==================
WARNING: The following information is LONG, boring to many, incomprehensible to others, and history that repeats itself!
==================
The Silver Beach Neighborhood recently debated adopting a list of policy measures to address the issue of protecting the Lake Whatcom Reservoir.
Many of the items on the list were recognizable as elements of earlier discussions during the deliberations on the City's 'Silver Beach Ordinance', designed in response to the Dept of Ecology's 303 (d) listing of the lake for fecal cliform and dissolved oxygen levels.
Some were adopted and incorporated into the Ordinance, while others were not for various reasons.
It may be useful to revisit those earlier discussions again as a reminder of what was considered during those initial eight public meetings, which resulted in a list of unanimous, or near-unanimous, recommendations that were adopted.
The adopted recommendations -from meeting No. 9- were the subject of my 8/8/07 blog.
This general subject was also discussed or rferenced in blogs from October 9, 12 & 13 and Dec 3
------------------------
Meeting Summary from 5/30/2000:
1. All present except B. Ryan & B. Bliss
2. Handouts:
• Agenda
• DNR Notes
• Urbanization & Water Quality Notes
• Porous Paving Systems (several)
• Salmon in City excerpt
• Olympia Ordinance
• e-mail from CTF members:
JW – minutes of 5/16 meeting
- incentives & tradeoffs list
TF - ideas
JK - ideas
AR - ideas
JH - ideas
BB - ideas
MW - ideas
3. Brief review of agenda.
4. Review of purpose of meeting and CTF’s objective:
• Main focus of this Task Force is the SB Ordinance itself, adding flexibility and options without changing its intent or goal, which is to arrest or reverse further degradation to water quality in measurable terms.
• Much education about Lake issues is obviously happening here.
Other programs and efforts, such as The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000, are either already underway or will be coming soon. These will address many of the ideas expressed by CTF. We will collect all CTF ideas, then sort out those, which could be incorporated into the SBO. Other ideas will be saved and passed on to other programs.
5. Comments by participants:
• Major concern is SBO is too narrow a focus; needs to encompass entire watershed; overall jurisdictional body is needed with powers to effect necessary changes and institutionalize them against future whims. Macro, not micro approach.
• Lake has competing uses; difficult to set rules to cover all activities. If drinking water is #1 use, then that takes precedence over others. Must take a long-term view and consider whether maintenance will allow BMPs to remain functional over time. Suggestions regarding topography and proximity to lake as important parameters are good. Add soil composition to this mix; lawns may be getting an undeserved “bad rap”.
• SBO affects only a small % of watershed; maybe good example for rest. Agrees that if drinking water is #1 use, then that takes precedence over other uses.
• Agrees 1st objective is (protecting) drinking water, but wonders if SBO gets cart before horse. Education is urgently needed about use of fertilizers & pesticides, big sources of problems. Needs relief in trade- offs, perhaps in donating land in excess of 15% open space requirement. Seasonal limits on land disturbance are serious problem; maybe extend if BMPs are used. Agrees with most SBO provisions.
• Admittedly a poor politician; wants to know what science says- e.g. fuels in water at non-detectable level. Spent 2 months talking to people re Prop #1; many want something more done to protect drinking water & environment. Where is the County on this? Repeats suggestions to ban fertilizers, pesticides, old pilings, jet skis, uncontrolled fueling activities. Might volunteer to install a catch basin if shown to be helpful.
• Agrees with prior comments. It’s City’s job to adopt tough policy & strict regs, set example for County. CTF could prioritize main impacts, develop example. “Roofmeadows.com”
• Agrees with prior comments. Everyone should be involved; not just SB. Consider stormwater fee credit for those affected by SBO.
• While banning chemicals, fertilizers and boats would help, the biggest impact on maintaining water quality is development itself. A moratorium should not be ruled out if time is needed to develop fair and effective regulations.
• Likes SBO; supports banning fertilizers, increasing public education and developing incentives & tradeoffs. Agrees SBO covers only small percent of users, but these are closest to the dirtiest water. Footprint limit is also in effect elsewhere. City needs to be first to protect lake, set example for County.
• Much info is available on plantings and impervious surfaces, but this still doesn’t address SBO flexibility refinements in a defensible way. SBO is a broad-brush approach now.
6. Questions & Discussion:
Q: How was 2000 sqft footprint determined?
• Lot size footprint @ 15%, which is watershed, targeted maximum impervious cover. 10 to 15% is recognized by science as threshold of impairing natural environment. (years of R&D in urban environments)
• 2000 sqft is common to typical floorplans, provides for up to maximum allowable size using multiple floor configurations. If pervious drives, etc are used, this provides for greater building footprint. Guarantees the right to build homes that are readily saleable, encourages use of BMPs. Combines opportunities for reasonable use and protection of public resource. Homes meeting these criteria are common already. Over 50% of remaining unbuilt lots in SB are of substandard size for the area zoning.
Q: Where does the CC want CTF to go? Recognizing we are an advisory group with narrow focus, how does this one ordinance fit into City’s overall plan?
• City is interested in all those policies & science that can be found to protect the water supply. The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Program 2000 is a joint City/County/Water District attempt at doing that in a comprehensive way. Three goals were made priorities for 2000:
Land Use/Urbanization: The SB Ordinance directly addresses this goal with its four topics: Allowed Uses; Density; Lot Coverage; Land Disturbance. This is a key piece of the puzzle, and citizen’s involvement can provide vital conditioning to make it more effective.
Stormwater Management: This will be the subject of an upcoming ordinance upgrade and public process later this year.
Land Ownership: This goal is being addressed by another Citizens Task Force sponsored by the Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000.
The City recognizes that the overall problem of protecting the lake is complex and interrelated. However, all helpful actions, no matter how insignificant their effect may seem, are important to the overall solution. Eventually, the cumulative effect of all these practical, incremental changes will result in observable improvement in water quality trends and will more equitably spread costs and benefits among all watershed users.
Q: Why weren’t fertilizers & pesticides banned in SBO? It has been mentioned that SBO is “bare bones” and we are to condition it; what does the CC want to hear?
• Development IS the biggest impact to the watershed, but this isn’t a “silver bullet”, but other ideas also have big potential. The idea of “cumulative impacts” is a difficult concept to convey, because people prefer a simple solution (e.g. a structural control like a wastewater treatment plant). Often, with prevention as policy, land use related regulations or non-regulatory volunteer actions are more effective.
Removal of old pilings would help. Banning fertilizers & pesticides also has a big potential impact, if this could be encouraged or enforced on a widespread basis.
• What we’re after is a “A to Z” list of all ideas, whether regulatory, persuasive, educational, voluntary, opportunistic, incentive-based or otherwise. Then, these ideas can be put into the right forum for consideration. This is the first time a CTF has focused on land use matters. Anything is fair game. We don’t know all the possibilities or their feasibility yet.
Q: Notwithstanding the pros and cons of divergent interests, why hasn’t the City done this already?
• The CC believes the best approach to insuring water quality is protected is to first fine-tune SBO, then proceed with other actions like stormwater ordinance upgrade, watershed land ownership and the like as part of Joint Watershed Management Plan. It is always very helpful to hear public comments on a wide range of issues. Main focus here is best use of SBO.
• We are now hearing that the SBO is picking on a small % of citizens for a watershed-wide problem. The next impacted group will likely feel the same way. Eventually, everyone will share benefits and costs of a preserved water supply.
• Fertilizers & pesticides could have been banned, but difficult to define trade-offs without first modeling lake impacts to determine and quantify TMDLs. This is underway now and will eventually provide a predictive tool to control future development. The SBO doesn’t wait for this to happen, it is preventative.
• Two trade-off principles:
a) if reduce one item, then another limit can be altered
b) trade types of impacts (e.g. contamination Vs season/BMPs, or density or uses)
• Philosophy is to attack worst situation first (SB) since it is likely to respond more readily to these efforts. Demonstrated effectiveness helps in showing leadership by example.
Q: Why trade-off? Why not have both?
• Example of chemicals ban: education first is more effective, especially when depending on voluntary compliance. Bans may not be practically enforceable, education can shape behavioral changes, persuade neighbors.
Q: Many SB residents feel SBO was crammed down their throats; this created anger, adversarial situation, detrimental to cooperation. Feedback is they don’t want to feel guilty about living there and practicing normal habits.
• A part of CTF’s role is to represent residents concerns and to learn and communicate reasons for SBO to other residents.
Q: What is role of trade-offs in comprehensive plan? Citizens like to know rules, like speed limits. Must educate public on fertilizer use, and the like.
Combination of rules and education shows leadership.
• Currently there are no regulations banning lawns, therefore this represents a legitimate trade-off opportunity regarding natural vegetation, porous pavement, etc.
• Look at next lot to develop: If more than 2000 sqft are desired, how can this be achieved? Perhaps by agreeing to no artificial lawn, a pervious pavement driveway, and considering other BMPs or development right options, an accommodation can be reached that satisfies both SBO’s intent and homeowner’s needs.
• Refer to handout, “Urbanization & Water Quality -Chapter 4 Notes”:
“Tools of trade are BMPs”
- nonstructural controls – rely on natural features, uses of land
- structural controls – built after the fact, to mitigate effects
HINT: Look at big picture, but see from “Land Baron” perspective.
• Actions that ALL residents can do, not just NEW residents. Banning lawns (or volunteering to) could be considered as retrofits. They are occupancy activities, very difficult to apply equally. Last to build or move in always pays more. Mission is to use non-regulatory, voluntary actions, the more the better. Lake Whatcom is one of many watersheds with similar problems to be addressed. Everyone lives in a watershed.
Q: Can a series of small mitigation projects be used? Are effects measurable? (e.g., determine stormwater GPM, then increase capacity of system)
• These can be verified, but past record is not good. Example: old DOE SW rules specified 100% swale filter system, now increased to 140% to allow for function inefficiency. If prevention is goal, it’s good to over design, since theory is better than actual response. Study of various lots Vs hydraulic influences; conversion to natural vegetation, mimics or restores natural systems; effective, low maintenance costs, no cost to public, attractive, good habitat.
Q: Is this a good trade?
• It can be. See Olympia Ordinance example in handouts.
Q: Can you configure existing SW systems to handle new loads?
• 2-part problem: Construction & Built Living Units
Silt fences during construction don’t work well with fine silt, containing phosphate. Best result is 50 to 60% effective. Therefore, cheaper & easier to shorten construction season to avoid rainy season.
Q: If a new home using 15% impervious cover is built, does this negatively affect the lake?
• All new development has an impact, but this scenario would “carry its own weight” with neutral (minimal) effect on lake.
• The CC is OK with SBO provisions as they stand; they achieve our goals. If CTF finds other ways to achieve goals, great. Creativity can mitigate impacts, plus add flexibility to SBO.
• Because of area density and undersized lots, if a resident wants a larger retirement home, it might be more cost effective to just buy 2 lots rather than rely on BMPs. Consolidation of 2 lots would stand better chance of variance approval. (could restore land or consume development rights)
Q: Haven’t some effects of SBO been seen already?
• Looks like it from TSS tests at PP Drain. A statistical correlation of reduced TSS levels since SBO was enacted seems to indicate improvement.
Results were not correlated to rainfall or flow monitoring, but were also observed elsewhere. We were surprised at how quickly this was seen.
Q: What is average lot size in SB?
• Lots range from 5000 sqft to a 10-acre, unplatted tract, with majority in 7200 to 10,000 range. Lot sizes are 6000, 7200, 10,000, 12,000 & 20,000 sqft. Area intended as 1/2 acre zoning?, though many lots are substandard in size, per area density.
• There are just under 500 unbuilt lots remaining, both platted and unplatted. Majority are existing lots of record. Possible to downzone, but this may not accomplish intended goal. Lowest density in City is 1/20,000 sqft. Not very helpful, would penalize largest parcels; better to consolidate impervious surfaces to common area ~ cluster.
Q: Why is downzone an option?
• Errors made in past, significant subsequent changes since 1904, and potential public health concerns make this an option for consideration. A search of U.S. reveals many similar examples from OR to CT. There are 5-acre properties in watershed with worse impacts than these potentials.
Q: When was data taken, what are projections for housing in watershed?
• Data in the 1/24/00 CC packet shows statistics; about 790 homes are in SB now, 470 single family & 300 multi. Potential buildout for entire watershed per current zoning is 11,300 homes, of which 15% would be in City, mostly in SB.
Q: Was this info obtained from Assessor’s Office?
• Yes, for unbuilt, subdividable tracts; also counted lots with fee simple title. Market pressure indicates close to 100% buildout is likely over time, counting redevelopment of existing structures and public area.
Q: Is 15% imperious surfaces the goal for entire watershed?
• City & County maps show existing impervious surface (+/_ 15%) with highest areas about 23% and lowest 5%. Aerial photos are used, along with paper weighting techniques to arrive at these estimates.
• Without SBO controls, SB could ultimately achieve 24% impervious;
with SBO controls, about 17% impervious is possible. This is a potential 25% reduction in impervious surface; a big management opportunity for the City. (saves 36 acres out of 673 from becoming impervious)
Q: Everyone should have info from 1/24 packet to be on same page. (some info in workbooks, rest available from CC office)
Q: Have subsurface wetland flow models been used to determine if infiltration is possible?
• No, generally soil is too shallow, saturated and close to bedrock for this to be effective. Applicable in isolated cases only.
Q: Less inclined to increase impervious surface limits; could buy another lot to mitigate, or give credit for stormwater hookups, etc.
Q: Many already have homes. Others want what they have
• Possible enticing offer for new homes is to treat their impacts times 2. This may fit with policy of prevention.
Q: Possible to allow phosphate-free fertilizer?
• That would not be enforceable, like banning pesticides.
Q: Understands disallowing B&B’s, but ADUs seem to cause hardship among those needing to care for aging parents. Any exceptions?
• Impossible to satisfy everyone, but variance process might allow conversion of existing impervious surface, or trade of development rights for this use. ADUs create lasting population impact.
• A low impact ADU today can become an apartment tomorrow
• There are only 4 ADUs in SB now; additional ADUs could set undesirable precedent. May be OK if total impervious surface with an ADU is less than otherwise. Good example of how to view tradeoffs; a mix of fair & equitable parts and pieces that are feasible. CTF can do a brain dump of examples like this.
Q: Objective seems to be to pick items with biggest impact from a list compiled by CTF.
• A list of ideas will be compiled and distributed before next meeting, on June 13 in Planning Dept Conference Room. From this list, CTF can decide which can be implemented as part of SBO; saving others for referral to other programs.
Q: One document with specific items, rated 1-20 would be ideal.
• Ratings are up to CTF; comments on relative importance or feasibility should not be a source of embarrassment to anyone.
• A comprehensive list can assist diverse levels of understanding in seeing various options. Can add to list at any time.
• Prioritizing the list is a group activity; sort out the ones that cleanly fit our mission.
Q: Blackboard example; industrial sites typically segregate relatively clean roof water from other sources, like parking lots which need treatment before releasing. Analogy with lakeside home; why can’t runoff from a 4000 sqft home be collected separately and directed to lake through a dedicated drain? Uphill drainage already goes to a ditch for routing away from property.
• Good idea as far as it goes, but loss of vegetative buffer near waterfront is a negative. Also zinc or copper strips added for moss control might add toxics to runoff.
• Good example of “Ying & yang” of stormwater management;
-big source of lake pollution is air-borne wood smoke particles
-loss of benefit of vegetative buffer
-loss of best buffer area closest to shoreline
-roof drain is “clean”
-big ditch across road caries uphill drainage somewhere else
• Ball park analogy: expensive seats near ball field, cheaper seats in stands, luxury boxes well away from action, enclosed with TV view.
Wrap-up:
• Info from 1/24 packet available to those who want it.
• 20/20 Engineering available for presentation if needed
• Much info to read and chew on
• List of ideas to circulate before next meeting; our focus
NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, June 13, 7-9pm in Planning Dept Conference Room
Meeting Dates:
Tuesday, June 13 (Planning Dept Conference Room)
Tuesday, June 27
Tuesday, July 11 (Board Room not available)
Tuesday, July 25
Tuesday, August 8
Tuesday. August 15 (final recommendations deadline)
.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Silver Beach Ordinance Redux: 1st Meeting Citizens Task Force
==================
WARNING: The following information is LONG, boring to many, incomprehensible to others, and history that repeats itself!
==================
The Silver Beach Neighborhood recently debated adopting a list of policy measures to address the issue of protecting the Lake Whatcom Reservoir.
Many of the items on the list were recognizable as elements of earlier discussions during the deliberations on the City's 'Silver Beach Ordinance', designed in response to the Dept of Ecology's 303 (d) listing of the lake for fecal cliform and dissolved oxygen levels.
Some were adopted and incorporated into the Ordinance, while others were not for various reasons.
It may be useful to revisit those earlier discussions again as a reminder of what was considered during those initial eight public meetings, which resulted in a list of unanimous, or near-unanimous, recommendations that were adopted.
The adopted recommendations -from meeting No. 9- were the subject of my 8/8/07 blog.
This general subject was also discussed or rferenced in blogs from October 9, 12 & 13.
==================
Summary of Meeting on May 16, 2000 (7-9pm) in Mayor's Board Room
1. All present except A. Kanne & T. Bornemann (both excused)
2. Handouts:
• Committee Members List
• Agenda/Topics Outline
• Committee Objective/Chronology of Events
• 3-ring Binders
-Silver Beach Ordinance
-Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000
-Impervious Surface Article
-Reference Materials
* Surrey, B.C. Watercourse Setback Limits
* The Washington Lake Book (DOE Handbook)
* Cooperative Extension Bulletin #1744 "Your Yard & Water Quality"
* Cooperative Extension Bulletin #1786 "Effective Options for Farmers"
* Cooperative Extension/Master Gardeners Workshop Materials (4/22/2000)
+How your lawn & garden affect water quality
+Soils & fertilizers
+Lawns
+Alternatives to grass
+Managing pests
3. Self-introductions of participants & particular interests. Most live, own property or do business in Silver Beach Neighborhood. All are interested in preserving water quality and in contributing citizen input/flexibility into the SB Ordinance.
4. Brief review of handouts & binder materials:
• Main focus of this Task Force is the SB Ordinance itself, adding flexibility and options without changing its intent or goal, which is to arrest or reverse further degradation to water quality in measureable terms.
• The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000 (County/City/WD#10) is much more comprehensive, with 21 lake-wide goals. Three of these goals are top priorities for year 2000: Land Use/Urbanization, Stormwater Management (Non-point source) and Land Ownership. Many of the suggestions and ideas submitted during the SBO process are already being addressed by this plan. (see Binder Tab #2) The overall problem of protecting the lake is complex and interrelated, however all helpful actions, no matter how insignificant their effect may seem, are important to the overall solution. Eventually, the cumulative effect of all these practical changes will result in observable improvement in water quality trends and equitably spreading their costs and benefits among all watershed residents and users.
• The SB Ordinance directly addresses the Land Use/Urbanization goal for the City.
• The Stormwater Management goal is also being addressed this year as a separate matter, but will be positively affected by the SB Ordinance. Improved Stormwater Management, as mandated by Federal & State law, very important to water quality, is also amenable to specific performance standards which can be measured. A number of proven Best Managements Practices (BMP's) are available to help achieve Stormwater Management goals. These BMP's could also be used or referenced to add flexibility to the SB Ordinance.
• The Land Ownership goal is being addressed by another Citizens Task Force sponsored by the (The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000) Inter-jurisdictional Coordinating Team (ICT). The ICT is comprised of County Executive, Mayor of Bellingham & Water District #10 General Manager. This Citizens Task Force is now meeting twice each month to develop criteria for prioritizing areas for protection, options for preserving and enhancing high priority lands in natural/protected condition, and mechanisms for integrating these options with identified priority areas. This watershed-wide effort should be completed this year.
All Task Force Members are invited to contribute or recommend additional reference materials to the group. City will copy & distribute.
5. Agenda review:
Why do this? See Lake Plan policy statements. Commitment to agreed-to goals. SB Ordinance Citizens Task Force needs to make recommendations for Planning Commission & City Council consideration by August 15. 6-8 meetings to be scheduled @ 2-week intervals.
Rules of meetings- orderly & respectful (taped). Diverse group; variety of ideas from public; range of knowledge/backgrounds; reach consensus whenever possible; report all views.
Additional resources are available as required (MRSC, Internet, etc); use experience from other areas; avoid re-inventing the wheel; use most current info available.
Ideas:
• Tour of Lake Whatcom Watershed -see examples of good/bad practices (afternoon)
• NEMO slide presentation (20-40 slides) Non-point source Education for Municipal Officials
Subjects:
Map of Geographic areas: City Limits, Urban Growth Areas, Other Zoning Designations
SB Ordinance Topics: Allowed Uses; Density; Lot Coverage; Land Disturbance
Native vegetation - use to improve flexibility
Definitions & interpretations (Intent -vs- Literal meaning?)
Incentives (what's in it for me? - showcase examples)
Appeals (process)
Corrections/Enforcement (+/- Friendly/Firm/Fair)
All Task Force Members are invited to contribute or recommend ideas for presentations/tours to the group. City will arrange.
FOCUS: SB Ordinance itself -look at flexibility ideas without sacrificing basic goals.
"Emergency" didn't just happen; was the culmination of events built over time.
Recently, two reports contributed further toward triggering the SBO;
1. DOE's 303 (d) listing & other findings (mercury in fish, other high toxics levels)
2. Entranco's summary of accumulated lake monitoring data (now undergoing Peer Review).
The DOE 303 (d) listing for fecal coliform clearly signaled an opportunity for action by the impacted jurisdictions for immediate and effective action. The SBO is a step in this direction, applicable within the city limits. Possible beneficial effects elsewhere in watershed. Other actions may also be required in a step-wise progression to protect public health & safety. Especially with this warning, all jurisdictions have the responsibility to prevent a larger public problem from developing.
"Emergency" process is still a public process, just different sequence for prevention.
All recommendations from this Task Force will be seriously considered.
City commissioned new aerial photographs taken on 5/15/2000. These will update impervious area data and quantify it very accurately, enabling us to show the changes in growth and related impervious areas since 1950. Both a predictive & enforcement tool. Primary impervious surfaces are roads, roofs & driveways.
Since January when SBO was enacted, the city has already seen a benefit in reduced TSS (total Suspended Solids), using continuing WWU water studies.
Question: What does the City Council want from this Task Force? What would be most helpful?
Answer: No easy answers from us, we are mainly facilitating input from residents who expressed interest in adding flexibility to SBO. General idea is to trade-off some strict limits in return for BMP's. These meetings are to introduce & quantify public's ideas related to 4 parts of SBO. We recognize that education on this subject is essential, that's why resources are at your disposal and homework is recommended. Learning will greatly assist this effort.
Suggestion: Start at beginning and go thru SBO item by item.
Comment: Look at limits; ID flexibility; What are incentives +'s & -'s; Interpretations -what does it mean? (eg, if an existing home exceeds 2000 sqft, you might reallocate space by allowing 1 additional sqft of home footprint for each 2 sqft of impervious surface eliminated, etc); illustration of WWU Viking Solar Vehicle Models, each an improvement over prior models.
Comments:
Members get phone calls from neighbors asking for interpretations. Can driveway be finished, etc?
This group must understand the SBO, to define these answers/alternatives/tradeoffs for others.
Similar situation to Energy Code changes; big impacts to costs and styles. Over time people found ways to meet intent.
Question: Is there a model of a city, which has an ordinance like SBO?
Answer: Yes, the NEMO Impervious Surface article in the binder shows Olympia, WA as a very similar example, in their case, trying to protect a groundwater drinking water source. There are other examples in US as well; some work and some don't. Lacey, WA has a "zero-impact" ordinance which details "compensatory practices". While the intent is clear, this one seems to fail because it is infeasible to understand or follow in practice.
Comment: There are many factors, which impact the SBO goals
Response: Yes, all are non-point source contributions. These can be broadly categorized into Building Practices & Living Behaviors.
Comments: Another good info source is a 67-page booklet "Urbanization and Water Quality"; copies have been ordered for all members.
One recognized problem is making the public aware of our specific watershed problem, as distinguished from "generic" watersheds. Lake Whatcom is unique, has several beneficial uses, of which drinking water source is most important. Our problems are not the same as for Lake Washington, which is not used as a municipal water supply!
Big cities almost always have protected water supply reservoirs, which are off-limits to other uses. Many locations get their water from wells or streams. Not many use a lake that supports development. While really dirty water can be treated to make drinking water, this is costly. (eg Astronauts, Navy ships, Saudi Arabia) Also, other beneficial uses complicate this strategy. Lake Whatcom also supports aquatic life and recreation activities like swimming. These beneficial uses have their own requirements to remain healthy and sustainable. Fish need oxygen to live and clean spawning areas to reproduce naturally. Humans, particularly children, need clean water to avoid exposure to disease. The water treatment plant requires a certain quality of its raw water to avoid excessive treatment costs or more expensive treatment facilities.
In each of these cases, prevention is distinctly preferable to cleaning up after a problem happens and is certainly cheaper and safer to the public at large. That is why Bellingham's Comprehensive Plan prioritizes protection over treatment in managing Lake Whatcom and its watersheds. (see Lake Whatcom Plan, Appendix B: Goals & Policies, page 27)
Bottom line: We must be careful & practical.
Question: Why doesn't the SBO ban fertilizing lawns?
Answer: Good example of an individual Behavior problem, simple and easy to change, that would be very effective in meeting the intent of the SBO. It is a personal choice with measurable effects that would improve the nutrient loading problem in the lake. Phosphate has a noticeable influence down to levels of 5 ppb (parts per billion). It can be measured directly in run-off, estimated by windshield survey or mathematically and modeled.
Comments: This is a voluntary decision. Some hire lawn-care professionals. Who supervises them? This is a common problem. Gross over-fertilization has been reported and observed.
Question: SBO covers only city limits (2% of watershed), while Proposition #1 covered entire watershed. Will SBO coverage significantly help the problem?
Answer: SBO does cover only a small part of watershed, but it is in the most critical location, which showed greatest water quality degradation and close to city's water intake. There is mixing between the 3 Basins by at least 3 known mechanisms: SE to NW water flow; wind mixing between #1 & #2; internal siches & seasonal turnover.
SBO may influence the Urban Growth Area later. At minimum, it sets a good example.
Question: Do we know the lake's water balance & seasonal variations?
Answer: Yes, good information is available on flows from COB, hatchery & WD10 intakes, plus ~200 direct home intakes. Diversion is known, day by day.
Question: Wouldn't it help water quality in Basin #1 if the G-P intake were moved to Basin #1?
Answer: Yes, probably, but don't consider it as the solution to the whole problem. G-P would need to agree to this, consider capital costs of relocation and potential increased treatment costs.
Comments: City intake withdraws ~50 MMGPD from Basin #2. Screen, disinfect water before splitting out G-P flow of ~35 MMGPD, treat rest for drinking water use. Intake is 27 feet below full lake level, slightly above oxygen-depleted level. Max depth is 66 feet. Original intake in Basin #1 was built in 1895, lasted until 1922, was rebuilt. This is still used as trout hatchery intake. New city/G-P intake in Basin #2 went into service in 1941. This may have contributed to Basin #1 stagnation problem because of the changed flow characteristics. If G-P intake were relocated to deepest part of Basin #1, it would tend to purge it better. #2 & #3 mix more.
example ~Moses Lake flushing =remedial measure. Good idea to evaluate.
Question: Doesn't the Middle Nooksack Diversion impact flow & dilution?
Answer: Yes, there have already been seasonal reductions during last 2 years and this will probably continue. Diversion & withdrawal questions are being addressed now by the Lake Management Plan. Next phase is modeling these variables. Lake has long turnover time now; if diversion goes away this increases and makes stagnation/eutrophication problems worse. Moreover, it could necessitate greater water level fluctuations, likely to be unpopular with watershed/lakeside residents. It could also mean relocating the intake to Basin #3 at major expense. Notwithstanding the value of this info, we need to redirect our focus back to SBO.
Comment: Land use is the single most influential factor in lake water quality.
There is no possibility of increased water supply, although water demand will increase.
Comments:
1) Is "let G-P fix it" realistic?
2) Interested in knowing the whole menu of ideas, recognizing differences in member’s points of view & education.
3) Since time is limited, this exercise (2) is better done at home by individuals, to be shared with members via e-mail before the next meeting. (Agreed)
4) Others are also interested. friends call for input.
5) Outside SBO items, can pass ideas on to ICT/Lake Whatcom Program
6) Need to summarize all ideas for all to hear.
7) Agree to consolidate a list of ideas & pet peeves. (send to chair)
Ideas:
1) Consider the concept of "Impervious Equivalents" or similar term, as a measure for trade-offs & incentives.
examples:
-what incentives might be popular with existing homeowners to encourage their participation in retrofitting either appropriate individual BMPs or a regional stormwater system?
or,
what additional building footprint would be allowed in return for:
-agreeing to not disturbing existing native vegetation?
-replacing a paved patio with a slatted deck?
-using porous pavers instead of conventional asphalt?
2) Literature on various porous paving systems is available for reference. Perhaps a presentation by vendors would be of interest.
3) The idea of developing Bloedel-Donovan Park into an environmental demonstration area, showcasing BMPs and serving to educate/encourage lake-friendly behavior was recently advanced by the Whatcom County Cooperative Extension. This idea seems to have much merit and preliminary support, patterned after the very popular Hovander Homestead Park in Ferndale.
Since Public Information & Education is such a critically important component in coming to grips with an effective watershed-wide program, this appears to be a good example of how the city could lead by example. Hands-on demonstrations of BMPs, which native plants are effective and low maintenance, which fertilizing practices are most appropriate, how to properly use pesticides, picking up after your pet, several types of porous paving systems (drive-on & park-on), signs & displays, presentations & exhibits and plenty of volunteer opportunities.
Comments: The Horticultural Society & Master Gardeners could also be involved. Also important to have private parties participate with garden tours and the like, especially near the shoreline.
People relate to live examples; need to see & feel things to understand better.
Merit in considering 2 types of impervious surfaces? Yes, all sorts of physical strategies -even sod roofs as in Germany.
Many different education opportunities, however, Objective remains: SBO improvements.
OK to broaden scope to learn, but need to focus on SBO recommendations!
City Council has small reference library: BMP Design & Maintenance, Fundamentals of Urban Runoff Strategies, Global Cities Series (Examples), Monitoring Report, etc.
NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, May 30. 7-9pm in Mayor's Board Room
Homework: Read information in handouts & e-mail ideas & suggested discussion topics to all members to read before next meeting.
Meeting Dates:
Tuesday, May 30
Tuesday, June 13 (Board Room not available)
Tuesday, June 27
Tuesday, July 11 (Board Room not available)
Tuesday, July 25
Tuesday, August 8
Tuesday. August 15 (final recommendations deadline)
Silver Beach Ordinance Citizen's Task Force
Kimberly Barron
Terry Bornemann
Bill Bliss
Dan Cantrell
Tim Farris
Jan Hayes
Allena Kanne
Jeff Kenoyer
Mike Minge
Bay Renaud
Barbara Ryan
Chris Spens
John Watts
Myron Wlaznak
WARNING: The following information is LONG, boring to many, incomprehensible to others, and history that repeats itself!
==================
The Silver Beach Neighborhood recently debated adopting a list of policy measures to address the issue of protecting the Lake Whatcom Reservoir.
Many of the items on the list were recognizable as elements of earlier discussions during the deliberations on the City's 'Silver Beach Ordinance', designed in response to the Dept of Ecology's 303 (d) listing of the lake for fecal cliform and dissolved oxygen levels.
Some were adopted and incorporated into the Ordinance, while others were not for various reasons.
It may be useful to revisit those earlier discussions again as a reminder of what was considered during those initial eight public meetings, which resulted in a list of unanimous, or near-unanimous, recommendations that were adopted.
The adopted recommendations -from meeting No. 9- were the subject of my 8/8/07 blog.
This general subject was also discussed or rferenced in blogs from October 9, 12 & 13.
==================
Summary of Meeting on May 16, 2000 (7-9pm) in Mayor's Board Room
1. All present except A. Kanne & T. Bornemann (both excused)
2. Handouts:
• Committee Members List
• Agenda/Topics Outline
• Committee Objective/Chronology of Events
• 3-ring Binders
-Silver Beach Ordinance
-Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000
-Impervious Surface Article
-Reference Materials
* Surrey, B.C. Watercourse Setback Limits
* The Washington Lake Book (DOE Handbook)
* Cooperative Extension Bulletin #1744 "Your Yard & Water Quality"
* Cooperative Extension Bulletin #1786 "Effective Options for Farmers"
* Cooperative Extension/Master Gardeners Workshop Materials (4/22/2000)
+How your lawn & garden affect water quality
+Soils & fertilizers
+Lawns
+Alternatives to grass
+Managing pests
3. Self-introductions of participants & particular interests. Most live, own property or do business in Silver Beach Neighborhood. All are interested in preserving water quality and in contributing citizen input/flexibility into the SB Ordinance.
4. Brief review of handouts & binder materials:
• Main focus of this Task Force is the SB Ordinance itself, adding flexibility and options without changing its intent or goal, which is to arrest or reverse further degradation to water quality in measureable terms.
• The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000 (County/City/WD#10) is much more comprehensive, with 21 lake-wide goals. Three of these goals are top priorities for year 2000: Land Use/Urbanization, Stormwater Management (Non-point source) and Land Ownership. Many of the suggestions and ideas submitted during the SBO process are already being addressed by this plan. (see Binder Tab #2) The overall problem of protecting the lake is complex and interrelated, however all helpful actions, no matter how insignificant their effect may seem, are important to the overall solution. Eventually, the cumulative effect of all these practical changes will result in observable improvement in water quality trends and equitably spreading their costs and benefits among all watershed residents and users.
• The SB Ordinance directly addresses the Land Use/Urbanization goal for the City.
• The Stormwater Management goal is also being addressed this year as a separate matter, but will be positively affected by the SB Ordinance. Improved Stormwater Management, as mandated by Federal & State law, very important to water quality, is also amenable to specific performance standards which can be measured. A number of proven Best Managements Practices (BMP's) are available to help achieve Stormwater Management goals. These BMP's could also be used or referenced to add flexibility to the SB Ordinance.
• The Land Ownership goal is being addressed by another Citizens Task Force sponsored by the (The Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Plan 2000) Inter-jurisdictional Coordinating Team (ICT). The ICT is comprised of County Executive, Mayor of Bellingham & Water District #10 General Manager. This Citizens Task Force is now meeting twice each month to develop criteria for prioritizing areas for protection, options for preserving and enhancing high priority lands in natural/protected condition, and mechanisms for integrating these options with identified priority areas. This watershed-wide effort should be completed this year.
All Task Force Members are invited to contribute or recommend additional reference materials to the group. City will copy & distribute.
5. Agenda review:
Why do this? See Lake Plan policy statements. Commitment to agreed-to goals. SB Ordinance Citizens Task Force needs to make recommendations for Planning Commission & City Council consideration by August 15. 6-8 meetings to be scheduled @ 2-week intervals.
Rules of meetings- orderly & respectful (taped). Diverse group; variety of ideas from public; range of knowledge/backgrounds; reach consensus whenever possible; report all views.
Additional resources are available as required (MRSC, Internet, etc); use experience from other areas; avoid re-inventing the wheel; use most current info available.
Ideas:
• Tour of Lake Whatcom Watershed -see examples of good/bad practices (afternoon)
• NEMO slide presentation (20-40 slides) Non-point source Education for Municipal Officials
Subjects:
Map of Geographic areas: City Limits, Urban Growth Areas, Other Zoning Designations
SB Ordinance Topics: Allowed Uses; Density; Lot Coverage; Land Disturbance
Native vegetation - use to improve flexibility
Definitions & interpretations (Intent -vs- Literal meaning?)
Incentives (what's in it for me? - showcase examples)
Appeals (process)
Corrections/Enforcement (+/- Friendly/Firm/Fair)
All Task Force Members are invited to contribute or recommend ideas for presentations/tours to the group. City will arrange.
FOCUS: SB Ordinance itself -look at flexibility ideas without sacrificing basic goals.
"Emergency" didn't just happen; was the culmination of events built over time.
Recently, two reports contributed further toward triggering the SBO;
1. DOE's 303 (d) listing & other findings (mercury in fish, other high toxics levels)
2. Entranco's summary of accumulated lake monitoring data (now undergoing Peer Review).
The DOE 303 (d) listing for fecal coliform clearly signaled an opportunity for action by the impacted jurisdictions for immediate and effective action. The SBO is a step in this direction, applicable within the city limits. Possible beneficial effects elsewhere in watershed. Other actions may also be required in a step-wise progression to protect public health & safety. Especially with this warning, all jurisdictions have the responsibility to prevent a larger public problem from developing.
"Emergency" process is still a public process, just different sequence for prevention.
All recommendations from this Task Force will be seriously considered.
City commissioned new aerial photographs taken on 5/15/2000. These will update impervious area data and quantify it very accurately, enabling us to show the changes in growth and related impervious areas since 1950. Both a predictive & enforcement tool. Primary impervious surfaces are roads, roofs & driveways.
Since January when SBO was enacted, the city has already seen a benefit in reduced TSS (total Suspended Solids), using continuing WWU water studies.
Question: What does the City Council want from this Task Force? What would be most helpful?
Answer: No easy answers from us, we are mainly facilitating input from residents who expressed interest in adding flexibility to SBO. General idea is to trade-off some strict limits in return for BMP's. These meetings are to introduce & quantify public's ideas related to 4 parts of SBO. We recognize that education on this subject is essential, that's why resources are at your disposal and homework is recommended. Learning will greatly assist this effort.
Suggestion: Start at beginning and go thru SBO item by item.
Comment: Look at limits; ID flexibility; What are incentives +'s & -'s; Interpretations -what does it mean? (eg, if an existing home exceeds 2000 sqft, you might reallocate space by allowing 1 additional sqft of home footprint for each 2 sqft of impervious surface eliminated, etc); illustration of WWU Viking Solar Vehicle Models, each an improvement over prior models.
Comments:
Members get phone calls from neighbors asking for interpretations. Can driveway be finished, etc?
This group must understand the SBO, to define these answers/alternatives/tradeoffs for others.
Similar situation to Energy Code changes; big impacts to costs and styles. Over time people found ways to meet intent.
Question: Is there a model of a city, which has an ordinance like SBO?
Answer: Yes, the NEMO Impervious Surface article in the binder shows Olympia, WA as a very similar example, in their case, trying to protect a groundwater drinking water source. There are other examples in US as well; some work and some don't. Lacey, WA has a "zero-impact" ordinance which details "compensatory practices". While the intent is clear, this one seems to fail because it is infeasible to understand or follow in practice.
Comment: There are many factors, which impact the SBO goals
Response: Yes, all are non-point source contributions. These can be broadly categorized into Building Practices & Living Behaviors.
Comments: Another good info source is a 67-page booklet "Urbanization and Water Quality"; copies have been ordered for all members.
One recognized problem is making the public aware of our specific watershed problem, as distinguished from "generic" watersheds. Lake Whatcom is unique, has several beneficial uses, of which drinking water source is most important. Our problems are not the same as for Lake Washington, which is not used as a municipal water supply!
Big cities almost always have protected water supply reservoirs, which are off-limits to other uses. Many locations get their water from wells or streams. Not many use a lake that supports development. While really dirty water can be treated to make drinking water, this is costly. (eg Astronauts, Navy ships, Saudi Arabia) Also, other beneficial uses complicate this strategy. Lake Whatcom also supports aquatic life and recreation activities like swimming. These beneficial uses have their own requirements to remain healthy and sustainable. Fish need oxygen to live and clean spawning areas to reproduce naturally. Humans, particularly children, need clean water to avoid exposure to disease. The water treatment plant requires a certain quality of its raw water to avoid excessive treatment costs or more expensive treatment facilities.
In each of these cases, prevention is distinctly preferable to cleaning up after a problem happens and is certainly cheaper and safer to the public at large. That is why Bellingham's Comprehensive Plan prioritizes protection over treatment in managing Lake Whatcom and its watersheds. (see Lake Whatcom Plan, Appendix B: Goals & Policies, page 27)
Bottom line: We must be careful & practical.
Question: Why doesn't the SBO ban fertilizing lawns?
Answer: Good example of an individual Behavior problem, simple and easy to change, that would be very effective in meeting the intent of the SBO. It is a personal choice with measurable effects that would improve the nutrient loading problem in the lake. Phosphate has a noticeable influence down to levels of 5 ppb (parts per billion). It can be measured directly in run-off, estimated by windshield survey or mathematically and modeled.
Comments: This is a voluntary decision. Some hire lawn-care professionals. Who supervises them? This is a common problem. Gross over-fertilization has been reported and observed.
Question: SBO covers only city limits (2% of watershed), while Proposition #1 covered entire watershed. Will SBO coverage significantly help the problem?
Answer: SBO does cover only a small part of watershed, but it is in the most critical location, which showed greatest water quality degradation and close to city's water intake. There is mixing between the 3 Basins by at least 3 known mechanisms: SE to NW water flow; wind mixing between #1 & #2; internal siches & seasonal turnover.
SBO may influence the Urban Growth Area later. At minimum, it sets a good example.
Question: Do we know the lake's water balance & seasonal variations?
Answer: Yes, good information is available on flows from COB, hatchery & WD10 intakes, plus ~200 direct home intakes. Diversion is known, day by day.
Question: Wouldn't it help water quality in Basin #1 if the G-P intake were moved to Basin #1?
Answer: Yes, probably, but don't consider it as the solution to the whole problem. G-P would need to agree to this, consider capital costs of relocation and potential increased treatment costs.
Comments: City intake withdraws ~50 MMGPD from Basin #2. Screen, disinfect water before splitting out G-P flow of ~35 MMGPD, treat rest for drinking water use. Intake is 27 feet below full lake level, slightly above oxygen-depleted level. Max depth is 66 feet. Original intake in Basin #1 was built in 1895, lasted until 1922, was rebuilt. This is still used as trout hatchery intake. New city/G-P intake in Basin #2 went into service in 1941. This may have contributed to Basin #1 stagnation problem because of the changed flow characteristics. If G-P intake were relocated to deepest part of Basin #1, it would tend to purge it better. #2 & #3 mix more.
example ~Moses Lake flushing =remedial measure. Good idea to evaluate.
Question: Doesn't the Middle Nooksack Diversion impact flow & dilution?
Answer: Yes, there have already been seasonal reductions during last 2 years and this will probably continue. Diversion & withdrawal questions are being addressed now by the Lake Management Plan. Next phase is modeling these variables. Lake has long turnover time now; if diversion goes away this increases and makes stagnation/eutrophication problems worse. Moreover, it could necessitate greater water level fluctuations, likely to be unpopular with watershed/lakeside residents. It could also mean relocating the intake to Basin #3 at major expense. Notwithstanding the value of this info, we need to redirect our focus back to SBO.
Comment: Land use is the single most influential factor in lake water quality.
There is no possibility of increased water supply, although water demand will increase.
Comments:
1) Is "let G-P fix it" realistic?
2) Interested in knowing the whole menu of ideas, recognizing differences in member’s points of view & education.
3) Since time is limited, this exercise (2) is better done at home by individuals, to be shared with members via e-mail before the next meeting. (Agreed)
4) Others are also interested. friends call for input.
5) Outside SBO items, can pass ideas on to ICT/Lake Whatcom Program
6) Need to summarize all ideas for all to hear.
7) Agree to consolidate a list of ideas & pet peeves. (send to chair)
Ideas:
1) Consider the concept of "Impervious Equivalents" or similar term, as a measure for trade-offs & incentives.
examples:
-what incentives might be popular with existing homeowners to encourage their participation in retrofitting either appropriate individual BMPs or a regional stormwater system?
or,
what additional building footprint would be allowed in return for:
-agreeing to not disturbing existing native vegetation?
-replacing a paved patio with a slatted deck?
-using porous pavers instead of conventional asphalt?
2) Literature on various porous paving systems is available for reference. Perhaps a presentation by vendors would be of interest.
3) The idea of developing Bloedel-Donovan Park into an environmental demonstration area, showcasing BMPs and serving to educate/encourage lake-friendly behavior was recently advanced by the Whatcom County Cooperative Extension. This idea seems to have much merit and preliminary support, patterned after the very popular Hovander Homestead Park in Ferndale.
Since Public Information & Education is such a critically important component in coming to grips with an effective watershed-wide program, this appears to be a good example of how the city could lead by example. Hands-on demonstrations of BMPs, which native plants are effective and low maintenance, which fertilizing practices are most appropriate, how to properly use pesticides, picking up after your pet, several types of porous paving systems (drive-on & park-on), signs & displays, presentations & exhibits and plenty of volunteer opportunities.
Comments: The Horticultural Society & Master Gardeners could also be involved. Also important to have private parties participate with garden tours and the like, especially near the shoreline.
People relate to live examples; need to see & feel things to understand better.
Merit in considering 2 types of impervious surfaces? Yes, all sorts of physical strategies -even sod roofs as in Germany.
Many different education opportunities, however, Objective remains: SBO improvements.
OK to broaden scope to learn, but need to focus on SBO recommendations!
City Council has small reference library: BMP Design & Maintenance, Fundamentals of Urban Runoff Strategies, Global Cities Series (Examples), Monitoring Report, etc.
NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, May 30. 7-9pm in Mayor's Board Room
Homework: Read information in handouts & e-mail ideas & suggested discussion topics to all members to read before next meeting.
Meeting Dates:
Tuesday, May 30
Tuesday, June 13 (Board Room not available)
Tuesday, June 27
Tuesday, July 11 (Board Room not available)
Tuesday, July 25
Tuesday, August 8
Tuesday. August 15 (final recommendations deadline)
Silver Beach Ordinance Citizen's Task Force
Kimberly Barron
Terry Bornemann
Bill Bliss
Dan Cantrell
Tim Farris
Jan Hayes
Allena Kanne
Jeff Kenoyer
Mike Minge
Bay Renaud
Barbara Ryan
Chris Spens
John Watts
Myron Wlaznak
Sunday, December 2, 2007
'Making Plays': Exercises in Frustration
===================
Speed is not your fastest, but your slowest man. No back can run faster than his interference. ~Jock Sutherland
He was the only man I ever saw who ran his own interference.
~Steve Owen, about Bronko Nagurski
The Rose Bowl is the only bowl I've ever seen that I didn't have to clean. ~Erma Bombeck
The reason women don't play football is because eleven of them would never wear the same outfit in public. ~Phyllis Diller
Football combines the two worst things about America: it is violence punctuated by committee meetings. ~George F. Will
===================
The Romans used to be entertained by gladiators and wild animals fighting and being killed in a public arena.
To them, that was sport. At least to the decadent rulers and hangers-on who valued strength and brutality.
Was that a contributing cause to the decline of that Empire?
What about today's gladiators?
I'm entertained by them, too, but only up to a point.
That point was reached sometime earlier today, when I experienced such butt-weariness that I gave in to the jaded practice of turning thumbs down to that icon of consumerism and excess, my over-worked TV.
But there were some highlights that were exciting, like two underdogs defeating teams that might have otherwise played each other in the BCS Championship Game.
Then, again today the Seahawks snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, after demonstrating such ineptitude that it was only surpassed by the Eagles with great effort.
That reminded me of the following quote that seems so appropo:
"You don't have to win it, just don't lose it." - Ray Lewis, Baltimore linebacker to quarterback, Elvis Grbac
---------------------
After that intro, I bet you thought this was about football, didn’t you?
In a sense it is, but only as an analogy to politics and real life.
Fitness, strategy, talent, motivation are all for naught unless you score.
Only a few actually play the game, with most participating as spectators.
The possibility of ‘instant replay’ does exist, however usually the officials enforce the law accurately.
In a football game, everyone knows the rules and the object, which is to win – meaning scoring more points than your opponent.
How many games have you watched that were settled in the last few seconds, or on the basis of one team just making fewer mistakes?
After the game, players are sore, but usually imbued with some sense of accomplishment or ‘thrill of victory’, or disappointment – the 'agony of defeat'.
So it is in politics, either after a campaign or when an issue is finally resolved, at least in part.
Yes, politics is a competitive sport that can be rewarding, but bruising.
One win means nothing until the next game is played.
The team that wins does not have long to brag or rest on its laurels!
The season is brutal, long and relentlessly demanding.
The rewards are often fleeting, but the sacrifices are lasting in nature.
Why would anyone want to play such a sport?
Because -both metaphorically and in actuality- we have no choice.
The best we can do is to accept the reality of knowing that constant attention and effort is required, and commit to prepare ourselves as best we can for it.
Win, lose or draw, politics –like football- depends on preparation, people and chance.
And -unlike football- the game never ends!
Now, that’s a sobering thought, isn’t it?
==================
Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work. - VINCE LOMBARDI
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score? - VINCE LOMBARDI
"Setting a goal is not the main thing. It is deciding how you will go about achieving it and staying with that plan. "- Tom Landry
---------------------
ACC Mascots
---------------------
Rabid Fans
---------------------
More Normal Fans
---------------------
Cheerleaders
---------------------
Speed is not your fastest, but your slowest man. No back can run faster than his interference. ~Jock Sutherland
He was the only man I ever saw who ran his own interference.
~Steve Owen, about Bronko Nagurski
The Rose Bowl is the only bowl I've ever seen that I didn't have to clean. ~Erma Bombeck
The reason women don't play football is because eleven of them would never wear the same outfit in public. ~Phyllis Diller
Football combines the two worst things about America: it is violence punctuated by committee meetings. ~George F. Will
===================
The Romans used to be entertained by gladiators and wild animals fighting and being killed in a public arena.
To them, that was sport. At least to the decadent rulers and hangers-on who valued strength and brutality.
Was that a contributing cause to the decline of that Empire?
What about today's gladiators?
I'm entertained by them, too, but only up to a point.
That point was reached sometime earlier today, when I experienced such butt-weariness that I gave in to the jaded practice of turning thumbs down to that icon of consumerism and excess, my over-worked TV.
But there were some highlights that were exciting, like two underdogs defeating teams that might have otherwise played each other in the BCS Championship Game.
Then, again today the Seahawks snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, after demonstrating such ineptitude that it was only surpassed by the Eagles with great effort.
That reminded me of the following quote that seems so appropo:
"You don't have to win it, just don't lose it." - Ray Lewis, Baltimore linebacker to quarterback, Elvis Grbac
---------------------
After that intro, I bet you thought this was about football, didn’t you?
In a sense it is, but only as an analogy to politics and real life.
Fitness, strategy, talent, motivation are all for naught unless you score.
Only a few actually play the game, with most participating as spectators.
The possibility of ‘instant replay’ does exist, however usually the officials enforce the law accurately.
In a football game, everyone knows the rules and the object, which is to win – meaning scoring more points than your opponent.
How many games have you watched that were settled in the last few seconds, or on the basis of one team just making fewer mistakes?
After the game, players are sore, but usually imbued with some sense of accomplishment or ‘thrill of victory’, or disappointment – the 'agony of defeat'.
So it is in politics, either after a campaign or when an issue is finally resolved, at least in part.
Yes, politics is a competitive sport that can be rewarding, but bruising.
One win means nothing until the next game is played.
The team that wins does not have long to brag or rest on its laurels!
The season is brutal, long and relentlessly demanding.
The rewards are often fleeting, but the sacrifices are lasting in nature.
Why would anyone want to play such a sport?
Because -both metaphorically and in actuality- we have no choice.
The best we can do is to accept the reality of knowing that constant attention and effort is required, and commit to prepare ourselves as best we can for it.
Win, lose or draw, politics –like football- depends on preparation, people and chance.
And -unlike football- the game never ends!
Now, that’s a sobering thought, isn’t it?
==================
Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work. - VINCE LOMBARDI
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score? - VINCE LOMBARDI
"Setting a goal is not the main thing. It is deciding how you will go about achieving it and staying with that plan. "- Tom Landry
---------------------
ACC Mascots
---------------------
Rabid Fans
---------------------
More Normal Fans
---------------------
Cheerleaders
---------------------
Saturday, December 1, 2007
B&O Tax News: The Missing Headline
===============
"The purse of the people is the real seat of sensibility. Let it be drawn upon largely, and they will then listen to truths which could not excite them through any other organ." -- Thomas Jefferson
"The taxpayer: That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination." - Ronald Reagan
Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon. - Winston Churchill
===============
The Herald has apparently missed reporting the equivalent of 'Man Bites Dog'.
Normally, such news would justify headline treatment.
And, the missed story was already printed in plain sight, on page 1 of the City Council Packet for its December 3 meeting.
It isn't a very long or complicated story either, so those who prefer sound bytes wouldn't likely feel too put off by it.
Why wasn't this story reported?
It really didn't have to be a headline, but I saw no mention of it at all.
Maybe that's because I stopped having the Herald delivered months ago.
Even so, its possible to review most things the Herald prints on-line, if you're willing to wait for its exceptionally slow loading time.
Today, I wasn't, so maybe I missed it.
If it was reported, sorry about this piece.
---------------
Here, without further ado, is the missed headline:
[drumroll]
"CITY REDUCES BUSINESS & OCCUPATION TAXES BY $890,000 FOR 2008!"
OK, after seeing it in print, suddenly I know why that headline wasn't printed.
It was good news!
Everyone knows that good news doesn't sell newspapers.
And the Herald is a business, with profit as its first motive
---------------
But, if that story had been reported, here's the SHORT story that might have appeared:
Local businesses can expect further reductions in the amount of B&O taxes they pay to the City for operating here. Based on a survey by the State Dept of Revenue in 2004, the City of Bellingham estimates a reduction of $890 thousand in B&O tax revenue in 2008 resulting from changes to the allocation and apportionment provisions included in the revision to the B&O tax code.
B&O taxes have been a controversial topic for years as businesses have seen them as excessive, difficult to understand and unfair because businesses located outside City Limits aren't subject to them. This latter point also acts as a financial disincentive to businesses locating within the City, thereby contributing to sprawl and under-recovery of the costs of infrastructure and essential services.
The $890 thousand estimated reduction in B&O taxes not only applies to 2008 General Fund revenues, but is a permanent reduction that increases in value over time. That amount is equivalent to nearly 5 & 1/4 percent in current Property taxes. The City Council can only raise Property tax by 1% a year without a public vote.
---------------
A somewhat LONGER version might add the following:
In the City's 2008 budget B&O tax provides these roles:
• It is a more stable source of revenue than Sales Tax
• It enables the City to provide services & infrastructure to support industry
• It provides $12.3 million or 16% of the General Fund revenue
Business categories that are exempt from B&O tax include Medical Services and Manufacturing.
---------------
Want more?
An even LONGER version would include this additional information:
From the Agenda Bill Summary Statement [partial]:
In December 2002, Council adopted a new B&O Tax Code effective April 1, 2003 based on a model ordinance prepared by AWC [Association of Washington Cities] with participation of several B&O cities, including Bellingham.
In December 2004, Council amended the B&O tax code as required by Engrossed House Bill 2030 (EHB 2030) which required adoption of the model ordinance and additional requirements effective January 1, 2005. EHB 2030 also included in Section 13 a provision regarding the allocation and apportionment of gross income for B&O tax purposes that does not take effect until January 1, 2008.
The purpose of this ordinance is to enact Section 13 of EHB 2030 and to incorporate other revisions to the Model Ordinance to comply with the allocation and apportionment provisions required in the law and in response to the business community.
---------------
Uh oh!
That last bit shows that this is not really 'new' news at all!
It's old news, all the way back to 2002 and then 2004. That's way before some reporters even lived here, and much longer than anyone can reasonably be expected to remember.
Even the Budget Advisory Committee might be surprised, which also sought reductions for the B&O tax.
---------------
To make the story even LONGER, let's also add the fact that the October 2007 Financial Report shows that B&O taxes collected year-to-date were 8.3% more than last year at the same juncture in time. That amounts to about $820 thousand more than the 2006 YTD total collected.
If that trend continues through year-end, another $164 thousand will be collected for a total of an additional $984 thousand for 2007.
Maybe that's also good news, because it shows a healthy and growing local economy?
OK, yet another reason not to get news coverage.
But, it seems even with the $890 thousand reduction, the City will still be ahead of 2007 B&O tax revenues by about $94 thousand, providing the same collection rate continues.
I guess that's even more good news, certainly better than having to face a major revenue reduction.
So, it looks like this 'win-win-win' scenario provides not one, not two, but three reasons not to report it!
Maybe the Herald got it right after all.
No story here worth printing.
===============
"Those who would give up quality of their environment to purchase a little temporary 'good business climate' deserve, and will get, neither."
- Benjamin Franklin
When it is a question of money, everybody is of the same religion. --Voltaire
Virtue has never been as respectable as money. --Mark Twain
===============
"The purse of the people is the real seat of sensibility. Let it be drawn upon largely, and they will then listen to truths which could not excite them through any other organ." -- Thomas Jefferson
"The taxpayer: That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination." - Ronald Reagan
Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon. - Winston Churchill
===============
The Herald has apparently missed reporting the equivalent of 'Man Bites Dog'.
Normally, such news would justify headline treatment.
And, the missed story was already printed in plain sight, on page 1 of the City Council Packet for its December 3 meeting.
It isn't a very long or complicated story either, so those who prefer sound bytes wouldn't likely feel too put off by it.
Why wasn't this story reported?
It really didn't have to be a headline, but I saw no mention of it at all.
Maybe that's because I stopped having the Herald delivered months ago.
Even so, its possible to review most things the Herald prints on-line, if you're willing to wait for its exceptionally slow loading time.
Today, I wasn't, so maybe I missed it.
If it was reported, sorry about this piece.
---------------
Here, without further ado, is the missed headline:
[drumroll]
"CITY REDUCES BUSINESS & OCCUPATION TAXES BY $890,000 FOR 2008!"
OK, after seeing it in print, suddenly I know why that headline wasn't printed.
It was good news!
Everyone knows that good news doesn't sell newspapers.
And the Herald is a business, with profit as its first motive
---------------
But, if that story had been reported, here's the SHORT story that might have appeared:
Local businesses can expect further reductions in the amount of B&O taxes they pay to the City for operating here. Based on a survey by the State Dept of Revenue in 2004, the City of Bellingham estimates a reduction of $890 thousand in B&O tax revenue in 2008 resulting from changes to the allocation and apportionment provisions included in the revision to the B&O tax code.
B&O taxes have been a controversial topic for years as businesses have seen them as excessive, difficult to understand and unfair because businesses located outside City Limits aren't subject to them. This latter point also acts as a financial disincentive to businesses locating within the City, thereby contributing to sprawl and under-recovery of the costs of infrastructure and essential services.
The $890 thousand estimated reduction in B&O taxes not only applies to 2008 General Fund revenues, but is a permanent reduction that increases in value over time. That amount is equivalent to nearly 5 & 1/4 percent in current Property taxes. The City Council can only raise Property tax by 1% a year without a public vote.
---------------
A somewhat LONGER version might add the following:
In the City's 2008 budget B&O tax provides these roles:
• It is a more stable source of revenue than Sales Tax
• It enables the City to provide services & infrastructure to support industry
• It provides $12.3 million or 16% of the General Fund revenue
Business categories that are exempt from B&O tax include Medical Services and Manufacturing.
---------------
Want more?
An even LONGER version would include this additional information:
From the Agenda Bill Summary Statement [partial]:
In December 2002, Council adopted a new B&O Tax Code effective April 1, 2003 based on a model ordinance prepared by AWC [Association of Washington Cities] with participation of several B&O cities, including Bellingham.
In December 2004, Council amended the B&O tax code as required by Engrossed House Bill 2030 (EHB 2030) which required adoption of the model ordinance and additional requirements effective January 1, 2005. EHB 2030 also included in Section 13 a provision regarding the allocation and apportionment of gross income for B&O tax purposes that does not take effect until January 1, 2008.
The purpose of this ordinance is to enact Section 13 of EHB 2030 and to incorporate other revisions to the Model Ordinance to comply with the allocation and apportionment provisions required in the law and in response to the business community.
---------------
Uh oh!
That last bit shows that this is not really 'new' news at all!
It's old news, all the way back to 2002 and then 2004. That's way before some reporters even lived here, and much longer than anyone can reasonably be expected to remember.
Even the Budget Advisory Committee might be surprised, which also sought reductions for the B&O tax.
---------------
To make the story even LONGER, let's also add the fact that the October 2007 Financial Report shows that B&O taxes collected year-to-date were 8.3% more than last year at the same juncture in time. That amounts to about $820 thousand more than the 2006 YTD total collected.
If that trend continues through year-end, another $164 thousand will be collected for a total of an additional $984 thousand for 2007.
Maybe that's also good news, because it shows a healthy and growing local economy?
OK, yet another reason not to get news coverage.
But, it seems even with the $890 thousand reduction, the City will still be ahead of 2007 B&O tax revenues by about $94 thousand, providing the same collection rate continues.
I guess that's even more good news, certainly better than having to face a major revenue reduction.
So, it looks like this 'win-win-win' scenario provides not one, not two, but three reasons not to report it!
Maybe the Herald got it right after all.
No story here worth printing.
===============
"Those who would give up quality of their environment to purchase a little temporary 'good business climate' deserve, and will get, neither."
- Benjamin Franklin
When it is a question of money, everybody is of the same religion. --Voltaire
Virtue has never been as respectable as money. --Mark Twain
===============
Friday, November 30, 2007
Growth: Following A Predetermined Path to A Foregone Conclusion
-----------------------
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Demagoguery beats data in making public policy."
- US House of Representatives Majority Leader
==================
Warning: If you are adverse to reading something longer than a few sound bytes, you will not be able to complete this blog at one sitting.
==================
I thought that disclaimer might help those who don't have the time or attention span to take on this writing all at one time.
And, I know there are folks out there who fit that description!
Why, just today, a reporter linked to yesterday's blog with the warning that it was 'long', as is 'usual' with my submittals.
A week or so ago, I got a similar response from a member of the County Planning Commission, who had e-mailed to ask me what I meant by 'reducing uncertainty' in growth planning.
In response I sent him a link to blog on that subject, to which he complained it was 'too long' and he didn't have time to read it!
Obviously, there is a perceived difference is how 'long' an article must be to cover any given subject.
Running the risk of being called 'sexist' or worse, I once heard that a speech -or a writing- should be like a woman's skirt; long enough to cover the subject, but short enough to arouse interest.
Let me state again for the record, the object of this blog is more about the former than the latter.
It is about providing some background, facts and reasoning on issues that have already attracted attention.
It is written for those who wish to know more, not less.
It is written to demonstrate the basis upon which my conclusions and opinions are based.
That's it.
I'm not trying to become famous, controversial, witty, entertaining or difficult; I am merely trying to communicate what I know and have come to believe as a result of serious study, reflection and resulting decision-making, that might be of interest to others.
Of course, this blog also serves as a place I can record and store information for future reference, kinda like an electronic filing system.
If folks don't want to rummage through my files, that's OK with me.
Hope this is clearer now, because I don't plan to mention it again.
If you still want to read more, maybe just reading between the dashed divisions at one sitting will help.
I'll try to make them a little closer together.
-----------------------
Meantime, the drumbeats continue, leading up to the Whatcom County Council's decision expected following its Dec 4 meeting.
'Sprawl or Infill' are the false choices being offered, despite the City's EIS that concluded some of each was necessary if the City is to accommodate the 51.4% of the growth projected by 2022.
Let's see, the City's 51.4% equates to 31,601 new people
So, if the City agreed to accept new population proportional to its existing share of 37%, it would only need to accommodate about 22,748 new people, which would be doable by infill alone.
That is certainly an option, and it would be much easier to accomplish.
So why not just do that, you might ask?
Well, I think the City may be forced to do that, depending upon what the County decides, just to remain honest about what is likely possible to achieve.
But, initially, the thought was to take a larger proportion -if possible- to further the goal of densifying existing urban areas, of which Bellingham is clearly the largest.
That goal was always ambitious, but it was undertaken in a good faith effort.
-----------------------
But, that goal was undertaken before the City decided to require annexation before extending water & sewer utilities.
The County didn't like that, because it reduced County revenue from sprawl in the UGA.
That goal was also set before some of the people who now represent the County on the Planning Commission and Council were on board and paying attention.
That goal was also set at a time when a bunch of former County Planners were still working for the County.
Of course, most of them are now gone and unavailable for consultation with the current decision-makers.
But now is the time the growth decision will be made, so recent history has little role to play.
Instead, opinions based on data-free analysis are seen as more appropriate.
I think that approach is a one-way ticket to disaster.
Under the circumstances, its hard to determine whether ignorance or arrogance is predominant in the rhetoric being heard.
At a minimum, a lack of consistency, good faith, common sense, and decent leadership is clearly lacking.
And, I don't really care whether the recommendations given to the County by the City are followed or not!
Except, I do resent the monumental waste of time in trying to arrive at a growth management plan that makes sense.
-----------------------
I have absolutely no financial interest either way, except if unnecessary sprawl is allowed by County action, I will have to pay for it along with every other citizen of Whatcom County!
Those impacts will likely take time to be felt, so they won't be clearly linked to current actions -meaning current decision-makers won't be held accountable.
And, those costs will undoubtedly include significant legal costs -the absolute epitomy of avoidable waste.
That bothers me a lot!
It bothers me that the County decision-makers don't seem to realize the true importance of the decisions they are about to make.
They don't realize it because they seem to lack the curiosity, time, expert advice and long term vision necessary to make a wise decision.
But, then all those things do take time, don't they?
Maybe even a long time.
That means some folks won't want to read about it, because it can't be covered in short sound bytes!
-----------------------
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
"You can't teach what you don't know, and you can't lead where you won't go"
- Jesse Jackson
"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." – Samuel Johnson
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." -Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Robert Louis Stevenson once said that politics is perhaps the only profession for which no preparation is considered necessary. It was true then -- it's true now.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Demagoguery beats data in making public policy."
- US House of Representatives Majority Leader
==================
Warning: If you are adverse to reading something longer than a few sound bytes, you will not be able to complete this blog at one sitting.
==================
I thought that disclaimer might help those who don't have the time or attention span to take on this writing all at one time.
And, I know there are folks out there who fit that description!
Why, just today, a reporter linked to yesterday's blog with the warning that it was 'long', as is 'usual' with my submittals.
A week or so ago, I got a similar response from a member of the County Planning Commission, who had e-mailed to ask me what I meant by 'reducing uncertainty' in growth planning.
In response I sent him a link to blog on that subject, to which he complained it was 'too long' and he didn't have time to read it!
Obviously, there is a perceived difference is how 'long' an article must be to cover any given subject.
Running the risk of being called 'sexist' or worse, I once heard that a speech -or a writing- should be like a woman's skirt; long enough to cover the subject, but short enough to arouse interest.
Let me state again for the record, the object of this blog is more about the former than the latter.
It is about providing some background, facts and reasoning on issues that have already attracted attention.
It is written for those who wish to know more, not less.
It is written to demonstrate the basis upon which my conclusions and opinions are based.
That's it.
I'm not trying to become famous, controversial, witty, entertaining or difficult; I am merely trying to communicate what I know and have come to believe as a result of serious study, reflection and resulting decision-making, that might be of interest to others.
Of course, this blog also serves as a place I can record and store information for future reference, kinda like an electronic filing system.
If folks don't want to rummage through my files, that's OK with me.
Hope this is clearer now, because I don't plan to mention it again.
If you still want to read more, maybe just reading between the dashed divisions at one sitting will help.
I'll try to make them a little closer together.
-----------------------
Meantime, the drumbeats continue, leading up to the Whatcom County Council's decision expected following its Dec 4 meeting.
'Sprawl or Infill' are the false choices being offered, despite the City's EIS that concluded some of each was necessary if the City is to accommodate the 51.4% of the growth projected by 2022.
Let's see, the City's 51.4% equates to 31,601 new people
So, if the City agreed to accept new population proportional to its existing share of 37%, it would only need to accommodate about 22,748 new people, which would be doable by infill alone.
That is certainly an option, and it would be much easier to accomplish.
So why not just do that, you might ask?
Well, I think the City may be forced to do that, depending upon what the County decides, just to remain honest about what is likely possible to achieve.
But, initially, the thought was to take a larger proportion -if possible- to further the goal of densifying existing urban areas, of which Bellingham is clearly the largest.
That goal was always ambitious, but it was undertaken in a good faith effort.
-----------------------
But, that goal was undertaken before the City decided to require annexation before extending water & sewer utilities.
The County didn't like that, because it reduced County revenue from sprawl in the UGA.
That goal was also set before some of the people who now represent the County on the Planning Commission and Council were on board and paying attention.
That goal was also set at a time when a bunch of former County Planners were still working for the County.
Of course, most of them are now gone and unavailable for consultation with the current decision-makers.
But now is the time the growth decision will be made, so recent history has little role to play.
Instead, opinions based on data-free analysis are seen as more appropriate.
I think that approach is a one-way ticket to disaster.
Under the circumstances, its hard to determine whether ignorance or arrogance is predominant in the rhetoric being heard.
At a minimum, a lack of consistency, good faith, common sense, and decent leadership is clearly lacking.
And, I don't really care whether the recommendations given to the County by the City are followed or not!
Except, I do resent the monumental waste of time in trying to arrive at a growth management plan that makes sense.
-----------------------
I have absolutely no financial interest either way, except if unnecessary sprawl is allowed by County action, I will have to pay for it along with every other citizen of Whatcom County!
Those impacts will likely take time to be felt, so they won't be clearly linked to current actions -meaning current decision-makers won't be held accountable.
And, those costs will undoubtedly include significant legal costs -the absolute epitomy of avoidable waste.
That bothers me a lot!
It bothers me that the County decision-makers don't seem to realize the true importance of the decisions they are about to make.
They don't realize it because they seem to lack the curiosity, time, expert advice and long term vision necessary to make a wise decision.
But, then all those things do take time, don't they?
Maybe even a long time.
That means some folks won't want to read about it, because it can't be covered in short sound bytes!
-----------------------
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
"You can't teach what you don't know, and you can't lead where you won't go"
- Jesse Jackson
"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." – Samuel Johnson
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." -Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Robert Louis Stevenson once said that politics is perhaps the only profession for which no preparation is considered necessary. It was true then -- it's true now.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.
==================
"If we are to solve the problems that plague us, our thinking must evolve beyond the level we were using when we created those problems in the first place."--Albert Einstein
'Always tell the truth. That way you can remember what you said.'
- Mark Twain
Dijon vu - the same mustard as before.
'To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.'
-- Abraham Lincoln
==================
I am reprinting today's BELLINGHAM HERALD 'OUR VIEW', which pontificates the following:
"City should bow to county on growth-area boundaries
It is ridiculous that Bellingham City Council and Whatcom County Council couldn’t negotiate an agreement to solve their impasse over the size of the city’s future growth areas.
Bellingham’s comprehensive plan calls for adding 2,128 acres to the city’s urban growth area, an area outside the current city limits that would eventually be annexed into town and receive city services. The County Council is responsible for the countywide growth plans and believes Bellingham’s planned expansion is much too big. The county suggested that only 250 acres near King and Queen mountains are needed in Bellingham’s growth area.
After the county made its suggestion, the two groups talked of working together for a compromise both sides could support. The thought was that it would be better if the councils spoke with a single voice, especially with the possibility that someone might appeal the plans saying they were not completed correctly.
The County Council invited the City Council to a joint meeting to discuss the possibilities, but City Council members refused. Some of them were reportedly upset that the County Council told its staff not to negotiate during meetings with city staff and to leave the negotiating only to council members.
We’re not sure why the two councils ended up not being able to get along. But we’re certain they should be able to do so. It requires maturity and a desire to put the needs of the community ahead of your own emotions. Those are both traits we would like to think all of our elected officials possess.
It should come as no surprise to regular readers of our editorials that we support the county’s plans to limit Bellingham expansion. The city has proposed more sprawl than is necessary to deal with potential population growth.
Sprawl outside the current city limits should be resisted wherever possible. City Council members should recognize this and support the county’s plan."
===================
As you might expect there were several comments posted in response to this editorial.
These are not reprinted here, but the one I submitted is shown below
===================
" It is not at all surprising that the Herald has issued an opinion on this subject.
What is surprising is the apparent lack of understanding of what has happened and what will happen.
There is no question about the County's right to make the final determination, because that is set by law.
What is in question is whether the County has any hard information that indicates the City has the ability to accept all the growth it offered to accept, without sufficient new UGA land supply.
Here, the key thing to remember is the growth projections are mandated by the State, with the County responsible for adopting a final number and apportioning it among the various municipalities, including its own unincorporated areas.
All that has been done by the City is to spend almost 4 years trying to determine where its alloted growth can and will occur. This exercise involved an Environmental Impact Study from which it was found that a combination of infill AND new UGA land supply would be required to achieve this goal.
Further, based upon history and best ideas, the City determined it needed about 1400 additional acres from the 2200 acres currently included in the County-approved '5-year Review Areas'.
I believe this determination was done as fairly and accurately as possible, because I sat through the entire proceeding. No one did from the Herald or the County! And neither of those organizations has undertaken the effort required to really understand how the City's estimate of land supply shortfall was determined.
It's OK to wish for something, and we all do it sometimes. But, to challenge careful work with nothing more than wishful thinking is the epitomy of hypocrisy!
No Joint Council meeting is able to simply negotiate away these results! Instead, the County needs to make its own determination, using the City's input - which has already been given in writing. There are distinct choices the County alone must make. If those choices are undertaken in good faith of the City's efforts, there should be no substantial problem.
If there are wide differences, the City must examine its commitment to a goal that cannot be reasonably reached. That's it!
No municipality should be required to accept something it just cannot do, whether it is growth related or otherwise. Failing a reasonable decision by the County to either (a) upzone its UGA to higher a MINIMUM density, (b) allow the City to use it's planning rules & regulations in the UGA, or (c) grant more UGA lands to the City -from the 5-year Review Areas, the City's only remaining choice will be to adjust the amount of growth it agrees to take to more closely fit the reality of land supply.
That is how I see it and I believe how the situation may be mitigated. Tampering with safety factors is better done by removing the layers of uncertainty that are curently inherent in the GMA land supply planning process.
Please notice I am using my own name here, not initials or pseudonyms. And, I have been consistent in these views ever since I understood the dynamics at work. Political dynamics are everyone's individual choice; I prefer to determine the facts first so that my political opinion has something solid under it as a foundation.
I hope this is adequate to explain a complicated issue in a few short paragraphs. Sound bytes don't do the job!
BTW, if the City is unable to accommodate the 51.4% of County growth its projections are based upon, where do you imagine it will go?
If you guessed rural sprawl, you'd be correct!"
John Watts | 11.29.07 - 11:29 am | #
====================
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism.- Winston Churchill
They are decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent. - Winston Churchill
====================
"If we are to solve the problems that plague us, our thinking must evolve beyond the level we were using when we created those problems in the first place."--Albert Einstein
'Always tell the truth. That way you can remember what you said.'
- Mark Twain
Dijon vu - the same mustard as before.
'To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.'
-- Abraham Lincoln
==================
I am reprinting today's BELLINGHAM HERALD 'OUR VIEW', which pontificates the following:
"City should bow to county on growth-area boundaries
It is ridiculous that Bellingham City Council and Whatcom County Council couldn’t negotiate an agreement to solve their impasse over the size of the city’s future growth areas.
Bellingham’s comprehensive plan calls for adding 2,128 acres to the city’s urban growth area, an area outside the current city limits that would eventually be annexed into town and receive city services. The County Council is responsible for the countywide growth plans and believes Bellingham’s planned expansion is much too big. The county suggested that only 250 acres near King and Queen mountains are needed in Bellingham’s growth area.
After the county made its suggestion, the two groups talked of working together for a compromise both sides could support. The thought was that it would be better if the councils spoke with a single voice, especially with the possibility that someone might appeal the plans saying they were not completed correctly.
The County Council invited the City Council to a joint meeting to discuss the possibilities, but City Council members refused. Some of them were reportedly upset that the County Council told its staff not to negotiate during meetings with city staff and to leave the negotiating only to council members.
We’re not sure why the two councils ended up not being able to get along. But we’re certain they should be able to do so. It requires maturity and a desire to put the needs of the community ahead of your own emotions. Those are both traits we would like to think all of our elected officials possess.
It should come as no surprise to regular readers of our editorials that we support the county’s plans to limit Bellingham expansion. The city has proposed more sprawl than is necessary to deal with potential population growth.
Sprawl outside the current city limits should be resisted wherever possible. City Council members should recognize this and support the county’s plan."
===================
As you might expect there were several comments posted in response to this editorial.
These are not reprinted here, but the one I submitted is shown below
===================
" It is not at all surprising that the Herald has issued an opinion on this subject.
What is surprising is the apparent lack of understanding of what has happened and what will happen.
There is no question about the County's right to make the final determination, because that is set by law.
What is in question is whether the County has any hard information that indicates the City has the ability to accept all the growth it offered to accept, without sufficient new UGA land supply.
Here, the key thing to remember is the growth projections are mandated by the State, with the County responsible for adopting a final number and apportioning it among the various municipalities, including its own unincorporated areas.
All that has been done by the City is to spend almost 4 years trying to determine where its alloted growth can and will occur. This exercise involved an Environmental Impact Study from which it was found that a combination of infill AND new UGA land supply would be required to achieve this goal.
Further, based upon history and best ideas, the City determined it needed about 1400 additional acres from the 2200 acres currently included in the County-approved '5-year Review Areas'.
I believe this determination was done as fairly and accurately as possible, because I sat through the entire proceeding. No one did from the Herald or the County! And neither of those organizations has undertaken the effort required to really understand how the City's estimate of land supply shortfall was determined.
It's OK to wish for something, and we all do it sometimes. But, to challenge careful work with nothing more than wishful thinking is the epitomy of hypocrisy!
No Joint Council meeting is able to simply negotiate away these results! Instead, the County needs to make its own determination, using the City's input - which has already been given in writing. There are distinct choices the County alone must make. If those choices are undertaken in good faith of the City's efforts, there should be no substantial problem.
If there are wide differences, the City must examine its commitment to a goal that cannot be reasonably reached. That's it!
No municipality should be required to accept something it just cannot do, whether it is growth related or otherwise. Failing a reasonable decision by the County to either (a) upzone its UGA to higher a MINIMUM density, (b) allow the City to use it's planning rules & regulations in the UGA, or (c) grant more UGA lands to the City -from the 5-year Review Areas, the City's only remaining choice will be to adjust the amount of growth it agrees to take to more closely fit the reality of land supply.
That is how I see it and I believe how the situation may be mitigated. Tampering with safety factors is better done by removing the layers of uncertainty that are curently inherent in the GMA land supply planning process.
Please notice I am using my own name here, not initials or pseudonyms. And, I have been consistent in these views ever since I understood the dynamics at work. Political dynamics are everyone's individual choice; I prefer to determine the facts first so that my political opinion has something solid under it as a foundation.
I hope this is adequate to explain a complicated issue in a few short paragraphs. Sound bytes don't do the job!
BTW, if the City is unable to accommodate the 51.4% of County growth its projections are based upon, where do you imagine it will go?
If you guessed rural sprawl, you'd be correct!"
John Watts | 11.29.07 - 11:29 am | #
====================
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism.- Winston Churchill
They are decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent. - Winston Churchill
====================
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Breaking Good News About NOAA
===============
"The breaking of a wave cannot explain the whole sea.” - Vladimir Nabokov
===============
This afternoon's gathering & event at the warehouse down at the Port's Deepwater facility definitely warrants some quick mention.
U.S. House Representative Rick Larsen announced he supports NOAA's relocation of it's Homeport to Bellingham from Seattle.
Larsen chose Bellingham because of the benefits NOAA would bring to our area in achieving multiple goals, one of which is providing an anchor tenant for our Waterfront District Redevelopment.
Larsen believes Bellingham would be a better fit for NOAA than Everett, which already has an established Naval Base there, as well as plan for expanding it.
His endorsement is a distinct plus for Bellingham, and we should thank him for it! Now, it's time to ask our other elected officials at all levels to help us attract NOAA to Bellingham.
This latest news, combined with the ongoing Community Master Planning efforts now underway, the recently approved Whatcom Waterway Cleanup Plan and Governor Gregoire's designation of the Waterfront District as an 'Innovation Partnership Zone', are continued signs that progress is being made toward realizing our goal of clean, vibrant and enjoyable waterfront!
-------------------
Here are a few thoughts on why Bellingham & NOAA are 'good fits' for each other:
Why Bellingham is a "good fit" for NOAA:
• Our Marine Trades Industry provides support for NOAA's vessel operations
• Good technical labor pool
• Ready to go facilities
• Strong connection to education and research at our Institutions of Higher Learning
• Port is a reliable development partner
-------------------
Why NOAA is a "good fit" for Bellingham:
• Economic
- $19 Million generated locally
- 188 permanent full-time jobs created
- living wage jobs
• NOAA's presence will jumpstart the Waterfront Redevelopment and will be a good neighbor
• NOAA's presence will stimulate a multitude of economic, research and educational opportunities thriughout the region
-------------------
As a kayaker, I know that surface waves range in size from small ripples to huge tsunamis.
This news rates as more than a ripple and far less than a tsunami, which is good news.
And, it has the distinct potential to become a steady, reliable wave action that can bring very constructive benefits to our area for many years into the future.
Let's work hard to make that happen!
---------------
Breaking Waves - In physics, a breaking wave is a wave whose amplitude reaches a critical level at which some process can suddenly start to occur that causes large amounts of wave energy to be dissipated. At this point, simple physical models describing the dynamics of the wave will often become invalid, particularly those which assume linear behavior.
--- http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Breaking+wave
===============
===============
"The News Business: changes, challenges.....and do we care?"
=====================
"In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind."
- Louis Pasteur
"Serendipity. Look for something, find something else, and realize that what you've found is more suited to your needs than what you thought you were looking for." - Lawrence Block
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!', but 'That's funny …'" Isaac Asimov
=====================
It's remarkable how plans sometimes come together, without being consciously planned.
Call it serendipity, I guess, but 2 blogs in a row on the topic of 'news' means that a rich vein of valuable discourse may have been discovered.
Maybe not a Mother Lode, mind you, but something definitely worth more digging into a bit deeper.
At the Bellingham City Club meeting at Northwood Hall today, this was the general topic addressed by a panel of four news professionals:
"What’s behind declining newspaper circulation and TV news audiences? And what does the future hold for traditional news outlets?"
Panel members who offered their views on the future of the news business included:
• Jack Keith, former city editor of the Bellingham Herald and now a member of the Journalism faculty at WWU;
• former Bellinghamite and now columnist for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Joel Connelly;
• Mike Fancher, editor-at-large at the Seattle Times; and
• Glen Nardi, Bellingham Herald publisher
Each of these news pros offered interesting insights into what is going on in the news business, and why.
It would have been nice to have had this panel discussion recorded because most of responses to the questions posed were well spoken and thought out, but it is not my point to summarize this event with minutes.
Rather, a few observations and comments of my own are offered.
One thing all agreed upon was that we are in the midst of an era of massive change and challenge for the news business.
And, it is a business!
The news business is historically a very profitable one at that is now facing declining profits from declining traditional readers.
REMIND you of any other businesses? Auto manufacturing for example?
It seems to me that many businesses share that problem these days, particularly with industry consolidation, technological change and globalization occuring rapidly.
Suddenly, there are a plethora of new competitors, modes of access and exponentially expanded - and diverse- subject matter and categorization taking place.
Not only that, but challenges of trust, ideological preference, interest and time to absorb everything that is offered.
Almost like a miniature 'Big Bang' Theory scenario, change is happening so quickly with the 'news' business that we humans are being challenged in real time to accept and come to grips with it.
One panelist described the situation as addressing infinite possibilities with finite resources, which seemed to fit.
Another talked about the news business taking on the character of a portfolio of products ranging from targeted magazines to newspapers to Internet based products. The latter products have been particularly difficult to find ways of making profitable.
A question from the audience related to combining available information from multiple sources at one common access point.
Maybe links to government data bases, sports, international news, national issues and the like from a local news source?
Another question went to what is the main point of news; is it to inform or entertain?
If it is to entertain and gain readership, is it really 'news'?
Good question!
Throughout the discussion was woven the essential theme of credibility, upon which 'hard' or fact-based news must be based before opinions are drawn. Also, that concept of credibility is inextricably linked to the concept of 'quality'.
That is just another way of saying trust remains very important!
Difficult to gain, easy to lose!
That is the quintessential quality control dilemma - how to maintain a consistent level of news coverage that is credible to any reasonably objective person.
And, it applies to more things than just the 'news'!
Government maybe?
One last thought: When considering any venture I have come to believe that the classic 3-legged stool analogy applies.
• Economics
• Ecology
• Social Equity
In this context, should the 'news industry' be any different from any other business?
Doesn't a benefit to the common good matter, especially in a democracy?
If so, how can this be assured?
Doesn't the 'news' being fair, reasonably complete and placed in proper context and perspective matter?
If so, how can this be accomplished with consistency?
When these two questions are being answered as consistently as the profitablility question, we may be on the right track toward consistent and reliable 'news' reporting.
Why not get those questions answered before allowing the FCC to give away any more of our airwaves?
Or, allowing the Rupert Murdochs, et al to further monopolize corporate media?
Or, allowing ANY single owner to dominate the media of any locality?
Or, allowing Congress -any Congress- to abrogate our First Amendment rights?
Think about it.
But, that's just my opinion.
Out.
===================================
"In reality, serendipity accounts for one percent of the blessings we receive in life, work and love. The other 99 percent is due to our efforts."
-Peter McWilliams
"Serendipity is looking in a haystack for a needle and discovering a farmer's daughter."- Julius Comroe Jr.
"Serendipity is putting a quarter in the gumball machine and having three pieces come rattling out instead of one—all red." Peter H. Reynolds
"--- you don't reach Serendib by plotting a course for it. You have to set out in good faith for elsewhere and lose your bearings ... serendipitously.
- John Barth, The Last Voyage of Somebody the Sailor
Serendip (also Serendib) is the old Persian name for Sri Lanka.
=====================
"In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind."
- Louis Pasteur
"Serendipity. Look for something, find something else, and realize that what you've found is more suited to your needs than what you thought you were looking for." - Lawrence Block
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!', but 'That's funny …'" Isaac Asimov
=====================
It's remarkable how plans sometimes come together, without being consciously planned.
Call it serendipity, I guess, but 2 blogs in a row on the topic of 'news' means that a rich vein of valuable discourse may have been discovered.
Maybe not a Mother Lode, mind you, but something definitely worth more digging into a bit deeper.
At the Bellingham City Club meeting at Northwood Hall today, this was the general topic addressed by a panel of four news professionals:
"What’s behind declining newspaper circulation and TV news audiences? And what does the future hold for traditional news outlets?"
Panel members who offered their views on the future of the news business included:
• Jack Keith, former city editor of the Bellingham Herald and now a member of the Journalism faculty at WWU;
• former Bellinghamite and now columnist for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Joel Connelly;
• Mike Fancher, editor-at-large at the Seattle Times; and
• Glen Nardi, Bellingham Herald publisher
Each of these news pros offered interesting insights into what is going on in the news business, and why.
It would have been nice to have had this panel discussion recorded because most of responses to the questions posed were well spoken and thought out, but it is not my point to summarize this event with minutes.
Rather, a few observations and comments of my own are offered.
One thing all agreed upon was that we are in the midst of an era of massive change and challenge for the news business.
And, it is a business!
The news business is historically a very profitable one at that is now facing declining profits from declining traditional readers.
REMIND you of any other businesses? Auto manufacturing for example?
It seems to me that many businesses share that problem these days, particularly with industry consolidation, technological change and globalization occuring rapidly.
Suddenly, there are a plethora of new competitors, modes of access and exponentially expanded - and diverse- subject matter and categorization taking place.
Not only that, but challenges of trust, ideological preference, interest and time to absorb everything that is offered.
Almost like a miniature 'Big Bang' Theory scenario, change is happening so quickly with the 'news' business that we humans are being challenged in real time to accept and come to grips with it.
One panelist described the situation as addressing infinite possibilities with finite resources, which seemed to fit.
Another talked about the news business taking on the character of a portfolio of products ranging from targeted magazines to newspapers to Internet based products. The latter products have been particularly difficult to find ways of making profitable.
A question from the audience related to combining available information from multiple sources at one common access point.
Maybe links to government data bases, sports, international news, national issues and the like from a local news source?
Another question went to what is the main point of news; is it to inform or entertain?
If it is to entertain and gain readership, is it really 'news'?
Good question!
Throughout the discussion was woven the essential theme of credibility, upon which 'hard' or fact-based news must be based before opinions are drawn. Also, that concept of credibility is inextricably linked to the concept of 'quality'.
That is just another way of saying trust remains very important!
Difficult to gain, easy to lose!
That is the quintessential quality control dilemma - how to maintain a consistent level of news coverage that is credible to any reasonably objective person.
And, it applies to more things than just the 'news'!
Government maybe?
One last thought: When considering any venture I have come to believe that the classic 3-legged stool analogy applies.
• Economics
• Ecology
• Social Equity
In this context, should the 'news industry' be any different from any other business?
Doesn't a benefit to the common good matter, especially in a democracy?
If so, how can this be assured?
Doesn't the 'news' being fair, reasonably complete and placed in proper context and perspective matter?
If so, how can this be accomplished with consistency?
When these two questions are being answered as consistently as the profitablility question, we may be on the right track toward consistent and reliable 'news' reporting.
Why not get those questions answered before allowing the FCC to give away any more of our airwaves?
Or, allowing the Rupert Murdochs, et al to further monopolize corporate media?
Or, allowing ANY single owner to dominate the media of any locality?
Or, allowing Congress -any Congress- to abrogate our First Amendment rights?
Think about it.
But, that's just my opinion.
Out.
===================================
"In reality, serendipity accounts for one percent of the blessings we receive in life, work and love. The other 99 percent is due to our efforts."
-Peter McWilliams
"Serendipity is looking in a haystack for a needle and discovering a farmer's daughter."- Julius Comroe Jr.
"Serendipity is putting a quarter in the gumball machine and having three pieces come rattling out instead of one—all red." Peter H. Reynolds
"--- you don't reach Serendib by plotting a course for it. You have to set out in good faith for elsewhere and lose your bearings ... serendipitously.
- John Barth, The Last Voyage of Somebody the Sailor
Serendip (also Serendib) is the old Persian name for Sri Lanka.
=====================
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
The 'News': Breaking or Broken?
=================
"When a dog bites a man, that is not news, because it happens so often.
But if a man bites a dog, that is news."
-Quote attributed to New York Sun editor John B. Bogart.
The function of the press in society is to inform, but its role in society is to make money. - A. J. Liebling
----------------
Here's some local 'breaking' news: This afternoon's swearing in ceremony at 4:30 PM, for our new Mayor and Ward 4 City Council Member will be the first time BTV10 has filmed a public event 'live'!
I hope no one feels 'scooped' by this revelation, but it does mark another significant milestone in the evolution of the City's Education & Government Television, Channel 10.
When the City Council decides to do it, every afternoon Council Work Session can also appear 'live'.
Of course, if the meetings are actually filmed, copies will be available for review as well, although maybe not as the fully edited versions currently being televised for the Evening Meetings.
I consider this to be very good news for citizens, including the local media, because it makes important information and discussions much more readily available to the public, and in a timely fashion
But, that's just my opinion.
=================
With all the stuff floating around posing as 'news', maybe its time to question who makes that determination?
And, what about all the latent 'news' that doesn't get reported?
Is it only 'news' because it gets reported?
It has been my observation that the media has a lot of control over what gets reported, and what doesn't.
Maybe the 'media' is not always up to the job?
What is the media's real job anyway? And who makes sure this is being done consistently?
Notice, I have no comment about 'news' being done 'well' - meaning accurately and timely.
No, my concern is whether the 'news' is being covered at all!
And, when it is covered is it being used to titillate or inform?
Please do not construe this as an attack, but an observation that is shared by many I have talked to.
It just seems too easy to cherry-pick controversy, gossip and relatively minor issues at the expense of serious news coverage.
Maybe this tendency is in response to what sells consumers?
If so, do people want to be treated more as consumers than citizens?
Is the em-PHA-sis being placed on the wrong syl-LA-ble here?
Anyway, this subject struck me as something useful to blog about today.
Not because of any one one thing, but because of the cumulative effect of inconsistent reporting on things I consider 'newsworthy' over time.
This has become a problem which seems to be getting more serious, particularly in the fuzzing of the boundary between fact and opinion.
And, in the inconsistency or absolute neglect of subjects that ought to matter more to people.
---------------
Here's a short definition of NEWS from the Internet:
See if you agree.
1.a. Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.
1.b. A presentation of such information, as in a newspaper or on a newscast.
2. New information of any kind: The requirement was news to him.
3. Newsworthy material: “a public figure on a scale unimaginable in America; whatever he did was news”.
--------------
Some more excerpts from Wikipedia to describe what is meant by the word 'news':
Hard news and soft news are terms for describing a relative difference between poles in a spectrum within the broader news trade—with "hard" journalism at the professional end and "soft" infotainment at the other. Because the term "news" is quite broad, the terms "hard" and "soft" denote both a difference in respective standards for news value, as well as for standards of conduct, relative to the professional ideals of journalistic integrity.
The idea of hard news embodies two orthogonal concepts:
• Seriousness: Politics, economics, crime, war, and disasters are considered serious topics, as are certain aspects of law, science, and technology.
• Timeliness: Stories that cover current events—the progress of a war, the results of a vote, the breaking out of a fire, a significant public statement, the freeing of a prisoner, an economic report of note.
The logical opposite, soft news is sometimes referred to in a derogatory fashion as infotainment. Defining features catching the most criticism include:
• The least serious subjects: Arts and entertainment, sports, lifestyles, "human interest", and celebrities.
• Not timely: There is no precipitating event triggering the story, other than a reporter's curiosity.
-----------------
Again, from Wikipedia: Concerns and criticisms:
The label "infotainment" is emblematic of concern and criticism that journalism is devolving from a medium which conveys serious information about issues that affect the public interest, into a form of entertainment which happens to have fresh "facts" in the mix. The criteria by which reporters and editors judge news value - whether something is worth putting on the front page, the bottom of the hour, or is worth commenting on at all - is an integral part of this debate.
Some blame the media for this perceived phenomenon, for failing to live up to ideals of civic journalistic responsibility. Others blame the commercial nature of many media organizations, the need for higher ratings, combined with a preference among the public for feel-good content and "unimportant" topics (like celebrity gossip or sports).
A specialization process has also occurred, beginning with the rise of mass market special-interest magazines, moving into broadcast with the advent of cable television, and continuing into new media, like the Internet and satellite radio. An increasing number of media outlets are available to the public that focus exclusively on one topic such as current events, home improvement, history, movies, women and Christianity. This means that consumers have more choice over whether they receive a general feed of the most "important" information of the day, or whether they get a highly customized presentation that contains only one type of content, which need not be newsworthy, and which need not come from a neutral point of view. Some publications and channels have found a sizable audience in the "niche" of featuring hard news. But controversy continues over whether the size of that audience is too small, and whether those outlets are diluting content with too much "soft" news.
What counts as journalism?
Some journalists define "journalism" to include only reports on "serious" subjects, where common journalistic standards are upheld by the reporter. The larger "news business" or news trade encompasses everything from professional journalism to so-called "soft news" and "infotainment", and support activities such as marketing, advertising sales, finance and delivery.
Professional journalism is supposed to place more emphasis on research, fact-checking, and the public interest than its "non-journalistic" counterparts.
-----------------
"Breaking" or non-routine news is defined as hard, unplanned news that takes the newsroom by surprise, such as a plane crash or earthquake. Breaking news cannot be predicted. However the industry is using breaking news as a label for more than just unplanned, hard news.
Weather and politics are the most frequent breaking news stories.
Celebrity news also makes a strong appearance.
Breaking news
1) is reported immediately,
2) contains new information (expected or unexpected) and
3) is most often market-based (chosen to increase ratings).
This study shows that breaking news stories do not have to be surprising or even important – but they do need to include new information. If this is the case, any story can be breaking news at any time when new information is introduced. Thus, labeling a story as breaking raises a question of credibility for the individual news outlets. Can viewers trust news outlets to emphasize the stories that are immediately important to them? If the practitioners cannot define breaking news for viewers consistently, viewers are sent conflicting messages. The difficulty lies then in viewers trying to establish for themselves what stories are important and relevant.
---------------
Adding to the distinction between journalists and anchors and reporters are "human interest", personality, or celebrity news stories, which typically are directed by marketing departments based on a demographic appeal and audience share. It's commonly accepted that anchors are also media personalities, who may even be considered celebrities.
---------------
Think its time for more debate and discussion on the subject of what constitutes 'news' and what constitutes 'journalism'?
Let it begin!
=====================
Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one.
A. J. Liebling
I can write better than anybody who can write faster, and I can write faster than anybody who can write better. - A. J. Liebling
I take a grave view of the press. It is the weak slat under the bed of democracy.
A. J. Liebling
People everywhere confuse what they read in newspapers with news.
A. J. Liebling
------------------------
"When a dog bites a man, that is not news, because it happens so often.
But if a man bites a dog, that is news."
-Quote attributed to New York Sun editor John B. Bogart.
The function of the press in society is to inform, but its role in society is to make money. - A. J. Liebling
----------------
Here's some local 'breaking' news: This afternoon's swearing in ceremony at 4:30 PM, for our new Mayor and Ward 4 City Council Member will be the first time BTV10 has filmed a public event 'live'!
I hope no one feels 'scooped' by this revelation, but it does mark another significant milestone in the evolution of the City's Education & Government Television, Channel 10.
When the City Council decides to do it, every afternoon Council Work Session can also appear 'live'.
Of course, if the meetings are actually filmed, copies will be available for review as well, although maybe not as the fully edited versions currently being televised for the Evening Meetings.
I consider this to be very good news for citizens, including the local media, because it makes important information and discussions much more readily available to the public, and in a timely fashion
But, that's just my opinion.
=================
With all the stuff floating around posing as 'news', maybe its time to question who makes that determination?
And, what about all the latent 'news' that doesn't get reported?
Is it only 'news' because it gets reported?
It has been my observation that the media has a lot of control over what gets reported, and what doesn't.
Maybe the 'media' is not always up to the job?
What is the media's real job anyway? And who makes sure this is being done consistently?
Notice, I have no comment about 'news' being done 'well' - meaning accurately and timely.
No, my concern is whether the 'news' is being covered at all!
And, when it is covered is it being used to titillate or inform?
Please do not construe this as an attack, but an observation that is shared by many I have talked to.
It just seems too easy to cherry-pick controversy, gossip and relatively minor issues at the expense of serious news coverage.
Maybe this tendency is in response to what sells consumers?
If so, do people want to be treated more as consumers than citizens?
Is the em-PHA-sis being placed on the wrong syl-LA-ble here?
Anyway, this subject struck me as something useful to blog about today.
Not because of any one one thing, but because of the cumulative effect of inconsistent reporting on things I consider 'newsworthy' over time.
This has become a problem which seems to be getting more serious, particularly in the fuzzing of the boundary between fact and opinion.
And, in the inconsistency or absolute neglect of subjects that ought to matter more to people.
---------------
Here's a short definition of NEWS from the Internet:
See if you agree.
1.a. Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.
1.b. A presentation of such information, as in a newspaper or on a newscast.
2. New information of any kind: The requirement was news to him.
3. Newsworthy material: “a public figure on a scale unimaginable in America; whatever he did was news”.
--------------
Some more excerpts from Wikipedia to describe what is meant by the word 'news':
Hard news and soft news are terms for describing a relative difference between poles in a spectrum within the broader news trade—with "hard" journalism at the professional end and "soft" infotainment at the other. Because the term "news" is quite broad, the terms "hard" and "soft" denote both a difference in respective standards for news value, as well as for standards of conduct, relative to the professional ideals of journalistic integrity.
The idea of hard news embodies two orthogonal concepts:
• Seriousness: Politics, economics, crime, war, and disasters are considered serious topics, as are certain aspects of law, science, and technology.
• Timeliness: Stories that cover current events—the progress of a war, the results of a vote, the breaking out of a fire, a significant public statement, the freeing of a prisoner, an economic report of note.
The logical opposite, soft news is sometimes referred to in a derogatory fashion as infotainment. Defining features catching the most criticism include:
• The least serious subjects: Arts and entertainment, sports, lifestyles, "human interest", and celebrities.
• Not timely: There is no precipitating event triggering the story, other than a reporter's curiosity.
-----------------
Again, from Wikipedia: Concerns and criticisms:
The label "infotainment" is emblematic of concern and criticism that journalism is devolving from a medium which conveys serious information about issues that affect the public interest, into a form of entertainment which happens to have fresh "facts" in the mix. The criteria by which reporters and editors judge news value - whether something is worth putting on the front page, the bottom of the hour, or is worth commenting on at all - is an integral part of this debate.
Some blame the media for this perceived phenomenon, for failing to live up to ideals of civic journalistic responsibility. Others blame the commercial nature of many media organizations, the need for higher ratings, combined with a preference among the public for feel-good content and "unimportant" topics (like celebrity gossip or sports).
A specialization process has also occurred, beginning with the rise of mass market special-interest magazines, moving into broadcast with the advent of cable television, and continuing into new media, like the Internet and satellite radio. An increasing number of media outlets are available to the public that focus exclusively on one topic such as current events, home improvement, history, movies, women and Christianity. This means that consumers have more choice over whether they receive a general feed of the most "important" information of the day, or whether they get a highly customized presentation that contains only one type of content, which need not be newsworthy, and which need not come from a neutral point of view. Some publications and channels have found a sizable audience in the "niche" of featuring hard news. But controversy continues over whether the size of that audience is too small, and whether those outlets are diluting content with too much "soft" news.
What counts as journalism?
Some journalists define "journalism" to include only reports on "serious" subjects, where common journalistic standards are upheld by the reporter. The larger "news business" or news trade encompasses everything from professional journalism to so-called "soft news" and "infotainment", and support activities such as marketing, advertising sales, finance and delivery.
Professional journalism is supposed to place more emphasis on research, fact-checking, and the public interest than its "non-journalistic" counterparts.
-----------------
"Breaking" or non-routine news is defined as hard, unplanned news that takes the newsroom by surprise, such as a plane crash or earthquake. Breaking news cannot be predicted. However the industry is using breaking news as a label for more than just unplanned, hard news.
Weather and politics are the most frequent breaking news stories.
Celebrity news also makes a strong appearance.
Breaking news
1) is reported immediately,
2) contains new information (expected or unexpected) and
3) is most often market-based (chosen to increase ratings).
This study shows that breaking news stories do not have to be surprising or even important – but they do need to include new information. If this is the case, any story can be breaking news at any time when new information is introduced. Thus, labeling a story as breaking raises a question of credibility for the individual news outlets. Can viewers trust news outlets to emphasize the stories that are immediately important to them? If the practitioners cannot define breaking news for viewers consistently, viewers are sent conflicting messages. The difficulty lies then in viewers trying to establish for themselves what stories are important and relevant.
---------------
Adding to the distinction between journalists and anchors and reporters are "human interest", personality, or celebrity news stories, which typically are directed by marketing departments based on a demographic appeal and audience share. It's commonly accepted that anchors are also media personalities, who may even be considered celebrities.
---------------
Think its time for more debate and discussion on the subject of what constitutes 'news' and what constitutes 'journalism'?
Let it begin!
=====================
Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one.
A. J. Liebling
I can write better than anybody who can write faster, and I can write faster than anybody who can write better. - A. J. Liebling
I take a grave view of the press. It is the weak slat under the bed of democracy.
A. J. Liebling
People everywhere confuse what they read in newspapers with news.
A. J. Liebling
------------------------
Monday, November 26, 2007
Is The Only Thing Constant, Change?
======================
Alfred North Whitehead:
The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order.
Arthur Schopenhauer:
Change alone is eternal, perpetual, immortal.
Charles Darwin:
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
George Bernard Shaw:
Some men see things as they are and say, "Why?" I dream of things that never were and say, "Why not?"
Henri Bergson:
To exist is to change, to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself endlessly.
Margaret Mead:
Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
William Shakespeare:
We know what we are, but know not what we may be.
Woodrow Wilson:
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
======================
This morning I got up and looked for my favorite hiking shirt before remembering it was stolen last Wednesday in Vancouver, BC, along with some other gear.
Bummer!
I really liked that shirt, shabby as it had become.
It will be hard to find a replacement that I will like as much.
And a replacement will also cost something.
But, finding replacements is part of life.
We expect to have to replace things because they do not last forever, although some are very durable.
And, we may see something else with more modern features that appeals to us.
Even so, the comfort and familiarity of an old garment that you have gone places with and enjoyed will take some getting used to.
It will not be difficult for me to find a replacement life style to serving on the Council.
But, in some respects I will miss it.
I doubt it will take people very long to become accustomed to dealing with other elected representatives either.
Likely, it will be more difficult for them to deal with the change they will experience in lifestyle.
Regardless of needing replacements at times, there are some things that ought not to change much.
Things like focusing on priorities that are necessary and for which funding and resources must be provided.
Or, like being as transparent as possible in dealing with every issue, whether it is viewed as a challenge or an opportunity.
And, like setting up a 'big tent', then inviting people of every persuasion inside to contribute their ideas, concerns and energy to the public process.
None of those things are really easy to do, although each does sound simple enough.
We often hear the phrase 'The Only Thing Constant Is Change', but is it?
Do the needs and expectations of people really change that much?
How about the values that endure?
I'm willing to concede that change is a big fact of life.
We have to deal with it the best we can.
But, I'm also convinced that there are also some things that don't change, despite perceptions to the contrary.
How to balance change with permanence is a feat difficult to even comprehend, isn't it?
======================
More Quotes-
Abraham Lincoln:
The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.
Albert Einstein:
Technological change is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.
Alvin Toffler:
In describing today's accelerating changes, the media fire blips of unrelated information at us. Experts bury us under mountains of narrowly specialized monographs. Popular forecasters present lists of unrelated trends, without any model to show us their interconnections or the forces likely to reverse them. As a result, change itself comes to be seen as anarchic, even lunatic.
Andy Warhol:
They say that time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself.
Charles Kettering:
If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong.
Emily Dickinson:
All but Death, can be Adjusted—
Dynasties repaired—
Systems—settled in their Sockets—
Citadels—dissolved—
Wastes of Lives—resown with Colors
By Succeeding Springs—
Death—unto itself—Exception—
Is exempt from Change—
Eric Hoffer:
In times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.
Felix Adler:
We cannot adopt the way of living that was satisfactory a hundred years ago. The world in which we live has changed, and we must change with it.
Georg C. Lichtenberg:
I cannot say whether things will get better if we change; what I can say is they must change if they are to get better.
Henry David Thoreau:
Things do not change, we change.
Heraclitus:
You cannot step twice into the same river, for other waters are continually flowing in. ca. 500 BCE
Heraklietos of Ephesos:
Whosoever wishes to know about the world must learn about it in its particular details.
Knowledge is not intelligence.
In searching for the truth be ready for the unexpected.
Change alone is unchanging.
The same road goes both up and down.
The beginning of a circle is also its end.
Not I, but the world says it: all is one.
And yet everything comes in season.
Irene Peter:
Just because everything is different doesn't mean that everything has changed.
John F. Kennedy:
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
Leo Tolstoy:
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.
M. Scott Peck:
The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, propelled by our discomfort, that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers.
Marian Wright Edelman:
If you don't like the way the world is, you change it. You have an obligation to change it You just do it one step at a time.
Nelson Mandela:
Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.
Ovid:
All things change; nothing perishes.
Pablo Picasso:
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it.
Pearl S. Buck:
I am comforted by life's stability, by earth's unchangeableness. What has seemed new and frightening assumes its place in the unfolding of knowledge. It is good to know our universe. What is new is only new to us.
Peter F. Drucker:
Society, community, family are all conserving institutions. They try to maintain stability, and to prevent, or at least to slow down, change. But the organization of the post-capitalist society of organizations is a destabilizer. Because its function is to put knowledge to work -- on tools, processes, and products; on work; on knowledge itself -- it must be organized for constant change.
Ralph Waldo Emerson:
Life is a progress, and not a station.
Robert F. Kennedy:
Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation.
Robert Frost:
Most of the change we think we see in life
Is due to truths being in and out of favor.
Thomas Jefferson:
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.
Unknown:
Change is inevitable, except from vending machines.
Washington Irving:
There is a certain relief in change, even though it be from bad to worse! As I have often found in travelling in a stagecoach, that it is often a comfort to shift one's position, and be bruised in a new place.
------------------------------------
Alfred North Whitehead:
The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order.
Arthur Schopenhauer:
Change alone is eternal, perpetual, immortal.
Charles Darwin:
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
George Bernard Shaw:
Some men see things as they are and say, "Why?" I dream of things that never were and say, "Why not?"
Henri Bergson:
To exist is to change, to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself endlessly.
Margaret Mead:
Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
William Shakespeare:
We know what we are, but know not what we may be.
Woodrow Wilson:
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
======================
This morning I got up and looked for my favorite hiking shirt before remembering it was stolen last Wednesday in Vancouver, BC, along with some other gear.
Bummer!
I really liked that shirt, shabby as it had become.
It will be hard to find a replacement that I will like as much.
And a replacement will also cost something.
But, finding replacements is part of life.
We expect to have to replace things because they do not last forever, although some are very durable.
And, we may see something else with more modern features that appeals to us.
Even so, the comfort and familiarity of an old garment that you have gone places with and enjoyed will take some getting used to.
It will not be difficult for me to find a replacement life style to serving on the Council.
But, in some respects I will miss it.
I doubt it will take people very long to become accustomed to dealing with other elected representatives either.
Likely, it will be more difficult for them to deal with the change they will experience in lifestyle.
Regardless of needing replacements at times, there are some things that ought not to change much.
Things like focusing on priorities that are necessary and for which funding and resources must be provided.
Or, like being as transparent as possible in dealing with every issue, whether it is viewed as a challenge or an opportunity.
And, like setting up a 'big tent', then inviting people of every persuasion inside to contribute their ideas, concerns and energy to the public process.
None of those things are really easy to do, although each does sound simple enough.
We often hear the phrase 'The Only Thing Constant Is Change', but is it?
Do the needs and expectations of people really change that much?
How about the values that endure?
I'm willing to concede that change is a big fact of life.
We have to deal with it the best we can.
But, I'm also convinced that there are also some things that don't change, despite perceptions to the contrary.
How to balance change with permanence is a feat difficult to even comprehend, isn't it?
======================
More Quotes-
Abraham Lincoln:
The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.
Albert Einstein:
Technological change is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.
Alvin Toffler:
In describing today's accelerating changes, the media fire blips of unrelated information at us. Experts bury us under mountains of narrowly specialized monographs. Popular forecasters present lists of unrelated trends, without any model to show us their interconnections or the forces likely to reverse them. As a result, change itself comes to be seen as anarchic, even lunatic.
Andy Warhol:
They say that time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself.
Charles Kettering:
If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong.
Emily Dickinson:
All but Death, can be Adjusted—
Dynasties repaired—
Systems—settled in their Sockets—
Citadels—dissolved—
Wastes of Lives—resown with Colors
By Succeeding Springs—
Death—unto itself—Exception—
Is exempt from Change—
Eric Hoffer:
In times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.
Felix Adler:
We cannot adopt the way of living that was satisfactory a hundred years ago. The world in which we live has changed, and we must change with it.
Georg C. Lichtenberg:
I cannot say whether things will get better if we change; what I can say is they must change if they are to get better.
Henry David Thoreau:
Things do not change, we change.
Heraclitus:
You cannot step twice into the same river, for other waters are continually flowing in. ca. 500 BCE
Heraklietos of Ephesos:
Whosoever wishes to know about the world must learn about it in its particular details.
Knowledge is not intelligence.
In searching for the truth be ready for the unexpected.
Change alone is unchanging.
The same road goes both up and down.
The beginning of a circle is also its end.
Not I, but the world says it: all is one.
And yet everything comes in season.
Irene Peter:
Just because everything is different doesn't mean that everything has changed.
John F. Kennedy:
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
Leo Tolstoy:
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.
M. Scott Peck:
The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, propelled by our discomfort, that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers.
Marian Wright Edelman:
If you don't like the way the world is, you change it. You have an obligation to change it You just do it one step at a time.
Nelson Mandela:
Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.
Ovid:
All things change; nothing perishes.
Pablo Picasso:
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it.
Pearl S. Buck:
I am comforted by life's stability, by earth's unchangeableness. What has seemed new and frightening assumes its place in the unfolding of knowledge. It is good to know our universe. What is new is only new to us.
Peter F. Drucker:
Society, community, family are all conserving institutions. They try to maintain stability, and to prevent, or at least to slow down, change. But the organization of the post-capitalist society of organizations is a destabilizer. Because its function is to put knowledge to work -- on tools, processes, and products; on work; on knowledge itself -- it must be organized for constant change.
Ralph Waldo Emerson:
Life is a progress, and not a station.
Robert F. Kennedy:
Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation.
Robert Frost:
Most of the change we think we see in life
Is due to truths being in and out of favor.
Thomas Jefferson:
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.
Unknown:
Change is inevitable, except from vending machines.
Washington Irving:
There is a certain relief in change, even though it be from bad to worse! As I have often found in travelling in a stagecoach, that it is often a comfort to shift one's position, and be bruised in a new place.
------------------------------------
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Growth: Are You Ready For Some Bootfall?
==========================
Let our advance worrying become advance thinking and planning.
Winston Churchill
It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link of the chain of destiny can be handled at a time. - Winston Churchill
==========================
Something might have been inadvertently proven today that I had often thought was true.
That is that veto power is almost always stronger than the power to achieve something positive.
It started out innocuously enough when I tuned into the Seahawks game against the Rams.
Aside from an improbable kick-off return that resulted in a Seahawks touchdown, the home team played miserably in the first half, making the lowly Rams look more like champions than they have for a long time.
The game was going so badly for the Seahawks that I decided to do something more enjoyable, like turning off the TV and going for a hike in the sunny, cool weather.
I'm really glad I did, for multiple reasons.
First, the walk was exhilarating.
Second, when I got home I found that the Seahawks had miraculously come alive in my absence and pulled ahead of the Rams.
They were driving for another score when I tuned in again, but as soon as it was again detected that I was watching, they stalled, missed another field goal and turned the ball over to the Rams near mid-field with about 3 minutes to play.
I should have tuned out again, immediately!
But, instead I watched as the Seahawks were called for pass interference and the Rams were put into the 'Red Zone' with a first down.
Bummer!
I watched with dismay and a growing sense of doom as the Rams moved closer and closer to the goal line, knowing they were motivated to score that go-ahead touchdown with little or no time remaining.
After 2 or 3 time-outs the moment of truth arrived, and I found myself averting my eyes from the TV.
It was fourth down at about the 1-foot line, and I could see a standard dive play easily getting that winning TD for the Rams.
But wait!
The Rams quarterback fumbled the snap from center and the Seahawks quickly covered him to take over the ball with seconds remaining!
I couldn't believe it!
The second my eyes were averted, something good happened and the Seahawks snatched victory from the jaws of defeat - just the opposite of what I had expected!
Did the Seahawks deserve to win?
You bet they did, because over the course of the season the breaks tend to average out.
But I felt like I deserved the game ball!
Anybody else feel that way?
========================
I'm pretty sure the game of football was invented to provide comic relief from real life.
It just has so many aspects that are similar to what we experience every day.
By somehow distracting us from reality, while still illustrating life's aspirations and futilities, football -like the ancient gladiators- constitutes real entertainment value.
And, combined with the medium of TV, football becomes the masculine equivalent of soap opera and movies - the opiate of the masses!
What would we do without our opiates?
More importantly, what would we do without our 'armchair' quarterbacks?
That is a role that anyone can perform, without any knowledge, training or understanding.
And, it can also become the ultimate in veto power if enough vocal people practice it!
========================
A case in point to illustrate the above:
It has become a very popular pastime to advocate -or simply wish for- no additional UGA area be awarded to the City, despite a 3-plus year rigorous analysis based upon assumptions rooted in fact and history.
The City's EIS clearly described its capacity for infill, neighborhood by neighborhood and UGA by UGA, and concluded that some combination of infill and UGA expansion was necessary, especially since the City agreed to accommodate 51.4% of the anticipated growth projection adopted by County and City.
Yet, there are some who ignore or discount this costly and time consuming exercise!
Instead, they prefer to substitute some version of armchair quarterbacking based on wishful thinking.
Have these advocates ever been watching the game?
If so, which one; the real game, or the fantasy game?
Ironically, the no-UGA advocates could get their wish, AND the City be able to satisfy its GMA goals through infill alone, IF more certainty can be attained in land use efficiency.
The following need to be accomplished:
• Minimum densities of the existing UGAs raised to 8 dwelling units per acre [County action]
• Parks level of service reduced to 28 acres per 1000 population [City action]
• Continue requiring annexation prior to extending water & sewer services [City action]
That's about it.
Points 2 & 3 are slam-dunks as long as the City Council doesn't wimp out.
Point 1 will require the County to act, which would be the biggest change.
Of course there are other things that ought to be done, like monitoring progress, requiring City standards and holding the line on not converting lands zoned for industrial use to other uses.
-------------
At the November 19 Council meeting, City Planning Director Tim Stewart was astounded that the GMA debate had been reduced down to just discussing land supply and growth projections.
Instead, these discussions ought to be focused on Master Planning large single owner parcels, applying City standards in the UGA, figuring out how to regionally plan and finance arterial concurrency, annexation strategies, using TDRs & PDRs to achieve GMA objectives, providing affordable housing, using sustainable Parks LOS, considering building heights and developing infill through multi-family, and developing urban village designs that appeal to people, including the Waterfront District.
Those discussions are the ones likely to prove beneficial in efficiently using the land we have available and in providing housing and jobs for people who will live here.
I really don't know how we got so far off track in planning for growth.
But, it might have something to do with the fact we don't understand the rules that ought to govern such things.
We don't really understand the 'game'.
And, even if we do know the game, we don't have the discipline to exercise good judgement in consistently applying the rules.
I'm frustrated enough to just walk away from watching this GMA fiasco game play out so poorly.
Maybe, just maybe, that strategy will pay off - like me NOT watching the Seahawks did?
I don't know, but I'm looking forward to NOT watching this game pretty soon now.
I hope that will make a positive difference, but I'm not counting on it!
We'll see when I tune in again, maybe in about a year from now.
========================
What It Was Was Football
By Andy Griffith (1953 ?)
It was back last October, I believe it was. We was going to hold a tent service off at this college town, and we got there about dinner time on Saturday. Different ones of us thought that we ought to get us a mouthful to eat before we set up the tent. So we got off the truck and followed this little bunch of people through this small little bitty patch of woods there, and we came up on a big sign that says, "Get something to Eat Here."
I went up and got me two hot dogs and a big orange drink, and before I could take a mouthful of that food, this whole raft of people come up around me and got me to where I couldn't eat nothing, up like, and I dropped my big orange drink. Well, friends, they commenced to move, and there wasn't so much that I could do but move with them.
Well, we commenced to go through all kinds of doors and gates and I don't know what- all, and I looked up over one of 'em and it says, "North Gate." We kept on a-going through there, and pretty soon we come up on a young boy and he says, "Ticket, please." And I says, "Friend, I don't have a ticket; I don't even know where it is that I'm a-going!" Well, he says, "Come on out as quick as you can." And I says, "I'll do 'er; I'll turn right around the first chance I get."
Well, we kept on a-moving through there, and pretty soon everybody got where it was that they was a-going, because they parted and I could see pretty good. And what I seen was this whole raft of people a-sittin' on these two banks and a-lookin at one another across this pretty little green cow pasture.
Somebody had took and drawed white lines all over it and drove posts in it, and I don't know what all, and I looked down there and I seen five or six convicts a running up and down and a-blowing whistles . And then I looked down there and I seen these pretty girls wearin' these little bitty short dresses and a-dancing around, and so I thought I'd sit down and see what it was that was a-going to happen.
About the time I got set down good I looked down there and I seen thirty or forty men come a-runnin' out of one end of a great big outhouse down there and everybody where I was a-settin' got up and hollered! And I asked this fella that was a sittin' beside of me, "Friend, what is it that they're a-hollerin' for? Well, he whopped me on the back and he says, "Buddy, have a drink!" I says, "Well, I believe I will have another big orange. I got it and set back down.
When I got there again I seen that the men had got in two little bitty bunches down there real close together, and they voted. They elected one man apiece, and them two men come out in the middle of that cow pasture and shook hands like they hadn't seen one another in a long time. Then a convict came over to where they was a-standin', and he took out a quarter and they commenced to odd man right there! After a while I seen what it was they was odd-manning for. It was that both bunchesfull of them wanted this funny lookin little pumpkin to play with. And I know, friends, that they couldn't eat it because they kicked it the whole evenin' and it never busted.
Both bunchesful wanted that thing. One bunch got it and it made the other bunch just as mad as they could be! Friends, I seen that evenin' the awfulest fight that I ever have seen in all my life !! They would run at one -another and kick one- another and throw one another down and stomp on one another and griiind their feet in one another and I don't know what- all and just as fast as one of 'em would get hurt, they'd take him off and run another one on !!
Well, they done that as long as I set there, but pretty soon this boy that had said "Ticket, please." He come up to me and said, "Friend, you're gonna have to leave because it is that you don't have a ticket." And I says, "Well, all right." And I got up and left.
I don't know friends, to this day, what it was that they was a doin' down there, but I have studied about it. I think it was that it's some kindly of a contest where they see which bunchful of them men can take that pumpkin and run from one end of that cow pasture to the other without gettin' knocked down or steppin' in somethin'.
========================
If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we have lost the future. - Winston Churchill
Kites rise highest against the wind - not with it. - Winston Churchill
Let our advance worrying become advance thinking and planning.
Winston Churchill
It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link of the chain of destiny can be handled at a time. - Winston Churchill
==========================
Something might have been inadvertently proven today that I had often thought was true.
That is that veto power is almost always stronger than the power to achieve something positive.
It started out innocuously enough when I tuned into the Seahawks game against the Rams.
Aside from an improbable kick-off return that resulted in a Seahawks touchdown, the home team played miserably in the first half, making the lowly Rams look more like champions than they have for a long time.
The game was going so badly for the Seahawks that I decided to do something more enjoyable, like turning off the TV and going for a hike in the sunny, cool weather.
I'm really glad I did, for multiple reasons.
First, the walk was exhilarating.
Second, when I got home I found that the Seahawks had miraculously come alive in my absence and pulled ahead of the Rams.
They were driving for another score when I tuned in again, but as soon as it was again detected that I was watching, they stalled, missed another field goal and turned the ball over to the Rams near mid-field with about 3 minutes to play.
I should have tuned out again, immediately!
But, instead I watched as the Seahawks were called for pass interference and the Rams were put into the 'Red Zone' with a first down.
Bummer!
I watched with dismay and a growing sense of doom as the Rams moved closer and closer to the goal line, knowing they were motivated to score that go-ahead touchdown with little or no time remaining.
After 2 or 3 time-outs the moment of truth arrived, and I found myself averting my eyes from the TV.
It was fourth down at about the 1-foot line, and I could see a standard dive play easily getting that winning TD for the Rams.
But wait!
The Rams quarterback fumbled the snap from center and the Seahawks quickly covered him to take over the ball with seconds remaining!
I couldn't believe it!
The second my eyes were averted, something good happened and the Seahawks snatched victory from the jaws of defeat - just the opposite of what I had expected!
Did the Seahawks deserve to win?
You bet they did, because over the course of the season the breaks tend to average out.
But I felt like I deserved the game ball!
Anybody else feel that way?
========================
I'm pretty sure the game of football was invented to provide comic relief from real life.
It just has so many aspects that are similar to what we experience every day.
By somehow distracting us from reality, while still illustrating life's aspirations and futilities, football -like the ancient gladiators- constitutes real entertainment value.
And, combined with the medium of TV, football becomes the masculine equivalent of soap opera and movies - the opiate of the masses!
What would we do without our opiates?
More importantly, what would we do without our 'armchair' quarterbacks?
That is a role that anyone can perform, without any knowledge, training or understanding.
And, it can also become the ultimate in veto power if enough vocal people practice it!
========================
A case in point to illustrate the above:
It has become a very popular pastime to advocate -or simply wish for- no additional UGA area be awarded to the City, despite a 3-plus year rigorous analysis based upon assumptions rooted in fact and history.
The City's EIS clearly described its capacity for infill, neighborhood by neighborhood and UGA by UGA, and concluded that some combination of infill and UGA expansion was necessary, especially since the City agreed to accommodate 51.4% of the anticipated growth projection adopted by County and City.
Yet, there are some who ignore or discount this costly and time consuming exercise!
Instead, they prefer to substitute some version of armchair quarterbacking based on wishful thinking.
Have these advocates ever been watching the game?
If so, which one; the real game, or the fantasy game?
Ironically, the no-UGA advocates could get their wish, AND the City be able to satisfy its GMA goals through infill alone, IF more certainty can be attained in land use efficiency.
The following need to be accomplished:
• Minimum densities of the existing UGAs raised to 8 dwelling units per acre [County action]
• Parks level of service reduced to 28 acres per 1000 population [City action]
• Continue requiring annexation prior to extending water & sewer services [City action]
That's about it.
Points 2 & 3 are slam-dunks as long as the City Council doesn't wimp out.
Point 1 will require the County to act, which would be the biggest change.
Of course there are other things that ought to be done, like monitoring progress, requiring City standards and holding the line on not converting lands zoned for industrial use to other uses.
-------------
At the November 19 Council meeting, City Planning Director Tim Stewart was astounded that the GMA debate had been reduced down to just discussing land supply and growth projections.
Instead, these discussions ought to be focused on Master Planning large single owner parcels, applying City standards in the UGA, figuring out how to regionally plan and finance arterial concurrency, annexation strategies, using TDRs & PDRs to achieve GMA objectives, providing affordable housing, using sustainable Parks LOS, considering building heights and developing infill through multi-family, and developing urban village designs that appeal to people, including the Waterfront District.
Those discussions are the ones likely to prove beneficial in efficiently using the land we have available and in providing housing and jobs for people who will live here.
I really don't know how we got so far off track in planning for growth.
But, it might have something to do with the fact we don't understand the rules that ought to govern such things.
We don't really understand the 'game'.
And, even if we do know the game, we don't have the discipline to exercise good judgement in consistently applying the rules.
I'm frustrated enough to just walk away from watching this GMA fiasco game play out so poorly.
Maybe, just maybe, that strategy will pay off - like me NOT watching the Seahawks did?
I don't know, but I'm looking forward to NOT watching this game pretty soon now.
I hope that will make a positive difference, but I'm not counting on it!
We'll see when I tune in again, maybe in about a year from now.
========================
What It Was Was Football
By Andy Griffith (1953 ?)
It was back last October, I believe it was. We was going to hold a tent service off at this college town, and we got there about dinner time on Saturday. Different ones of us thought that we ought to get us a mouthful to eat before we set up the tent. So we got off the truck and followed this little bunch of people through this small little bitty patch of woods there, and we came up on a big sign that says, "Get something to Eat Here."
I went up and got me two hot dogs and a big orange drink, and before I could take a mouthful of that food, this whole raft of people come up around me and got me to where I couldn't eat nothing, up like, and I dropped my big orange drink. Well, friends, they commenced to move, and there wasn't so much that I could do but move with them.
Well, we commenced to go through all kinds of doors and gates and I don't know what- all, and I looked up over one of 'em and it says, "North Gate." We kept on a-going through there, and pretty soon we come up on a young boy and he says, "Ticket, please." And I says, "Friend, I don't have a ticket; I don't even know where it is that I'm a-going!" Well, he says, "Come on out as quick as you can." And I says, "I'll do 'er; I'll turn right around the first chance I get."
Well, we kept on a-moving through there, and pretty soon everybody got where it was that they was a-going, because they parted and I could see pretty good. And what I seen was this whole raft of people a-sittin' on these two banks and a-lookin at one another across this pretty little green cow pasture.
Somebody had took and drawed white lines all over it and drove posts in it, and I don't know what all, and I looked down there and I seen five or six convicts a running up and down and a-blowing whistles . And then I looked down there and I seen these pretty girls wearin' these little bitty short dresses and a-dancing around, and so I thought I'd sit down and see what it was that was a-going to happen.
About the time I got set down good I looked down there and I seen thirty or forty men come a-runnin' out of one end of a great big outhouse down there and everybody where I was a-settin' got up and hollered! And I asked this fella that was a sittin' beside of me, "Friend, what is it that they're a-hollerin' for? Well, he whopped me on the back and he says, "Buddy, have a drink!" I says, "Well, I believe I will have another big orange. I got it and set back down.
When I got there again I seen that the men had got in two little bitty bunches down there real close together, and they voted. They elected one man apiece, and them two men come out in the middle of that cow pasture and shook hands like they hadn't seen one another in a long time. Then a convict came over to where they was a-standin', and he took out a quarter and they commenced to odd man right there! After a while I seen what it was they was odd-manning for. It was that both bunchesfull of them wanted this funny lookin little pumpkin to play with. And I know, friends, that they couldn't eat it because they kicked it the whole evenin' and it never busted.
Both bunchesful wanted that thing. One bunch got it and it made the other bunch just as mad as they could be! Friends, I seen that evenin' the awfulest fight that I ever have seen in all my life !! They would run at one -another and kick one- another and throw one another down and stomp on one another and griiind their feet in one another and I don't know what- all and just as fast as one of 'em would get hurt, they'd take him off and run another one on !!
Well, they done that as long as I set there, but pretty soon this boy that had said "Ticket, please." He come up to me and said, "Friend, you're gonna have to leave because it is that you don't have a ticket." And I says, "Well, all right." And I got up and left.
I don't know friends, to this day, what it was that they was a doin' down there, but I have studied about it. I think it was that it's some kindly of a contest where they see which bunchful of them men can take that pumpkin and run from one end of that cow pasture to the other without gettin' knocked down or steppin' in somethin'.
========================
If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we have lost the future. - Winston Churchill
Kites rise highest against the wind - not with it. - Winston Churchill
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Municipal Budgeting: Care & Feeding of the Fiscal Monster
--------------------------
"The purse of the people is the real seat of sensibility. Let it be drawn upon largely, and they will then listen to truths which could not excite them through any other organ." -- Thomas Jefferson
--------------------------
An AWC* CONFERENCE Work Session I attended back in 2005 was titled 'TACKLING TOUGH BUDGET CHOICES'
[*= Association of Washington Cities]
This session first focused on what some of the toughest budget issues are and then developed ways to address those choices.
While it is true that 2005 is history, this kind of history does repeat itself in every community, every year in some variation.
See if you can recognize which of the issues summarized are 'unique' to Bellingham, and which are shared by many communities.
HINT: 'unique' is very rare!
--------------------------
TOUGHEST BUDGET ISSUES
• The cost of operating budget items (salaries, benefits) increasing at a rate faster than inflation, particularly health care benefits
• The cost of infrastructure, such as transportation, sewer/water, and the need to respond to growth by providing more of these
• The property tax increase cap at 1% per year vs. 3% annual inflation
• The need to educate Council, staff and citizens
• Unfunded mandates
• Impacts from UGA residents outside the city limits being served but not paying
• The tax structure
• Disconnects – distrust of government, perceived lack of value for taxes paid
• Fee increases with service cuts
• Deferred maintenance
--------------------------
SUGGESTIONS
• Communicate more effectively with the public •••
o Be honest
o Frame the issues carefully
o Unify the Council before going out to the public
o Go to the public; don’t expect them to come to you
o Use all available tools (web site, etc.)
o Use polls to determine public opinion rather than basing it on what those who attend a hearing say
o Recognize that “complainers” care; connect with them
o Remember the audience
o Educate ourselves with “The Price of Government”
• Mid- to long-term: Change the tax structure •••
o Some possibilities for changes short of full scale changes:
• Designate the sales tax to the jurisdiction in which the purchaser resides (e.g., by tracking internet sales)
• Look at the AWC proposal to replace impact mitigation fees with additional .25% REET
• Lift the levy lid
• Identify cross-jurisdictional economic regions and the facilities needed to support the region and identify different ways to pay for them (no city can handle the full cost of regional facilities established by other jurisdictions, such as ports)
• Set up an opportunity fund for leveraging grants, etc.
• Focus REET truly on capital, rather than diverting it indirectly
• Use the private sector as well as government comparables when setting salaries and benefits
• Set up an equipment replacement fund
• Make fee increases incrementally (more regularly), rather than making larger increases less often
• Maintain good relationships with the Legislators who represent you
• Don’t miss grant opportunities
o But be careful when using grants for operating costs because there can be unintended consequences, such as establishing a service that must be sustained after the grant period
• Establish a vision for the city.
o Use a public process to engage the public in confirming the vision
o Use the vision to prioritize the budget and do long-range planning for economic development
--------------------------
Other comments :
• Cost of significant sewer extension with few people to pay the cost
• Private developments (e.g., in one community, a Big Box Store) pay for capital projects
• Can’t fund police and fire strategic plans. Unions view significant public safety problems.
• Impact on utility tax on proposed annexation area not used to paying that cost; impact on city to suddenly annex area with nearly same population as existing city.
• Cost of programs such as EMS with small population base
• Need 10-11% increase in utility taxes
• Half of the sales tax is allocated to the street fund by ordinance
• 40% growth rate for 20 years
• Lots of folks in the UGA who get water and sewer without annexing; need moratorium to stop that
• Growth in community, with changing demographics, has hit fire services and created very expensive capital and operating costs
• Growth has brought lots of one-time revenue, and the city has to avoid putting it into O&M that can’t be supported in the long-run
• Traffic, traffic, traffic – the city is most impacted by traffic from other communities over which it has no control
• Suggestion for utility costs: have the storm water utility help pay the costs of storm water infrastructure associated with transportation projects
• Need to educate people about costs that are imposed by others, esp. mandates
• To fund major regional projects, we need to identify areas of risk in our regional economy and target investment
• Focus revenue on maintenance, because in the long term, the deferred maintenance will become major capital projects
• Give high priority to funds to be used for matches (the “opportunity fund”)
• In growing areas, focus funds on areas where developers are doing a lot of work
• Create a budget advisory committee
--------------------------
Common perceptions are that municipal budgets are very simple, like household budgets.
Folks, they aren't, except in general principles!
Despite the City's winning national awards for excellence in accounting and budgeting for the last several years, this is a topic that is still about as clear as muddy water for most people.
A municipal budget is made up of multiple parts, some of which are relatively simple because they are self-balancing -like so-called enterprise funds [Water, Sewer, etc]
Other budget components are accounting devices to hold designated reserves, inter-departmental transfers and long-term obligations -like the LEOFF-1 Pension fund. [LEOFF refers to 'Law Enforcement & Firefighters]
The key budget component to watch is the so-called 'General Fund' which currently is being proposed at just under $82 million for 2008.
That compares with just over $77 million adopted for 2007, about a 6% increase.
In recent years, the General Fund has represented about a third of the total City Budget.
A 12% Reserve is established for augmenting the General Fund for use in case of emergency or other needs that are OKed by the City Council.
A brief explanation is offered in the 2008 Preliminary Budget for how these Reserves are expected to be impacted;
- a slowing of revenue growth
- a change in B&O tax rules [reduction of $890 k per year]
- some funds to be used for Fleet replacement
- some funds to be used for LEOFF-1 pension liability
Although General Fund monies are considered as more 'discretionary' than other public funds, this is largely a misconception.
That is because almost half [48%] of the General Fund is used to pay for essential Public Safety services like the Police and Fire Departments.
No one I know considers those services as discretionary!
Of the remainder;
- 19% goes to pay for Parks, Library, Museum and the like
- 14% goes to pay for General administrative services
- 7% goes to pay for Debt service & Capital projects
- 6% goes to pay for Judicial Services
- 6% goes to pay for Planning
General Fund revenue sources are broken down like this:
- 19% comes from B&O taxes
- 19% comes from Utility taxes
- 16% comes from grants, interest and other sources
- 15% comes from sales taxes
- 13% comes from property taxes
- 12% comes from inter-fund transfers
- 6% comes from various charges
Note the proposed '1%' Property Tax increase for 2008 will raise about $170 k in new revenues, all of which will be dedicated to help pay for the City's LEOFF-1 Pension obligation, which is estimated to total about $47 million.
--------------------------
The annual City Budget process is always interesting and often controversial.
But, more than anything else, it should be viewed as an opportunity to learn by anyone interested.
It is the time when comparisons can be drawn between what was expected and what actually happened.
And, it is a time to take into account the new demands, challenges and opportunities that are always changing.
The City has made great strides in being transparent about its budget process, but that alone can not be expected to adequately explain the inherent complexities involved to every citizen in a way that is completely understandable.
That is a much longer process which even intelligent professionals can have trouble understanding, without more direct experience with government accounting procedures and requirements.
With these comments in mind, now imagine how often the Municipal Budgeting mystery is encountered everywhere -not just in Bellingham.
That is the beauty of having associations, like the AWC, convene to bring public officials together periodically so that common problems and issues can be addressed and discussed in common.
Fortunately, common problems are often amenable to common solutions, notwithstanding the inherent differences between jurisdictions and times.
The Monster can be tamed, but it's still a Monster and will need taming again and again!
--------------------------
"We are what we do repeatedly. Excellence is not a single act but a habit."
- Aristotle
--------------------------
"The purse of the people is the real seat of sensibility. Let it be drawn upon largely, and they will then listen to truths which could not excite them through any other organ." -- Thomas Jefferson
--------------------------
An AWC* CONFERENCE Work Session I attended back in 2005 was titled 'TACKLING TOUGH BUDGET CHOICES'
[*= Association of Washington Cities]
This session first focused on what some of the toughest budget issues are and then developed ways to address those choices.
While it is true that 2005 is history, this kind of history does repeat itself in every community, every year in some variation.
See if you can recognize which of the issues summarized are 'unique' to Bellingham, and which are shared by many communities.
HINT: 'unique' is very rare!
--------------------------
TOUGHEST BUDGET ISSUES
• The cost of operating budget items (salaries, benefits) increasing at a rate faster than inflation, particularly health care benefits
• The cost of infrastructure, such as transportation, sewer/water, and the need to respond to growth by providing more of these
• The property tax increase cap at 1% per year vs. 3% annual inflation
• The need to educate Council, staff and citizens
• Unfunded mandates
• Impacts from UGA residents outside the city limits being served but not paying
• The tax structure
• Disconnects – distrust of government, perceived lack of value for taxes paid
• Fee increases with service cuts
• Deferred maintenance
--------------------------
SUGGESTIONS
• Communicate more effectively with the public •••
o Be honest
o Frame the issues carefully
o Unify the Council before going out to the public
o Go to the public; don’t expect them to come to you
o Use all available tools (web site, etc.)
o Use polls to determine public opinion rather than basing it on what those who attend a hearing say
o Recognize that “complainers” care; connect with them
o Remember the audience
o Educate ourselves with “The Price of Government”
• Mid- to long-term: Change the tax structure •••
o Some possibilities for changes short of full scale changes:
• Designate the sales tax to the jurisdiction in which the purchaser resides (e.g., by tracking internet sales)
• Look at the AWC proposal to replace impact mitigation fees with additional .25% REET
• Lift the levy lid
• Identify cross-jurisdictional economic regions and the facilities needed to support the region and identify different ways to pay for them (no city can handle the full cost of regional facilities established by other jurisdictions, such as ports)
• Set up an opportunity fund for leveraging grants, etc.
• Focus REET truly on capital, rather than diverting it indirectly
• Use the private sector as well as government comparables when setting salaries and benefits
• Set up an equipment replacement fund
• Make fee increases incrementally (more regularly), rather than making larger increases less often
• Maintain good relationships with the Legislators who represent you
• Don’t miss grant opportunities
o But be careful when using grants for operating costs because there can be unintended consequences, such as establishing a service that must be sustained after the grant period
• Establish a vision for the city.
o Use a public process to engage the public in confirming the vision
o Use the vision to prioritize the budget and do long-range planning for economic development
--------------------------
Other comments :
• Cost of significant sewer extension with few people to pay the cost
• Private developments (e.g., in one community, a Big Box Store) pay for capital projects
• Can’t fund police and fire strategic plans. Unions view significant public safety problems.
• Impact on utility tax on proposed annexation area not used to paying that cost; impact on city to suddenly annex area with nearly same population as existing city.
• Cost of programs such as EMS with small population base
• Need 10-11% increase in utility taxes
• Half of the sales tax is allocated to the street fund by ordinance
• 40% growth rate for 20 years
• Lots of folks in the UGA who get water and sewer without annexing; need moratorium to stop that
• Growth in community, with changing demographics, has hit fire services and created very expensive capital and operating costs
• Growth has brought lots of one-time revenue, and the city has to avoid putting it into O&M that can’t be supported in the long-run
• Traffic, traffic, traffic – the city is most impacted by traffic from other communities over which it has no control
• Suggestion for utility costs: have the storm water utility help pay the costs of storm water infrastructure associated with transportation projects
• Need to educate people about costs that are imposed by others, esp. mandates
• To fund major regional projects, we need to identify areas of risk in our regional economy and target investment
• Focus revenue on maintenance, because in the long term, the deferred maintenance will become major capital projects
• Give high priority to funds to be used for matches (the “opportunity fund”)
• In growing areas, focus funds on areas where developers are doing a lot of work
• Create a budget advisory committee
--------------------------
Common perceptions are that municipal budgets are very simple, like household budgets.
Folks, they aren't, except in general principles!
Despite the City's winning national awards for excellence in accounting and budgeting for the last several years, this is a topic that is still about as clear as muddy water for most people.
A municipal budget is made up of multiple parts, some of which are relatively simple because they are self-balancing -like so-called enterprise funds [Water, Sewer, etc]
Other budget components are accounting devices to hold designated reserves, inter-departmental transfers and long-term obligations -like the LEOFF-1 Pension fund. [LEOFF refers to 'Law Enforcement & Firefighters]
The key budget component to watch is the so-called 'General Fund' which currently is being proposed at just under $82 million for 2008.
That compares with just over $77 million adopted for 2007, about a 6% increase.
In recent years, the General Fund has represented about a third of the total City Budget.
A 12% Reserve is established for augmenting the General Fund for use in case of emergency or other needs that are OKed by the City Council.
A brief explanation is offered in the 2008 Preliminary Budget for how these Reserves are expected to be impacted;
- a slowing of revenue growth
- a change in B&O tax rules [reduction of $890 k per year]
- some funds to be used for Fleet replacement
- some funds to be used for LEOFF-1 pension liability
Although General Fund monies are considered as more 'discretionary' than other public funds, this is largely a misconception.
That is because almost half [48%] of the General Fund is used to pay for essential Public Safety services like the Police and Fire Departments.
No one I know considers those services as discretionary!
Of the remainder;
- 19% goes to pay for Parks, Library, Museum and the like
- 14% goes to pay for General administrative services
- 7% goes to pay for Debt service & Capital projects
- 6% goes to pay for Judicial Services
- 6% goes to pay for Planning
General Fund revenue sources are broken down like this:
- 19% comes from B&O taxes
- 19% comes from Utility taxes
- 16% comes from grants, interest and other sources
- 15% comes from sales taxes
- 13% comes from property taxes
- 12% comes from inter-fund transfers
- 6% comes from various charges
Note the proposed '1%' Property Tax increase for 2008 will raise about $170 k in new revenues, all of which will be dedicated to help pay for the City's LEOFF-1 Pension obligation, which is estimated to total about $47 million.
--------------------------
The annual City Budget process is always interesting and often controversial.
But, more than anything else, it should be viewed as an opportunity to learn by anyone interested.
It is the time when comparisons can be drawn between what was expected and what actually happened.
And, it is a time to take into account the new demands, challenges and opportunities that are always changing.
The City has made great strides in being transparent about its budget process, but that alone can not be expected to adequately explain the inherent complexities involved to every citizen in a way that is completely understandable.
That is a much longer process which even intelligent professionals can have trouble understanding, without more direct experience with government accounting procedures and requirements.
With these comments in mind, now imagine how often the Municipal Budgeting mystery is encountered everywhere -not just in Bellingham.
That is the beauty of having associations, like the AWC, convene to bring public officials together periodically so that common problems and issues can be addressed and discussed in common.
Fortunately, common problems are often amenable to common solutions, notwithstanding the inherent differences between jurisdictions and times.
The Monster can be tamed, but it's still a Monster and will need taming again and again!
--------------------------
"We are what we do repeatedly. Excellence is not a single act but a habit."
- Aristotle
--------------------------
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
