Most Recent Article [more articles below]

Categories Engagement, Public Safety, Transparency

Committee Video Recordings

The City is making good on a proposal I made at our June 20th City Council Meeting to publish the video of Committee Meetings. The first batch are now available on the Des Moines Councilmember Youtube Channel. Go get ’em!

Thanks to Councilmember Martinelli and Deputy Mayor Mahoney for supporting the idea. And of course, thanks to our IT staff, Dale Southwick and our City Clerk Bonnie Wilkins for making it happen!  This has been a long time coming. I’ve been trying to educate the public about the importance of Committees since forever.

What’s so special about Committees?

People who attend full City Council Meetings often comment that they seem somewhat ‘pre-decided’. They’re not wrong, but that in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s at the Committees are where most policy actually happens. The members are expected to know more about their specific area than the rest of the Council. Each committee receives more detailed briefings and the discussions are far more specific. So when an item comes to the Council from one of the five committees, it should sail through nine times out of ten. If items referred from a committee were routinely being argued over it would indicate that the full Council did not have confidence in the referring committee.

Unfortunately, just between us, Committee Meeting Agendas and Minutes are often not exactly… how do I put this delicately? Detailed. For example, here is the Agenda for the June 20 Public Safety Committee Meeting. This is where the PSEM discussed Body Cameras in detail. The description is… blank. Absolutely no detail. At the next full Council Meeting, the Council voted 6-1 for the proposal. I was the lone vote against it and I struggled to explain my vote to residents (who were mostly in favour of the idea in the broad strokes) because until now, the public could not see what I saw.

This is where you come in…

The public has an interest in showing up to committees to engage on issues that are of specific concern to you. If there is an item relevant to your neighbourhood, you want to be at those Committee discussions and presentations and make sure that your voice is heard before it gets to the full Council. Because, again, by the time a referred item gets to the full Council, the CMs consider it ‘pre-vetted’. So, if you show up to a full Council meeting upset about an issue that has already been approved by one or more Committees, you’re asking the full Council to vote against their colleagues who usually know more about the issue than they do. Awkward. 😀

Unfortunately, you’re super-busy and Committee Meetings are at the super-inconvenient time of 3PM in the afternoon. So without the video, you could never really know what was going on. Now you can.

There’s always room for improvement…

OK so, how do you know when there are ‘items relevant to your neighbourhood’? Still working on that. 😀 Improving transparency and public engagement were among my primary bitches … er,,, ‘goals’ 😀  in wanting to join the City Council in the first place. It’s an ongoing process, but I want to acknowledge that this is a step in the right direction.

Another one of my  ‘asks’ has been to add a Calendar on the City web site that will allow you to be automatically notified of meetings and other events. That’s coming soon, too!

Can we do even better? You bet. We could refine that notification system to alert you not just when a meeting occurs, but when it contains items that might be of interest to you. (Eg. based on your location or a school or a particular program.) We can provide public comment at Committee Meetings. (And on a side note, we could also enhance the system to notify you of emergencies like the recent beach closure. 🙂 )

There are a lot of things we can do, not just to make the system more ‘transparent’ but also to make it more relevant to you–which will hopefully get more of you to engage in public life–advocating for issues, volunteering 🙂

No drama…

Now, a word about politics. For a small portion of the public, there is this notion of a ‘lack of civility’ on our City Council. That is actually quite true–but not in the way people think and I’ll talk about that another time. The point is: I want people to watch these committee meetings not just to learn about issues, but also to see how drama-free things go when the discussion sticks to policy. There is (almost) never any of the ‘cringey’ stuff that people make so much hay about when watching full Council meetings. You can see how things could work and should work on the full Council.

Why? I think the reasons things are calmer at Committee Meetings boil down to:

  1. The tasks are specific. So there’s no room for extraneous posturing or no speechifying.
  2. But ironically, there are also no limits (eg. the dreaded ‘2X rule’). It’s more of a conversation with staff. (And honestly? That’s how full Council Meetings used to be.)
  3. The goals are all short term and obvious. There are rarely any big strategic decisions or new policy ideas. In other words, although the meetings are supposed to be ‘Council’, they are actually Staff meetings where they discuss their agenda. We agree on mostly everything because the current meeting configuration does not support doing anything we might disagree about.

Anyhoo, if you’ve heard about all the ‘conflict’ on the Council,  the thing you will notice is that when it comes to the actual policy, things run smoothly and there actually is cooperation that you can feel good about as a resident.

It ain’t Netflix…

As of today, only six videos are published and unless I’m mistaken there are at least fifty more coming from the past year. I’m not suggesting you start plowing through all of these like Netflix. They’re not that compelling. 😀 But now that we’re starting, I hope to provide some ‘highlights’ on items where I think the discussion went beyond the presentations I attach to each Weekly Update. And somehow I hope we can connect the videos and the agendas and presentations in Search so you can see everything about an issue at a glance.

A practical example…

Back to that PSEM discussion on Body Cameras. Here is the Video 06/03/2021.  Again, here is the Agenda, with absolutely no detail. The full Council voted 6-1 for the proposal.

I voted against it because the Committee approved the plan without answers to some basic questions like “When can the officer turn the camera on and off?” I had hoped that in the interim period, the administration would flesh out ‘details’ like that. But it came to the full Council with the same questions left unanswered. And I won’t vote for anything that leaves basic questions like that unanswered.

Now that you have the video, you can see what I saw and decide for yourself whether or not I made the right call.

Previous Articles

Categories Economic Development, Engagement, Transparency, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 08/01/2021

Leave a comment on Weekly Update: 08/01/2021

Hopefully you’ve already seen the Christmas In July post.  Please send me your ideas!

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Tuesday: Adam Smith. I keep pitching our the SeatacNoise.Info Remote Works Better proposal. Anything that gets any department or organization thinking about Zoom instead of getting on an unnecessary flight is worth doing. 🙂

Thursday: The Budget Retreat City Council Meeting (Agenda) This is the meeting that kicks off the only State-mandated process of a City Council: passing a budget. For decades that basically was the only function of most small town City Councils. If it’s like previous years, there will be a department by department presentation which is typically the best overview of the City you’ll see all year. Just to be clear though: this is not an objective assessment of the City. It is the administration’s point of view. That’s not any slam; not at all. It’s the simple truth.  every statement from management comes with a point of view.

Anyhoo, Councilmembers ask questions, offer direction and the staff goes off and next month the City Manager presents the First Draft Budget as prescribed by law.

As usual, the City Manager requested questions about the Agenda. For me, this week was easy: I just re-submitted the same questions I did not get answers to from the last meeting. 😀 Now, I get scowls about being snarky, but overall, I think I’m pretty nice about it. On any properly functioning Board, a CEO who refused to answer questions from a Board Member would be subject to removal for cause. Occasionally I remind readers: it is unethical for a City Manager to treat any Councilmember differently from another. And it’s only the current majority that makes this possible. The fact that such conduct was ever tolerated, either by my colleagues or the voters is a real problem.

Sign up to comment

Thursday: Friends Of Saltwater State Park (if I make it on time!) Despite my main ARPA Stimulus proposals, I’m also ‘taking requests’. 😀 My interest in FOSSP is part of a bigger picture: water quality in Des Moines. FOSSP have been the lookout on all the Midway Sewer problems over the past two years and we owe them thanks–and our support. We’re stewards of three significant stretches of shoreline, important creeks and thousands of inter-connected water, sewer and storm water systems.

Last Week

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) I guess the ‘highlight’ is the allocation of $2M for the South King County Fund–which Cities and various organizations can obtain various grants. The reason I always hem and haw on these is that this is actually your money. Like all Port grants, it comes from your Property Tax Levy. So basically you’re just paying yourself. It’s not airline or cruise revenue.

And this is an intrinsic problem with our relationship with the Port. It looks like the Port is doing all these great projects and it directs attention away from the fact that the Port is not doing anything meaningful to reduce airport noise and emissions. Plus, there is an insidious quality which rarely gets talked about: once an organization accepts any of these grants, it’s unlikely to expect them to oppose the Port on anything real concerning noise and pollution. In other words: the SKCF is a powerful lobbying tool which prevents doing big things by helping people do small things–using our own money.

Thursday: Municipal Facilities Committee Meeting (Agenda) There was a review of Capital Improvement Projects plan and an update on the Marina Master Plan. This struck me as sort of a recap of 2021 accomplishments–which was great. There are hold-ups on some playground projects and I’m now struck by how outrageously expensive the equipment items have become. I don’t know if all that is pandemic-related or just that you can’t throw up a set of steel monkey bars and call it good. (Sorry, my fingers could not seem to stop from typing a Dad joke about the bad old days.) But seriously, I was going to do a short piece on the pricing but I’ve run out of time here.

Thursday: Economic Development Committee Meeting (Agenda) This is a continuation of the HB1220 discussion and I hope you will view the presentation. I wish the video was on-line! This will sound unkind, but frankly, the discussion centered on all the places Committee Members want to exclude from use as homeless shelters and affordable housing. The only place mentioned as acceptable? Pacific Ridge, of course.

Look: I have exactly the same concerns about all these issues as you do. I am by far the most aggressive CM on Code Enforcement. However, like all cities, our government has officially been saying for years how committed we are to solving these problems. But most cities actually did very little. So the State called our bluff. We now have to allow these structures. But by the same token, I do not want Pacific Ridge to be the ‘affordable housing spot’. I don’t know what or where at this point, but I do know that that idea is not fair. We can’t stop this or try to ‘work around it’. We need to make it work well. And the only way affordable housing works we is to put our energies towards insisting that it be attractive and available throughout Des Moines.

Saturday: A tour of the new Why Not You? Academy. This is a Charter School that will start this autumn with about 113 9th Graders. I met Scott (the boss) and one of the engineers who helped redo the building and I was impressed. They already have a waiting list, which is a good sign.

My Four ARPA Proposals…

Update 08/31/21: Since this original post, I have added two other proposals for a total of six. I’ve added them below.

As I said in the Christmas in July post on spending our $9M in stimulus money, after the July 22 City Council Meeting, Councilmembers were given an application by the City Manager to fill out potential programs for research.

As I wrote last Sunday, I’ve had lots of suggestions from very informed citizens. But I’ve had no blazing insights as to which ideas to put forward.

So far, I have submitted four ideas. I could’ve submitted dozens. What I submitted have the following shared features:

  • I think I know enough about the idea to know if it might work
  • I think the City has the ability to execute it’s part with excellence
  • Each is strategic, as opposed to short term relief
  • Each would improve the quality of life for most or all residents
  • Each would lead to ongoing sustainable economic benefit to the City

And just to be clear: based on everything I have learned thus far, the primary goal I have is: the City Of Des Moines needs more money. You can’t do anything the public wants if you don’t have the money.

Consolation prize

A few words as to why I did not prioritize other stuff.

First off, I had a slew of questions about almost every line item on the City Manager’s draft proposal. It’s exactly the kind of detail-free thing that drives me nuts. It’s like designed to mess with me. So as I said last Sunday, more than anything else, I would like to slow down the entire train. We have plenty of time to decide most (not all) of these things.

Second, all the suggestions I have received are wonderful. I’m not kidding. Some of these proposals are so detailed, I was thinking, “Man if I was still working, I’d want that person’s résumé” If it were appropriate, I’d share a few of your suggestions just to show you how thoughtful and civic-minded so many of our residents really are. And that’s the problem: there are so many equivalently wonderful ideas I have no way of deeming one better than the other. So I took the coward’s way out. 😀

Third–every corporation has core competencies; things it excels at and things it finds more challenging. For example, my experiences with EATS and GRO were not exactly great, so I’m not as jazzed to repeat those, unless I get assurances that they’ll be handled differently in REV 2.0.

Fourth–with regard to anything ‘human servicesy’, again, I just found a lot of ittoo vague. I’m happy to provide funding for programs that have demonstrable need and a proven track record. However, I’m very reluctant to talk about any new program that we might have to build from scratch (see EATS and GRO.) Again, you’d have to show me that they can be executed well. If that sounds like micro-managing? Sorry. I just can’t support a blank check made out to ‘Mental Health’ or whatever. This has nothing to do with my support for the issue. *I just want evidence.

And parenthetically–I have to point out something I’ve been grousing about since day one: the fact that all our Advisory Committees (especially our Human Services Advisory Committee–which is where the majority of our social services spending is generated) is something of a black box to me. The Council gets only a single annual report during budgeting season. I’ve asked for information and been denied. If Council could get more routine information about the programs they fund–I’d be thrilled to be more supportive. I just refuse to spend money without details. Which makes me heartless, of course. And cold. Probably cruel to small animals as well.

The proposals

And with all that build -up:

#1 ENVIRONMENTAL Strategist

As most of you know “the airport” was and is my issue. The Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) is here. People are often asking me “OK, what’s the answer?” This proposal is a big part of it. I would like the City to create a full-time position dedicated  to managing the negative impacts of Sea-Tac Airport. We’ve needed such a person since basically forever.

It’s one of the few ideas I’ll ever float that has some ‘what?’ factor. As far as I know, there is literally no person doing this job in the United States. But there should be.

People always complain that I’m gassing on, but there have been successes  in managing the airport, you know about them, you just don’t hear about them. (Until 1990, the airport literally dumped untreated waste directly into Des Moines Creek and Puget Sound.) But those successes have been epic and  inexpensive. They were also local talent and that was the key. Unfortunately, the only thing that ever got newspaper coverage seems to have been the truly spectacular wastes of money (eg. over $5.5M on Third Runway legal fees).

Anyhoo, I’m being a terrible tease and  I’ll come back to this another time. For now: the key mistake we always make is to outsource airport management–as a reaction to the Port. We hire outsiders from a small club of people inside the airline world, to come in, usually at the 11th hour. And that is why it is always unbelievably expensive and totally ineffective.

But among this person’s duties would be:

  1. Develop a strategic approach towards all negative impacts from Sea-Tac Airport.
  2. Educate the public and improve awareness to build regional support
  3. Act as legislative advocate on all related legislation.
  4. Identify and develop grant funding both for this department, but also to create mitigation programs that benefit the entire community.
  5. Organize other governments and organizations towards coordinated and strategic responses.
  6. Facilitate a new Council/Citizen Committee that can create legislation for the full Council.

This person needs to have a very specific set of skills: environmental law, communication, and the ability to grok airports. I’m asking for funding for three years as a proof of concept–and I’m applying the same standard our City Manager proposed when he accepted his job: if the work product isn’t paying for itself, it should be terminated.

The City Manager has chaired our Aviation Advisory Committee and currently represents the City on all airport-related groups. This person will take over that slot.

#2 DIRECTOR OF Business formation

I would like the City to create a dedicated business formation program. The program would initially consist of an FTE who’s job would be to:

  1. Promote Des Moines businesses, both locally and regionally
  2. Assist new business formation and existing business relocation to Des Moines
  3. Use a dedicated fund to provide start-up money as needed
  4. Provide ongoing surveys, events and other support services to help the business community support and grow their customer bases

Currently the City Manager also functions as Economic Development Director. But this is actually a very different job. The job of EDD is strategic planning–and in practice that has meant land development. But Des Moines also (and especially) needs someone to help the business owners. Years ago we had a Chamber Of Commerce but it was not particularly effective. This person will recruit promising businesses to locate here. When someone begins the process, this person will make it their mission to help them open and then thrive. To build their digital presence. To market. And to keep their finger on the pulse of every business and help raise their profile with media.

One of the first thing my critics often say about me is that I hate business. Sometimes I think I’m the only person on the Council who actually likes  running a business. I think we’ve often confused ‘building’ and ‘real estate’ as ‘business’. Construction is great. But a business–something that serves customers–is an ongoing process. A City that says it supports business should provide services that actually, you know, support business.

#3 Second metro shuttle

The Metro Shuttle that runs down 216th was a very good idea. Now let’s bring it to the rest of Des Moines. I propose to establish a second and permanent Metro Shuttle line for the south end of town with a route heading south from Marine View Drive and the Marina down to Judson, Huntington Park and Highline College. This will help us in our stated goals as a transit-centered community and it will help tie the south end of town into the downtown core–especially for our large senior community.

#4 Accelerated Marina Dock Replacement

I would like the City to research the possibilities of using as much of the $9M, up to the entire amount, to accelerate dock replacement. Not land side or restrooms. Just the docks.

I would like to research how much/if any cost savings, economic benefits or other advantages there might be in using all or a much larger portion of this money to complete multiple docks. Are there some docks we could use this money to replace now that would immediately start generating more revenue? If so, how much? How much borrowing costs would we save over the long haul?

If not the full $9M does $6M give significant benefits?  $4M? I’m trying to get a sense of what the relative benefits (if any) might be to each of these spending points.

#5 MARINA COMMUNITY OUTREACH PRESENTATIONS

The Marina Master Plan is very complex. The document is good, but it is very difficult for most people to visualize what the experience will be given so many various possibilities. Some of the options discussed compete for the same space. It is also challenging to understand many of the financial aspects, including revenue potential and costs.

It is essential to provide the public with a clear understanding of what this all might mean for the future of the Marina … and for them. To create that understanding, the City will immediately identify and engage with a specialist in creating media presentations to create a series of materials:

  1. A Virtual Tour Of The Marina. These are common in residential and commercial real estate. It would consist of a video animation allowing the viewer to “fly over and through” the area and explore what the Marina might look like from several perspectives (birds eye, street level pedestrian, etc.) The animation will demonstrate all aspects of the proposal in the document as far as they can currently be known. It might begin with a ‘before’ fly-over approaching the Marina entrance and showing how the Marina looks now and then transition to an ‘after’ fly-over showing the new elements. It could also give a visitor’s viewpoint taking walk though various features on the land side. The following list of elements to be included is by no means comprehensive but is provided to give a sense of scope:
    1. Waterside
      • The new covered moorage look
      • How guest moorage changes
      • Changes to the fairways
      • Possible Expansion of Ranger
      • A view of the APB from the docks
      • A ferry docking
      • Views of the various seawalls – most of the public never sees these and do not understand what it does or the challenges to wildlife. This is important to residents who want to have confidence that the rebuild is compatible with ongoing interest in wildlife
    2. Landside
      • Hotel
      • Pedestrians moving from the ferry to parking
      • Movement of boats going in and out of the APB dry stack to the launch
      • Movement of boats going in and out of the east bank dry stack to the launch
      • A view from the condos looking down on the APB
      • Interiors of the APB with proposed uses
      • Pedestrians descending the 223rd stairs
      • A re-purposed harbormaster building
      • Parking flows
  2. A series of posters and hand outs, and web pages, crafted at a sixth grade level , explaining the various environmental concerns: why permitting is so costly and so fraught. This is important to residents who want to have confidence that the rebuild is compatible with ongoing interest in wildlife.
  3. A series of posters, hand outs and web pages, crafted at a sixth grade level, explaining the costs, revenue forecasts, permitting challenges, how we intend to finance and also the appropriate uses of ongoing Marina money (eg. how an Enterprise Fund works.)

Important: All these materials will be updated as various elements of the project are approved and a complete set of all revisions will be maintained so that the public can see how the project evolves over time.

These materials will be created to be both self-standing, but also with a presenter in mind. The goal will be to support community meetings where experts from the City and its partners can use these to enhance their presentations and Q&A sessions with the public.

$20,000.

#6 FRIENDS OF SALTWATER STATE PARK WEB SITE

“The Friends Of Saltwater State Park are invaluable to the City and our residents through their efforts at park clean up, education and in monitoring the health of Puget Sound and the water quality at McSorley Creek. Their ongoing efforts to monitor and report spills from Midway Sewer District are much appreciated by our residents who feel safer knowing that they are watching. Their work also greatly enhances the value of the park as a tourist destination both at the water and on the forest trails.

Like many non-profits, FOSWSP struggles to attract volunteers and the donations necessary to provide these valuable benefits to Des Moines. To address these challenges, they are asking for our help to create a new web site to attract volunteers and donations. The new site will also provide educational opportunities and keep the public updated on the health of McSorley Creek, Puget Sound and the forest. Please see their attached proposal with details.”

Full proposal

$7,500

Summary: Tie it together

Look, I don’t know if any of this is going anywhere. But I’m sharing this with you because I honestly have never been clear as to the City’s strategy. We talk about the ‘Marina Redevelopment’ and other projects, but they always feel like separate and unrelated items. At the end of the day, Des Moines started out in 1959 as a very small city that grew by leaps and bounds with many small annexations. And in truth, the City still feels like all those separate ‘chunks’.

Part of that is just life. An administration is busy enough with the day to day stuff. But at some point we have to make real efforts to stamp Des Moines as a unified City. I’ve already suggested having unified branding across the City. Beyond that, we need to have a series of strategic goals that get beyond this project and that project–and finally gets us to being a unified city.

*Some day I’ll write an article on Detroit during the late 70’s. I’ll call it “How to waste half a billion dollars with only the best of intentions.” The City of Detroit went through a very long phase where it received absolutely lavish sums of Federal grants. And it just poured money into various social programs that were almost uniformly ineffective. But after so many decades of abject racism, questioning the effectiveness of any of these programs was politically impossible. Outcomes mattered far less than simply to appear to be trying. I still have a bad taste in my mouth thinking back on all the neighbourhoods that should have been helped.

Categories Airport, Economic Development, Marina, Neighborhoods, Transportation

My six ARPA proposals

1 Comment on My six ARPA proposals

Update 08/31/21: Since this original post, I have added two other proposals for a total of six. I’ve added them below.

As I said in the Christmas in July post on spending our $9M in stimulus money, after the July 22 City Council Meeting, Councilmembers were given an application by the City Manager to fill out potential programs for research.

As I wrote last Sunday, I’ve had lots of suggestions from very informed citizens. But I’ve had no blazing insights as to which ideas to put forward.

So far, I have submitted four ideas. I could’ve submitted dozens. What I submitted have the following shared features:

  • I think I know enough about the idea to know if it might work
  • I think the City has the ability to execute it’s part with excellence
  • Each is strategic, as opposed to short term relief
  • Each would improve the quality of life for most or all residents
  • Each would lead to ongoing sustainable economic benefit to the City

And just to be clear: based on everything I have learned thus far, the primary goal I have is: the City Of Des Moines needs more money. You can’t do anything the public wants if you don’t have the money.

Consolation prize

A few words as to why I did not prioritize other stuff.

First off, I had a slew of questions about almost every line item on the City Manager’s draft proposal. It’s exactly the kind of detail-free thing that drives me nuts. It’s like designed to mess with me. So as I said last Sunday, more than anything else, I would like to slow down the entire train. We have plenty of time to decide most (not all) of these things.

Second, all the suggestions I have received are wonderful. I’m not kidding. Some of these proposals are so detailed, I was thinking, “Man if I was still working, I’d want that person’s résumé” If it were appropriate, I’d share a few of your suggestions just to show you how thoughtful and civic-minded so many of our residents really are. And that’s the problem: there are so many equivalently wonderful ideas I have no way of deeming one better than the other. So I took the coward’s way out. 😀

Third–every corporation has core competencies; things it excels at and things it finds more challenging. For example, my experiences with EATS and GRO were not exactly great, so I’m not as jazzed to repeat those, unless I get assurances that they’ll be handled differently in REV 2.0.

Fourth–with regard to anything ‘human servicesy’, again, I just found a lot of ittoo vague. I’m happy to provide funding for programs that have demonstrable need and a proven track record. However, I’m very reluctant to talk about any new program that we might have to build from scratch (see EATS and GRO.) Again, you’d have to show me that they can be executed well. If that sounds like micro-managing? Sorry. I just can’t support a blank check made out to ‘Mental Health’ or whatever. This has nothing to do with my support for the issue. *I just want evidence.

And parenthetically–I have to point out something I’ve been grousing about since day one: the fact that all our Advisory Committees (especially our Human Services Advisory Committee–which is where the majority of our social services spending is generated) is something of a black box to me. The Council gets only a single annual report during budgeting season. I’ve asked for information and been denied. If Council could get more routine information about the programs they fund–I’d be thrilled to be more supportive. I just refuse to spend money without details. Which makes me heartless, of course. And cold. Probably cruel to small animals as well.

The proposals

And with all that build -up:

#1 ENVIRONMENTAL Strategist

As most of you know “the airport” was and is my issue. The Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) is here. People are often asking me “OK, what’s the answer?” This proposal is a big part of it. I would like the City to create a full-time position dedicated  to managing the negative impacts of Sea-Tac Airport. We’ve needed such a person since basically forever.

It’s one of the few ideas I’ll ever float that has some ‘what?’ factor. As far as I know, there is literally no person doing this job in the United States. But there should be.

People always complain that I’m gassing on, but there have been successes  in managing the airport, you know about them, you just don’t hear about them. (Until 1990, the airport literally dumped untreated waste directly into Des Moines Creek and Puget Sound.) But those successes have been epic and  inexpensive. They were also local talent and that was the key. Unfortunately, the only thing that ever got newspaper coverage seems to have been the truly spectacular wastes of money (eg. over $5.5M on Third Runway legal fees).

Anyhoo, I’m being a terrible tease and  I’ll come back to this another time. For now: the key mistake we always make is to outsource airport management–as a reaction to the Port. We hire outsiders from a small club of people inside the airline world, to come in, usually at the 11th hour. And that is why it is always unbelievably expensive and totally ineffective.

But among this person’s duties would be:

  1. Develop a strategic approach towards all negative impacts from Sea-Tac Airport.
  2. Educate the public and improve awareness to build regional support
  3. Act as legislative advocate on all related legislation.
  4. Identify and develop grant funding both for this department, but also to create mitigation programs that benefit the entire community.
  5. Organize other governments and organizations towards coordinated and strategic responses.
  6. Facilitate a new Council/Citizen Committee that can create legislation for the full Council.

This person needs to have a very specific set of skills: environmental law, communication, and the ability to grok airports. I’m asking for funding for three years as a proof of concept–and I’m applying the same standard our City Manager proposed when he accepted his job: if the work product isn’t paying for itself, it should be terminated.

The City Manager has chaired our Aviation Advisory Committee and currently represents the City on all airport-related groups. This person will take over that slot.

#2 DIRECTOR OF Business formation

I would like the City to create a dedicated business formation program. The program would initially consist of an FTE who’s job would be to:

  1. Promote Des Moines businesses, both locally and regionally
  2. Assist new business formation and existing business relocation to Des Moines
  3. Use a dedicated fund to provide start-up money as needed
  4. Provide ongoing surveys, events and other support services to help the business community support and grow their customer bases

Currently the City Manager also functions as Economic Development Director. But this is actually a very different job. The job of EDD is strategic planning–and in practice that has meant land development. But Des Moines also (and especially) needs someone to help the business owners. Years ago we had a Chamber Of Commerce but it was not particularly effective. This person will recruit promising businesses to locate here. When someone begins the process, this person will make it their mission to help them open and then thrive. To build their digital presence. To market. And to keep their finger on the pulse of every business and help raise their profile with media.

One of the first thing my critics often say about me is that I hate business. Sometimes I think I’m the only person on the Council who actually likes  running a business. I think we’ve often confused ‘building’ and ‘real estate’ as ‘business’. Construction is great. But a business–something that serves customers–is an ongoing process. A City that says it supports business should provide services that actually, you know, support business.

#3 Second metro shuttle

The Metro Shuttle that runs down 216th was a very good idea. Now let’s bring it to the rest of Des Moines. I propose to establish a second and permanent Metro Shuttle line for the south end of town with a route heading south from Marine View Drive and the Marina down to Judson, Huntington Park and Highline College. This will help us in our stated goals as a transit-centered community and it will help tie the south end of town into the downtown core–especially for our large senior community.

#4 Accelerated Marina Dock Replacement

I would like the City to research the possibilities of using as much of the $9M, up to the entire amount, to accelerate dock replacement. Not land side or restrooms. Just the docks.

I would like to research how much/if any cost savings, economic benefits or other advantages there might be in using all or a much larger portion of this money to complete multiple docks. Are there some docks we could use this money to replace now that would immediately start generating more revenue? If so, how much? How much borrowing costs would we save over the long haul?

If not the full $9M does $6M give significant benefits?  $4M? I’m trying to get a sense of what the relative benefits (if any) might be to each of these spending points.

#5 MARINA COMMUNITY OUTREACH PRESENTATIONS

The Marina Master Plan is very complex. The document is good, but it is very difficult for most people to visualize what the experience will be given so many various possibilities. Some of the options discussed compete for the same space. It is also challenging to understand many of the financial aspects, including revenue potential and costs.

It is essential to provide the public with a clear understanding of what this all might mean for the future of the Marina … and for them. To create that understanding, the City will immediately identify and engage with a specialist in creating media presentations to create a series of materials:

  1. A Virtual Tour Of The Marina. These are common in residential and commercial real estate. It would consist of a video animation allowing the viewer to “fly over and through” the area and explore what the Marina might look like from several perspectives (birds eye, street level pedestrian, etc.) The animation will demonstrate all aspects of the proposal in the document as far as they can currently be known. It might begin with a ‘before’ fly-over approaching the Marina entrance and showing how the Marina looks now and then transition to an ‘after’ fly-over showing the new elements. It could also give a visitor’s viewpoint taking walk though various features on the land side. The following list of elements to be included is by no means comprehensive but is provided to give a sense of scope:
    1. Waterside
      • The new covered moorage look
      • How guest moorage changes
      • Changes to the fairways
      • Possible Expansion of Ranger
      • A view of the APB from the docks
      • A ferry docking
      • Views of the various seawalls – most of the public never sees these and do not understand what it does or the challenges to wildlife. This is important to residents who want to have confidence that the rebuild is compatible with ongoing interest in wildlife
    2. Landside
      • Hotel
      • Pedestrians moving from the ferry to parking
      • Movement of boats going in and out of the APB dry stack to the launch
      • Movement of boats going in and out of the east bank dry stack to the launch
      • A view from the condos looking down on the APB
      • Interiors of the APB with proposed uses
      • Pedestrians descending the 223rd stairs
      • A re-purposed harbormaster building
      • Parking flows
  2. A series of posters and hand outs, and web pages, crafted at a sixth grade level , explaining the various environmental concerns: why permitting is so costly and so fraught. This is important to residents who want to have confidence that the rebuild is compatible with ongoing interest in wildlife.
  3. A series of posters, hand outs and web pages, crafted at a sixth grade level, explaining the costs, revenue forecasts, permitting challenges, how we intend to finance and also the appropriate uses of ongoing Marina money (eg. how an Enterprise Fund works.)

Important: All these materials will be updated as various elements of the project are approved and a complete set of all revisions will be maintained so that the public can see how the project evolves over time.

These materials will be created to be both self-standing, but also with a presenter in mind. The goal will be to support community meetings where experts from the City and its partners can use these to enhance their presentations and Q&A sessions with the public.

$20,000.

#6 FRIENDS OF SALTWATER STATE PARK WEB SITE

“The Friends Of Saltwater State Park are invaluable to the City and our residents through their efforts at park clean up, education and in monitoring the health of Puget Sound and the water quality at McSorley Creek. Their ongoing efforts to monitor and report spills from Midway Sewer District are much appreciated by our residents who feel safer knowing that they are watching. Their work also greatly enhances the value of the park as a tourist destination both at the water and on the forest trails.

Like many non-profits, FOSWSP struggles to attract volunteers and the donations necessary to provide these valuable benefits to Des Moines. To address these challenges, they are asking for our help to create a new web site to attract volunteers and donations. The new site will also provide educational opportunities and keep the public updated on the health of McSorley Creek, Puget Sound and the forest. Please see their attached proposal with details.”

Full proposal

$7,500

Summary: Tie it together

Look, I don’t know if any of this is going anywhere. But I’m sharing this with you because I honestly have never been clear as to the City’s strategy. We talk about the ‘Marina Redevelopment’ and other projects, but they always feel like separate and unrelated items. At the end of the day, Des Moines started out in 1959 as a very small city that grew by leaps and bounds with many small annexations. And in truth, the City still feels like all those separate ‘chunks’.

Part of that is just life. An administration is busy enough with the day to day stuff. But at some point we have to make real efforts to stamp Des Moines as a unified City. I’ve already suggested having unified branding across the City. Beyond that, we need to have a series of strategic goals that get beyond this project and that project–and finally gets us to being a unified city.

*Some day I’ll write an article on Detroit during the late 70’s. I’ll call it “How to waste half a billion dollars with only the best of intentions.” The City of Detroit went through a very long phase where it received absolutely lavish sums of Federal grants. And it just poured money into various social programs that were almost uniformly ineffective. But after so many decades of abject racism, questioning the effectiveness of any of these programs was politically impossible. Outcomes mattered far less than simply to appear to be trying. I still have a bad taste in my mouth thinking back on all the neighbourhoods that should have been helped.

Categories Public Safety, Transparency

The Truman Show

1 Comment on The Truman Show

I occasionally hear from critics that I make too many things ‘public’. Why aren’t I trying to communicate with the administration or colleagues? The fact is that I do that. Whether I want to or not. 😀 My life as an elected in a very public and very hostile work environment sometimes remind me of that movie The Truman Show.

Just to recap, since declaring a State Of Emergency in March 2020, the City Manager will not take my phone call. He will not schedule in person or Zoom meetings. That’s on record.

However, he does continue to do all that stuff with other Councilmembers. I know this because they say so publicly. That is obvious favoritism. And that seems to be against the ICMA code of ethics, which says that “a manager should always treat all members of the governing body equally and impartially.”

Equal opportunity cranky…

This means that all my communication is limited to 1email. OK, fine. However: even with all that, it’s email, right? I can address a message specifically to City Manager Michael Matthias. And I can say in the subject or body “this is just between us” or “g2g” or “please do not forward”. But generally speaking what then happens is… he forwards my email to the entire City Council. Happens all the time.

So very quickly I developed a simple rule: I almost never say anything, even in private, that I wouldn’t care if it was repeated. Some people might use that constraint to be become completely bland. My response was to go equal opportunity cranky.

Just to be clear, I don’t think I’ve ever received a message from another CM automatically forwarded for my  viewing pleasure. And frankly, I would not want to. I think each CM should be able to have private conversations with the City Manager–so long as everyone agrees to abide by the rules of the road, eg. RCW 35A.13.120.

You can suggest all you want…

RCW35A.13.120 makes it clear that a Councilmember cannot give orders. However, you can make all the suggestions you want. When you’re not on the dais, you’re just another member of the public making a public comment. I guess one could suggest that a City Manager might forward all ‘suggestions’ to the full Council out of an abundance of caution–a show of transparency. But again, since I have never seen a similar email from any other CM, who knows.

But I do know that other CMs make suggestions all the time. Here’s just one where the Deputy Mayor describes in detail that he was a key driver in the City Manager’s to add four new police officers to the City’s Draft Proposal for ARPA funding.

Just to be clear: Neither Councilmember Martinelli or myself had any awareness of that proposal until we watched that Candidates Forum. Which makes Deputy Mayor special, I guess. 😀

The problem…

Now don’t mistake me: the position I am in is not something I would want for any Councilmember. But it is what it is until we have a Council that will not tolerate favoritism. Unfortunately, favoritism works to the advantage of  the favored. To put it bluntly: it is not in Deputy Mayor Mahoney’s interest (or any of the majority) to have all Councilmembers treated equally.

So the question becomes, why would the City Manager do stuff like forwarding my emails? I often ask and I hope you will too. 🙂

You want transparency? I’ll show you transparency!

But I’ll give you an example I sent today and let you decide:

To: Michael Matthias <MMatthias@desmoineswa.gov>
Wednesday July 28, 2021 11:01AM

Just this once... 3g2g...

[Please find out the percentage of employees who are vaccinated.]
If you don't know, it's probably below 70. And if so, you should research mandating vaccinations.

My company used to do customer service programs--like converting sales
people to apps like SalesForce. For decades those were PAINFUL. People
would always threaten to organise and quit en masse. There's been a ton
of studies on corp. group behaviour crap like this--getting people to do something they aren't thrilled about. And the curve of vaccination
uptake and resistance is consistent with that.

Well-meaning organisations  go out of their way to make an unpopular
policy 'voluntary' -- to sound 'sensitive' and 'ease' people into it or
whatever. But this actually makes certain personality types dig in.
People start off -mildly- pissed off about the policy and the more time
they get to mull the idea, the more militant they become.

So the corp. finally gets fed up and makes the policy compulsory... and
a whole bunch of people show up for a meeting and scream and threaten to quit. And....

Basically, nobody quits.

I can send you studies if this isn't already in the Trash.

If you did this:
  a) you (possibly) save lives directly
  b) you set an example that ripples out to the wider community...
hopefully it gives other businesses/governments cover to do the same.
  c) people would hate you... but hey... what's new, right? :D

My guess is that if the PD alone could do a PR indicating 100%---that
right there would move residents to get the shot.


---JC

(The number ’70’ refers to the vaccination percentage of City employees. The City Manager wrote telling me he does not know the percentage.)

You read that right. I would be thrilled if our City made COVID-19 vaccinations mandatory for all employees for which it has the authority.

Speaking of which: remember that pandemic?

The thing is: I actually broached the subject almost a year ago from the dais and here. Back in the February, the Chief Of Police reported a reluctance by many (mainly younger) officers towards getting vaccinated.  He stated that the vaccination rate was 50%. I suggested that the City should ‘strongly encourage’ officers to get vaccinated. I said that vaccine hesitancy would be a real problem. And I told the administration that it would send a strong message to the public if City employees–and especially the Police–were vaccinated. I wanted our City to be a model in that regard.

I was immediately criticized for this stance by both my colleagues, the administration and the Police Guild. However, I am certain I made the right call then and now.

I understand the concern for personal freedoms. But dying from COVID-19 now strikes me not so much as  ‘tragic’ as just plain willful. It reminds me of how people used to scream against seat belt or drunk driving laws as some major  threat to democracy.

g2g

The only reason I asked it to be “g2g” is not because because I wanted to hide anything, but rather because, as I say in the email, all the research shows that the only way to implement a program that will be unpopular for a small number of people is to have a ‘heavy’ take the blame. And it should not be someone the public engages with, like the Chief Of Police or the Guild or the Council. Do I wish we could vote for this sort of thing? Absolutely. But occasionally, there are certain important things that aren’t politically possible otherwise.

And this is the reply…

From: Michael Matthias <MMatthias@desmoineswa.gov> Thursday July 29, 2021 3:55PM

The reasons I forwarded your communication to City Council are as follows:

First, you are suggesting policy/protocol changes. As you know, policy direction to City Administration requires a majority vote of the City Council, I felt City Council needed to be informed about your proposal. However, in this specific case, related to the COVID pandemic, and acting under the existing Emergency Proclamation, all City actions are vetted through our Emergency Operations Center. We have been at the forefront responding to the pandemic, continuing to require 100% masking for all who come to City Hall. We were early to close down and we are remaining cautious and vigilant. Knock on wood, we have had zero fatalities and zero infections at City Hall.

I felt it was worth advising City Council that you feel we are not fulfilling our responsibilities to our employees because (your words) we are acting in a manner that is designed to sound "sensitive," and "ease" employees into responding. Throughout the process, going back to the start of the pandemic you have been critical of our EOC and emergency efforts. I felt that City Council deserved to hear your current critique based on some corporate assumptions that do not apply to a public institution.

Be advised, that we will stay the course, under my leadership. Mandating vaccines is an approach that will shortly end up in the courts. We have prepared based on the possibility of a resurgence in COVID, which is occurring. We will not open our facilities prematurely. All employees and visitors (very rare these days) to City Hall must undergo a health screening (including temperature check) and must wear masks. We welcome thoughtful suggestions, however, emergency operations and policies are formulated and executed by our Incident Commander, Assistant Fire Chief Dave Mataftin and our Emergency Operations Center (I chair the EOC policy committee).

I hope this gives you some insight into my thinking and will hopefully encourage you to support and not continue to demean our efforts.

I guess I’d buy into that whole ‘public institution’ jazz if I hadn’t already seen this notice: Highline College Vaccination Mandate for returning students Fall 2021. But… whatever.

To: Michael Matthias <MMatthias@desmoineswa.gov> Friday July 30 2:31PM
I appreciate the detailed follow up.
I have never doubted Shannon's abilities or her department's commitment
to safety.

And I struggle to read my suggestion as being any kind of negative
critique of anyone's performance.

My understanding is that employee policy decisions are at your
discretion. If I am in error on that, please help me to understand this
particular distinction.

Whether administrative or legislative, it's still an idea worth
considering. Based on my experience, it will take corporations and
organisations setting an example to bring the pandemic to closure. I
believe that my suggestion could be a meaningful step in that direction
and is worth exploring. Infections are rising and there's the larger
community to be considered.

YMMV

Anyhoo, the public see the dialogue at the City Council Meetings. And this is a slice of my world off the dais. Which is basically, more of the same. 😀

1Now, all Councilmember communication is (theoretically) subject to public records requests. Any member of the public can request any emails from any CM or the City. Most people don’t bother, but they could.

3Guy to guy for you non-slangy people. As in: “just between us guys”.

Categories Economic Development, Engagement

American Rescue Plan – Change My Mind

2 Comments on American Rescue Plan – Change My Mind

Like my colleagues, I’m sure, I’ve been thinking a lot about how to spend the $9M I discussed in my Christmas In July post.

I’ve received dozens of messages about this. Many are very detailed proposals showing a concern for civic life that is seriously wonderful.  And they spread the gamut. “More police!” to “no police!” to “spend it all on relief programs!” to “rebuild the downtown!” to “fix my road before people DIE!” (four of those so far.)

Money decisions used to be so simple…

One good thing about being a typically strapped small City. It usually makes money decisions simple. Since there’s usually no money, there’s no decision. Simple. 😀

All these people who write care deeply. Many of their ideas are just wonderful and seem so reasonable. Unfortunately, they are also, totally impossible.

Sorry. I should be more sensitive when bursting the balloon. But one reason I wanted to join the City Council is because I’ve had such a great experience in this area over the past quarter century. And, like many people, instead of things getting progressively better, I’ve started seeing it slip away from the next generation. I look at everyone’s Laundry List of ideas and I think, “Why aren’t all these things possible?” I mean, people aren’t asking for wild Louis XIV shit like:

“Ferraris and Unicorns: for everyone!”

They just want normal stuff. Traffic calming. A charging station. A shuttle bus. A park. A community center. A cop on the beat. A market. A sidewalk next to a school. Some trees. Not a lot to ask, right?

I whipped out a cocktail napkin and totted up just the things I knew the general price of and stopped at $50M. No lie. To do all the reasonable stuff people asked for… stuff that probably sounds like standard equipment for a successful mid-twentieth-century city… is in the “if you have to ask you can’t afford it” price range.

I’m not trying to be depressing here. I’m just telling you that since everything you’ve suggested seems so reasonable, it also seems impossible  to ask the City Council to choose based on ‘reasonable’ or ‘worthy’. They’re all reasonable things; not extravagances.

The clock is ticking…

The City Manager asked us to hand in our suggestions by tomorrow. Which seems ridiculous to me and it’s made me realize that I simply don’t have enough information to recommend anything. I’ve called various agencies and asked them, “How much do you need?” And they also need time to provide a number.

I’m watching how other cities are doing surveys, of business and individual needs and that makes a lot of sense to me. But those take time to do.

Frankly, I don’t want to commit to any idea without (my favourite word) ‘data’. I don’t want to say “$100,000 for business grants” without knowing why that particular number.

My first two ideas

So as of Sunday night, I’ll just tell ya the only two ideas I’ve come up with so far that make sense to me. I guess both will appear ‘extreme’ or at least unsexy. But the more I look at your list of ideas, the smaller $9M looks. And the more I look at the City Manager’s ideas, the more ‘meh’ they look to me. Don’t get me wrong. I mean, most (not all) seem like ‘responsible’ things to do. But since this is a one-time deal, I was hoping for more than that.

#1 Do nothing

So since I have no burning inspiration at the moment, if it were up to me, I’d direct the administration to get to work on some surveys of businesses, non-profits, individuals and come back with some numbers, maybe in September. Then we decide. Or not. Maybe we take even more time.

Several people have asked about a Town Hall, and I’m fine with that. But I’m reluctant to even do that until we have those numbers. I don’t want to us to talk with the public without being able to share what is possible.

#2 OK, But if you had to choose?

You little arm twister, you. OK, if I had to choose, I mean right now, I’d probably throw the entire $9M into replacing the Marina docks. I don’t mean restrooms or multi-purpose buildings or anything on the land side. Just the actual docks. Also known as ‘those things that bring in money’.

Yeah, that might seem extreme, or at least unsexy, but the docks must be replaced. And going all-in does a few things you might like:

  • First, it’s cheaper. A lot cheaper. Spreading the project out over 15-20 years (the current plan), adds seriously to the total cost.
  • Second, the quicker we get docks replaced, the quicker they start bringing in more money than they do now. A big part of the dock replacement involves re-sizing the slips to accommodate larger boats. Larger boats = More money. The quicker that happens, the more money we generate. And the more money we generate, the faster we can complete the whole shebang. It’s a virtuous circle.
  • Third, it could buy us time; many years of time for better planning. It completely removes any pressure to start developing the land side now. We could use that time to get the public input we needed in the first place and have a real discussion as to what the entire town wants the Marina Floor to be for the next fifty years.

As I said, I know this sounds about as sexy as a flannel night gown, but at the moment, I’m having difficulty thinking of a better strategy. It addresses an imminent need, it helps us achieve our long term goals, it saves a ton of public money, and all that fiscal responsibility jazz aside, it avoids doing the wrong things to the Marina Floor.

In our short history, we’ve made a number of really big planning errors–things that have kept us from becoming the ‘waterfront town’ we all like to dream about. I really want to find a way to slow things and get that right.

It was all a dream

OK, none of that is going to happen, so remain calm. 🙂

I know many of you want to use as much of this money as possible for immediate relief. I hear you. But I also look at some of our neighbouring cities, who are doing so much better financially, and I see how they are now able to do a lot more for their communities on an ongoing basis. And I want us to be able to do that as well. Not just this one year. I mean every year. Because the truth is: yeah, it’s been horrible, but we have growing and unmet human services needs every year. If there was a way to use this money to improve our permanent human services budget, I would be inclined towards heading in that direction.

Also, there are traps to almost every line item on the draft proposal. Just one example: I know how much many of you want more police. But I look at the City Manager’s draft and it funds new police for only two years. So I ask myself, “then what?” We’re currently spending well over half the City’s budget on public safety. So as much as I also want safer neighbourhoods, I don’t want to start down that road without knowing we’ll have the money.

Again: there are gotchas like that with every line item on the draft proposal.

Show me the money…

What Des Moines needs, what Des Moines has always needed, is more money. More sustainable money. Not grants. Not one-time permit fees. There are all these things residents have always wanted and will always want: human service programs, sidewalks, housing, education, infrastructure, restaurants. Things that we can never afford. We just can’t.

The current majority balanced the books largely by maxing out Utility Taxes–which I despise for many reasons. But even if you love them, this is as far as they go. Des Moines has to find a new way to get generate more ongoing revenue in order to face the future.

And in closing…

Anyhoo… it’s a choice. Or rather, a spectrum of choices: Somewhere between short term relief or planning for the future.

And I guess those are the two edge cases my mind wandered to this Sunday night:

  • We need more time to decide.
  • How could we use this money to make money?

But as that guy at the park says: Change my mind. 😀

Categories Economic Development, Engagement

Christmas In July: The ARPA Stimulus Money Request

24 Comments on Christmas In July: The ARPA Stimulus Money Request

At last night’s City Council Meeting, the City Manager unveiled the City’s ARPA Stimulus money proposal.  In short, the City is receiving $9,000,000 to be used for a limited number of purposes and it must be spent by 2024.

I urge all of you to watch that fifteen minute segment of the meeting and read these two PDFs.

American Rescue Plan – City Manager Recommendations

American Rescue Plan Fact Sheet

It’s only a first draft…

The City Manager gave a rundown of his staff’s initial recommendations. These are only initial recommendations. Councilmembers now will add their recommendations to add new ideas, modify some things on the list and remove others. Nothing will be fixed in stone for quite some time.

Which is where you come in…

I am asking you to send me your ideas and your priorities. Do not feel limited by what you see on that list of initial recommendations. If there is something you feel the City really needs? I want to hear about it. But remember: it must be something that can be done by 2024.

This is probably the biggest injection of one-time money the City will ever see, so we need to spend it wisely. Ideally, our spending choices will not merely help us recover. If we make truly inspired choices, this money has the potential to make Des Moines better than we could ever have achieved otherwise.

Some things I’m thinking about…

I know many of you are hurting. And many of you feel strongly that the City should use this money for short term relief programs like the Food Bank, income relief, business grants, etc. Got it. Loud and clear.

A couple of things, though:

  1. I will be looking at what those programs actually need. Take the Food Bank. That’s often the first thing residents say we should put money into (Often because it’s the only program they know about. Actually we help fund oodles of really great causes!) Anyhoo, on the many occasions I’ve talked to their directors where they’ve indicated that, at that particular moment, money was not the problem–often what they really need are volunteers. My point is that I will be looking at this based on what those agencies tell us they need.
  2. There are any number of human services programs that look great on paper, but frankly have not yet demonstrated their value. I am reluctant to spend money on any program simply because it looks humane. I want to see programs that work.
  3. I am also reluctant to fund any program that requires ongoing revenue. For example, I know many of you desperately want more police officers. But I would only consider that if I can see that we can afford it with the money we have going into the future.
  4. I hope you will also consider long-term projects. Something transformative. This is a once in a lifetime shot at doing something real, like starting a conversation about a community center for the South End or an entirely new park–something we could not achieve under any other circumstance–and which would benefit the entire community forever.
  5. $9,000,000 is actually not that much money. We could spend every drop of it on things like rent-relief or business grants and not make a serious dent in the need. Of course, if you need that relief right now, you feel differently. I get it. All politics is very local. But still, I’m asking you to consider the future, because when the whole city thrives it does benefit you, if only indirectly.

I look forward very much to hearing what you have to say. If nothing else, this is a great chance for me to refresh myself as to what the community is thinking about. And $9,000,000 could be quite a lot of refreshment. 😀 So please wrote or give me a call (206) 878-0578.

Categories Economic Development, Transparency

GRO Outreach TLDR

2 Comments on GRO Outreach TLDR

This is sort of a TLDR for the .01% of people who drill down. If you write what I do, angry people will always say you over-simplified or didn’t provide enough detail and so on. Which is often true. You cannot help but do those things in any short form article. So this is some detail.

Many people have responded to my writings about GRO with comments along the lines of “We need more transparency!”

TLDR

There were 26 applications and 26 acceptances. No denials. That in itself is actually a problem. Because there are close to 32,000 currently licensed businesses in Des Moines. No, many of them would not have qualified under any circumstances. But hundreds surely were at least plausible.

I have no complete statement as to the efforts the City made to reach out to the business community about the program. But this result is completely predictable if you do not do an active outreach program. It doesn’t just look bad, it is bad for reasons discussed below. That is one reason why MRSC recommended that a 3rd Party professional administer the program.

Background

I had an interest in business grants as soon as the pandemic began. I attended my first planning meeting involving ‘business grants’ back in April of 2020–along with the City planner who eventually helped create the GRO program along with our City Manager and the Highline College SBA person.  At the time, everyone in the room agreed that ‘outreach’ would be key. I told one 2civic leader that I would be willing to go door to door if necessary to make sure that every business across town was made aware. That was my level of passion on the issue.

Initially, the Council majority was lukewarm to the entire notion of business grants. They wondered if it was even the place of the City to do such a thing.

In May, the administration announced that they were working on something. I would periodically ask “how are things going?” and the administration would say they were working on it, but did not unveil ‘GRO’ until August 17th. I immediately asked for information on the program:

  • What were the requirements?
  • What was the outreach?
  • What was the scoring system?
  • What was our equity policy?

As so often happens, I was ghosted. I went so far as to ask from dais as to when the Council might receive those policies. And I was told by the City Manager, “…at some point.”

The Council was told by the City Manager that the awards had been chosen and the checks already disbursed. He did not reveal the names or amounts. The Mayor apparently did a photo op with several businesses but did not inform the Council. The first time the public became aware of the recipients was with an October 16th Press Release. I continued to press for answers to the above questions and continued to get nowhere.

So in January 2021, I did a public records request (the fact that a Councilmember should have to do a PRR to get this information, should drive voters insane.)

Let’s just say that I did not receive a complete response. And… if you do not feel like you have received a complete response to a PRR, your only choice is to go to Superior Court. Which sounds tempting, but as an elected, you also gotta take into account how it looks to embarrass the City like that.

But the information I received created almost as many questions as it answered. Here are a few:

  • There is no scoring system. The materials provided by each applicant vary widely. You can’t tell how they were judged for worthiness. There are links to various private Google Drive files, but I can’t see those. And there are references to various Zoom meetings where the actual process and decision making were discussed, but apparently no recording was made. All I can see is that every applicant received what they asked for… or more than they requested. 5I saw no denials.
  • Some applicants received waaaay more than they requested. One guy asked for $2,500 and received $25,000. There is no explanation as to why he received 10 times the requested amount. (Seriously?)
  • There is no mention of how applicants found out about the program.

Discovery and outreach…

I’ll just focus on that last one here. The term of art for ‘how applicants found out about the program’ is discovery. I have no way of knowing how the applicants discovered the program. And that matters.

But first, there was also no mention of what efforts the City made at outreach–again, one of my original questions. I asked the City repeatedly what efforts it had made to advertise the program. As far as I can tell, the only efforts seemed to be to put the notice on the web site and the City’s Facebook Page; what’s known as a traditional passive approach: post a public notice and you’ve done yer due diligence.

Now, most people, especially business owners who are working their asses off 14 hours a day, do not just happen to go to the City web site or even related social media pages every day. Shocking, right? 😀

The one business owner who got publicly upset? His family is super-active on social media and volunteers for numerous city-related stuff. There was no way he was not going to be among the first to discover the program. I’m not being snarky here. I’m glad they got the helped they needed. But this is a real point. I want the people who are digitally clued in to recognize that you are outliers. You are, by definition, elites in Des Moines, because you tend to know things and people that most of us do not.

My point is that all the efforts the City made at outreach were passive and not active. And if you do it that way you get just what happened–26 people, almost all clustered around MVD, with some connection to the City… and yeah, a high likelihood of campaign donors. Because that is exactly the set of people who will hear about the program if you take a passive approach.

Don’t buy it? It’s exactly the same thing that happens with public auctions for stuff like property and automobiles. You almost always get the same people (professionals), because… again, how many people actually read “public notices”? Only the outliers and the friends they clue in. Which is why they get ‘all the deals’.

Game theory…

Again, we have close to 2,000 registered businesses here with only 26 winners. So it’s a lot more than transparency. It’s game theory.

To be clear, I am not saying that some evil guy ‘hand picked’ 26 businesses of his closest pals. This strikes me as a poorly designed game where the rules heavily favor a certain outcome. I’m not splitting hairs here: if the results are the same, they’re both ‘hand picked’. Whether someone intended that result or not is irrelevant. What matters is that when you design a program like this with no active public outreach, you are almost certain to get a 4‘hand picked’ result.

That other number…

I’m seeing some eye rolls. Fine. But there is another uncomfortable truth: this was a zero sum game. The City received roughly $987,000 in CARES funding. The administration spent what it needed on salaries to avoid layoffs (well done!) So one assumes that the City Manager simply decided to spend the entire remainder of $500k on GRO recipients. Sounds fantastic, right? Given the low number of applicants, this allowed a 100% approval rate. It allowed most businesses to get the maximum amount ($25,000). It even allowed some businesses to get more than they requested. Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

OK, about that dinner: If more people had been aware of the program, more would have applied. And again, the dinner was fixed at $500k.

So let’s keep this simple. Let’s say another 26 businesses had applied and that they had all similar application profiles. Now what?

  • Do you give each applicant half their dinner?
  • Do you start being more rigorous in your vetting so that some people get to have dinner and some do not?

There are many possibilities. And there’s also the fact that if you double the number of applicants, you significantly increase the staff and consultant time in administering the program. Does that double? Do you have to find ways to speed the process? Does that mean having a more standardized (and more rigorous) application which the applicants would find more demanding?

Look, the important thing is that the moment you have more applicants, the whole program becomes more expensive, more complex, more contentious and frankly… a whole lot less fun for everyone involved. Because now you have real winners and real losers.

And for me this is the part that makes me most cranky. So let’s cut the comedy: It was not in the self-interest of either the City or any business who received a grant to have the applicant pool increase. Having a low number of applicants was easier. For everybody.

If that would’ve happened, businesses might’ve received less, they might’ve received nothing. Or, pay attention here, if they had again received the full amount, they would’ve been subject a bit more scrutiny than what happened which was basically, “Everyone’s a winner!”

I’m not saying anything untoward was going on. I’m just saying, again, why MRSC recommended that we hire an independent 3rd Party administrator. Because those are the incentives.

But the Mayor and City Manager were so excited with the results, they just gushed at all the above features. And given that, one has at least consider the possibility that the lack of outreach was not some oversight. Remember: the City took at least four months to design the program. This was not something thrown together over a weekend. It wasn’t like, “Sorry guys, this is the best we could do on short notice. Hope it’s OK!” No. The City and majority were over the moon at the fact that the administration “took the extra time to do it right.”

Curses! Foiled by altruism…

After the checks were handed out, I spoke with two  businesses who I had told about the grant just before the deadline (they were unaware of the program), but ultimately chose not apply. Why? “Some businesses are probably hurting way more than me.” That’s a real quote from a guy who is now kicking himself that he did not apply.

There’s also this: some businesses I talked to, frankly, had to be begged to obtain help–some because they’d had a terrible experience with other State and Federal grant programs which were either confusing or simply did not deliver.

Because, remember that back in August 2020,a lot of people thought the pandemic was might be under control. The idea that there might be not one, but two subsequent waves, that were worse than the initial wave? A lot of, frankly, were in a bit of denial. So at least some businesses, in my opinion, should have received a more active message, “Dude, seriously, you need to apply.”

So when these business people see that some applicants got more than they requested? Yeah, they’re not too thrilled.

But for reasons that should be obvious, businesses will never complain.

And again, all of the above is why MRSC recommended that the City hire an outside agency to administer the program.

The counterargument

I can see a certain number of readers saying, “Nonsense. Everyone had exactly the same access to the City web site. There was equal opportunity. If some people didn’t find out about it? Maybe that’s sad, but it’s not unfair. The program was completely fair.”

It’s a lifeboat, not an auction…

I must disagree. This was not a public auction where a few people gather to get great deals on distressed property. GRO was meant as emergency relief. COVID relief  grants were meant as a life line for businesses that were in danger of going under. And thus, a much higher standard of outreach should have applied. You have to make every effort to reach every business in Des Moines.

Even if you’ve never been on a boat, imagine this:

You’re on a boat on a very foggy day out on Puget Sound. Can’t see your hand in front of your face. Suddenly you hear people in the water. Sounds coming from all over the place. 1So you stop the boat, throw out some life preservers and say, “Here we are!”

Now some of those people are near enough so that they hear the sound; or maybe they knew in advance that you had planned to be in that spot. Either way, they know to swim to where you are. They will be saved.

Others do not. They have no idea that help is even out there. So unless you move the boat to where they are? Oops.

You don’t know what you don’t know

Even if the City came forward with tomorrow with completely reasonable explanations for all my questions right now I would not care. And neither should you. The fact is that the City did not provide its electeds with full information about the program design. Even after doing a public records request I do not have answers to the issues I raised. That is what matters most.

And to summarize

  • Most electeds did not bother to even ask for it. I can question their lack of curiosity, but whatever.
  • And the one who did, was stonewalled by the administration. That just bad.
  • And when that one elected went to his colleagues in the majority and asked them to help obtain that information? They refused. That is intolerable.

And about those donors…

Now one of the recipients was very upset that I referred to these twenty six as ‘the lucky few’. That’s a fair point. ‘Luck’ had little to do with the selection process. Perhaps ‘fortunate’ would have been better.

He was also especially offended that I mentioned “look at the campaign donors”. And here is my response, not to any person, but any organization that receives public money.

  1. You receive a grant from a government.
  2. You then make a significant donation to a candidate/elected in the next election.
  3. An elected representative from the opposition party (who is also responsible for oversight of that grant) requests routine information from the executive.
  4. The executive refuses. Repeatedly.
  5. So that same, cranky elected asks your candidate/elected, the guy you just donated to, for assistance in obtaining that information from the executive, and your candidate/elected also refuses.

If that sequence of events occurs? You should write the executive, and your candidate/elected, asking the executive to comply fully with the original request for information.

Because if they don’t? If they don’t happily and with all due speed cough up an appropriate request for information? All that does is create instant and totally reasonable skepticism from the elected, both in your candidate, the executive and, unfortunately you.

Now if people say to me, “I had no idea about any of that crap. I hate politics.” or something along the lines of, “You should’ve just asked me about it. Everybody in town knows me.” or even, “You hate business.”

Sir, I am not angry with you for not following politics. So please don’t be angry with me for just doing my job. The moment the above sequence events happened, that business person enters the conversation. I cannot just go and talk to you about it and ask for your explanation and call it good. That’s not how public money works. And I’m sorry. It has nothing to do with you personally.

But if one still does not see this, forget that we’re talking about a ‘small town’. Just substitute the word Senator and President for ‘elected’ and ‘executive’.

It is exactly the same. I know people like to think of our Councilmembers as sort of small town volunteers. But in reality, we seven are the sole oversight of a $100M corporation and executive with extraordinary authority. It’s my job to raise these kinds of concerns.

1This is not the correct lifesaving procedure, by the way. 😀

2You do understand how much I loathe using euphemisms like “civic leader”, right? But the moment you ‘name names’ you get angry phone calls like, “Dude leave me out of this!” They don’t dispute what I’m writing. They just don’t want to get into ‘politics’.

1This figure is not meant to be precise. The number of active businesses is constantly shifting. People have licenses they don’t use or have bedroom operations.

4In techno-babble, a passive approach strongly selects for a non-random distribution.

5Actually, three obviously not credible denials, but they only show up in the final version of the spreadsheet, not in earlier drafts. But one isn’t located in Des Moines and I don’t even see an application for the others.

Categories Campaigning, Economic Development, Engagement, Transparency, Weekly Updates

Weekly Update: 07/18/2021

Leave a comment on Weekly Update: 07/18/2021

You’ve received your ballots. Great! If it’s not too late, I want to add my strong endorsement for Joe Nguyen for King County Executive , especially if you care about reducing the noise and pollution from Sea-Tac Airport. I know that Dow has become a fixture around here, but frankly, he’s one of those politicians that talk like ‘environmentalists’ but in reality have not been great for Des Moines. These people (basically our entire long-standing slate) have engaged in ‘all or nothing thinking for decades when it comes to the airport.

Because Sea-Tac brings in so much moolah for Seattle and the East Side, King County as a whole has tended never lift a finger to consider any reasonable compromise or relief for us. They get the money, we get the noise and pollution. There’s a reason things never change. And it’s simply because we keep voting for the same people who sound like they have our interests but do not. Twelve years is enough. Vote for Joe.

Public Service Announcements

This Week

Monday: A meeting with Tina Orwall on some ideas we had at SeatacNoise.Info towards developing a remote work/remote attendance policy at the State level.

Tuesday: SCATBd Meeting.

Tuesday: Burien Airport Committee (Agenda) I am hoping to get Burien (and Des Moines and King County and basically everyone) on board with the same message as I was just mentioning to Rep. Orwall.

Wednesday: Highline Forum (The usual stuff).

Thursday: Transportation Committee (Agenda) First draft of five year TIP.

Thursday: Environment Committee (Agenda)

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda)
First off, a chronic problem for me is that the opening ‘Administration Report’ is blank. But apparently, the City Manager is preparing a presentation on our stimulus money. Which is great, but I hate that. If the administration has a topic planned, it should be in the packet so I can notify the public and prepare questions.

The Consent Agenda is also loaded with stuff I have questions about: Body Cameras, a staff coaching service that I don’t understand, and the appointment of two new people to the Human Services Advisory Committee. This is always of particular interest to me because it’s the group that chooses grants we provide to various community agencies and it’s kind of a black box to me; not only their process, but also how members are chosen. Last year when I asked about this, the other kids were really mean to me. 😀

Thursday: Port Of Seattle Candidates Forum (sign up)

Last Week

Tuesday: Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda). I asked the Commission to re-engage on Port Package Updates and got smacked down pretty hard by Commission President Fred Felleman. This is almost a total retrenchment from their February 25, 2020 meeting.

Of some note is that the Commission voted to permanently ban facial recognition from their facilities. As I previously wrote, this sounds fabulous on its face (see what I did there? 😀 ) for privacy activists, except that this is the Port we’re talking about so you may want to read the fine print. 😀 There are some caveats such as ‘subject to State and Federal laws’. And that basically means that, if the FAA decides it wants to allow facial recognition? It’s game on again. The airlines will want this because it will increase throughput if they can validate your identity without the (slow) ID checks.  And one other thing I’ll keep repeating: the ‘chokepoints’ for airport expansion are not up in the sky. There will never be a need for a ‘Fourth Runway’. Whenever you hear about ‘airport expansion’ it will concern moving planes and people around on the ground.

Wednesday: Marina Association seminar on “Understanding Your Marina’s Economic Impact”. I’ve attended several of these over the past few months and more and more I’m convinced that the City Council should have a more formal engagement in the planning and management of the Marina.

Wednesday: Des Moines Marina Association meeting. I was pleased to see a couple of guests from the surrounding condos. Over time, the DMMA has kinda/sorta become a de facto City Advisory Committee for the entire Marina Redevelopment–both land side as well as the docks. The DMMA should rightly and aggressively defend the interests of boat owners. But IMO, they should not be the focus for decisions affecting the entire Marina floor. But until there is another mechanism, I am very grateful that they are so welcoming of guests. 🙂

Saturday: Aviation Summit Part II (solutions) More to follow.

My non-endorsement endorsement…

Part I: Who to vote for

Your ballot for the Primary Election is due August 3rd. 1There is only one race that is significantly contested and that is Position #7 between current Deputy Mayor Matt Mahoney, Soleil Lewis and Yoshiko Matsui Grace.

I am not formally endorsing any single candidate. But after having spent considerable time getting to know who they are, what they stand for and what they hope to achieve, I ask you to consider either Soleil Lewis or Yoshiko Grace Matsui. I believe that both well-qualified but also better qualified to help lead the City Of Des Moines than Mr. Mahoney.

Look, I had not intended to endorse anybody. But you know how the media is always screaming, “This is the most important election since…!” Well, this really is that election for Des Moines. The stakes are as high as they will ever be. Next year will contain some of the most consequential events in our history that you probably haven’t heard about yet. Such as:

  • Marina Redevelopment — the most expensive capital project in our history
  • A major expansion of Sea-Tac Airport
  • Highly controversial Affordable Housing legislation affecting the entire City
  • The largest infusion of Federal stimulus money any of us are ever likely to see

And that’s just for openers.

Soleil Lewis and Yoshiko are very different candidates and I will refer you to their web sites so they can sell themselves. I’ll just tell you what I see: both have made transparency, public engagement and improving the quality of government in Des Moines their top priorities. And those are what is most needed on on our City Council.

In fact, I think it is unfortunate that they did not choose to run for different seats. Des Moines needs more high quality candidates. However, I think it is telling that both chose to run against Matt Mahoney. And that raises the obvious question: why not re-elect Matt Mahoney?

For me, there are two related answers:

The first is policy. I doorbelled 6,000 homes on literally every street in Des Moines in 2019. Most of you told me you had no knowledge about what your City was doing or even how to participate. You said that you wanted more transparency and more public engagement. But since day one, the Council majority have gone in exactly the opposite direction.

    • Our City Manager unilaterally handed out $500,000 in business grants to only 26 selections in a 2deeply flawed process, leaving the vast majority of our businesses unaware and out in the cold. Who are these lucky few? Check the campaign donations.
    • Marina Redevelopment is now  proceeding–but only with input from the small number of boat owners, 80% of which do not live in Des Moines. There has been no public input from Des Moines residents in four years.
    • Sea-Tac Airport is embarking on the largest expansion program since the Third Runway. The Port Of Seattle is now treated as our partner based on a 30 year old myth that the Port provides ‘jobs and economic benefits’ to Des Moines. It. Does. Not. Our former Mayor lobbies for the Port.  What the Port really is: the biggest threat our City faces in terms of health, property values and schools.
    • The City’s digital presence, including its web site, access to meetings and  public outreach are the poorest in the area. It is literally impossible to search for important public documents and access for people with disabilities is beyond frustrating.

And that leads to the second reason: a lack of individual professionalism that is simply unacceptable in a leader of a city with a $100M budget. Mr. Mahoney has engaged in an ongoing campaign of personal insults and  unfounded accusations as tactics to prevent minority Councilmembers from doing their job. When any Councilmember has a reasonable disagreement or shows the kind of initiative you should want from your Councilmembers, he does not communicate or compromise; he simply attacks.

Ironically, my second vote on the Council was for Mr. Mahoney to be Deputy Mayor. But it is now the vote I most deeply regret. Before that vote he told me that he recognized that when voters elected Councilmember Martinelli and myself, they had chosen representatives with perspectives that differed from the majority. So he promised to be someone who would help build consensus and find compromise. That would be leadership. But in reality, Mr. Mahoney has behaved like the high school bully of our City Council. And for that reason alone, he does not deserve your vote.

OK, that’s the business part of this. Stop here if all you needed was a recommendation and some links. The remainder is just me gassing on about why I feel so strongly about the need for reform. 🙂

Part II: Marco Polo

When Marco Polo returned home after years in China, the Italians did not believe his stories of ice cream and spaghetti and gun powder because they had not seen it for themselves. Actually, lots of influential people knew about all that stuff. They just didn’t talk about it.

Perhaps the above seems shocking or ‘sour grapes’ if your only images of City Council are from hand shakes and friendly ribbon cuttings.

We have had no newspaper for many years and almost none of you follow local government. For most of you, your only knowledge of City affairs comes four times a year with the City Currents magazine–a promotional newsletter and not objective news coverage. Hell, key portions of our City’s web site–access to your public information–have been broken now for months and no one seems to know the difference. This is not something I brag about, but I’m probably one of maybe four(?) people who have followed Des Moines politics closely for a continuous period of time. And two of them are/were part of the majority I ran to oppose. You have no way of knowing the objective state of your City.

Yes, there’s a bit of social media, but frankly 99% of that is either official announcements or gossip or CMs doing warm fuzzies. I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I’ve seen any other CM or candidate give their unvarnished opinion on any policy of consequence.

Now, during this campaign season, there will be some ‘candidate forums’. I just saw one tonight and they can be somewhat helpful. But frankly, almost none of you will know the really important questions to ask. I’m not saying that your question isn’t important. It’s just that you don’t know what you don’t know.  And even if you did, you might not be able to tell what’s what.  There’s no fact checking and no follow-up. So candidates, and especially incumbents, can skate by with almost any level of pandering.

I know this will sound snarky, but it’s a real problem: often the most gossip-laden people–those who think they’re well-informed, will get some pretty basic things wrong. But hey, if you heard it from ‘your friend’ on the City Council , the rumors spread and that determines what people think is possible and round and round we go year after year.

Actually, gossip doesn’t even need to come from a friend. Deputy Mayor Mahoney himself has developed quite the habit of talking about things that a few key people are working  on–telling the public stuff like how  ‘A ferry is coming!’ or  ‘We’re looking at hiring four more police officers!’ It’s specifically meant to imply that he has some special insider authority which the ceremonial office of Deputy Mayor does not have.

The In Crowd

However, Mr. Mahoney is not wrong to imply that decision making is limited to ‘a few key people’. It’s not a bug; it’s a feature. A culture of insiderism has been festering in Des Moines for many years now. There is now an almost complete lack of transparency which has become so chronic that the few who do follow City affairs consider our situation ‘normal’ or at least inevitable.  It is not.

I don’t want to make it sound like there’s some group of evil people lingering in the shadows. More often the problem is that good people don’t speak up. Why should they? If you have any connection with the City, you cannot.  And the influencers just assume that because “it’s always been like that” the current system is “as good as it gets.” People like the whole polite small town vibe. So do I. But ironically, this can work against good government. Democracy only works when people really can ‘disagree without being disagreeable’ in public. But at some point, agreeability starts to look an awful lot like a lack of courage.

The only issue…

Frankly, many of us have come to think of fine words like ‘good government’ as somewhat optional. It’s nice to have, but so long as it seems like the City is handling your issue at any given time, many of us don’t care how the sausage is made. Now having seen both sides, both as a concerned citizen before and as your elected now,  I can tell you truthfully that this is incorrect.

I’ll be specific: I’ve made such a deal about Matt Mahoney’s ethical lapses because that should be the entire election. Seriously, good professional conduct should be the baseline, right? Right? 😀

But I doubt any member of the public or candidate will even mention it. Instead, they may ask about ‘differences on the issues’ or ‘hope to bring more cooperation’. Everyone runs away from the issue. As a community we’re constantly sending the message that ethical conduct is just not a big deal. It would be like watching a ball game, knowing that one team is allowed to cheat and then wondering why they tend to win. It’s ridiculous.

Residents have asked for decades why Des Moines has not thrived like so many other waterfront communities. That is the real answer.

What I have written may sound abstract, but it’s not so let me put it in one sentence. It is in your personal interest to have a City Council that functions with transparency, professionalism and fairness. Better government tends to lead to better outcomes for you on every issue you care about. Swear to God.

Every big ticket issue I mentioned: Marina Redevelopment, Airport Expansion, Stimulus money, public safety, even the potholes. Everything is negatively impacted by the current lack of transparency and lack of public engagement in decision making. Everything.

One last thing. If you’ve read this far I know what yer thinking: Nope. This letter has got nuthin’ to do with any party politics. In fact, I have always been a true independent and non-partisan–perhaps the last of a dying breed. 😀 During my campaign, I requested no endorsements from anyone. I also did not ask for campaign donations from any business or organization. I have never represented any political agenda other than my own and I will resist any attempt by any candidate or elected to ever put the interests of any organization ahead of  the residents of Des Moines. I’m just telling you who I think are the best available choices for Position #7 at this one key  moment–because, as I said, this time it really matters.

As always, it is my honor to serve Des Moines.

1Yes, Position #5 is also on the ballot. My advice? Do a write-in. Seriously.

2This is one of the few times I have ever edited an article. The original expression was ‘hand selected’ which offended one local business owner–he thought it created the impression that he was somehow ‘in on it’ which was not at all my intention. My intention was to say that ‘the selection process was poor’, But that sounds far too polite, IMO. Here is some details on that selection process and how tough it has been for me to obtain information about the program. Judge for yourself.

Categories Campaigning, Policy

Primary 2021: The non-endorsement, endorsement

Leave a comment on Primary 2021: The non-endorsement, endorsement

Part I: Who to vote for

Your ballot for the Primary Election is due August 3rd. 1There is only one race that is significantly contested and that is Position #7 between current Deputy Mayor Matt Mahoney, Soleil Lewis and Yoshiko Matsui Grace.

I am not formally endorsing any single candidate. But after having spent considerable time getting to know who they are, what they stand for and what they hope to achieve, I ask you to consider either Soleil Lewis or Yoshiko Grace Matsui. I believe that both well-qualified but also better qualified to help lead the City Of Des Moines than Mr. Mahoney.

Look, I had not intended to endorse anybody. But you know how the media is always screaming, “This is the most important election since…!” Well, this really is that election for Des Moines. The stakes are as high as they will ever be. Next year will contain some of the most consequential events in our history that you probably haven’t heard about yet. Such as:

  • Marina Redevelopment — the most expensive capital project in our history
  • A major expansion of Sea-Tac Airport
  • Highly controversial Affordable Housing legislation affecting the entire City
  • The largest infusion of Federal stimulus money any of us are ever likely to see

And that’s just for openers.

Soleil Lewis and Yoshiko are very different candidates and I will refer you to their web sites so they can sell themselves. I’ll just tell you what I see: both have made transparency, public engagement and improving the quality of government in Des Moines their top priorities. And those are what is most needed on on our City Council.

In fact, I think it is unfortunate that they did not choose to run for different seats. Des Moines needs more high quality candidates. However, I think it is telling that both chose to run against Matt Mahoney. And that raises the obvious question: why not re-elect Matt Mahoney?

For me, there are two related answers:

The first is policy. I doorbelled 6,000 homes on literally every street in Des Moines in 2019. Most of you told me you had no knowledge about what your City was doing or even how to participate. You said that you wanted more transparency and more public engagement. But since day one, the Council majority have gone in exactly the opposite direction.

    • Our City Manager unilaterally handed out $500,000 in business grants to only 26 selections in a 2deeply flawed process, leaving the vast majority of our businesses unaware and out in the cold. Who are these lucky few? Check the campaign donations.
    • Marina Redevelopment is now  proceeding–but only with input from the small number of boat owners, 80% of which do not live in Des Moines. There has been no public input from Des Moines residents in four years.
    • Sea-Tac Airport is embarking on the largest expansion program since the Third Runway. The Port Of Seattle is now treated as our partner based on a 30 year old myth that the Port provides ‘jobs and economic benefits’ to Des Moines. It. Does. Not. Our former Mayor lobbies for the Port.  What the Port really is: the biggest threat our City faces in terms of health, property values and schools.
    • The City’s digital presence, including its web site, access to meetings and  public outreach are the poorest in the area. It is literally impossible to search for important public documents and access for people with disabilities is beyond frustrating.

And that leads to the second reason: a lack of individual professionalism that is simply unacceptable in a leader of a city with a $100M budget. Mr. Mahoney has engaged in an ongoing campaign of personal insults and  unfounded accusations as tactics to prevent minority Councilmembers from doing their job. When any Councilmember has a reasonable disagreement or shows the kind of initiative you should want from your Councilmembers, he does not communicate or compromise; he simply attacks.

Ironically, my second vote on the Council was for Mr. Mahoney to be Deputy Mayor. But it is now the vote I most deeply regret. Before that vote he told me that he recognized that when voters elected Councilmember Martinelli and myself, they had chosen representatives with perspectives that differed from the majority. So he promised to be someone who would help build consensus and find compromise. That would be leadership. But in reality, Mr. Mahoney has behaved like the high school bully of our City Council. And for that reason alone, he does not deserve your vote.

OK, that’s the business part of this. Stop here if all you needed was a recommendation and some links. The remainder is just me gassing on about why I feel so strongly about the need for reform. 🙂

Part II: Marco Polo

When Marco Polo returned home after years in China, the Italians did not believe his stories of ice cream and spaghetti and gun powder because they had not seen it for themselves. Actually, lots of influential people knew about all that stuff. They just didn’t talk about it.

Perhaps the above seems shocking or ‘sour grapes’ if your only images of City Council are from hand shakes and friendly ribbon cuttings.

We have had no newspaper for many years and almost none of you follow local government. For most of you, your only knowledge of City affairs comes four times a year with the City Currents magazine–a promotional newsletter and not objective news coverage. Hell, key portions of our City’s web site–access to your public information–have been broken now for months and no one seems to know the difference. This is not something I brag about, but I’m probably one of maybe four(?) people who have followed Des Moines politics closely for a continuous period of time. And two of them are/were part of the majority I ran to oppose. You have no way of knowing the objective state of your City.

Yes, there’s a bit of social media, but frankly 99% of that is either official announcements or gossip or CMs doing warm fuzzies. I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I’ve seen any other CM or candidate give their unvarnished opinion on any policy of consequence.

Now, during this campaign season, there will be some ‘candidate forums’. I just saw one tonight and they can be somewhat helpful. But frankly, almost none of you will know the really important questions to ask. I’m not saying that your question isn’t important. It’s just that you don’t know what you don’t know.  And even if you did, you might not be able to tell what’s what.  There’s no fact checking and no follow-up. So candidates, and especially incumbents, can skate by with almost any level of pandering.

I know this will sound snarky, but it’s a real problem: often the most gossip-laden people–those who think they’re well-informed, will get some pretty basic things wrong. But hey, if you heard it from ‘your friend’ on the City Council , the rumors spread and that determines what people think is possible and round and round we go year after year.

Actually, gossip doesn’t even need to come from a friend. Deputy Mayor Mahoney himself has developed quite the habit of talking about things that a few key people are working  on–telling the public stuff like how  ‘A ferry is coming!’ or  ‘We’re looking at hiring four more police officers!’ It’s specifically meant to imply that he has some special insider authority which the ceremonial office of Deputy Mayor does not have.

The In Crowd

However, Mr. Mahoney is not wrong to imply that decision making is limited to ‘a few key people’. It’s not a bug; it’s a feature. A culture of insiderism has been festering in Des Moines for many years now. There is now an almost complete lack of transparency which has become so chronic that the few who do follow City affairs consider our situation ‘normal’ or at least inevitable.  It is not.

I don’t want to make it sound like there’s some group of evil people lingering in the shadows. More often the problem is that good people don’t speak up. Why should they? If you have any connection with the City, you cannot.  And the influencers just assume that because “it’s always been like that” the current system is “as good as it gets.” People like the whole polite small town vibe. So do I. But ironically, this can work against good government. Democracy only works when people really can ‘disagree without being disagreeable’ in public. But at some point, agreeability starts to look an awful lot like a lack of courage.

The only issue…

Frankly, many of us have come to think of fine words like ‘good government’ as somewhat optional. It’s nice to have, but so long as it seems like the City is handling your issue at any given time, many of us don’t care how the sausage is made. Now having seen both sides, both as a concerned citizen before and as your elected now,  I can tell you truthfully that this is incorrect.

I’ll be specific: I’ve made such a deal about Matt Mahoney’s ethical lapses because that should be the entire election. Seriously, good professional conduct should be the baseline, right? Right? 😀

But I doubt any member of the public or candidate will even mention it. Instead, they may ask about ‘differences on the issues’ or ‘hope to bring more cooperation’. Everyone runs away from the issue. As a community we’re constantly sending the message that ethical conduct is just not a big deal. It would be like watching a ball game, knowing that one team is allowed to cheat and then wondering why they tend to win. It’s ridiculous.

Residents have asked for decades why Des Moines has not thrived like so many other waterfront communities. That is the real answer.

What I have written may sound abstract, but it’s not so let me put it in one sentence. It is in your personal interest to have a City Council that functions with transparency, professionalism and fairness. Better government tends to lead to better outcomes for you on every issue you care about. Swear to God.

Every big ticket issue I mentioned: Marina Redevelopment, Airport Expansion, Stimulus money, public safety, even the potholes. Everything is negatively impacted by the current lack of transparency and lack of public engagement in decision making. Everything.

One last thing. If you’ve read this far I know what yer thinking: Nope. This letter has got nuthin’ to do with any party politics. In fact, I have always been a true independent and non-partisan–perhaps the last of a dying breed. 😀 During my campaign, I requested no endorsements from anyone. I also did not ask for campaign donations from any business or organization. I have never represented any political agenda other than my own and I will resist any attempt by any candidate or elected to ever put the interests of any organization ahead of  the residents of Des Moines. I’m just telling you who I think are the best available choices for Position #7 at this one key  moment–because, as I said, this time it really matters.

As always, it is my honor to serve Des Moines.

1Yes, Position #5 is also on the ballot. My advice? Do a write-in. Seriously.

2This is one of the few times I have ever edited an article. The original expression was ‘hand selected’ which offended one local business owner–he thought it created the impression that he was somehow ‘in on it’ which was not at all my intention. My intention was to say that ‘the selection process was poor’, But that sounds far too polite, IMO. Here is some details on that selection process and how tough it has been for me to obtain information about the program. Judge for yourself.