Posts tagged ‘Snohomish County’

July 27, 2008

R E S P E C T Gimme a little respect, just a little bit

by Steve Dana

The Snohomish City Council just adopted guidelines to “rein in” council members who make inappropriate comments during council meetings.  Those would be comments that are not consistent with the majority point of view. 

 

The guidelines discourage council members from making personal or disruptive comments.  The guidelines were developed and adopted to “force” councilmember Swede Johnson to act more civilly toward his council colleagues. 

 

It is probably true that Johnson lost patience with his council mates and blew his cool on a couple occasions.  But when you are dealing with inexperienced novices; that is understandable.  I think Swede could have crafted more civil language that conveyed the same point, but he got caught up in the moment.  Sometimes acting outrageously is the only outlet when dealing with folks who are closed to outside ideas.

 

It seems that since council member Johnson is the only member of the body with the experience and knowledge to recognize bad government when he sees it and then point it out in a public meeting, he is being “put in his place” by Hamlin and his posse.

 

Swede Johnson has more experience in government than Hamlin and the majority of the council combined.  His knowledge about how government works and the substance of our local government makes him uniquely qualified to offer insights his council colleagues have not even imagined.  Most of the majority have made up their minds that they don’t really care what Johnson has to contribute so they take positions opposite his without really considering the content of his comments.  The arrogance of the majority emboldens them to push forward with their agenda, hoping that the public will never know about their errors in judgment. 

 

It really annoys them when Johnson asks questions that are embarrassing to council members or staff when they cannot be answered.  It doesn’t seem to bother most of them that the staff managers are not prepared to answer more than most basic questions.  Council members are elected to ask the tough questions.  It is their job to protect the interests of the citizens by making certain the issues are thoroughly discussed and possible outcomes have been assessed. 

 

I would hope that every council member comes to every meeting prepared to hold the feet of staff to the fire.  Responsible council members do their home work and look deeper than the cover sheet on agenda bills.  They take the time to know the material and are prepared to take the staff to task if the material is not complete enough to make a good decision.  It is clear that some council members take their responsibility more seriously than others.

 

I don’t live in the historic district so the people I listen to seem to have a different spin on this effort by the council.  Comments I hear suggest the average citizen views the Snohomish City council and city management to be a bad joke.  And I believe the council is oblivious to it.  Unfortunately, that is typical of people convinced that they are the only smart ones in the room.  They are so full of themselves they are not listening to anyone else’s input.

 

I am not suggesting that Swede Johnson is the only one with good questions, but he has quite a few.  His many years of experience would suggest he is not a crackpot.  His ideas might have some merit.

 

On the other hand, the lack of experience and knowledge of Hamlin, Guzak, Schilaty, Clemans and Randall suggest they could use all the help they can get. But they don’t like the tone of his input.

 

Bad decisions by city councils are often not detected until significant time passes.  Some are evident right away.  Sometimes, bad decisions are as simple as not holding staff accountable for their mistakes.  The current crop of rookies is confident that the city manager and his staff will prevent them from making too many bad mistakes.  They think staff has their back.  It is my opinion with the council we have and the staff we have the blind are leading the blind.

 

Over the years we have had some pretty decent department heads; finance managers, planners and engineers.  That is not my view today.  I cannot remember a time when I felt the city was in such jeopardy because of a lack of substance on the council and with city staff.

 

In difficult times, we hope we have capable leaders and managers to protect the interests of the city.  At this time, I have no confidence that our city will have the ability to avoid the pitfalls and capitalize on the opportunities that might come around.  Council members aren’t digging into the issues deep enough to be prepared for the tough choices that have to be made or sharp enough to recognize the difference between the two.  If they are counting on staff to cover their back side, they are in deep trouble.

 

Swede Johnson has been a respectable member of the school board and the county council.  It is only when he drops back to a city council position that his credibility is called to question.  How can that be?  I have known Swede Johnson for forty years and he is not the one whose credibility should be questioned.

 

Council members are not comfortable with Johnson’s input.  The truth is often uncomfortable.  Dealing with it is often painful.  But, council should listen because there is substance in his comments.  If nothing else, his questions and comments should serve as a “heads up” to lead them to questions of their own.  Sadly, arrogance and ego won’t let them.

 

Respect is something you earn with your deeds.  Swede Johnson has paid his dues and done the work to earn the respect of his peers and his constituents.  All I see on the Snohomish City Council is a bunch of whiners who think they can demand respect with a council motion.  I’m sure Swede Johnson is quaking in his boots in fear of these intellectual giants.

 

I am proud of Swede Johnson for having the courage to stand up for the city when it would be very easy for him to sit back and do nothing.  I can assure you that based upon the actions of most council members doing nothing is the only thing they do well.

 

Let’s hope that a code of conduct helps them with those tough choices and good luck with that respect thing!

July 23, 2008

Paine is a Pain

by Steve Dana

There has been a lot said about Paine Field lately.  An air carrier wants to use the airport for commercial purposes and the county is finding that in exchange for taking federal money to maintain the airport, they cannot exclude users from the facilities.  Nevertheless, politicians are compelled to weigh in on the issue to protect their image with the voters.  In the end, they may roll over since they can’t give up the money, but they will put on a good show to convince the voters they did all they could to stop commercial use of the airport.

County Executive Aaron Reardon sponsored the group that recommended the airport be used for commercial purposes, yet when a candidate for using the airport steps forward, he back-slides with the political winds that blow in southwest Snohomish County.  He says he is in favor of economic development, but it appears that he is only in favor if it doesn’t impact his voter base.  Imagine how he would react if the facility in question was in Arlington.  He would be apologizing left and right, but he would acknowledge the necessity of commercial air service to county economic development.  He would be talking about how the folks in Arlington and Marysville would just have to take the hit for good of the whole.  District 1 is not his voter base, so he is not too concerned about them.  Sadly for him, there is no suitable facility there or you know where the airport would be.

When the Growth Management Act was passed, it specifically addressed the issue of “siting essential public facilities”.  We arm twisted many public entities to accept facilities that benefitted the whole county, even though it may not be in their individual best interests.  I think most people would consider a commercial airport an essential public facility.

I can’t remember exactly which of those essential public facilities were sited in Mukilteo, Lynnwood, Edmonds or Woodway.  I am sure they took responsibility for some, I just can’t remember which ones.  It probably would have been cheaper to build The Brightwater Sewage Treatment Plant in Edmonds, but you have to know that would not happen.

We have a major airport in our county and we can’t use it because it makes airport noises.  That makes good sense.

Our county is one of the fastest growing urban counties in the state, yet leadership has been non-existent in confronting politically sensitive issues.  Our guy in council district 5, Dave Somers has been chairman of the county council, but I don’t hear any ideas coming from him that address any of the critical issues.  Where does Somers stand on the Paine Field issue?  Does he have any thoughts about how his constituents feel about having local access to commercial air travel? 

June 26, 2008

Council Priorities

by Steve Dana

I remember the day I made the decision to run for city council in 1988.  I saw a city council making decisions I thought were not in my best interests or those of the city.  I agonized about whether I was up to the task.  After much internal debate, I decided that I would commit to the work for at least four years.  I never thought of it as a start to a political career, rather the continuation of public service.  In order to be elected to office, you have to participate in a political process.  Whether you like it or not, you are a politician.  There are a lot of elected officials that are good politicians and lousy public servants just as there are some that are mediocre politicians and good public servants.  The skill set required to be elected is totally different from the one you need to serve after the election.  Sadly, if you are not good at the first, you often are not given the chance at the second.  Running for office in a non-partisan city election is fairly mild, but can be a little testy.  Partisan positions become more and more complex because of the need for funding a campaign and not having personal intimate relations with the constituents.  Partisan elections are often rancorous. 

For me it was easy running because I didn’t understand the work it would take to do the job.  It was only after the filing did I begin to understand what I had gotten myself into.  I was committed to advocating for the citizens I saw every day in my business.  I wouldn’t let them down.

It is important that city staff have the professional knowledge to manage the business of a city.  It is more important that city elected officials have the common sense to insure that staff is doing the job right.  That requires a commitment to learning about the business of the city.

Everyone comes to the job of City Council Member with an agenda.  We were motivated to run for office because we thought we had ideas that would be of a benefit in some way.  That is not to say the benefits would necessarily be accrued to the majority in the community, but to some in the community.  I only say this because there have been folks who served in the past that had an agenda so narrowly focused that when they achieved their goal they became dead wood.

Each person that runs for office needs to be prepared to do the work necessary to understand the issues with enough depth to know whether management is protecting the interests of the public.  When a person decides to be a candidate, they should feel obligated to learn about the job as if it were a job. 

Cities provide services no other level of government provides.  Cities are the grass root of government.  They take care of Public Safety first, safe drinking water second and dozens of less important priorities after that.  Even though urban planning is not an essential service, it is an important component of the job

Cities vary in the services they provide.  Some are full service with Police and Fire Departments, Water and Sewer Utilities and amenity services like parks.  In addition to the services citizens can see, there are also services the public does not generally see.  Administrative services range from engineering to accounting to planning.

Since public safety is our highest priority, we have to understand what is covered under that umbrella.  Some people might argue about the difference between police and fire services, but what we know is that both are essential.  The fire departments are generally viewed as the “good guys” because they save our lives in ways we can see.  Police departments deal with criminal behavior and enforcing the law so they are not such “good guys”.  The off shoot of police is criminal justice and the cost of prosecuting and incarcerating criminals.  Even though we don’t have city jails like in the old days, we do have an obligation to maintain our share of the facility somewhere.  We contract with Snohomish County to be our jail provider and with the county court system to process our criminals.  Elected officials need to understand the issues regarding police services from basic levels of service, department accreditation and budget up through the jail services contract and the court system.

Our city decided a number of years ago to get out of the fire and emergency medical service business and leave that to Fire District 4.  From an efficiency perspective that worked because one larger department can work better than two smaller ones.  From a control perspective, it was terrible.  The fire and emergency medical system was managed by people not particularly committed to city priorities.  As the political winds blow in the two jurisdictions, the levels of service can vary.  Not a perfect system, but in general it works.  It is important that city and fire district elected officials meet periodically to insure that both are working for the common good.

It is generally assumed that without a municipal water supply, there is no city.  There are many cities that have water departments or a water delivery system without a sewer system.  Water is essential, sewer is not essential if there is adequate drain field capacity to handle the population density with septic tanks.  Managing a utility system requires an understanding of the facilities.  Snohomish is not unique, but it is one of the few small cities with a “water right” on the Pilchuck river that entitles it to draw water from the river for the purpose of a municipal water system.  Along with the right comes the obligation to manage the resource.  If you start at the diversion dam and work your way to the water treatment plant and all its variables to the transmission line to the local storage facilities and then to the distribution system, the water utility requires a significant commitment for staff to stay up to speed, let alone the commitment elected officials need to make to understand what is going on.

In our city, we have a combination sanitary sewer treatment system.  That means we use both mechanical means to separate biomaterials along with the more passive ponding systems.  It requires a larger foot print than a purely mechanical system, but it has lower operating cost.  The science of sanitary sewers changes regularly based upon the standards for discharge into water ways.

Obviously, collection of the sewage presents a range of technical challenges.  Do you have pump stations or can you do all gravity?  Do you have dedicated sanitary system or is it a combination storm and sanitary system?  The sizes of the pipes in the ground have some bearing on the ability to convey effluent.  Capacity of a system is a major factor in determining efficient cost of operation.  City staff and elected officials need to be up to speed on the different variables regarding ranges of services and costs associated with the different choices.

Elected officials develop policy and approve budget in close cooperation with either an elected mayor or a City Manager.  In our city the Manager is the CEO and has all administrative power to hire and develop staff, to manage labor relations with employee collective bargaining units, to represent the city at locations away from the city, to promote the agenda of the city council and insure that the city operate within the law, both in city code and in the state code.

Developing and understanding a budget for a city is a challenge.  State law and financial management policies drive requirements for reserve accounts and other considerations that complicate the process for new elected officials.  Some revenue is required by law to be used for certain purposes.  Understanding the framework for city budget is essential.  There are as many tricks to managing multiple revenue sources and fund balances as there are sources.  It is easy with the budget to throw up your hands in frustration and just leave it to the “professionals”.   I would be reluctant to relinquish my authority to evaluate every aspect of my city’s budget.  It is the fuel that drives all the services we pay for with discretionary funding.

The last significant area where city council people need to be educated is in land use planning.  The State Growth Management Act raised the bar for the planning and community development department.  The act requires that we all have planning policies that drive almost every aspect of city government.  Police services are impacted by the policies along with every other department.  The city does get to develop its own policies, but the effort to do that is often used as a good excuse for adopting some other city’s language.

When you begin to understand the importance of your city’s Comprehensive Plan, you can see the importance of not delegating that authority to staff since if they screw it up, they are not the ones stuck with it after they are gone.

It may not sound too profound, but this last point is the reason we serve.  City managers, police chiefs, public works directors, finance managers and planners come and go.  They are hired guns that come to town to work, but seldom live here.  They are given the keys to the city to manage and manipulate with their professional input, but they do not inherit the legacy of their decisions like residents do.  To suggest that they are in the best position to decide how things should be done is a failure to govern.  Staff should recommend a course of action with a range of options and let council members make the policy decisions with the best information available.  Then monitor staff as they implement the policy.

All too often, elected officials take the word from staff as the gospel and that will get you killed.  Staff members need to demonstrate their professional ability and earn your trust.  If they can’t do the first, they shouldn’t get the second.

June 20, 2008

Flood Issues are Drowning Us

by Steve Dana

Now that the county has denied the application from Snohomish to expand their UGA to the north, they have pretty much closed down that city.  In previous actions the county council decided that development south of the city across the Snohomish river would be discouraged.  The flood plain regulations currently in place prohibit new commercial activity in that area along with denying existing businesses the opportunity to improve their situation.

Snohomish worked with Snohomish County to develop the Urban Growth Boundary in the beginning because both governments recognized that in spite of the fact that there is periodic flooding, the area was still urban and they would expect additional development.  Including the sawmill, the airport and the surrounding lands in the UGA makes good sense.  Those are important businesses in our economy and they have long history in our community.  We need to recognize the fact that in spite of periodic flooding, both have continued to invest in rebuilding whenever there was an event.

The politics of flood plain regulations has swung back and forth so many times I have doubts about the science.  Common sense tells me that the railroad tracks create a barrier to flood waters on both the north and the east sides of the airport.  In my mind that says that in the event that the water came over the dike anywhere in the vicinity of the airport, the airport would not impede the flow since the water wants to flow west.  There would be some pooling of standing water, but not floodway flow.

We did have a catastrophic dike failure in 1990 that allowed floodwater to ravage the area around Batt Slough.  That event did fill the valley with water.  But after the tub was full, we just had a big lake.  There was infrastructure damage along Springhetti Road and the south margin of Airport Road when the dike failed and the flow swept through the area.  There is no doubt that when a dike fails, there is significant damage. 

If however, there is predictable overtopping of a dike, there is more controlled flooding that is aimed to areas where there are less impacts to improvements.  The diking districts plan for overtopping by designating places for controlled flooding.  Certainly it does not prevent damage, it just tries to control it.

The dike along our river has been built to protect from most flood events.  It does its job pretty well.  Periodically, a significant event reminds us that it is not perfect.  The question we have to ask ourselves is “Because our dike is not perfect, do we abandon the valley?”  Are we suggesting that all places that have periodic flooding should be abandoned for human use? 

In the Mississippi River drainage area, we are seeing catastrophic flooding this month.  Dikes protect developed land along all those rivers.  If our logic is to remove the dikes and let the water flow where it may in all the places where there is periodic flooding, we might run into a little resistance in the heartland.  The federal government is pouring billions into the protection of the lower Mississippi valley.  They must not agree that we should abandon low areas along rivers that flood now and then.

Officials from both the city and the county have sent mixed messages to property owners on the south side of the river.  The map shows they are designated for URBAN GROWTH by being included inside the boundary.  The lengthy debates since 1994 have not answered any of the questions.  We are more confused than ever.  

For the city’s part, they are no better.  On the one hand they talk about the things the south siders can’t do, then propose some of those same land uses on the north side of the river.  The city built up the protective berm around the sewage treatment plant as they should have.  That berm elevation is a couple feet above the 100 year flood level.  That act alone prevented the river from flowing freely in places where it had done so for all of history.  That was “Flood Way” in that during a flood event, the water flowed with river velocity right through that site prior to the improvements.

The city built their maintenance facility on the river bank many years ago.  Some years the river flooded and the water came up into the buildings and did damage to the equipment and buildings there.  The city did not abandon the site because of periodic flooding, it did what anyone would do.  It filled the site to raise the elevation above flood levels.  It makes perfect sense.  If it floods, fill.

When the Snohomish Iron Works wanted to build a dike to prevent flooding in their shop, that was not an option available for them.  When the Seattle Snohomish Mill wanted to build a dike to keep flood waters out of the mill yard, they couldn’t either.

It is clear that the politics of flood plain regulation need more work.

Now comes the “Rails to Trails” organization suggesting that the rail line from Snohomish to Bellevue could be a component in the east side transportation corridor.  Imagine the troubles that project will face if the north terminus and staging for that deal lands at Harvey Field.  What compromises will that force?

These issues are complex.  I have not done them justice in this space.  The debate will rage until we clarify what our priorities are in this area.

The critical area regulations will be up for review before too long.

There is no doubt that we will have thoughts along the way.