This Week
Tuesday: 12:00PM Port of Seattle Commission Meeting Pier 69 (Agenda) Two items of note:
- There will be a finance review, with the kind of depth I dream about here. They need to have a lot of very good financial reports because their empire is so freakin’ complex. The Port isn’t one thing, it’s four things and we could learn a lot from how they present information and how the PortComms handle these discussions.
- The second item is their Annual Tourism Program. One quarter of the empire, includes both their real estate division and tourism–and that should tell you something. The Port owns a bunch of properties (including the Des Moines Creek Business Park and several marinas) and they all make money. When they talk tourism they have a strategy you can actually follow.
Last Week
Wednesday: 7:00PM Des Moines Marina Association Meeting (Agenda) (Harbormaster’s Report) There is a lot to say about ‘the Marina’ even though I feel like I’ve talked it to death.
Dry Stack Redux…
As I’ve written, I strongly favour financing all the dock replacements and remaining seawall work ASAP and for exactly the reasons the City Manager pointed out in his remarks about the North Bulkhead at our last meeting. Ganging together projects saved a ton of money. The longer we wait the more we will shove off huge expense increases to the future. But then the question becomes: how to pay for any of it? Because the real challenges are yet to come.
The only real potential moneymaker on the Marina Floor is called dry stack storage, which would go in the building previously known as Prin.. er… “the adaptive purpose building”, tucked under the South Shores Condominiums.
The current boat hoist has been off-line since last summer. Replacing it was originally scheduled for Phase II (in 2032). The boat owners seem to favour rebuilding something low-cost and similar to the current hoist but are in no hurry to get to dry stack. Why? Because the A-K docks which are for the smaller boats which would need to move into dry stack are also not scheduled to be built until 2032. In other words, the boaters seem to be thinking about the dry stack as a storage facility for existing boat owners.
I want to write this in as light hearted and gentle way as I know how, but…
Dear A-K Boaters… If we can make money now, the City cannot afford to hold anyone’s place in line. 🙂
If one is to believe the boater market magazines, there seems to be demand now for dry stack storage. Apparently, people are buying boats which will fit into dry stack now. And those storage units grab 1$300+ a month. Here’s one place I’ve visited. Check out the pricing.
Some quick math…
$300 x 12 months x 200 units = $720,000 a year.
Hello! In 2023 dollars, that would get us a looooong way to paying off dock replacement, which would save the tax payers millions. It also might reduces our need to raise in-water moorage rates any higher than absolutely necessary and that would be good for boaters.
On the other hand, trade groups have (on occasion) been known to open a big box of exaggerate in the morning as part of their healthy breakfast. So the first step should be to do a post-COVID review of market demand. Now. And if that demand seems solid, we should build it. Now. Bring in the money we need to finance the Marina. Now.
And one last thing. Maybe this sounds a bit ‘insensitive’ but I completely disagree. I’ve been a boater all my life. And the one thing I’ve said about everything: Be transparent and be firm. Tell the people we serve, “this is where we’re going”, years in advance. That way no one feels blindsided.
There’s never a bad time for a Patton Quote…
The worst case scenario for moi would be to re-build the current deck in order to accommodate current boat owners, then end up paying again to build that special purpose lift system for the dry stack in 2032. In the words of General Patton, “I don’t believe in paying twice for the same real estate.”
Reasons to wait?
- If you believe that we owe boat owners who currently have slips in A-K docks a spot in dry stack storage when we reduce the number of docks in 2032. (In other words, we would hopefully fill up the dry stack with new customers and then those in-water tenants might have to look elsewhere for storage.)
- If you are someone who lives in the Marina District and are looking for excuses to hold off on any development, but don’t want to look shamelessly NIMBY? You might say, “Think of those poor, stranded A-K boaters in 2032!” 😀
- If you believe that interest rates will move down to current levels (or even lower) in the next nine years.
- If you don’t believe there is true demand for dry stack.
The only one of those reasons that strike me as legit is number four. But we should find out. Now. And for one very simple reason I already mentioned: Dry Stack is not only the best source of revenue on the Marina Floor, it’s the only guaranteed money making idea on the Marina Floor. That being the case, it should be our first Port of Call. (See what I did there? 🙂 )
Thursday: 4:00PM: Tour of Redondo Police Substation. Soon after my election I attended a similar tour of our Emergency Operations Center and I got just a ton of crap for writing the following: It’s basically a room. 🙂
Guess what. So is this. 😀 It’s a very typical office space the City leases out with a couple of dozen cubicals and computers. The only thing “special” about it? The blacked out windows. But like the EOC that doesn’t mean it’s not a good thing.
- Primarily, the Chief has marketed the place as a shared space we offer to various regional law enforcement agencies. In exchange they provide networking and information. He believes strongly in the value of those informal partnerships.
- The space also provides a place for our officers to perform routine tasks without having to go back to the main office. That saves travel time and keeps them closer to Redondo and Woodmont when needed.
Me being a dumb managerial type, I respond a lot more to that second use case. And I think the public probably does too because it’s more concrete. So while the first use case may be the key strategic value, I hope we can market that second use case a bit more. The public is aware of the building but they don’t exactly ‘get’ what it does for them. Knowing that it can help our officers respond more quickly is something I think people will appreciate.
Thursday: 6:00PM: City Council Meeting (Amended Agenda) (Video) Recap below
March 09, 2023 City Council Meeting Recap
Public Comment
Several commenters from Redondo mentioned non-speeding public safety issues. I have always told residents: stats are your friends. If you don’t get the data, make a public request! Over time, I’ve come to believe that the solution isn’t to try to ‘stop’ everything. On the contrary, I think that if we could we make the place more attractive to pedestrians, it might help box out the ne’er do wells who thrive in the dark and absence of healthy activity. I also continue to advocate for a beat cop–ie. an ongoing police presence more than strictly technological solutions.
Consent Agenda
- The South King County Housing and Homelessness Partnership (SKHHP) Budget. We voted to approve funding on actual projects. At SKHHP’s last meeting people got very emotional at this milestone. But I was less than Woo Hoo! because neither is in Des Moines.
- I asked a question during the presentation which I ask every year, “When is the inventory coming?” And the fact that I ask it every year means we’re going too slow. And my predecessor Luisa Bangs, to her credit, also thought so. That’s where I got that line, “Too Slow”. (Apparently it wasn’t as much of a buzz kill when she said it. 😀 ) But it’s true nonetheless.
- What I advocate for is to also provide money to upgrade existing stock. When we permit a new apartment, it needs to comply with various safety protocols, including lighting and fencing. Existing buildings are grandfathered in with no such requirements. If we could get those buildings more livable, we make them more attractive to a wider range of tenants.
- We voted to approve the final plat on the 216th Townhome Project. This is an issue I organised on before I was elected. It was going to be an apartment complex, now it’s going to be market-rate ownership and far better for the neighbourhood.
Hit the one in the middle…
I made the error of pulling the wrong item on the Consent Agenda–the above 216th Townhome discussion. D’Oh!!!!! It was bound to happen sooner or later.
I had no intention of voting ‘no’. I simply wanted to comment on the issue and my colleagues were gracious enough to work around it.
So I guess it’s not a bad time to mention just one of delightful side-effects of having what is now referred to as a TBI. As a short hand, people call it ‘double-vision’ but that really does not give one a sense of what it’s like. This is the best image I’ve found, except that IRL, the kid is moving so it’s not just two images, it’s more like an extremely mundane version of this…
(Sorry for the first second of guns, I couldn’t get the start point any better on short notice.) Anyhoo, the closer you get to an object, the more it snaps into place. The farther away, the more copies you get. That’s why you see me looking down at City council meetings–I’m watching the presentations on Youtube via a tablet. It’s also why sometimes I don’t recognise people unless they a) have some unique appearance b) are standing very still or c) are three feet awaye. There’s also the occasional falling down when I don’t notice that the grey sidewalk has morphed into a grey curb. Hysterical.
Occasionally, I get snippy questions like “It doesn’t look like your eyes are out of whack!”, which I guess means they’re skeptical because I don’t look like Igor? 😀
Yeah, that’s not how it works.
Or, “How do you drive”? You get special ‘distance’ glasses, 1great question, by the way! 😀
Like anyone with a disability, especially one that is not obvious, you’re trying to keep it that way, ie. not to call attention to it. But… you also want to use the occasional gaffe as a chance to educate.
Aside from the curiosity, the biggest challenge for me in this job is headaches watching those big screen presentations; not because it’s painful (it’s not) but because your brain is constantly having to make the decision, “Which ‘image’ do I pay attention to?”
And here is that educational moment, kids: If you ever see multiple images and must navigate the world, in the words of Paulie in Rocky IV (the best one, right?) “Hit the one in the middle.”
New Items for Consideration
Councilmember Achziger asked to receive a briefing on a Seattle report from 2019. I mentioned it last month when I attended a City of Burien Council Meeting. I asked Mr. Achziger for a copy but have not received it. But here are some of the reports I’ve seen and Dr. Johnson’s presentation to the BCC…
Comments
Next week I will be in Olympia, advocating for issues I care about, specifically with regard to the airport. You may have read that there are proposals to build a (cough) ‘second airport’. You may have also heard that such an airport might provide some ‘relief’ for residents in Des Moines. For the 100th time. Not. True. The entire strategy can be summed up with only a slight over-simplification
- Fill Sea-Tac Airport to the brim. Or more.
- (Hopefully) provide that new airport with incentives to make it more appealing to nearby residents (ie. reassure those poor sap… er ‘residents’ that they will be better treated than us.)
- Send whatever overflow to wherever. If there is no whatever? Just keep adding onto Sea-Tac Airport.
What has not been a part of the discussion is any relief for us. After all, Sea-Tac Airport is still going to be the primary part of the strategy forever.
Our current strategy is the strategy the Port of Seattle, our City and the FAA all agree on. And it is a complete sham.
The Port has already built enough of the elements of ‘the SAMP‘ to meet its capacity goals. What people don’t seem to understand is that an airport is a factory. Every time the airport gets a grant to speed up the TSA line? That means it can handle more flights. Every time it adds more baggage capacity? More flights. More parking? More flights. We have already lost that fight because the airport has been building and will continue to build.
You will hear that four cities have come together to hire consultants to fight over NEPA! SEPA! What you will not hear is that all the stakeholders (including the City) have already agreed on a standard set of plays that never work. It’s like going to a cancer clinic in 1980. No one gets better. But they all receive ‘the best possible care!’ One issue is how different each city’s interests and goals are. SeaTac is the only city in the area with anything close to the same environmental impacts we receive. But they are already getting paid. Frankly, none of our partners have anywhere near the incentives we do to deal with this effectively.
I always welcome help and collaboration from my colleagues on dealing with the airport. I’m desperate. And they should be too. But the fact is, I’m still the only one actually working the issue productively at the moment.
It goes back too far for most residents to be aware of, but the entire area came to a development agreement in 1976 called the Sea-Tac Communities Plan. It was a model for the entire nation on how an airport community and an airport could live in harmony. The area around the airport was bought out to be a noise buffer and for community benefit. The north end became North Sea-Tac Park. The south end is now the Des Moines Creek Business Park. Oops. Wonder who got the better end of that deal? 😀
My point is that the entire ‘deal’ got slowly unwound over the decades. And as disrespectful as it may sound, it’s a bit like all the agreements made with the American Indian 200 years ago, which were also slowly unwound, leaving one side of the bargain with only trinkets. After enough time has gone by, people stop even trying to obtain justice. (It was too long ago! Stop whining! Move on!) Fortunately, Native Americans did not give up. They found ways around the problems of never having a realistic path to reclaiming their contractual obligations. In short: they found ways to get paid and empower themselves. And that should be our strategy.
You can keep screaming at the airport and begging the Federal government grants and programs that will never happen, or you find innovative ways to make your own money, and start solving some of the same problems yourself.
What I found ironic in Councilmember Steinmetz’ comments was that he is very concerned about local control. That is precisely what the original Sea-Tac Communities Plan was about.
And again, as much as I appreciate Councilmember Achziger’s gesture, the report he referenced is now over three years old. That does not mean it’s not useful. It just means that we’ve done nothing. The City Manager’s ‘plan’ will lead nowheresville and we’d get a lot farther by working together to move the rest of the Council in a different direction.
Sorry. Normally I have a great deal of genuine intellectual humility on every issue. But this is the one issue I can speak to with that kind of certitude.
The stridency in my tone is also because the clock is ticking. As I wrote, most of the building is already complete or underway. And what people don’t seem to get is that SR-509 is coming and that is not about making life more convenient for your commute. It’s about increasing airport capacity.
We need structural revenue. The City of SeaTac gets about $4,000,000 a year in revenue from airport operations. There is no reason we could not have negotiated the same. Do you have any freakin’ idea what $4,000,000 in structural revenue would do for a City like Des Moines? It would solve every problem we’ve ever had. Or ever will have.
If it’s so great, why don’t we have it? Simple: We were the first major airport to go through this ‘experience’. We had no one to show us what a success strategy might look like. Like the American Indian first we got swindled, then we hurt ourselves trying to fight back without knowing how to fight back, and now we’re in the period of “If you can’t beat ’em join ’em!”, which is just as bad.
Your City bought into bogus offers of economic development instead of structural revenue. Think of it like your employer offering you a traditional pension or a 401k; the promise being that “you can take the safe bet or you can really make some money!”
At the end of the day, we have to start taking some responsibility for our bad politics and stop blaming everything on the FAA. Or the Port.
Go look at the Des Moines Creek Business Park sometime. Looks nice. Brings in (almost) no money to the City. All the tax-free moolah goes to the Port of Seattle. That is an example of what we gave up. Over and over. One negotiation at a time. That’s not their fault. We did it to ourselves.
One last thing in this novella. One reason I’m a bit ‘short’ with people is that the clock is ticking. If you think the Marina is complex, the airport is 100X. I deeply resent all the energy we constantly put into preventing bad decision making at the Marina because, as big a project as it is, it’s a distraction from the much larger ongoing problems with the airport. Our Council has spent so many years moving the attention away from the airport at every turn. It’s been an intentional misdirection and that is just unforgivable.
Councilmember Steinmetz commented a bit on HB1110
In his role as our SCA rep on the Public Issues Committee, Councilmember Steinmetz mentioned the opposition most cities have to HB1110, which is meant to dramatically increase multi-family zoning. And I take those concerns very seriously. However, I am not as all-or-nothing about “local control” as some. As I’ve written, there are certain issues that are so radioactive that, if the State doesn’t do something, nothing ever happens. And this is one of them. I’m not calling myself a ‘fan’ of HB1110, but I recognise that we as a city have not taken action and have brought some of this on ourselves.
The ‘housing crisis’ can be boiled down to one word and one equation:
- NIMBY: City Councils are afraid of backlash from property owners fearful of something bad getting built right next door. I’m one of them.
- (Mortage x 3) = Rental: I can rent out my modest home for three times my mortgage payment. Most people who financed over the past two decades can do so as well.
With incentives like that, why would anyone support building more houses?
You should. Because you like low taxes and more services from your City. There is a reason cities like Des Moines are called ‘bedroom communities’. Forty percent of our budget comes from those property taxes. At one time it was over seventy. Instead of fighting any new development tooth and nail, we should making every effort to provide home ownership opportunities.
My comment about the 216th Townhome project was important because we can ask developers to provide for appropriate trees in their landscaping plans: more privacy for surrounding neighbours and better for the environment.
We can also allow duplexes and triplexes and make them appropriate to the lot size. We can be flexible. It’s not all or nothing.
Since everything here does end up connected to the airport…
In 2012, a previous Council in Des Moines made a grievous mistake. The three cities next to the airport got Port Packages in exchange for updating our building code to provide equivalent sound insulation to all new construction. Our Council rescinded that requirement. And that made life noisier for all new construction over the past decade. The rationale was that “no one will build here!” It. Was. Not. True. How do I know? Because builders continued to build in both Burien and SeaTac.
One moral of that story is, of course, that we should re-instate that sound code and benefit all our residents. Why haven’t we? No. One. Made. Us. It’s the reason I ran for office.
The bigger picture is this: we can ask things of developers. Sound insulation. Trees. And appropriate unit sizes. It’s a negotation, not all-or-nothing. They’re not going to walk away today any more than they walked away from Burien and SeaTac.
When we fight ‘density’ so hard, we not only screw young families who deserve at least a fraction of the good deal most of us boomers got, we also screw ourselves out of a whole lot of juicy tax revenue.
One last thing. The only reason not to fight like a wild badger against multi-family housing reform is… wait for it… it’s a gasser…
If you do not trust your local government.
That is the reason for our government to build community trust. If you don’t trust the government, you never want them to do anything, even if it’s in your ultimate best interest. Only a moron supports something as complex as zoning reform if there’s a chance it might lead to some knucklehead City Council approving a ginormous house next to your 3wee, cozy bungalow.
But if you trust that your government really does get your concerns, it opens up not only more opportunities for other families, but also a lot more money for city services for you.
3The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy pg. 5 comes to mind for some reason.
3Truthfully, I was gonna write “Very carefully, jackass!” But I was nice. 🙂 I Seriously, I don’t mind the usual snippy comments I get, but questioning a disability? Really?