March 5, 2026 — Committee of the Whole, 5:00–5:50 p.m.
Surface Water Management Tree Preservation Program Update
Draft 2027-2046 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)
March 5, 2026 — City Council Study Session, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
Day to Remember Master Police Officer Steven J. Underwood Proclamation
City of Des Moines Local Road Safety Plan Update
Amenity Rentals Discussion
Appointive Committee Code and Citizens Advisory Board Code Update Discussion
Formalization of the Proclamation Process
March 12, 2026 — City Council Regular Meeting, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
Presentation from Seattle Southside
SKHHP Housing Capital Fund Presentation
Marina Steps Construction Update and Public Art
Allocation of Funds to Finance Affordable Housing in South King County in Accordance with the 2025 South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP) Housing Capital Fund
Density Bonus for Religious Properties Ordinance – 2nd Reading
Department of Commerce Grant Award and On-Call Task Assignment with Parametrix, Tree Preservation Program
Resolution for Safety Plan/Vision Zero
Redondo Manhole Replacement Project – Construction Contract Award
North Hill Elementary Walkway Improvements Project – Public Works Construction Contract Award and Consultant Services Agreements for Construction Administration, Inspection, and Engineer of Record Services
2026 Field House Maintenance
Salary Commission Ordinance – 1st Reading
Planning Commission Appointments
Sixgill Shark Commemorative Street Renaming
Executive Session: Labor Negotiations under RCW 42.30.140(4)(a)
March 26, 2026 — City Council Regular Meeting, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
King County 2026-2027 Waste Reduction & Recycling Grant Award
Presentation from FCS on Benchmark City Analysis & Development Tax Impact Model
April 2, 2026 — Committee of the Whole, 5:00–5:50 p.m.
Public Works CIP Update
April 2, 2026 — City Council Study Session, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
Marina CIP
Community Development Software
Future Capital Improvement Projects Update
April 9, 2026 — City Council Regular Meeting, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
Black Wellness Week Proclamation
April 23, 2026 — City Council Regular Meeting, 6:00–10:00 p.m.
South Sound Opening Day Boating Proclamation
Recognition of Assistant Police Chief Kevin Penney for 25 years of service
Recognition of Harbormaster Scott Wilkins for 30 years of service
I kinda wish I didn’t have to write this, but we’re getting off to a bad start council-relationship-wise. I have tried to be as friendly as possible during this transition but this Resolution is pointed directly at Mr. Martinelli and myself and it’s exactly the kind of good-ol’-boy nonsense I ran against so I feel compelled to provide some context for people who watched this. In other words: Do I turn the other cheek to try and get along or do I actually do what voters said they wanted me to do?
(And what really sucks is that, as per usual, it got stuck in with all the very nice awards so it makes me look even more rantier than usual.) But I digress… 😀
Last week if you recall…
At the last CC Meeting, the Council introduced Resolution 19-113 (the 113th resolution of 2019) which consisted of a dozen changes to how the Council Meetings function. During the year, CCs think about how meetings might be improved, they suggest changes and then occasionally there is enough momentum to have the City Attorney roll them all into a Resolution. Normally these are pretty routine. And half of the items on 19-113 are common sense.
However about half of the changes in this Resolution were definitely not routine and not common sense. They were, in fact, in response to the election results and address some sudden concerns about Council Member ‘conduct’. We know this because if you watch that 14 November video, several of the Council Members specifically mention concerns about ‘candidates during the election’–meaning Anthony Martinelli and myself. In other words, half of these items are to address possible future misbehaviour. The problems aren’t happening with the current Council. They’re worried about it happening going forward with us noobies.
The merely wasteful stuff
For example, the Resolution calls for Council to be ‘drug-free’. But there is already a rule will states that CCs shall not be intoxicated. So why the need for extra emphasis now? Has there been an ongoing problem with current CCs showing up three sheets to the wind? 😀
The Resolution specifically forbids Council Members from ‘slander’. There are already rules calling for CCs to treat each other respectfully. Who on the current council is guilty of this? I go to all the meetings and I don’t see CCs routinely ‘slandering’ one another. In fact, ‘slander’ isn’t a word I ever run across. It’s the kind of thing one hears on Masterpiece Theatre. Right before guys in frilly shirts break out the dueling pistols.
The Resolution also reminds CCs to not divulge confidential information from Executive Session. Again, this is already against the law.
I could go on. The point is that these items are already covered in the rules. They’re just being given added emphasis because it just isn’t good enough for them to be against the rules. They have to be extra special against the rules!
Time crunch
The thing that really ticked me off, though, was the reduction in discussion time down to four and five minutes for different sections of the meeting. This is ridiculous because:
None of the current CCs come anywhere near to using five minutes of time (except when they start getting all sentimental about how much they looooooove Des Moines of course.) When it comes to actual policy discussions? They are quite terse. How do I know this? Because I attend CC Meetings at all six Airport Communities. And I can assure you that Des Moines CC Meetings are usually the shortest. So the resolution addresses a problem that does not exist.
However (and this is the undemocratic part), it also makes it impossible to have a thorough discussion when something important is going on. It requires that a CC get permission from the Mayor to keep speaking. If the Mayor dislikes what is being said for any reason, he/she can cut off discussion immediately. How democratic is that?
Each CC’s desk will be equipped with the famous red and green lights which public-commenters have to live with. I can tell you that watching those lights whilst trying to collect one’s thoughts is not easy. (By the way, if you watch last night’s meeting, you’ll notice that our Mayor himself gassed on for almost fifteen minutes in describing his weekly activities. I wonder how well he will enjoy the new lights?)
To add irony on top of irony, as I say in my public comment, the original discussion on the Resolution went on for over forty five minutes. That is the single longest discussion I’ve seen in over three years of watching every CC Meeting. That discussion simply would not have been possible under the new rules.
But here’s the thing: is this Resolution really the most important debate that we’ve needed to have in the past few years? How many other very important Resolutions did not get a full airing of views? This really questions the essential values of the rest of the current Council.
What I’m trying to get to is this: A lot of that stuff was simply petty. The comments of the CCs directed at Mr. Martinelli and myself in the discussion two weeks ago make that clear. But far more important, this whole thing is really, really expensive.
Time is money
The City currently does not keep project-based time sheets (I will encourage the City to start doing that with the new accounting software coming on-line next year.) But according to the City Attorney a complex resolution often takes more than forty hours of staff time to get ready for CC discussion. Now given the salaries of top staff, that is real time and money. Time and money that should be spent on real problems, not stuff that’s already against the rules or addressing problems that do not exist. And certainly not on score-settling.
Some of the things I really hate
I hate wasting time. I hate wasting money. I hate wasting time. I hate wasting money. I hate wasting time. I hate wasting money.
I don’t know how else to say it. Anything that can be settled without a ‘regulation’, by simply having a conversation? I’m there. And conversely, using the City’s time and money for score-settling? Not. Too. Cool.
Anyhoo, I could’ve let this slide for sure. I’m sure my reaction will come off as whiny to some. But as I said in my public comment, the Council was sending me a message: No honeymoon. Which is fine. If you voted for me, you weren’t thinking I’d be getting a back massage and a Diet Sprite every two weeks. You said you wanted me to try to dial back this sort of behaviour.
Sorry for another post so quickly. As I said before, I’m still figuring this out: should I post about stuff I did or stuff that’s coming up?
Frankly, I had hoped to to take it easy after the election and get organisi-ised, but unfortunately, November tends to be the busiest time of the year for many governments: budgets, events. So it’ NUTS.
OK, this morning I attended the monthly SCATbd Meeting. SCATbd (pronounced skate-board) is a regional group of South King County Cities and the Port, which discusses anything ‘transportation’ related–from those little commuter shuttle buses right up to Sea-Tac Airport. If you have any desires, concerns about everything from transit for disabled people, bike lanes, ST3, a second airport, whatever, this is the place to go. 9AM third Tuesday of every month at SeaTac City Hall.
At noon was a Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting. They approved their 2020 budget and their Property Tax Levy (which you find on your taxes–more on that soon!) and also they approved a large series of environmental clean-up programs for South Park and Georgetown which could be models for helping our City with airport impacts. And finally, they approved the first two new noise monitors in 20 years–on Vashon Island. As a budding politician I can take partial credit for this as their whole new system for providing public data on noise events came about because of work that SeatacNoise.Info did three years ago.
At 4:30pm today there is a ‘joint meeting’ of the Des Moines Airport Committee and the Burien Airport Committee at the Beach Park at 4:30pm. For those of you who care about the noise/pollution, this is a very good thing to follow. I don’t have time to get into it now, but we have not been doing a good job on this stuff and I will need your help to make changes.
Tomorrow, there is a Stakeholders Meeting run by your State Rep. Tina Orwall for people with Port Packages. This is a thing that my organisation SeatacNoise.Info started and it has the potential to get some money for everyone with damaged sound insulation. I hope it expands into something good for all of Des Moines–but one step at a time.
Also tomorrow is a meeting of the Highline Forum, which meets every 2 months. It’s attended by the Port Of Seattle and City Councils from the six airport communities.
There is also a meeting for Reach Out Des Moines, a group which attempts to provide a bunch of services for kids in the area and help reduce teenage crime and violence. They do great things in our schools including YETI. Ahhhhhhhh! I DON”T HAVE ENOUGH TIME FOR ALL THE LINKS! GOOGLE IT! 😀
And still on Wednesday, and still at the Beach Park will be a City meeting to discuss ‘SR3’, the plan to host some sort of sealion recovery program at our Marina. I have no idea what this is all about so I’ll be as curious as you what to think. https://www.sealifer3.org
And on Thursday at 7PM there will be the regular Des Moines City Council Meeting. There are a whole bunch of procedural changes, which were designed specifically to be not too friendly to us new Councilmembers. So I will have public comment on that.
Somewhere in there are meetings with current Councilmember Traci Buxon (so far the only current member who has welcomed me) and incoming member Anthony Martinelli. And there are more salmon to count. (Won’t they ever stop? :D)
Call or email if any of this interests you and I’ll get you more details. BUT NOT NOW. I’m late for another meeting!
This is my first post-election post. In the future, my posts will be mostly about what I’m doing (events, etc.) But for this first time I need to ask a favour.
But first: for ‘transparency’s sake, I’ve hidden away all the ‘candidate’ stuff. Not to be sneaky, just because the campaign is over (it is over, right?) And I’m really trying to move forward as a part of the Council and not have a bunch of contentious stuff out front. My goal is to get along as well as possible with my new colleagues.
Also: I am still working out how best to communicate with you. I think one reason Councilmembers find this difficult is because there are so many channels. I’ve got emails, people on Facebook, people who watch this site and… a whole group of people who are off-the-grid. It’s time-consuming just making sure that the same message gets to everyone. So please be patient.
Now, you know that I am but one guy out of seven. I can’t get anything done on my own. I am counting on you to provide the support I need to help convince the rest of the Council on a whole range of issues. One big reason things have not changed in this town is because traditionally there is usually very little public pressure on the Council. Few people show up to City Council Meetings.
But if it’s clear that when I speak, you guys have my back, that sends a powerful message to the rest of the Council that the public wants change. Your support is what is going to make things happen, not me.
The public eye?
This is something I joked about a lot during the campaign: “I do not ride around in the golf cart.” It’s very popular for Councilmembers to mostly engage with the public via ‘fun’ or symbolic events–like the Farmers Market (where Council Members zip around in the golf cart waving at people) or various parades. I’m not saying those aren’t very nice and valuable things to do. But, frankly, that’s not me. I’m just not a ‘parade’ kinda guy. 🙁 😀
I spend most of my time doing stuff out of the public eye. For example, this week I counted salmon for Saltwater State Park. I attended a Port Of Seattle Commission Meeting and did research at their archives. I met with KC Prosecutor Dan Satterberg. I read a lot of boring policy junk so I vaguely know what I’m talking about on complex things like Sea-Tac Airport. These are not things one takes selfies of and posts on ‘the Gram’.
My concern is that I won’t have as cheery a public profile as some residents are used to in their Councilmembers and that will create the impression that I’m not ‘doing’ very much. A lot of people really like seeing the Councilmember at all those more symbolic shindigs.
OK, Here’s The Favour
So here’s what I’m asking: If you see something I’m doing or talking about that you think is valuable, please take a moment to ‘share’ it with your friends or on social media.
That’s all. Just talk it up. Because this campaign is not over; far from it. We need to keep trying to get our message out in public until we get some of the things we campaigned on. It’s important that people understand that all the boring junk I’m doing matters, even if it’s not quite as visible as riding around in the golf cart.
One bonus favour: Please let me know what you think of this post (or any update I do) so I can serve you better. As I said, this is going to be a process.
I believe I can now be properly referred to as Council Member-Elect, Position #2 for Des Moines, Wa.
Sorry for the delayed announcement. I know it’s been a pain waiting. But the race was so close that it did not seem prudent to declare ‘victory’ until we were sure of the result. You may now begin an equal number of days of celebration and so on and so forth. 😀
In this video I (try to) thank my supporters a bit. And to explain the (cough) philosophy behind my campaign and how I hope to transfer that to my work on the Council.
I will be posting updates here on how the city is doing and how things work. If you hit the ‘Subscribe’ button, I’ll also be let you know where and when I’ll be hosting informal meetings (Coffee With A Council Member).
Finally, I want to give my regards to my opponent, Luisa Bangs. To her supporters: I recognise that it was a very close election and that Des Moines (like so much of America now) is split in many ways. I hope you will give me the opportunity to earn your trust.
I have something to say about Social Media and politics in Des Moines. 😀
This town has no newspaper or other truly objective coverage of city hall. During my campaign I’ve doorbelled over 5,000 homes and actually talked with thousands of DM residents. And the sheer tonnage of misinformation, rumour, inuendo and just plain blather that people spout as ‘fact’ about various issues would break a freight car. Getting the public better information is something I hope to improve upon if elected.
But the current state of play is that I can count on the fingers of both hands the people who actually know the ‘real story’ on many issues going back decades. I’ve spoken with many ex-Council Members and City employees who have been surprised to learn what really happened on issues during their tenure. Des Moines politics has not exactly been a model of transparency over the years.
Then there’s the fact that once one gets to a certain level of networking, one learns at least two really embarrassing things about every person who has held office in this here town.
And here is my point: This not a small town anymore. But the pool of people who are truly engaged is very small. So my advice is to be extremely careful when posting stuff. Don’t write anything you wouldn’t say to my face. And once you’ve said yer peace? Let it go! This is not national politics. The rules should be different. Take it easy on the campaigning by proxy bullshit. That’s not your job. That’s the candidate’s job (the campaigning, not the bullshit. 😀 ) . Because, at the end of the day? We have to live and work together.
And I say this for a very practical reason:
I think y’all should want and encourage participation from candidates and electeds. At the end of the day, their words are what will matter.
But if you treat them as harshly as some of you now do, as if this is all some sort of ‘contact sport’ where one can just say whatever you want and then see what it kicks up? You pretty much guarantee that no candidate or elected will ever want to engage with anyone on social media. And that would leave us right where we are now–in a black hole of constant half-truths, speculations and rumour, completely removed from city hall. Is that what you really want?
IMO that would not be a good thing for a city with no newspaper and no objective news coverage.
Don’t ignore real issues, for sure. But please: try to be a bit more careful.
A drunken neighbour burned my back fence one year by lighting off a rocket horizontally. Apparently, this was his way of celebrating a Seahawks Playoff Game. Fortunately, I came home from work early that night and was able to put out the fire before it spread to my house.
I think it’s fair to say that I now have some feelings on this subject. 🙂
The City Of Des Moines has a ban on fireworks and a very stiff penalty. Unfortunately, like many crimes of annoyance, the difficulty is enforcement. The legal standard seems to require a witness and officers are traditionally reluctant to write such citations.
The good news, however, is that there are a variety of related technologies referred to as “noise cameras” that are currently being trialed in several countries. Basically, they “hear” a certain noise profile they are programmed to listen for. And when they detect it, they connect the signal to the source (vehicle license plate or address) and… just like a red light camera… mail you a citation. No police officer required.
Sadly, the tech is not quite ready for prime time here. But I wanted you to know that they’re gettin’ closer every day.
And as soon as they are… let me tell you, Sonny Jim, if elected I will make it my mission that the City Of Des Moines budgets their purchase and writes the appropriate Ordinance.
I’ll even pay for the postage stamps out of my own pocket. 🙂
When longtime Des Moines Councilmember Donald Wasson died a year ago he left his waterfront property located at the entrance to Beach Park to the city and now City Council and staff are working to figure out whether to continue it as a rental house or making other plans. City Manager Michael Matthias at the Thursday (March 2) study session said the immediate question is what happens to the property now that no one is living there.
During Council comment period resident Rick Johnson suggested the city investigate putting a fish and chips restaurant in the Wasson house. “It seems to me it would be an excellent venue and also give decent revenue badly needed in Des Moines. Once the building is destroyed, you can bet no other building would be built there. “I have talked to a number of citizens and their feelings are he same as mine – Don’t tear the Wasson house down.”
Multiple possibilities But Matthias said the property could become part of the marina complex. The city staff report says the parcel is developed with a single-family residence located along the shoreline of Puget Sound. Up until June 2016, the property had been rented as a single-family residence. Since that time, it has been vacant. It is part of the marina, and the property along with the entire complex must generate enough revenue to pay the costs of owning and operating it, said Matthias. New paid parking will aid in revenue generation. The city says the “disposition” or “redevelopment options” include keeping it a rental house – the building has been vacant for about a year and would have to occupied soon to retain its existing use. It could also be developed into a restaurant or made into a public plaza or promenade along the existing bulkhead as part of Beach Park, which is north of the house location. The city says the property could bring in revenue by continuing the rental of the house, with considerable updating and repair costs.
Councilmember Jeremy Nutting said using the property as a rental or commercial property would be “very costly” but recommended the city not demolish the house prior to developing a more complete plan. Matthias said there never was any thought to tear down the house until some plan as to what to do with the property. Councilmember Rob Back thought some renovation would allow the house to be rented while the city figures out what the eventual use is, but Councilmember Dave Kaplan said he was not in favor it being a rental but that could be an interim consideration, perhaps a commercial use like a kayak rental area. Mayor Matt Pina said the city needs to do repairs to the house to bring in revenue while the city figures out a long-range plan. “We need to find the right thing before we take any decisive action,” Pina said. City staff was told to look into potentials and come back to Council for decisions.
More court staff The Council voted unanimously in study session to add a city court clerk because the current staff is “over-burdened yet working diligent,” said the meeting agenda. As background, the city staff noted that last year the city court staffing was decided “upon an estimated 30-40 citations per day for all red light enforcement locations, totaling about 12,000 tickets per year.” But in reality the estimate, at up to 24,000 tickets a year. Because of the increase, the Court asked the Council for “an 18-month limited term court clerk” beginning in June. But Councilman Rob Back said situations in the court have changed and the Court needs the position filled “as soon as possible.” Councilmember Luisa Bangs said the staffing size was an estimate for the red light cameras and the reality is that estimate “far exceeded that.”
Stand-by generator The Council approved an optional emergency standby generator that would provide sufficient power to the public works and engineering building adjacent to City Hall to operate on a normal basis during a power outage. The city staff said there were three options for Council consideration. One would be for a $507,000 generator to power both complexes, or a $334,000 generator only for public works and engineering with the potential to add it city hall later; the third option would be to spend $162,000 for a generator only for the public works and engineering complex. The Council approved the recommended $162,000 option, The idea is to protect major city functions for a long period of time and the adjacent public works and engineering building is “vitally important to maintain critical services.” It costs a lot to provide emergency power to the city hall building because of additions and changes over the years, which complicate easily powering it.
Two still unseated SeaTac City Council members went before the Des Moines City Council on Thursday night to tell its members to not believe its staff on advice about a proposed 16 percent utility tax to balance its budget for the next two years.
Mayor Dave Kaplan lashed at the two, saying they had no business coming to his city to tell them how to run his city, adding that one of the SeaTac people had “another agenda” and that he would not go to their city and give unsolicited advice. Retiring Councilmember Bob Sheckler, also a former Des Moines mayor, said in his 20 years on the Council, that he’s “seen a lot of political tricks and a lot of politicians that think they are really hot and really aren’t. Observers said the actions of the two from SeaTac were surprising. City councilmembers virtually never go to another city and publicly lecture its governing body on how to raise budget money or telling the other city’s leaders not to believe their own staff advice.
‘Please don’t believe them’
Rick Forschler, former and soon to be again a SeaTac Councilmember, told the Des Moines Council he respected them but he might say things they might not like to hear. “The city staff here will likely tell you that the utility taxes are necessary in order to make the budget meet – please don’t believe them.” He added “sorry Tony” to City Manager Tony Piasecki. “I know these special purpose districts very well,” Forschler said. “They operate efficiently, they live within their means. There is very little, if any, waste… “Long before we consider raising taxes, we should exhaust all other options,” Forschler said, “including competitive contracting services … if used wisely would save from 10 to 30 percent of those costs.” Then he listed other cities that had reduced costs by better managing the services of city contractors. “I have these same sort of comments last year to the SeaTac City Council,” he said. “They ignored them.” Forschler said “a major reason” four SeaTac Council lost the election was the 6 percent utility taxes they had approved. Then he turned to the citizens in the Des Moines audience and addressed them. “Will the voters among you raise your hands, please. Write down the name Rick Forschler and if these folks,” gesturing to the Council members, “impose that utility tax contact Rick in SeaTac and I’ll help you do the same thing we did in SeaTac. “I’m sorry, but we need to protect these small districts, they do well, they work efficiently and you are doing a disservice to your citizens if you don’t consider these alternatives for saving money first.” He got long and loud applause from the Des Moines citizens in the Council chambers.
Soon to be SeaTac Councilmember Peter Kwon, recently elected, and former and soon to be again City Councilmember Rich Forschler told the Des Moines Council of the utility tax increase approved in SeaTac last year that he said resulted in four Council members being voted off that city’s Council. “Please listen to your citizens and at least put it to a vote,” he said. Kwon takes his SeaTac Council seat in January.
Kaplan blasts ‘ludicrous’ duo
At the later Councilmember comment period, Kaplan addressed the appearance of Forschler and Kwon, “people form a city that don’t even live here.” Referring to Forschler, Kaplan said, “I have a great deal of respect for you but Des Moines is not SeaTac. We don’t have a bunch of hotels, we don’t have a parking tax, we don’t have a $30 million a year budget like you do. We don’t have the same economic base. “For you to come in and tell us what we need to do for our city and our citizens and the services we provide is ludicrous,” a visibly angry mayor said. “It was our city that took the steps forward to get the SCORE (South Correctional Entity) jail built. Why? Because it saves us $350,000 a year in our jail costs. “I get really frustrated with people who really don’t know what they are talking about when it comes to the finances of the city coming in and telling us – we’ve had these conversations publically in public forums year after year after year about our financial condition. “I don’t appreciate you coming into our city and telling us how we should be conducting our business,” Kaplan said. “I wouldn’t presume to do the same thing in yours and hope that you and Mr. Kwan would keep that in mind when you take office in January. Councilmember Bob Sheckler, said “the most disgusting thing I’ve seen any politician do was what Mr. Forschler did this evening. “Imagine if we were to go over to SeaTac and do that, how would they think of us as a neighbor? Now, I think there is going to be quite a problem between Des Moines and the city of SeaTac. ”
A woman from the audience shouted out, “They are here to help us.” “They are not here to help you, that is a political stunt,” Sheckler snapped back. “You ask yourself what is Mr. Forschler really doing? He’s got some other ambitions; he’s got some other agenda. “You never come into another’s city and do what he did, that’s disgusting,” Sheckler said, jabbing a pen in the direction of the woman in the audience.
Here’s video of Forschler and Kwon, along with responses from Mayor Dave Kaplan and Councilmember Bob Sheckler:
Utilities protest
Ken Case, manager of the Midway Sewer District, regarding the proposed 16 percent gross tax on utility districts, said he is not confident that all Council members are seeing the comments of the district sent to the city. While a Councilmember said they were interested in proposed solutions to alleviate the tax, Case said his district has offered the solution of a franchise agreement that would pay to the city up to 6 percent of the district’s revenue, but the city has not responded and has rejected the suggested agreement. Case said the city at a meeting suggested the sewer district could be taken over by the city if there was no agreement on the city tax. Such assumption of special purpose district is legal under state law with caveats including paying the district for certain property. The city has acted in a punitive fashion, Case told the Council, noting that the city says that all money paid to the district for its services or service expansion would be taxed at 16 percent. If the city and district can’t come to an agreement, Case said the sewer utility would consider suing the city but suggested negotiate a franchise or some other form of “win-win” agreement with the district. Matt Everett, manager of the Highline Water District, said the district ratepayers are having a hard time getting by without additional taxes. “Going from zero to 16 percent “seems amazingly high … especially in a year when people on Social Security are receiving zero percent raise,” Everett told the Council. The best agreement from his utility would be to work on a franchise tax agreement. Several other residents objected to the proposed 16 percent utility district taxes and taxes in general, with some suggesting the city does not listen to their comments and complaints.
Partially true
Suzy Gonzale a commissioner of the Southwest Suburban Sewer District said the district got a letter from City Manager Piasecki on Nov. 9 that said there was no progress on a franchise agreement, “but this is only partially true.” She said the district’s manager “did not respond on a couple of occasions but his requested modifications to the proposed agreement “were not considered by city staff.” She said the city’s argument that utility taxes were not subject to negotiation “is not true” and that SeaTac and Normandy Park are negotiating a utility tax cap of 6 percent. “I don’t understand how you can make this statement when other cities are doing so,” Gonzale said. “Why are you the only city within Puget Sound region unwilling to negotiate a utility tax within a franchise agreement? Why are you the only city dictating a 16 percent tax, 10 percent higher than anyone else?” Gonzale also said the city has told them they have “unrestricted cash to we can afford to pay your imposed 16 percent utility tax. Do you have any idea what that money is earmarked for?” The money is for designated capital improvements to the district’s system, she said. Gonzale said the city told them it has “neither the time, nor patience to stretch out the negotiations,” which she calls the “most troubling” part of the city’s letter. “You made absolutely no effort to reach out and discuss this with any of the utility districts or even the residents that will be financially affected by this new tax.” The various districts involved have told the city they will explore a lawsuit if the tax is imposed.
Negotiate tax down
Councilmember Victor Pennington said he hoped the 16 percent could be negotiated down. “We have to find a balance between all of us in the community because we are all invested in the community,” Pennington said. Councilmember Sheckler said he expected the complaints from the special purpose districts but was concerned about comments that the city does not listen to people or “spending money on ludicrous things.” Prior to putting the utility tax before the Council, Sheckler said “the same number of people that are here tonight were here and out the door that were very, very concerned that the Council was about to do something that they didn’t want to have happen …” Those people spoke against cuts in the Parks and Recreation, especially senior programs and those for youth, and road repairs and “the thing we have been hearing a lot, the need for more police officers, he said, “people on the opposite side of the equation coming before us and demanding these things, too.” Those requests were worthy, but he said he hoped citizens didn’t think they just making budget change “willy-nilly for more cash.” “How do you keep everybody happy in politics? You definitely don’t,” Sheckler said. “Hopefully this evening maybe we can come to some sort of compromise.” The Council had to weigh both sides, he said.
Hard to do things right
Mayor Pro-Tem Matt Pina agreed, and that many things have happened to change the way Des Moines is financed. Where once it was possible to exist as a bedroom community, now the “law has slowly changed.” “We are a bedroom community that no longer can be that because you can’t generate enough revenue through property tax or any other means to really sustain yourself and sustain the essential services.” Pina said the city is working hard to get “things right” like the business park and other moves to improve the financial situation for Des Moines. Councilmember Luisa Bangs said her six months on the Council have been tough one coming up with a budget and getting to “a better state of affairs in this city.” “It is our job to listen to you in terms of where you want it to come from. Sometimes we don’t have a choice, it is not easy. As a new Councilperson, we are going to do our best and if ‘best’ isn’t enough, my God, we’ve got to do something,” Bang said. “It’s taxes and it’s cuts. “I don’t think its we don’t hear you,” she said. “There is nothing easy about what we hear today but hopefully in the future it will be a lot better. Councilmember Melissa Musser said she was offended at someone saying all of the “people up here” are the same, they don’t care. When no one comes to meeting, Musser said, “it is quiet happiness, there is nothing to complain about. “But, man, you want to get to come to a meeting, levy a special assessment, raise their taxes, do something controversial and people come out and then you learn who your community is …” She said that “you citizens should be ashamed of yourselves” because two Council seats on the latest election were uncontested. “I hope to see all of you on the ballot in two years, because that means you care, that you are engaged,” returning to the audience comments that many commenters have made during Council session of late, adding that many committees go begging for volunteers. “Please, stay engaged,” Musser told the audience. “Just because the controversy goes away doesn’t mean there is not still stuff happening in our city. I hope you people stay engaged.”
‘We care’
Mayor Kaplan said, “The Council does care.” In 1999, Initiative 695 passed “it eliminated the welfare check our city was getting in the form of sales tax equalization to the tune of somewhere between $1.5 million and $2 million a year.” Since then the city had been trying to do what it could to “sustain the services that you told us you want.” The voters pass an initiative “that caps the amount of property taxes we collect on an annual basis.” “So if you collect $2.5 million worth of property tax one year, you can collect a whopping $25,000 the next,” Kaplan said. “That doesn’t pass our utility bill increase the following year, let along (cost of living) increases or other things for operating the city.” “Since 1999 we have reduced staff in the city by 30 percent. Name another city that can say that. In the last eight years, we have reduced by 20 percent, a number of those were police positions. “Do our communications need to import? Yes,” said Kaplan. “We have had talks about the utility tax going back to Aug. 8. Should there have been more direct communication with the utility districts prior to October, yeah, we own that.”