Weekly Update 01/26/2025

Some bits of business…

City Manager Stuff

City Manager’s Report January 24, 2025

This week features our ‘new’ logo. 😀

It also highlights an award for our harbormaster so glowing I needed sunblock to read it. 😀 But it’s also kinda true. The Des Moines Marina has had any number of challenges over the years, but customer service generally hasn’t been one. Some people don’t enjoy my little joke, but a Marina is essentially a floating parking lot for Lamborghinis. It’s a high touch biz. Anyone who has spent time at more than like two marinas will tell you that the customer service experience is not the same. And most marinas are not responsible for the front yard maintenance of an equally particular residential community. So, there’s that. We take all this for granted and we should not.

This Week

Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission (Agenda) . Not much for us. The Commission was supposed to get a report on the SIRRPP (Port Packages) in January. But they didn’t say which January. 😀

Thursday: 6:00pm Study Session – 30 Jan 2025 – Agenda – Pdf Originally there was one item and one word. ‘FIFA’. And my first thought was, for the first time in five years, I should try to book an evening dentist appointment. 😀 But fwiw, https://www.lumenfield.com/fifa-world-cup/2025-fifa-world-club-cup-seattle is pretty fantastic – three of the best teams in the world will be in Seattle and seats are available.

And then a second item was added which does matter. I am absolutely furious. And you should be too because, regardless of the merits, this is yet another BLIND SIDE!

The item in question is one more piece of WSDOT surplus property from what was going to be SR-509 20 years ago. It triggers me because the same stretch of land across the street is Des Moines Creek West. Cues scary music. Dunh, dunh, dunnnnnnnnnnnnh!

This whole item is misleading and disrespectful and it begins with the image in the packet – more of that ‘leading the witness’ business. When you’re presented information in this narrow manner, someone is basically leading you to make a decision. But to me this is like a doctor making a health recommendation from one x-ray without regard for the entire body.

WSDOT first contacted the City last October, asking for $5.350,000 for what looks like less than six acres. They would prefer an answer by January 31st. But this is the first the Council has heard about it?

Here is the current Barnes Creek Trail 216th – 220th segment, which runs parallel to much of the surplus parcel. This woodland is what the community expects for the area.

• 

• 

It’s one piece of a puzzle; a trail that was planned to go from at least Des Moines Elementary to Kent Des Moines Road through the center of Des Moines, hook up with the Des Moines Creek Trail to 200th and finally to the entire King County Lake To Sound Trail system. That was supposed to be the dream.

Start here. See how it’s right next to the Barnes Creek Trail segment?

Now step back. It’s easier to see the ‘swath’ of forest where SR-509 was gonna go. That’s Barnes Creek.

Now step back to the original ‘plan’ – a trail heading south to Kent Des Moines Road. That‘s the Barnes Creek Trail.

The ‘dream’ has never been fully fleshed out. But in some way, it’s meant to provide an amenity every bit as amazing for the center of Des Moines as the Marina or Redondo are along the water – frankly, a much larger swath of families. Where are we at? Those four blocks from 216th to 220th, which may now be at risk. Every other aspect is undetermined.

WSDOT is working on another piece, from 220th south – but it’s their show.

Des Moines Creek West is a hope and a prayer. Des Moines Creek Business Park has been a complete disaster.

What absolutely infuriates me is that this is yet another ginned up “we gotta decide!” moment that the Council should not have to decide now. WSDOT surplus offerings take years to prepare. It is being presented with a one-day deadline, none of this context, and no other options — not even an easement to acknowledge preservation of the trail because the City is just presuming the outcome. One shouldn’t have to ask these questions. They should be in there. We’ve known for years all these surpluses are coming and we should have had a policy in place a decade ago concerning the entire trail.

The City will argue that we can’t afford it. True. We’ve blown our wad on so many other things. But we should at least try. This is the kind of project that has historically been funded by State and County grants. If you have the time. It is the lack of time that is the real problem.

However, I’ll close with something micro-positive. In the last decade, WSDOT offered us the same opportunity wrt the north side of the street (ie. Des Moines Creek West.) The City Manager of that time simply did not respond – thus handing it over to the Port of Seattle. So, I guess even presenting this to the Council means were now ‘more transparent’? Woo hoo.

Reason #327 why we need a public planning commission. And an election. Every meeting I keep trying to say ‘slow down’. And every meeting, it’s just Pow, Pow, Pow.

Saying you can’t stop the train is the strategy to keep the train going in exactly the same direction it’s been going for a very long time.

Last Week

Monday: Martin Luther King Day at Northwest African American Museum. I always try to recommend a book and this year it’s Death of a King, the best short volume on MLK’s real philosophy; not the made-up ‘saint’ he has seemed to become.

Tuesday: Burien Airport Committee (agenda) Our City Council seems hell bent on re-creating a new airport committee in Des Moines. I encourage interested residents to show up for BAC meetings (third Wednesday every month 6:00PM) to see what such a thing can (and cannot) do for us. I favour creating a joint committee; rather than separate groups, because frankly, we’re much stronger as a shared voice. But again, the lack of strategy here is the strategy. We haven’t wanted to do anything meaningful on the airport for over a decade.

Wednesday: ZEV Car Share Ribbon Cutting at the Marina. Sign up for a membership here: Zev Co-Op.

Wednesday 2:30pm Highline Forum (at Sea-Tac Airport)

Thursday: I testified at the State Environment Committee on behalf of HB1303. The CURB Act is the most important piece of environmental legislation you haven’t heard of. When/if passed into law, it will require developers of mega-projects (like Sea-Tac Airport) to provide an enhanced environmental impact statement – specifically to address community impacts. It’s exactly what was missing in the SAMP Draft EA.

Thursday 4:00pm Municipal Facilities Committee – 23 Jan 2025 – Agenda

Their first meeting of the year, so mostly planning calendar, but an interesting update on the Flag Triangle.

Thursday 5:00pm Economic Development – 23 Jan 2025 – Agenda

Their first meeting of the year, so mainly planning calendar. It is so fundamentally different from EDC meetings from the last regime it is Must-See-TV. And despite my above screed on Barnes Creek, I want to acknowledge the wonderful potential I heard. Truly. That’s the problem I’m currently having with the new regime. It swings so hard back and forth between terrible and wonderful it’s making me seasick. And I fished for a living. 😀

But in fact, it was so hopeful?

City Council Meeting Recap

Thursday 6:00pm Regular Meeting – 23 Jan 2025 – Agenda – Updated

Public Comment

Last week I (cough) ‘challenged’ Redondonites to show up if you care about the Fishing Pier. And you sure did! There is nothing like a land use decision to concentrate the mind. 😀 But still, I say the same thing: Public. Planning. Commission. As with all land use decisions, you shouldn’t have to get worked up.

A number of people walked out in a huff for not being able to provide public comment.  As I often say when it comes to your City government, you’re often looking in the wrong direction. It is not unheard of for governments to time-limit public comment on huge issues with dozens of commenters. But in this case, there were maybe a dozen commenters. Frankly, there was plenty of time to accommodate all commenters.

Said it before, say it again, what is abnormal about our meetings is the 9:00PM hard stop. For a variety of reasons, a super-majority of the Council are becoming increasingly averse to ‘long’ meetings. So, the Mayor’s goal seemed to be to finish the meeting early enough to accommodate a follow-on Executive Session (private meeting) and still get outta Dodge by 9:00PM. That is new and worrying trend. In the past, it was just assumed that if a meeting went long, it went long. If a Cm needed to leave? No one’s stoppin’ ya, pal! 😀

The social norms, the expectations of what this job means keep slipping. We need to end the culture of the hard stop.

City Manager presentations

Animal Control Update: A crisp 3 minutes on life (mostly) post-Burien Cares. So far, the news is as good as can be expected. The Waterland Blog originally got a couple of details wrong in their coverage (apparently corrected) but it was enough time to create the usual social media frenzy.

We’ve lost a drop-off service for stray pets, which is troubling – especially with reductions of service @ RASKC. But we do have coverage for serious issues. It’s not nothing. And this is where we are for now.

At the risk of sounding defensive, when people scream “the council doesn’t care” about issues like Animal Control it gets on my last nerve. We are seven very different people. Or haven’t you noticed by now? 😀

In the case of Animal Control, I vigorously opposed outsourcing ACO services and have never voted for any reduction in service levels. I worked me arse off on that. But the Chief of Police at that time wanted to outsource ACO hard — telling the Council, with zero evidence, of an expected $300,000 cost savings! I got nowhere because I had no backup. When we vote on certain things (like Redondo), it packs the house for public comment — and the Council usually listens. That’s backup. However, when that ACO thing happened, only one person showed up. And sadly they chose not to provide public comment! No backup. Frankly, girlfriend, that’s how you lose ACO services. The Council responds when people show up and speak their mind.

Legislative Issue Update on HB1380 I want to express my admiration for our lobbyist for not making more out of this than it is, but HB1380 concerns the right of people to sleep in public places and without fixes it is worrying in its scope of ambition. I am not freaking out because I want to note that it has strong sponsorship in all area legislative districts. So IMO the correct move is to try to fix it rather than to scream into the void and lose any chance of compromise.

New Business

Transportation Impact Fee Reduction For Early Learning Facilities.

Being the child hater I am, I voted no.  I felt it was a $95,000 discount for a single use case and for an unfunded mandate. The State law which made such discounts possible was meant to incentivise developers. Fine. But in this case we were offering a retroactive discount to a project already in the works.

The City provided numbers as to relative costs in other cities – and even without the discount we were squarely in the middle. But that isn’t the issue. It should also have provided a comparison of efficacy. If other cities already have a discount? We should be able to see how many new projects have opened or are likely to open as a result of that discount.

Contrary to the City’s presentation, the developer felt our fees were exorbitant writ large. But the City already has generalised incentives in the toolbox. My skepticism has to do with past projects that provided big incentives with too little return. This discussion was about encouraging Early Learning Centers.

The public told us no new taxes. Fine. That makes it incumbent on the City Council to be frugal and ask for evidence, even on very well-intentioned programs.

If the State wants to promote Early Learning Centers? Fine. Give us the $95,000, not a guilt trip. 🙂

City Logo Discussion

In the toughest budget environment in years, we’ve already ‘invested’ 10 Gs  on a Mission Statement. So why wouldn’t we do the same on a new logo and branding discussion?

In a Hail Mary effort to avoid wasting an hour and tens of thousands of dollars, I asked the Director of Public Works for the number of signs in town that already have the little green/red sailboat. I blindsided him and I apologise. I was thinking if we had even a vague idea how much it would cost to re-set every sign in town to a new logo, it would incentivise the gang to simply go with that. My wag guess is that there must be at least a few thousand. And my other wag guess is that four-colour signs probably cost $2o0. Do the math.

Additionally, have you walked around our city recently and seen how much dough we’ve already spent in the last decade on stuff like ‘the gateways’ at 216th and KDM? People just love image and branding.

Frankly, I could care less. A true re-brand costs a fortune. And I’d rather do nothing than waste one more centavo.

And I disagree with my colleagues. A city is not a ‘brand’. It’s a place. For me, ‘the brand’ was always the places. I like the current flag for one thing: 1889. As much as anything I used to feel like that was ‘the brand’. When I moved here it had more interesting ‘stuff’ per square foot than any surrounding area. It didn’t need too much new stuff. It just needed to preserve and refresh what it had and build from there. So much for that notion. 😀

Redondo Fishing Pier Replacement Project

I (sorta) owe the DPW a second apology. I asked him to confirm on camera something the contract is fairly clear on: that this contract was only structural. I just needed him to say that it would not change the look because you have no idea how many revisions that deck went through to get salmon-approval. 😀 This is the last rendering I remember. The majority of the deck is see-through, which salmon apparently really need.

I also got my little speechifyin’ in here. As much as I value the Redondo Fishing Pier, I am slightly queasy about any vote that has to be done tonight. Or else! I know some of my colleagues often feel the same, but it’s like the learning center thing. Passion often trumps consistent discipline.

There are these competing energies: strategic planning vs. gettin’ shit done! Spending $11,000,000 and doing the docks should be more than enough initiative for one year. We may end up doing three : Docks, Redondo Fishing Pier, Marina Steps. For me, it’s too much. Oh, and we have the 24th Ave mess to clean up.

My only disagreement with some of my colleagues is that the Redondo Fishing Pier is not a revenue driver. That is not what a park is. There was a time when Redondo was a revenue driver. Here it is. Get it? Everything you see as fishing pier, MAST Center, Salty’s was built on very old piers for a revenue driver that is never coming back – at least, not that kind of revenue. And all of it costs a fortune both to build and to maintain.

I want the City to slow down. Not stop. Slow down. Do one major project a year. Not three. If we do all this stuff, it’s riskier and it can’t be undone. And right now, a lot of it is not being thought of strategically. People want the Pier? Groovy. But the area is changing We’ve seen Salty’s close. And there are likely other big changes coming. If I were Emperor Shaddam IV, I would make it clear to residents that we are doing something – in the 2026 fish window. But since we have to pay a ton of money for re-design work anyway, we should take a breath and consider how the project might be improved to fit the changing waterfront.

This is worrying

I had planned to finish up my rant… er… dissertation… on Marina planning, but as you can see, stuff happens. At the last Highline School District Board Meeting, two of the five directors resigned, including our own District #5 Director Azeb Hagos. Imagine if three our Council resigned in one night. It says something.

I cannot speak for either of them. But Ms. Petrini’s statement speaks for itself and I urge you to watch it.

In May of 2022, I asked, nagged, wheedled, cajoled, pleaded, and begged Azeb Hagos to apply for a vacancy on the Highline School Board. And when she got appointed, I thought it might be the biggest accomplishment in my (cough) public service.

Thirty years ago the schools here were pretty good. Objectively, they haven’t been for a very long time. It is my belief that our city cannot thrive without quality schools. And both women focused on the basics – which in itself was controversial. Coming from Ireland, which is not exactly wealthy, but does have a superior education system, this drives me crazy.

I’ve heard some jabs about them as ‘quitters’, which is insulting and always comes from people who did not know them or tend to make jokes like “You couldn’t pay me enough to deal with that kind of shit show! Haw, haw, haw.” Exactly.

If it were possible, school board is an even more thankless job than City Council. The meetings are loooooooooooooong, at odd hours, pay so low it wouldn’t even cover child care costs, and filled with hours of platitudes rather than actual policy. What’s more, I think some people might find them lonely. Almost no one watches. Voters in Des Moines have no idea what is going on at HSD — most reflexively support bond issues based on the lovely flyers — as do I — because it seems like the right thing to do, not based on much knowledge of the circumstances.

I do not believe we can improve our schools without creating a space for voices like theirs in leadership. I also believet their resignations have implications for cities like Des Moines. If people of their quality, do not feel supported, the people who should run for office will simply choose not to. Or at best, will not serve with the passion necessary to take us where we need to go.

I wish I had been following more closely. I wish I could have been more encouraging. But that is what people who run for office and want to effect change need: Support. Encouragement.

It should not be this hard.

I salute borh women for their exemplary service and I sure hope their talents find outlets somewhere else. Soon. 🙂