive’ community.

Inclusion means fair access for everyone, not just the people lucky enough to own an iPhone, have no disabilities, read English fluently–and already possess a level of digital literacy that is apparently taken for granted by people here. Maybe that’s still the majority in Des Moines, but even if it is I could care less.

The web site is a cue as to what the City values, not just in terms of transparency, but in terms of which types of people.

If it cost a million dollars to have a proper web site, I wouldn’t squawk. It doesn’t–it’s actually less than putting in a single ADA ramp.

Friday: Adam Smith–the usual airporty stuff. (See above. 🙂 )

Saturday: Des Moines Waterfront Farmer’s Market Grand Opening! It was a great day. Check out the new logo! (And guess what? parking is now free, Free, FREE! on Saturdays!)

Mayor as majority leader

The following is a heavily edited version of a very wonky thing I wrote on one of those Des Moines Facebook Pages. In that post, a resident creates a poll of “who should be mayor!” and then discusses the job in terms of “Rule 5”.  I’m redoing it here because although it’s super-wonky and boring and repetitious, every once in a while I accidentally hit on something that matters about local politics and this is it.

Introducing: The Hidden World Below!

Now, the rest of my original Facebook comment reads to me a bit like one of those grade school film strips trying to get kids to appreciate the wonders of the public sewer system. You know, “The Hidden World Below!” 😀  I mean, OK, you can’t live without it, but do you really want to know what’s going on?

My goal here is not so much to get you to appreciate this particular wonder of local politics anymore than I think you should fall in love with the Midway Sewer District. But I do think you should know that it’s there, whether you see it or not. In fact, I wish there was an ‘explainer’ of the political roles of the Council and Mayor included in every voters packet (or at least as part of Councilmember training). At least then every voter would  learn that, yes even in small town Des Moines, politics is politics

The rules are not the game

The role of Mayor is described in our Council Rules Of Procedure–primarily in these two sentences from Rule 5:

The Mayor shall preside at meetings of the Council, and be recognized as the head of the City for all ceremonial purposes. The Mayor shall have no regular administrative or executive duties.

That makes the job sound pretty innocuous, right? Sort of ‘impartial referee’ at meetings and ‘ribbon cutter’ on weekends. But to describe the job of Mayor in CMG in those terms (or any of the other Rules) is to almost completely misunderstand (or misrepresent) what the position really is. Yes, even in a small town like Des Moines. I would never criticize any individual for putting it that way–after all, that is what the rules say, right? Plus, I’ve heard lots and lots and lots of people put it that way over the years. But we should stop doing that, K? Because Rule 5 is not only a small fraction of the actual job, putting it in terms of any ‘Rule’ can’t actually explain the job.

See the Rules Of Procedure are just like the rules to any game. Yes, they give you some basic instructions, but they can’t tell you how the game is actually played.

Mayor as Majority Leader

OK, so here it is, playah:

The unwritten, but real authority of the Mayor in Council-Manager Government (CMG) is as leader of the majority of the City Council.

It’s a lot like being the Majority Leader of the US Senate. That’s what the job really is in CMG. It was designed as a ceremonial and non-partisan position. But since the first day a majority elected a mayor, every CMG mayor on earth has functioned with that political authority. Yes, even in a small town like Des Moines. And anyone who tells you otherwise either doesn’t know what they’re talking about or wants you to believe something that is not true. (Perhaps because the notion that our lovely town might have a ‘political sewer system’ doesn’t sound all that appealing? 😀 ) Look, I don’t want to torture this metaphor. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s actually essential to how our Council runs. So don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.

The Mayor’s role as majority leader may not be written down anywhere, but again it should be (just like Majority Leader in the Senate). And let’s be clear: I’m not saying I have a better system laying about. I just think the public (and CMs) should properly understand.

Specifics

Now what does it mean to be majority leader?

First of all, a CMG City Council is 100% majoritarian. All or nothing voting. 24/7/365 the Mayor has exactly the authority that the majority supports. Note that I did not say ‘the Council’. Whatever authority a mayor has flows from the majority; not the full Council.

Second, the role presiding officer has an in-built potential for bias. Remember: he gets to vote on every issue, just like every other Councilmember. So to a very real extent, he functions as both judge and jury member. He was elected by his majority–at least in part, to further a shared vision, not because he’s some paragon of impartiality. That doesn’t make impartiality impossible, but this tension should always be freely acknowledged. He is the leader of the majority. Not some ‘referee’.

Third, the Council functions according to a written set of rules. Those rules define both the Council and the Mayor and they are what the majority says they are. These can be formally changed by a majority vote at any time.

Finally, however,  Council Rules are not laws. The City Council is self-policing–again (as always) by a vote of the majority. And that has three big features:

  • At any time, either on or off the dais, the Mayor has great flexibility to interpret or add to or reduce or modify his authority and even, to a large extent, ignore certain rules–so long as the majority does not object. Our current Mayor has done so many times. That’s not being snippy, it’s just a fact. Every CMG mayor does it (at least a teeny, weeny bit) from time to time. So long as the majority is cool? It’s cool.
  • If anyone has a problem with anything the Mayor or the Council does–the majority must agree to take action.
  • There are rarely any external penalties for bending or even breaking meeting rules. At this point, I should probably point out that this is neither complaint or hyperbole. Again, it’s just how CMG works in the State Of Washington. Feel free to Google ‘Open Public Meetings Act Violations in Washington’ (OPMA) or connect with me for specifics.

So… what does that mean for the public?

Well first of all, it means that you should probably understand what  candidates actually believe in–and who he/she is likely to align with and why when you vote. Because it is a member of that majority who will become the next Mayor.

Second, stop acting like we have a strong mayor. If you don’t like something the Mayor is doing? Tell his colleagues.

Focusing attention solely on the Mayor  is not only unfair to him, it’s misinformed and counter-productive. Because it stokes the impossible narrative that you can be a good CM who supports a bad Mayor. C’mon: a ‘good’ CM would always object whenever the Mayor gets out of line. (Did I mention we’re supposed to be self-policing? ? )

Again, again, CMG is 100% majoritarian. All or nothing. Every action the Mayor takes is because of the support (or lack thereof) of the majority. Whenever a Mayor goes beyond a ceremonial function in any way, he is actually working for the majority, not the other way round.

Ironically, the only time I ever focus attention solely on the Mayor? Is in his ceremonial role–when he’s really in his Rule 5 mode. That’s when he is on his own. If he did a bad job at a ribbon cutting? I’d be upset. Our Mayor does a fine job with those sorts of things. 🙂

So it’s only a slight exaggeration to say that there no are good or bad Mayors in CMG. The Mayor can only be as good at any given moment as the majority.

OK, sorry, that was a bit over the top. ? There totally are bad CMG Mayors that don’t reflect their council majority. But not many. And BTW, regardless of our ‘differences’, our Mayor is not one of them.

Choose the right majority

If any or all of this seems like some thinly veiled grouse at our current Council, it’s not. All CMG Mayors and Councils have exactly the same incentives and challenges–and that’s the real point: the role of Mayor matters far less than the members of the majority. There are definite requirements for being a good mayor in CMG and they are not chopped liver. But if you have a fair and competent majority, you tend to have fairer rules and better governance regardless of who they choose to be Mayor. If you don’t? You can have all the rules you want, pal! Because, for the umpteenth time, it’s majority rules in this here town.

The purpose of this novella

Anyhoo, I just wanted to describe the political role of Mayor in CMG. Yes, it’s Rule 5, but just as the Senate Majority Leader, our Mayor’s real authority is as head the majority that voted for him/her to be their leader. A Councilmember may not put it like that. They may not like it much. They may not have even thought about it like that. But, not to torture the metaphor, this really is like “The  Hidden World Below” I opened with. You don’t have to talk about it, like it or even know it exists to use it every day. 😀

Categories Transparency

Mayor as Majority Leader

The following is a heavily edited version of a very wonky thing I wrote on one of those Des Moines Facebook Pages. In that post, a resident creates a poll of “who should be mayor!” and then discusses the job in terms of “Rule 5”.  I’m redoing it here because although it’s super-wonky and boring and repetitious, every once in a while I accidentally hit on something that matters about local politics and this is it.

Introducing: The Hidden World Below!

Now, the rest of my original Facebook comment reads to me a bit like one of those grade school film strips trying to get kids to appreciate the wonders of the public sewer system. You know, “The Hidden World Below!” 😀  I mean, OK, you can’t live without it, but do you really want to know what’s going on?

My goal here is not so much to get you to appreciate this particular wonder of local politics anymore than I think you should fall in love with the Midway Sewer District. But I do think you should know that it’s there, whether you see it or not. In fact, I wish there was an ‘explainer’ of the political roles of the Council and Mayor included in every voters packet (or at least as part of Councilmember training). At least then every voter would  learn that, yes even in small town Des Moines, politics is politics

The rules are not the game

The role of Mayor is described in our Council Rules Of Procedure–primarily in these two sentences from Rule 5:

The Mayor shall preside at meetings of the Council, and be recognized as the head of the City for all ceremonial purposes. The Mayor shall have no regular administrative or executive duties.

That makes the job sound pretty innocuous, right? Sort of ‘impartial referee’ at meetings and ‘ribbon cutter’ on weekends. But to describe the job of Mayor in CMG in those terms (or any of the other Rules) is to almost completely misunderstand (or misrepresent) what the position really is. Yes, even in a small town like Des Moines. I would never criticize any individual for putting it that way–after all, that is what the rules say, right? Plus, I’ve heard lots and lots and lots of people put it that way over the years. But we should stop doing that, K? Because Rule 5 is not only a small fraction of the actual job, putting it in terms of any ‘Rule’ can’t actually explain the job.

See the Rules Of Procedure are just like the rules to any game. Yes, they give you some basic instructions, but they can’t tell you how the game is actually played.

Mayor as Majority Leader

OK, so here it is, playah:

The unwritten, but real authority of the Mayor in Council-Manager Government (CMG) is as leader of the majority of the City Council.

It’s a lot like being the Majority Leader of the US Senate. That’s what the job really is in CMG. It was designed as a ceremonial and non-partisan position. But since the first day a majority elected a mayor, every CMG mayor on earth has functioned with that political authority. Yes, even in a small town like Des Moines. And anyone who tells you otherwise either doesn’t know what they’re talking about or wants you to believe something that is not true. (Perhaps because the notion that our lovely town might have a ‘political sewer system’ doesn’t sound all that appealing? 😀 ) Look, I don’t want to torture this metaphor. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s actually essential to how our Council runs. So don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.

The Mayor’s role as majority leader may not be written down anywhere, but again it should be (just like Majority Leader in the Senate). And let’s be clear: I’m not saying I have a better system laying about. I just think the public (and CMs) should properly understand.

Specifics

Now what does it mean to be majority leader?

First of all, a CMG City Council is 100% majoritarian. All or nothing voting. 24/7/365 the Mayor has exactly the authority that the majority supports. Note that I did not say ‘the Council’. Whatever authority a mayor has flows from the majority; not the full Council.

Second, the role presiding officer has an in-built potential for bias. Remember: he gets to vote on every issue, just like every other Councilmember. So to a very real extent, he functions as both judge and jury member. He was elected by his majority–at least in part, to further a shared vision, not because he’s some paragon of impartiality. That doesn’t make impartiality impossible, but this tension should always be freely acknowledged. He is the leader of the majority. Not some ‘referee’.

Third, the Council functions according to a written set of rules. Those rules define both the Council and the Mayor and they are what the majority says they are. These can be formally changed by a majority vote at any time.

Finally, however,  Council Rules are not laws. The City Council is self-policing–again (as always) by a vote of the majority. And that has three big features:

  • At any time, either on or off the dais, the Mayor has great flexibility to interpret or add to or reduce or modify his authority and even, to a large extent, ignore certain rules–so long as the majority does not object. Our current Mayor has done so many times. That’s not being snippy, it’s just a fact. Every CMG mayor does it (at least a teeny, weeny bit) from time to time. So long as the majority is cool? It’s cool.
  • If anyone has a problem with anything the Mayor or the Council does–the majority must agree to take action.
  • There are rarely any external penalties for bending or even breaking meeting rules. At this point, I should probably point out that this is neither complaint or hyperbole. Again, it’s just how CMG works in the State Of Washington. Feel free to Google ‘Open Public Meetings Act Violations in Washington’ (OPMA) or connect with me for specifics.

So… what does that mean for the public?

Well first of all, it means that you should probably understand what  candidates actually believe in–and who he/she is likely to align with and why when you vote. Because it is a member of that majority who will become the next Mayor.

Second, stop acting like we have a strong mayor. If you don’t like something the Mayor is doing? Tell his colleagues.

Focusing attention solely on the Mayor  is not only unfair to him, it’s misinformed and counter-productive. Because it stokes the impossible narrative that you can be a good CM who supports a bad Mayor. C’mon: a ‘good’ CM would always object whenever the Mayor gets out of line. (Did I mention we’re supposed to be self-policing? ? )

Again, again, CMG is 100% majoritarian. All or nothing. Every action the Mayor takes is because of the support (or lack thereof) of the majority. Whenever a Mayor goes beyond a ceremonial function in any way, he is actually working for the majority, not the other way round.

Ironically, the only time I ever focus attention solely on the Mayor? Is in his ceremonial role–when he’s really in his Rule 5 mode. That’s when he is on his own. If he did a bad job at a ribbon cutting? I’d be upset. Our Mayor does a fine job with those sorts of things. 🙂

So it’s only a slight exaggeration to say that there no are good or bad Mayors in CMG. The Mayor can only be as good at any given moment as the majority.

OK, sorry, that was a bit over the top. ? There totally are bad CMG Mayors that don’t reflect their council majority. But not many. And BTW, regardless of our ‘differences’, our Mayor is not one of them.

Choose the right majority

If any or all of this seems like some thinly veiled grouse at our current Council, it’s not. All CMG Mayors and Councils have exactly the same incentives and challenges–and that’s the real point: the role of Mayor matters far less than the members of the majority. There are definite requirements for being a good mayor in CMG and they are not chopped liver. But if you have a fair and competent majority, you tend to have fairer rules and better governance regardless of who they choose to be Mayor. If you don’t? You can have all the rules you want, pal! Because, for the umpteenth time, it’s majority rules in this here town.

The purpose of this novella

Anyhoo, I just wanted to describe the political role of Mayor in CMG. Yes, it’s Rule 5, but just as the Senate Majority Leader, our Mayor’s real authority is as head the majority that voted for him/her to be their leader. A Councilmember may not put it like that. They may not like it much. They may not have even thought about it like that. But, not to torture the metaphor, this really is like “The  Hidden World Below” I opened with. You don’t have to talk about it, like it or even know it exists to use it every day. 😀

Categories Transparency

Please RTFM

Leave a comment on Please RTFM

Believe it or not, I now get anywhere from dozens to hundreds of requests every week, often for exactly the same thing. So, if your question is in reference to a particular article, please try reading said article thoroughly, or use the Search to find what you need, before you contact me. If you can do that, it frees up my schedule to do more for the community. 🙂

My wee, tiny violin…

  1. It takes a certain amount of effort every week attending meetings, recording, transcribing, writing articles and providing references and citations to make the materials here what they are.
  2. And yet, some people (not you, of course) choose neither to read or search. Instead, they immediately text me for an immediate and personalised answer.
  3. Now I know you’ll be shocked to hear it, but a certain number of those people get at least slightly dis-chuffed no matter how gently I ask them to read the article. Some examples…
    • “Just gimmee the Cliff Notes.”
    • “It’s only a few words, don’t be a jerk.”
    • “I’m a busy person!”
    • “I’m a senior citizen!”
    • 1“I don’t want to know that much.”
    • “Social media, dude, KISS!”
    • “You’re asking me to RTFM?”
    • “That’s a vote I wish I could take back.”
    • Etc…
  4. I risk all those delightful possibilities (or simply being ghosted) because…
    • Many of these issues do not easily distill into “25 words or less.”
    • And even if they do, responding to dozens of tiny requests in a ‘personal’ manner takes a 2surprising amount of time.
    • I am unpaid.
    • I have no assistant.
    • I also help run a much larger community advocacy SeaTacNoise.Info.
    • I have a visual disability. Typing into tiny msg boxes on a phone ain’t happening. I work at a purpose-built device and then copy/paste it into social media. Every. Frickin’. Time.
    • Not to mention the fact that the information is in there. Somewhere. 😀

If you give it the old college try and still cannot find what yer looking for? Obviously, I’m there for ya. You know that! 100%. Write. Send up a flare. Smoke signal. Or… call me (206) 878-0578.

We’re all in this together. 🙂


1My personal fave.

2Think back to yer post-wedding thank you cards, right?

Two quick examples of the transparency problem

Leave a comment on Two quick examples of the transparency problem

At our last City Council Meeting there was a contentious discussion about providing public comment. But the problem of transparency and public engagement is actually far more profound and I am concerned that the discussion made it seem more trivial than it is.

There is no obvious way for a member of the public to become aware of the existence of committee meetings, what they do, their agendas, or how to attend. And the recent new web site actually makes this situation worse.

How about a quick example?

Let’s say a member of the public actually wanted to attend this week’s Economic Development Committee Meeting or just learn what is on the Agenda. (They’re discussing Marina Redevelopment, so I’d highly recommend it.)

1. They would start by going to the City web site:

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/

There’s no mention of their existence on the home page. And this week’s meetings don’t appear on the home page calendar.

2. OK, so maybe someone told me of their existence and suggested I attend. I have some initiative so I do a search for ‘Committee Meeting’

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/search/default.aspx?q=committee+meeting&type=0,17385004-244742,17385004-117|-1,17385088-124

The URL is totally cockamamie, but the search results are there.  So far so good.

3. Now click on Economic Development Committee Agendas. Good.

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/cms/one.aspx?portalId=17385088&pageId=17516545

4. Now click on the link to the 27 May meeting. You get the PDF. Even better.

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=17726545

5. Now click the link in the PDF to attend the meeting.

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/FormCenter/City-Forms-3/Council-Meeting-Comments-49

Oops.

OK, so at that point a lot of people would simply give up. But let’s say you’re persistent. And luckily, you’ve been told by someone else… or were ambitious enough to phone or email the City for help… They would tell you that the way to go is…

6. Enter a GENERAL COUNCIL COMMENT FORM (again with no mention of ‘committee’.)

https://www.desmoineswa.gov/cms/One.aspx?portalId=17385088&pageId=17667089

(And again with the cockamamie URL)

7. Or… if you’re really The Amazing Kreskin you might stumble upon the new ‘Council Portal’ and see that calendar.

https://desmoines.civicweb.net/portal/default.aspx

Unfortunately, the current week’s meetings aren’t there either.

In one sentence

This bears repeating: there is no obvious way for a member of the public to become aware of the existence of committee meetings, what they do, their agendas, or how to attend.

It’s one thing to not to take public comment at committee meetings. It’s another to not want those meetings recorded. But to make a public meeting so difficult to even learn about… let alone attend… in the age of Zoom… sends an obvious message of what we value. It tells the public that the City does not consider their participation in, or even awareness of, the Committee process, of importance.

And then there is the Search problem…

One last nerdish-sounding detail that you actually should pay attention to: almost all city documents are in PDFs which are non-searchable.

What that means is that their content is not part of the Search system.

So if a member of the public wants to know about any action of the Council or Administration, ever, they would need to be either psychic, tediously go through a zillion documents one by one or do a Public Records Request and… wait at least a week for an answer. There is simply no immediate way for the public to learn about almost any Council activity without manually opening document after document after document after document.

For example…

Let’s try a Search on “Passenger Ferry”

Gee. I guess nobody in the City ever thought of discussing a passenger ferry before.

I think it is unacceptable for the City to provide such poor access to information about your government. And I honestly do not understand how anyone can say that they are confident in their knowledge of how our City is doing until these issues are resolved.

So I will continue to strongly advocate for improvements to make it easier for you to find out about your government and to participate in its decision making.