Weekly Update: 05/07/2023

This Week

Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission (Agenda)

Thursday: Environment Committee (Agenda) (Video) The ‘highlight’ will be a review of the property out behind the Engineering Building. Long story short, it was something of a toxic cleanup job for many years, and hopefully the report this year will be that it’s (finally) getting close to complete. 🙂

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) Highlights include:

• The City Manager’s Report has four announced items. Which is four more than usual. 🙂
  • SR3 – SEALIFE RESPONSE, REHABILITATION, AND RESEARCH
  • SOUTH KING COUNTY COMMUNITY IMPACT FUND UPDATE
  • LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
  • G2300 CLASS UPDATE

On the Consent Agenda there is an item to increase the fine for illegal parking on Fire Lanes. This is in concert with a mitigation in Redondo. It caught my eye because I had no idea that currently parking in a fire lane is only $25. And it reminded me that when I lived in Detroit everyone parked illegally because a) the chance of getting caught was negligible and b) because the fine was like $4.00. 😀

Last Week

Tuesday: I attended a workshop on how the State Legislative Session would affect cities like Des Moines. Here is a summary:  https://wacities.org/advocacy/City-Legislative-Priorities

Thursday: Sound Cities Association SB5536 workshop. This workshop provided an overview of how other cities in the region were addressing the failure of SB5536 (‘the drug laws’) It was great to see the various perspectives. Everyone agrees that a State solution would be better than a patchwork of local ordinances. https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/public-safety/law-enforcement/drug-use-possession.

After attending this, I am very pleased that the Legislature is back in special session to try to sort this out because, candidly, before it was withdrawn, the draft ordinance in the original packet was not ready for prime time, certainly not to be passed in one night.

IMO, the final draft of SB5536 was very good. It goes on for pages and pages because you not only have to get people off the streets, you have to get them into quality treatment and there’s a lot of infrastructure to be built. I know a few people “just want these people to go away!” But locking people up costs a fortune and, more importantly, people don’t get better, so they just keep cycling through the system. I think we want a law that properly addresses both sides of the equation and I think the revised version of SB5536 is a step in the right direction. Fingers crossed.

Thursday: Public Safety Emergency Committee (Agenda). Topics included: Animal Control Update, Flock Camera Update, EOC Staff Training Update.

However, the bulk of the meeting concerned a forthcoming camping ordinance, which was discussed in detail but not presented. Frankly, I found it disturbing. As with our previous discussions on HB1220 (emergency shelters) in 2021 there was almost no discussion concerning the welfare of the people without shelter. Literally every aspect of the discussion was about ‘protecting’ the residents, the police and the challenges in “finding a place to put them.” The implication being that when we see a tent we should consider it as a potential threat, rather than as a person in crisis.

Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda) Details are below.

Friday: Hillgrove (or is it Hill Grove 😃 ) Cemetery (200th St. near 18th Ave.) is the final resting place for many of the post-Civil War homesteaders of Des Moines. Visitors will notice many familiar family names. For geneology fans: Hillgrove Cemetery in SeaTac, Washington – Find a Grave Cemetery

Currently, the property is maintained with a grant from the Port of Seattle and public access is limited. Hopefully (soon) a way will be found to provide tours and regular hours–perhaps in conjunction with another local historical organisation.

I also try to keep an eye on the place due to its location directly under the flight path. Every five years the airport conducts an FAA mandated Flight Corridor Safety Program, which translates to cutting precious trees!  And every five years I do whatever I can to question that necessity. It’s an ongoing ‘conversation’. 😀

May 4, 2023 City Council Meeting Highlights

(Agenda Packet with Public Comments)

Consent Agenda

Ferry

We’re bringing back the ‘Ferry Pilot’ for a second year, which is now being re-branded as a ‘water taxi’. Its basically the same boat. Here’s the good news:

• It will start May 23 and end September 23.
• It expand service to cover morning and evenings.
• It will also dock at a more common sense location: Pier 50, which is where the real King County Water Taxi docks.

And as with last year, the numbers do not include fuel, moorage or marketing.  Last week I created a table using a far more realistic forecast, using last year’s contract as a baseline. I did not think it could get any worse, but the City Manager threw a curve, saying there will be an additional $65,000 expense for schlepping the boat up from San Francisco.

I meant to simply make a two minute principled objection and then move on. But the discussion veered into a surreal zone which ended up taking 20 minutes. I wrote last week that it was four months because, using my noggin (always dangerous), I figured mid-May-to mid-September is about 120 days, which is four months or 16ish weeks, right? I was off by 3 days.

But we started talking about some typos in the presentation which make it hard to tell if it’s 24 weeks, 20 weeks. The City Attorney acknowledged that there might be a problem, but shrugged it off as only $30,000. Well, $30,000 is ten percent of the entire revenues. I started to get a bit cranky because, frankly? I had to agree with him in a funny way. Within the context of losing $900 grand, $30,000 is, indeed, small change.

I spoke with a resident after the meeting who said something I’ve tried to convey many times, but did so much better than I ever have.

If someone came into your office with their resume, or a business proposal, and there were significant typos, you would ask them to come back or, just show them the door.The sloppiness would be a red flag that they were either unqualified or did not sufficiently respect the opportunity.

Agreed.

My colleagues do not have facts to back up the proposal. The best the Administration seems able to do is name drop “Dow Constantine” or “Karen Keiser” as a less than subtle hint that some big shot will fund this long term, despite the fact that the packet says that it has no plans to partner with the State and King County rejected the whole notion in 2015. What the packet does say is that if the program continues it will be through a “public/private partnership”; like the surprise hotel proposal.

Good government means, no more “behind closed doors” stuff. If we actually have investors, we should say so. If not, we shouldn’t proceed.

At the meeting I called it a ‘pony’, which was the wrong metaphor. It’s a cheap, very fun ride into town, and a certain number of residents (even those who call themselves ‘fiscal hawks’), will find it so irresistible, they won’t care whether it is good for the City or not. If I wasn’t of pure-heart I might think that the plan all along was to try to get people hooked on it. (OK, ya got me. I did refer to it as being like when yer kid brings home a puppy.)

And like so much of our ARPA spending, including this latest transportation fee, it has nothing to do either with ‘COVID relief’ or ‘build back better’. Apparently, ARPA is just a bank account the City Manager can use at will.

New Business

Housing Action Plan

There was no action item. I called this report one of the better reports I’ve read since I’ve been watching our local politics, however, it still had many shortcomings.

• First off, many of the people you want to be part of these discussions will not participate. They may be homeless, they may be working, they may not know about it for many reasons, not the least of which being language barriers.
• Second, although I’m glad that the study conducted outreach in Spanish, the fact that we did not also survey people in at least one East African language was not cool.
• Third there was absolutely no discussion concerning improving existing stock, which is a huge chunk of our apartments and multi-family units. People have to want to live places that are safe.
• Fourth, the report had an implicit bias towards keeping housing types separate. ie. keeping all multi-family systems in the ‘multi-family’ part of town. That entire thought process has gotsta go.
• I tend to cringe at the term ‘affordable housing’ because it has the odour of ‘ghetto’. Literally, it should mean housing that is less expensive to build, which is about half of Des Moines (including my house.) But that is not how people use the term today. I am in favour of subsidies, including Section 8, because it gives people a chance to live throughout Des Moines. There are Section 8 Units all through Des Moines (including the Marina District) and if I hadn’t just told you, you probably wouldn’t know it. Therefore, we should stop stigmatising these systems. We should, in fact, be encouraging them.
• Finally, every home in DM anywhere near the flight path deserves quality sound insulation; especially and particularly multi-family units. We must re-instate the sound code we rescinded in 2012.

New Items For Consideration

Councilmember Nutting had two ideas which moved forward to Committees.

The first was to investigate adding EV charging stations for Metro buses. I was not as enthusiastic as my colleagues, not because it’s might not be a good idea but because it was slightly too vague for my taste.  For example, we’ve previously been given opportunities to install EV chargers for automobiles in multiple places (including the Marina) and not moved forward on any of them. KC has waaaaaay deeper pockets and there was no mention of cost. Are we being asked to foot the bill on this as opposed to chargers meant for our own residents and businesses? Hopefully those kinds of issues will be addressed. 🙂 But, as with ferries and hotels, etc. I struggle to support anything that doesn’t come with some numbers.

On the other hand, he also proposed something that did come with specifics, setting aside ARPA money to cover the insurance deductible for business owners who’ve been vandalised. I supported that because (and it may be just a co-inky-dink 😉 ) I sent the Council an e-mail describing an existing program immediately after the last meeting where we discussed a recent incident of vandalism.

I asked that the program also include the ability for business owners to apply for a grant for CEPTED, which is just a fancy acronym for taking steps to make your property safer (lighting, barriers to protect display windows, etc.)

Whether providing relief when a crime occurs, or helping prevent incidents, this is an essential part of business support. The City can’t cover all costs, but we can do things to show how much we value our retail stores and are committed to helping them thrive.

Comments

In the recently passed State budget a tiny but critical piece of airport-related legislation, courtesy of Rep. Tina Orwall. Here are my comments.

I want to thank Rep. Tina Orwall for her successful proposal this year to fund  the first true aviation emission monitoring station anywhere near Sea-Tac Airport.

Until now there have never been permanent monitors within 9 miles of the airport. Never. I tell people that in 1976 scientists planned to create a network of monitors and they yawn. But think about it. Ecology spends $11 million every year monitoring Puget Sound. We spend more than that on sensors near every highway. The Port of Seattle maintains 24 permanent noise monitors.

If you think about it, it‘s nuts that there is not a network of air quality monitors around the airport. If we treated other forms of pollution like this, we’d take a water sample once every few years and call it good.

Rep. Orwall’s proposal is actually a set of small individual items that could add up to something much bigger. It buys a gizmo,  hands it off to Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to place it in a little 'hut' where it will be live. Then pays UW for one year of data analysis.

So we have a device, a permanent spot, managed by a legit agency and the first year of reporting. Definitely not a network. But, considering it’s taken 40 years to get here, this is a good day.

Rep. Orwall has created a recipe for us to take it the rest of the way. We don’t need Federal this or FAA that. We can add stations and sensors to track other pollutants with small grants like this. We can make monitoring routine, which is what it always should have been.

I understand the recent interest in the law suit thing. There is a lot of appeal in suing to obtain ‘justice’. But regardless, scientists would be the first to tell you that we are nowhere near where we need to be on the science. That’s actually the problem--we, Cities like Des Moines, have been complicit. We helped slow walk this work for 40 years. So regardless of what happens in court, someone will still have to do that boring, 3 yards and a cloud of dust science to get to the regulations that will actually protect the public going forward. That's the justice.

The challenge will be what we do next year. Will we have the courage to build that network? To add stations and sensors? To fund it every year and take readings every year like any ol' Water District? Because, again, one year and one station will not do it.

People tend not to care that much about chronic diseases. For example, we all know that being overweight takes years off yer life. Doesn’t change behaviour. We also know that long term exposure to various particulates does terrible things to human health--especially for kids; including asthma and even lower IQ scores. Seriously.

You’d think we’d care more about that kind of thing. But unless we're willing to pay to do something about it? The only honest answer is, Nope.

For all its economic value, for us, the airport is a chronic disease. But because it doesn’t do something to your children today, no one ever takes it seriously. But if we care about kids as we say we do, we now have a path forward:

Small grants every year to build the network and gather the data. And in 5-10 years, that gets you the answers you need to get to the regulations we should've had all along. That's the path to protect every future generation in Des Moines.