Important information on Masonic Home: Zenith EIS
The public comment period on scoping for the Environment Impact Statement will begin on July 27, 2022 and end on August 25, 2022 at 4:30 p.m. A virtual Public EIS Scoping Meeting is scheduled for August 15, 2022 at 6 p.m. This webpage will be updated with more information on July 27th.
This Week
The majority of the week will be spent on three ‘projects’.
- Meetings with several local archives searching for information on the lead up to the Second Runway for SeaTacNoise.info
- Tree Tours! I host a one hour driving tours of various key areas around Sea-Tac Airport to demonstrate the changes and explain what is coming with construction of SR-509 Stage 2 and the SAMP (aka The Fourth Runway).
To schedule a Tree Tour for your group? (206) 878-0578
If it seems like I’ve currently got “airport on the brain” it’s because now is the time. I know it’s a long article, but the above article The Fourth Runway describes the urgency of the problem, which so far is not getting proper attention. Flights over Des Moines will increase by 33% starting in 2027. The SAMP environmental review process will occur next year. But as you’re figuring out with the Masonic Home, if you wait until the environmental review, you’ve waiting too long. The time is now to start getting engaged on the coming airport expansion to protect the future of Des Moines.
And then…. the Oral Surgery, Girls! (with apologies to Monty Python) Several of you have asked me when I’m going to stop looking like a pirate. Probably January. Some of the seven implants I’m having done have not healed properly and I keep going in for more stitching.
Last Week
Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) The key item was the Port Commission approving an agreement to develop the Des Moines Creek West property on 216th and 15th. Our Mayor Mahoney and Deputy Mayor Buxton spoke in favour of the proposal and here is the video.
And here is my rebuttal, which I subtitled This is what a sellout looks like. I take a lot of crap for my ‘inflammatory’ titles, but if you understood my article re. the Ferry Pilot, this is sooooo much worse. In one sentence: We had a chance to buy the property for $3M, but instead, we gave the deal to the Port of Seattle, who is now leasing the land for $3.4M a year to the same developer who cut down all the trees on Phases I, II and III. That is not a typo.
Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda)
Highlights
- The City Manager offered an update from the Finance Director. As usual, the presentation was delivered at the last minute and this time there wasn’t even a worksheet! (A statement of financial position.) I want to remind the public that all our sister cities provide at least some form of quarterly financial statement to Council and many provide monthly worksheets.
- Despite the enthusiasm at our last meeting, we did not proceed with the LEED program as expected. There was some delay according to Police Chief Ken Thomas. Disappointing.
- We voted to lower the speed limit on Pac Highway to 40MPH all along Des Moines.
- In New Items For Consideration:
- I asked the Council to direct the City to begin work on the Marina Town Hall Presentation we voted for last September. (Although the public cannot see it, we’re getting close enough in the process that the public should start to see how all of this is supposed to work. Having a 3-D model of the Marina would make that super easy. We voted for it. Why aren’t we doing it?) Failed.
- I asked the Council to direct the City to begin work on creating a Mitigation Bank for our shoreline. (A mitigation bank is sort of like carbon offsets. Every time we need a marine permit, we have to pay money somewhere to offset the environmental damage. For example, we paid the Everett Blue Heron Slough $343,000 last year to obtain the permit to rebuild the North Bulkhead. They have a mitigation bank. We don’t. If we did, we could pay into our environmental projects. And best of all, other governments could pay into our bank when they need permits, which would speed our environmental clean-ups. It takes many years to create a mitigation bank. So the sooner we apply, the sooner it happens. What sorts of environmental projects do we have here in Des Moines? Oh, about 25,000 toxic tires at the bottom of Puget Sound for starters. 😀 What frustrates me is that Mayor Mahoney is very aware of the tire problem. If anyone should vote for this, it should be him.) Blank stares.
- I asked the Council to direct the City to research a Sales Tax By Geographic Zone Report. (For two years I’ve wanted a report showing the amount of revenue the city gets organised by geographic area. That way the council could understand just how well each part of the city is performing and use that information for future planning decisions. I was told it was ‘impossible’. I showed up at our 7 April Meeting with an example from Poulsbo. The Mayor of Poulsbo called it “invaluable” and I agree. But that led to the various nasty accusations from the Mayor.) Passed.
Friday: South King County Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP)
Friday: I got a memo from Mayor Mahoney announcing that he had appointed himself, Deputy Mayor Buxton and Councilmember Steinmetz to something called the Ad Hoc Rules Committee.
So: two members with an obvious and stated agenda and a *first year member with seven months experience and thus far according to AWC, no training classes beyond the introductory. And based on my observations, no great familiarity with the history of our Rules. I’m also concerned that, thus far, he’s shown no willingness to speak to the ethical failures of the majority and City Manager. In other words: follow the rules we currently have.
In the past, when the Council created an Ad Hoc Committee there might be a Resolution describing an operating procedure (as we did here when we created our first Senior Citizens Advisory Committee), when it will meet, how meetings will be conducted, expected work product. That’s what Rule 23 of our current Rules Of Procedure seems to indicate and that is what I was asking for at our last meeting. Blank stares.
It’s also worth noting that Ad Hoc Committees of the Council are generally considered to be subject to the same OPMA rules as standing committees, ie. being noticed to the public, recorded, etc.
So far we have a Rules Committee without rules. Life, she is ironic, no? 😀
This is what a sellout looks like…
I almost titled this post “This is what a sellout looks like” But I restrained myself. 🙂
At the 12 July Port of Seattle Commission Meeting, the Port voted to proceed with the Item 10b (Des Moines Creek West Ground Lease.) (Presentation.) This is the scrubby forest land west of the FAA building on 216th with the road connecting to the Des Moines Creek Trail. It will become Phase 4 of the Des Moines Creek Business Park (DMBCP).
Des Moines Mayor Mahoney and Deputy Mayor Buxton mentioned all the “jobs” and “economic development”. The Port announced that it was exceeding the City’s current tree code with a 4-1 replacement provision. As Commissioner Cho said, “What’s not to like?”
A few details…
- *As the presenter said, the FAA paid for most of the original land. And WSDOT bought the rest as one of three possible routes for SR-509. There is also a corresponding parcel at the northern end of the Des Moines Creek Trail.
- In 2016, both those north and south parcels were up for auction. The north was offered to the City of SeaTac, the south to the City of Des Moines.
- In 2021, the City of SeaTac bought 8.8 acress on the north side (a large portion of it with a grant from King County), and is converting their end to BMX trails and forest.
- The City of Des Moines turned the 14.4 acre parcel at the south end over to the Port of Seattle, who bought it for about $3,000,000 in 2021. And that leads up to today’s agenda item.
- According to the Port’s real estate manager, the new development will generate over $3.4M in annual lease revenue for the Port.
- The developer is Panattoni Development, the same firm that developed all three previous phases of the DMCBP. Please take a drive around the existing DMCBP and let me know how well they’ve done so far in terms of ‘tree canopy’. A 4-1 replacement program sounds nice until one asks, “How well has the City of Des Moines ever enforced our existing tree code on commercial projects?” (†Spoiler alert below.)
- The Mayor and Deputy Mayor mentioned “jobs” and “economic development.” Please ask the City Manager of Des Moines how much money those existing projects have generated for the City of Des Moines. (I tried to get the City to create such a report and was told that it’s ‘impossible’, despite the fact that other cities do exactly that.
Frankly, I do not care about “jobs” or “economic development” for the Port of Seattle or King County–unless they’re in Des Moines.
What if…
If the City of Des Moines had bought the land, we would have control. We could explore a whole spectrum of development opportunities:
- On one end we could have done as did the City of SeaTac, extended their forest and parks.
- Or, we could have done exactly what the Port of Seattle is doing and then we would have that $3.4M in lease revenue.
Do you have any idea what $3.6M would mean for a City like Des Moines? It’s over 14% of our annual general fund. It’s enough money to pay for the entire dock replacement program. It’s enough money to power basically every project we would ever need.
Of course the Port is enthusiastic about the project. Who wouldn’t be excited? They got land partially subsidised by Federal and State dollars and they have no responsibility for the outcomes for the residents of Des Moines. But they do get all that juicy money. Forever. And they can add the project to their list of “economic development” and “job creation” wins, because so long as it’s King County, it’s all good as far as they’re concerned. Double plus good? They can also say how ‘environmentally woke’ they are by talking about a ‘tree replacement’ plan that they will ultimately have no control over.
History Repeating itself…
Mayor and Deputy Mayor got to make the exact same arguments that former Mayors Sheckler, Kaplan and Pina made ten years ago. Arguments that have been proven false with all three development phases. And what is so scary is that people are now signing off on the same same trickle down economics for a fourth go round:
- Whatever “economic development” is generated by the project will (somehow) accrue to the benefit of Des Moines. Not true.
- The area is an environmental mess, so whatever they do will be better than what is there now. Wrong. Even a crappy forest is better for the environment than acres of impermeable surfaces.
- That the same developer who stripped bare all three previous phases of the DMCBP will (somehow) embrace a different ethos on the fourth try?
If you let yourself be fooled four times, you’re not a fool; you’re in on it.
The In Private World
One last thing: in assigning ‘blame’ it’s worth noting that our City Manager did not present the option to the City Council. However, more than one of my predecessors did know about it. I certainly did as early as 2017 (you could just ask WSDOT. It’s public information, after all.)
All my current colleagues and predecessors have told me they were super-jazzed about it. And certainly nobody spoke up. The fact that they did not feel a need to inform the public is the real problem in my opinion.
Unlike every other nearby city, we’ve had no public planning commission for a decade now. I’m stunned that people don’t realise how important this is. One has only to look at every other city (who do have planning commissions) to notice all the surveys and town halls that’s the reason.
So when you hear about trying to censure me or changing Council Rules to block my access to information, this is why. We don’t want the public to know unpleasant facts. They’d just slow things down.
In Des Moines, neither (most of 😀 ) the Council, or the public, see the design for almost every project until it comes to a vote. And none of the new CMs so far have mentioned this as a problem. We’ve become addicted to the “in private world.”
*When planning large projects, government agencies frequently buy several parcels of land in an area so that they have choices. When the final route is selected, they then auction them off. The Barnes Creek Trail is another SR-509 route that was not chosen.
†My conflict with the City Manager began literally at our first meeting after my election. He showed me a page from Chapter 16 of the DMMC and demanded an apology because of a public comment I had made before my election. During that comment I had asked why we hadn’t been replacing trees on commercial property in Des Moines. He considered the excerpt he had handed me to be proof that the City had been good stewards of the environment under his leadership. He said that my comments had damaged his reputation and that he did not know if we could proceed with our professional relationship until I offered that apology. To diffuse the situation, I told him I would do some research and if I found out I had wronged him I would issue a robust apology. I immediately did a public records request asking for a total number of tree replacements during his tenure. I was told that the City does not collate either removals or replacements and that the only way to know would be to go through every jacket by hand searching for the required form each developer is required to fill out. The clerk assumed I would not want to do that. But, me being me, I made an appointment to sit in the North Conference Room with every jacket since his hiring. I was joined by both the City Clerk and her assistance because he had required them to do so for some reason. So we all spent the afternoon together. Me going through jackets. Them watching me. Sure enough, there was a form in every jacket where the developer duly notes each tree removal on a diagram of the property. But in over 200 jackets I found zero indications of tree replacement. Regardless, one has only to take a walk around the perimeter of DMCBP to assess the tree cover. Now, here’s the punchline: I was later told by another staff member that the ‘3-1 replacement’ section of the code was put in place at the behest of WSDOT and Sound Transit in order to comply with a State law on transportation projects.
*I made an edit to address the objection of Harry Steinmetz. The original sentence was based on my recollection of a conversation we had about this topic. His recollection was different so I substituted another phrase that presents my sincere assessment. I want to assure the public that there is no rancor here on my part. A first year CM should not be on a Rules update, especially one this obviously partisan. And it is disappointing to me that Councilmember Steinmetz would not agree.
Thanks for your research and perseverance. Any chance of getting the state highway going through our downtown moved to another location? The traffic is outrageous! Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t see any cars stopping to support our businesses. They are mostly on their way home from work trying to avoid I-5 or Pac Highway.
Thank you for all the insight!
I so agree with your assessment of the missing trees. I have lived in Des Moines and Burien for about 35 years now. I keep seeing our trees diminish and cement increase. Is there anything a resident can do to help push these agencies that are just here to make money at least create walkable, living (more trees) spaces? I also agree that traffic needs to be re-routed and not because I don’t like traffic but because most of it is just run offs from I-5 and Pac Highway during accidents. For us who live in town and work Seattle we see the difference now that Google as made us the (easy out ) on the freeway mess. I would love to see some real traffic deterrents around 250th to slow down folks as they come into our neighborhood.
And as a resident, I would love to see how much tax money is really being paid into the community by these so called new employers with these new so called jobs.
Thank you. As cliche as it sounds, the two best things you can do atm are 1) Vote 2) Tell your councilmembers. Frankly, I’m the only member of the Council in many, many, MANY years who cared about ‘the environment’. It’s just not been a priority.
Frankly, what my colleagues have been able to do, for 20+ years, is do some very small ‘tree plantings’, which as you can see are ‘feel good’. And then use that as cover to tear about huge areas with no accountability. So, if I complain, it comes across as ‘cranky’. But all those PR moments are the distractions that enable the real damage.
JC,
What the hell is this crap? “a first year member with seven months experience and admittedly no training in parliamentary procedure or the history of our Rules.”
I have never admitted any such thing and you most certainly have never asked. I have plenty of experience with parliamentary procedure and I would have shared it with you had you asked. But you would rather make up shit.
As for the history of our Rules? How much did you have when you were first elected to the council? Like you had bee observing the council for a long time prior to being elected.
You asked me the other day why no one listened to you? I replied that you had no credibility. This is example 1A.
Councilmember, -nobody- enjoys criticism, but this is not some ‘snipe’. And it is definitely not -personal-. I have said many kind words about you, probably more than the reverse. 😀 I truly value your talents and contributions to the community.
But we met only a few weeks ago to go over this very topic. And there is a large difference between being “irritating” and “not credible”. If I appeared “not credible” then, I’m not sure what I could do to change your mind now.
Frankly, I don’t think very many people -care- about expertise here atm.
Regardless, it is my view that nobody with less than one year of experience on the Council should be a part of any Rules update. You asked how much parliamentary experience I had when I joined the Council and that’s a valid point. I would have had trouble voting for me to be on such a committee in my first year either.
I stand by my other comments, but to defend them on-line would certainly come across as even less kind than the original post. I would be happy to discuss off-line if you have interest.
The goals that both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor have stated for this Rules update, on video and in the emails we’ve both seen from the Mayor, do not inspire confidence in the process. Perhaps if I had heard any objections from you to those statements, or any of the constant misconduct, I would have been more optimistic about your role on the committee.
I would -love- to be proven wrong. As I told you when we met, -every- major rules update has had at least one vindictive change meant to target one particular CM. And future Councils pay for it.
If you turn out to be a strong voice for ethics, and push back against all of that, you can be -sure- I will be absolutely lavish in my praise.
For what -that’s- worth. 😀
Thanks for meeting your comment. I’m sorry you cannot resist the urge to snipe.
Council member Steinmetz you are right on the money about JC Harris! He makes zero attempt to collaborate and behaves like a petulant child when he consistently is outvoted 6-1. He also thinks he is the smartest guy in the world but he’s likely the only person who feels that way about him. Please stay the course Council member Steinmetz.
hanks again JC . There is SO much the public does not know about Des Moines I am grateful you make the effort to let the residents know what is happening her . Another place where all the trees have been cut down is on216th on the south side . Is that a condo or Apartment build going up? what? Will there be a dedication of the new park at the Van Gaskin site ?
I enjoy reading JC’s blogs they are informative, he takes the time to share presentations, upcoming dates and information with residents. JC could do a better job by just providing facts w/out drama but it is his blog and his style. I think social media has taken away from real life interactions. My concern is that not all voices are being valued, heard & respected. It seems government at all levels has lost the concept of working together, of learning to listen to everyone and compromise. Team building would be a great course and a requirement yearly. We should expect this from our council. Anything less becomes gossip and is not a good look for our city. Respect is given when respect is shown.
There is this ongoing narrative that I’m ‘grandstanding’… avoiding trying to work with my colleagues. That is simply untrue and I can’t understand why it isn’t obvious to viewers. Going in, my colleagues knew that I disagreed with them on various policies so they made a conscious decision to ‘shun’ me from day one. And it then proceeded to bullying and all manner of unethical tactics. Simple as that. There was -never- any attempt at ‘team building’ or ‘compromise’. We’re the only Council that holds no retreats. Heck, we’re the only Council that has no group photo. Think about that.
I -wish- we were able to “disagree without being disagreeable”. But the current state of affairs was never my choice. In fact, I’ve never -had- a say in the matter.
Stop being a victim and begin making attempts to work with the other 6 council members. You d made yourself the odd man out. The more you write your snarky comments about them the less likely they will ever want to collaborate with you.