Bellingham Public Library is the
...Power of Information...Discovery of Ideas...Joy of Reading!
---------------------------
"Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one." -A.J. Liebling
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
- Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." – Samuel Johnson
"There are two stages to the public policy process; too early to tell, and too late to do anything about it." - Anonymous
---------------------------
I was disappointed, but not surprised, to read yet another negative editorial in today's WIndy about the Library planning process that is now underway.
So, I've decided to comment on that, and to use this blog to print more feedback from the October 9 meetings.
The first quote above seems to accurate reflect the way things are in general, and the way news gets mixed with opinion.
But, nowadays there are more ways to get information than we used to have, thanks to the Internet, cell phones and video channels.
In fact, one of my motivations in starting this blog was to be able to communicate some information I thought was important that wasn't easily available, and to respond to other information being put out to the public that I thought was wrong, misleading or questionable.
This Library editorial is one of those cases that may need responding to in a timely manner, while impressions are fresher in people's minds.
Mind you, this blog comes no where close to reaching the circulation of the WIndy, or the Weakly, or the Herald.
But, it will reach some people, and they will have an opportunity to hear another view on this subject.
Here goes;
To say the Library Board has done anything other than expend hours and hours of honest hard work and effort in their deliberations since 2001 is inaccurate to say the least!
I should know because I was the (non-voting) Council Liasion to the Library Board for 5 out of the last 7 years and attended most of their meetings during that time.
Former Council Member Dr. Grant Deger acted as Liaison the other two years, and he also attended most meetings.
In 2001, the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee [CIAC] completed over 2 years of its extensive review of the City's Capital needs over the next 20 years.
I also participated fully in that remarkable learning exercise, and agreed with its carefully considered conclusions and recommendations.
The CIAC rated the need for a new Central Public Library as its number 1 priority six years ago!
The Library Board has worked on this goal ever since, despite turnover among each of its 5 positions, the Library Director and Mayor.
At this moment, I happen to be the one person with the most experience of participating in this process!
Yet, the WIndy concludes that the 'public process' is severely flawed?
Baloney! I'm not buying that.
But, that is often the argument heard when some folks don't think they're getting their way on something, and seek to simply sandbag the efforts that others actually work towards.
Suffice to say, the WIndy and anyone else is entitled to their opinion, but substituting that opinion for 'public process' doesn't work very well either!
The WIndy seems to think the central argument should be a choice between having a new Central Library, or a system of Branches.
I believe that is a false choice, because we can have both!
But, like a tree, without a sturdy trunk there is no support for strong branches!
So, what seems appropriate is to have the discussion focus on how a well-conceived Library system can be designed to provide more widely distributed service to the community.
That's the discussion we are having now, despite claims to the contrary.
The practical side of this that it may be impossible for everyone to get everything they want all at one time.
That might break the bank and prevent any Library bond issue to pass at the ballot box.
'Phased implementation' is a term most people will recognize.
It means working on a bigger objective, one piece at a time, until the entire goal can be realized.
So, I see that as a basic strategy that can help whatever the community decides to do for its future Library needs.
Does anyone really believe a central hub is unnecessary?
The location of that hub is already known; it is the current Library site.
That decision has already been approved by the City Council, based upon the recommendation of the Library Board.
It takes advantage of the fact the Library is already a well-used facility that people know how to find.
It saves millions of dollars in property acquisition costs, because that property is already owned by the City.
It replaces a tired old building that is way too small, needs major repairs and is unequipped for modern technology.
Bottom line; its cheaper, quicker, more easily done to tear it down and build another modern facility that can meet the City's projected needs for the next 50 years or more.
A big part of those future needs is a central storage and distribution center, a place to concentrate staff, a place to hold more public meetings and events, a place to park, including school buses, ADA vehicles, book mobiles, and a high tech nerve center capable of linking to branches.
How is that for explaining quickly phase 1 of a plan?
I don't know if a plan like this will result, but it sounds logical to me.
But then logic and politics don't always agree, do they?
Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth.
Hope it helps.
But, its no excuse for not participating in the public process that is now taking place.
Now, printed below is more information on 6 of the 7 categories discussed in the October 9 meetings:
Please don't tell me this doesn't count as public process, because there were many citizens who showed up and participated!
Plus, the meeting that night was televised on BTV10, just as the October 23 meeting was.
And now, here it is again, right here on this very public blog, for your reading pleasure....
============================
Community Spaces
Bright, open, easily-accessible Friends of the Library space. Consult Friends regarding what kind of space they need. Friend’s bookstore. Courtesy phone in community space. Computer labs for staff training, the public, and for community groups to use for training. Technology play room. Large internet area. Common space for gathering, relaxing, talking, learning. Flanked by commercial space. Create pedestrian conduit between City Hall and new Art and Children’s Museum. Reading area with comfy chairs. Study areas with comfortable chairs. Small study/gathering rooms for tutoring and study groups. Comfortable reading places with light. Quiet research area. Whatcom Genealogy Society space. Literacy Council. Small office for COB police. Light, light, light. Coffee shop is a must. Potentially next to public meeting space and Friend’s bookstore. Large enough for small meetings. Café, comfy space to meet friends. Lunch opportunity for civic center employees. Concession area with wireless internet capability. Space for community events, inside or outside. Gallery spaces for art. Places for local artists to display work. Small and large meeting rooms that offer flexibility. (10, 25, 50, 100, 200-500 people) Large meeting room for civic purposes, 200 plus people. Moveable partitions for flexibility. Meeting room that can be opened to the outside and available for after hours use. Meeting rooms with technology tools, AV equipment. Will be able to use 3-D holograms of regional and national speakers. Co-location with public access TV, radio and other community media. Classroom space for teaching. Indoor/outdoor spaces for the community. Program outdoor space for activities such as outdoor performances. Casual meeting areas, not always in rooms. Ability to combine rooms for book sales. Small amphitheater/meeting/lecture area. Theater/performance area. Establish the Library as the place of open dialogue in the community. Keep a water feature. Inviting outdoor spaces offer cover as well as take advantage of sun. Rooftop garden room like Chicago Public. Any opportunities for interactive first floor spaces with street. Strive to design spaces to be used by the community for non-library events and programs. Zone areas; Children’s, Teen’s, Genealogy, Reading, Study rooms, Tech areas. Quiet reading space for kids in children’s area. Kid’s area with some limited recreation. Destination for families. Nice staff lounge.
============================
Collections
More copies of best sellers, movies, E-books, and NW related. Hip/new/fresh movies, books, and CDs. Current, new, attractive titles. Face out display like bookstores. Multiple copies of popular items to satisfy demand. More copies of new releases. More periodicals. More room to browse shelves. No closed stacks, everything out for the public. Continue with local/Northwest authors. Responsive; attractive; relevant; cutting edge formats. Downloadable video, music, and books. Lots of media, a variety of formats. E-books. Books on CD. Expand documentaries on DVD; PBS quality documentaries. How about playaways? Databases that are popular and well used. More computers if we’re accessing collections from computers. Web based collections to order remote and pick-up/return at street level. Teen collection with current appeal. Zones for Children’s and Teens. Children’s area for play and exploration (library and book related) Business center. Expand the world language collection. Expand genealogy collection. Local history, genealogy, LEED, and green practices. Security system. Small collections for new branch locations- Barkley? Keep up the great work. Maintain great service we currently enjoy. Maintain high quality of print and non-print materials.
============================
Operations/Service
Friendly and efficient. Adjacencies that make sense. As automated as possible but simple to understand. Secure Library from public space; allow doors to public space to operate alternate hours. Roving staff. None to very little staff sitting. Contemporary signage to direct customers. Welcoming lobby/entry. Information desk at entry. A better flow of traffic in and out of the Library. One service point. Only one exit. Additional staff at service points. Full service website, virtual branch. 24/7 virtual reference. Separate phone reference (behind scenes?) Homework help chat. Additional IT help to speed up introducing new technologies/applications. Must use innovative service technologies to reduce staffing costs. Longer hours. Outside book drop that presorts materials. Well-designed space for deliveries. Auto CKi. Large space for delivery processing. Easier flow of holds pick-up to self check. A better flow of incoming deliveries to acquisitions (cataloging, processing) and cki (reshelving). Drive-up book drop that can be accessed from the driver’s side. Efficient parking/circulation for all employees and customers. Better way to store books when not in use. Easier way for donated books to get into “Friends” space for distribution. Outdoor book bin for Friends donations. Customer service orientation. Staff members to go to other sites to do presentations. Marketing component. Every fall establish community outreach program. Include children’s program, transition from high school to technical school/college, adult program, and seniors program. Self service. Staff room near staff. More adequate staff lockers and storage. Excellent customer service always. Areas for service/questions set apart from reading/quiet areas. Plan for adequate custodial staff for high use public building. Bathrooms on all floors. Expand services to branch at Barkley location. Act as a clearinghouse/advertising center for all local recreation program providers. Ability to view council meeting tapes. Potential to combine funding with PFD and parking fund to build joint parking. Any proposal for bond measure must fit within City debt capacity. Must be cost-efficient, affordable over long-term. Must support multi-modal transportation goals of the City and community.
============================
Technology
Use technology to make the new library more efficient. Get wider band width. Wifi throughout. Places for laptop users. Public library should be cutting edge of technology, especially for those without access. Computer access for all residents. Audio-visual. Incorporate presentation needs into conference room design. State of the art. More computers than we presently have. Internet stations away from reference area. More internet stations throughout the library. Many computer stations for children’s area. Kid-sized. Electrical outlets everywhere, including tables with built in outlets for laptops. Keep/expand web-based library services. Ability to check book availability from personal computer. Home access through library site to online journals for monthly or annual fee. Online viewing of DVDs/documentaries. Access to services like lexus-nexus research services for a fee. RFID materials handling system. Plan to include it even if can’t afford it now. Book sorting. CD/DVD dispenser. Phones with cordless/wireless options. Staff can answer questions on the floor. State of the art public announcement system. Automated checkout/check-in. Automated tracking for books. Self-check becomes the norm. Catalog stations by the stacks. More catalogs throughout library. Technology lab- enclosed room with windows to inside with computers and library staff person. Computer labs. On-line books. Copier/fax area enclosed to cut down on noise. Design flexibility will facilitate change as it is hard to know what future technology will be. State of the art security, cameras, book theft protection.
============================
Interior Environment
Warm, inviting, welcoming environment. Warm, friendly children’s spaces and separate teen spaces. Fun reading area for small kids groups, like a little barn or boat. Fun/dynamic kids area with fun entry to space. Motif such as Mt. Baker, lake, creek. Teen homework room where they can talk/work together without getting yelled at. Cool, rad teen zone with flat screen TV. Creative teen space with teen appeal. Teen approved comfortable chairs in teen area. Design each space for its purpose. Inspiring. Modern looking that is inviting. Neat, modern, environmental products for flooring, shelving, etc... Reflect the diversity of the community. Fun and exciting. Perhaps public art, interactive or mobile displays, programming. Pacific Northwest architecture. Use of local materials, lots of wood. Reflects a sense of place. Active commercial areas that are compatible with library. Sound and noise control. Quiet spaces for reading. Lots of natural light. Bright and open. Excellent lighting, including daylight dimming. Windows with views. Seating areas along windows. Tall ceilings. More places to sit. Comfortable seating areas. Fire place with comfortable furniture. Study areas for small and medium sized groups. Quiet, cubby type reading areas, especially for children. Variety of areas for people to retreat with books and studies. Variety of public meeting spaces. Computer spaces should incorporate space for backpacks, purses, etc... Logical furniture layout with smooth traffic patterns. Variety of furniture choices from cozy by the fireplace to desks and chairs for study. Softer chairs for longer meetings. Earth tone furniture. Furniture that is Northwest craftsman, comfortable. David Gray style furniture would be perfect. More space to browse shelves, even sit on floor. Safe, secure. Security for restrooms. Pleasant restrooms. Convenient bathrooms in visible areas. Efficient work spaces. Easy to maintain. Clean. All areas easily accessible. Allow for donations by category and use plaques. Signs with large letters and in visible locations. Display work of local artists, both permanent and temporary.
============================
Spirit of the Place
Embrace the Northwest. Northwest feel in materials and design. Lots of wooden structure. Historic, reflective of outdoor environment. Honor what Bellingham is. Make Bellingham proud. Connection to natural elements. Bayside, Oceanside feel. Salish theme; eagle and raven, orca and salmon, bear and wolf. Totems; sun and moon, earth, water, sky/air, and fire. Make it feel earthy, granola, tree-hugging. Reflection of community character. A place for everyone to gather. A community gathering place. Engaging and comfortable for all ages. Diverse culturally, community, and programming. A destination. Soul enriching. Visually inspiring and exciting. Architecturally superb. Peaceful yet stimulating. Fun and dynamic. Quirky, whimsical, playfull, and joyful. Enriching. Accessible. Easy to use. Welcoming. Holistic. Inviting. Open and light. Warm. Safe. Inspiration for learning and exploration. The place of open, objective, relevant information. Leader of community; free speech, freedom of information, embrace all people and cultures. Leader in dissemination of information; new technologies, sustainable ideas, renewable energies, objective information. Celebrating the arts. Include lots of art, serious and whimsical, stationary and interactive, large and small. View of Mt. Baker. Start with the thought that we are doing most everything well, we have a lot to be proud of in our library.
---------------------------
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." – Thomas Edison
“Opinion is power.” - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1816
"There are two stages to the public policy process; too early to tell, and too late to do anything about it." - Anonymous
"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
"My experience in government is that when things are non-controversial and beautifully coordinated, there is not much going on." - JFK
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. - Winston Churchill
---------------------------
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
My Goodness! Should Today's Weakly be Considered An In-Kind Campaign Donation?
There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion.
- Winston Churchill
Ninety eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hardworking, honest Americans. It's the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity.
But then, we elected them. - Lily Tomlin
---------------------------------------
Some folks are really testing the limits on what passes for impartiality and fairness when it comes to the Mayoral race!
Both the content and timing of the collection of strongly biased political opinion in today's Weakly might well qualify as expensive contributions to the McShane Campaign!
Has this 'in-kind' donation been declared?
At what price would publishing this issue be valued?
Tell us again, who is paying for this issue? The owners?
Will our erstwhile WWU political science professor now be able to admit there is more to his PDC inquiries than routine curiosity?
Will the Weakly's editor believe his 'confessions' are any big surprise to anyone?
Is this another sign that those so entrenched in power will not give it up easily?
Will this latest excess serve to galvanize people who want a clear change from this kind of political gamesmanship, to actually vote for that change?
I certainly hope so!
Just imagine what a Mayor with this divisive a mentality would do in office.
All this and Halloween's not even here yet!
But, its coming next week.
Count on it, but vote first.
-----------------------
Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage. - H. L. Mencken
Everyone has his day and some days last longer than others.
- Winston Churchill
- Winston Churchill
Ninety eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hardworking, honest Americans. It's the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity.
But then, we elected them. - Lily Tomlin
---------------------------------------
Some folks are really testing the limits on what passes for impartiality and fairness when it comes to the Mayoral race!
Both the content and timing of the collection of strongly biased political opinion in today's Weakly might well qualify as expensive contributions to the McShane Campaign!
Has this 'in-kind' donation been declared?
At what price would publishing this issue be valued?
Tell us again, who is paying for this issue? The owners?
Will our erstwhile WWU political science professor now be able to admit there is more to his PDC inquiries than routine curiosity?
Will the Weakly's editor believe his 'confessions' are any big surprise to anyone?
Is this another sign that those so entrenched in power will not give it up easily?
Will this latest excess serve to galvanize people who want a clear change from this kind of political gamesmanship, to actually vote for that change?
I certainly hope so!
Just imagine what a Mayor with this divisive a mentality would do in office.
All this and Halloween's not even here yet!
But, its coming next week.
Count on it, but vote first.
-----------------------
Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage. - H. L. Mencken
Everyone has his day and some days last longer than others.
- Winston Churchill
Library Planning Update: Citizen Input Wanted!
Bellingham Public Library is the
...Power of Information...Discovery of Ideas...Joy of Reading!
---------------------------
A quick Google search on the Internet found this information on a kid's website:
"Benjamin Franklin - Librarian
Books were very expensive during my time and therefore not everyone was able to afford them. Some fellow printers and I, known as the Leather Apron Club (because most of us wore leather aprons) discussed ways we could help the community. Through my suggestion, we started a lending library that was open to everyone. We would pool our money and buy books, which people could borrow.
So, in 1731, the first lending library in America opened. Soon, other towns began to imitate the library, until reading became fashionable even among the less educated."
---------------------------
In addition to helping found our country, it was also good old Ben Franklin who conceived the idea of public libraries!
Founded by Franklin in 1731, The Library Company of Philadelphia still functions to this day.
Old Ben and the other founders chose as their motto a Latin phrase which roughly translates as
"To support the common good is divine."
That idea still resonates as the basis for providing free public libraries that allow all citizens access to the knowledge which is so necessary to sustain our form of government!
-----------------------------------------------
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
==================================
Back on August 28, 2007 my blog, 'Accentuating the Positive: Qualities to Reflect in Library Design', briefly summarized the process that is being used to better define our future needs in library facilities.
It also contained some ideas I think might help reflect some essential characteristics of Bellingham.
Since then much has been happening!
So today, here's an update on the important public outreach that the City and its excellent consultant team, led by Thomas Hacker Architects, are now undertaking.
Last night, the Bellingham Public Library -and its Board of Trustees- held a second Open House in the City Council Chambers, one object of which was to introduce those attending -plus the BTV10 audience- to new concepts now being used in modern Libraries.
But, the main objective was to get direct feedback on what a new Library should contain or provide from the 60 or so people that attended this event.
Like the previous Open House on October 9, this one was televised for later airing on BTV10.
Both the initial presentation and the feedback from citizens were televised, but in between, the group split into eight work groups.
--------------
Four specific questions were asked of each group:
• How do you use the Library?
• What works and what doesn't work at the existing Library?
• What services & features would you like to see in a new Library?
• What questions would you like to see answered in this process?
--------------
Obtaining answers to these questions from the citizens attending was the main purpose -and product- of this meeting.
There were some pretty comprehensive lists developed!
The entire audience participated and was split at random, into work groups that were selected by the individuals themselves.
While there was much in common between the eight responses, there were also some very interesting and even unique concepts that were expressed.
All of this valuable feedback provides excellent input for the consultant team, which is trying to determine what needs should be addressed in defining what a new Library facility should contain and provide.
The lists of answers were verbally summarized from flip charts by each group's spokesperson.
This part was also visually recorded for BTV10.
Written information from the eight lists will also be captured and posted on the Library website for reference.
The energy in the room last night was very positive, and I think the consulting team sensed that.
This 'programming' phase of the new Library is critical, because it is the step that describes what functions are needed, and are most desired by citizens.
These ideas, plus those received from earlier meetings, will be incorporated into a Statement of Needs, which -along with associated costs- will reflect the Library of the future that our community requires and can support.
------------------
The earlier October 9 meetings also produced several pages of ideas from participants, captured into these seven categories:
• Site/Landscape
• Community Spaces
• Collections
• Operations/Service
• Technology
• Interior Environment
• Spirit of the Place
Can you think of something that may not already be on one of these lists?
I've reproduced below the ideas from the October 9 meetings for the first category - 'Site/Landscape'.
I will consider printing ideas from the other lists in later blogs.
--------------
Check out the BTV10 schedule, and the Library website for more information:
http://www.bellinghampubliclibrary.org
And while you're at it, take the short Library Survey - online!
It only takes a minute or two to answer, but the answers are important.
======================
List of ideas from the October 9 'Site/Landscape' category:
Site/Landscape: Bring exterior into interior. Consider public space extension of the library. Welcoming public space with seating, possible outdoor seating for café. Outdoor seating. Inviting, comfortable, inspiring. Inviting, pedestrian friendly higher priority than “architectural statement.” Accessible, inviting entrance. Striking architecture to look at. Striking, functional design. A destination, vibrant. Welcoming to all community members. Secure, safe feeling. Public gathering space that can serve community events, concerts, plays, meetings, etc... Interactive (public art, vendors, programming) gathering space. Program public space at the same time as library space. Flexibility in use of space. Active ground floor with private sector opportunities. Performance area. Incorporation of art; sculpture, fountain, amphitheater. Band shell/ gazebo on library lawn. Embrace Bellingham history, Native American culture, and the Arts. Peaceful, quiet book reading and contemplative space. Place for children; kid friendly, playground, children’s garden connected to children’s area. Green space. Native landscaping and materials. Landscape that celebrates the Pacific Northwest, the sun, rain, and wind. Low water use landscape with a few beautiful focal points. Limited maintenance landscaping. Lush landscaping. Mix of hardscape and green space. Remembering the fountain. Oriented to south sun. Open space/plaza to south Main entrance to the south. Civic Center/Library should be a park. Complimentary to civic center uses. At grade entry, level with Grand Ave. Locate building closer to City Hall. Close off Lottie St., remove paving. Easy to approach by car, bicycle, bus, and on foot. Place for bikes, roller blades, strollers. Covered bicycle racks. Bus stop on block. Place for bus drop off. Easy delivery access for outreach and movement of materials. Drive through book drop. Drive through pick-up area. Underground parking. On-grade parking. Lots of parking. Plaza in front of City Hall. Park area serving the entire CBD and arts district. Connection to CBD. Connection to City Hall. Connection to Children’s Museum and Art Museum; Grand Ave. and alley. Develop alley leading to children’s museum as a people space. Opportunity for connection of Children’s Museum to Children’s Library. Potential to extend waterfront and old town development up towards town.
-------------------------------------------------------
"A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy... a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
-James Madison, Author of the U.S Constitution and 4th President of the United States
...Power of Information...Discovery of Ideas...Joy of Reading!
---------------------------
A quick Google search on the Internet found this information on a kid's website:
"Benjamin Franklin - Librarian
Books were very expensive during my time and therefore not everyone was able to afford them. Some fellow printers and I, known as the Leather Apron Club (because most of us wore leather aprons) discussed ways we could help the community. Through my suggestion, we started a lending library that was open to everyone. We would pool our money and buy books, which people could borrow.
So, in 1731, the first lending library in America opened. Soon, other towns began to imitate the library, until reading became fashionable even among the less educated."
---------------------------
In addition to helping found our country, it was also good old Ben Franklin who conceived the idea of public libraries!
Founded by Franklin in 1731, The Library Company of Philadelphia still functions to this day.
Old Ben and the other founders chose as their motto a Latin phrase which roughly translates as
"To support the common good is divine."
That idea still resonates as the basis for providing free public libraries that allow all citizens access to the knowledge which is so necessary to sustain our form of government!
-----------------------------------------------
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
==================================
Back on August 28, 2007 my blog, 'Accentuating the Positive: Qualities to Reflect in Library Design', briefly summarized the process that is being used to better define our future needs in library facilities.
It also contained some ideas I think might help reflect some essential characteristics of Bellingham.
Since then much has been happening!
So today, here's an update on the important public outreach that the City and its excellent consultant team, led by Thomas Hacker Architects, are now undertaking.
Last night, the Bellingham Public Library -and its Board of Trustees- held a second Open House in the City Council Chambers, one object of which was to introduce those attending -plus the BTV10 audience- to new concepts now being used in modern Libraries.
But, the main objective was to get direct feedback on what a new Library should contain or provide from the 60 or so people that attended this event.
Like the previous Open House on October 9, this one was televised for later airing on BTV10.
Both the initial presentation and the feedback from citizens were televised, but in between, the group split into eight work groups.
--------------
Four specific questions were asked of each group:
• How do you use the Library?
• What works and what doesn't work at the existing Library?
• What services & features would you like to see in a new Library?
• What questions would you like to see answered in this process?
--------------
Obtaining answers to these questions from the citizens attending was the main purpose -and product- of this meeting.
There were some pretty comprehensive lists developed!
The entire audience participated and was split at random, into work groups that were selected by the individuals themselves.
While there was much in common between the eight responses, there were also some very interesting and even unique concepts that were expressed.
All of this valuable feedback provides excellent input for the consultant team, which is trying to determine what needs should be addressed in defining what a new Library facility should contain and provide.
The lists of answers were verbally summarized from flip charts by each group's spokesperson.
This part was also visually recorded for BTV10.
Written information from the eight lists will also be captured and posted on the Library website for reference.
The energy in the room last night was very positive, and I think the consulting team sensed that.
This 'programming' phase of the new Library is critical, because it is the step that describes what functions are needed, and are most desired by citizens.
These ideas, plus those received from earlier meetings, will be incorporated into a Statement of Needs, which -along with associated costs- will reflect the Library of the future that our community requires and can support.
------------------
The earlier October 9 meetings also produced several pages of ideas from participants, captured into these seven categories:
• Site/Landscape
• Community Spaces
• Collections
• Operations/Service
• Technology
• Interior Environment
• Spirit of the Place
Can you think of something that may not already be on one of these lists?
I've reproduced below the ideas from the October 9 meetings for the first category - 'Site/Landscape'.
I will consider printing ideas from the other lists in later blogs.
--------------
Check out the BTV10 schedule, and the Library website for more information:
http://www.bellinghampubliclibrary.org
And while you're at it, take the short Library Survey - online!
It only takes a minute or two to answer, but the answers are important.
======================
List of ideas from the October 9 'Site/Landscape' category:
Site/Landscape: Bring exterior into interior. Consider public space extension of the library. Welcoming public space with seating, possible outdoor seating for café. Outdoor seating. Inviting, comfortable, inspiring. Inviting, pedestrian friendly higher priority than “architectural statement.” Accessible, inviting entrance. Striking architecture to look at. Striking, functional design. A destination, vibrant. Welcoming to all community members. Secure, safe feeling. Public gathering space that can serve community events, concerts, plays, meetings, etc... Interactive (public art, vendors, programming) gathering space. Program public space at the same time as library space. Flexibility in use of space. Active ground floor with private sector opportunities. Performance area. Incorporation of art; sculpture, fountain, amphitheater. Band shell/ gazebo on library lawn. Embrace Bellingham history, Native American culture, and the Arts. Peaceful, quiet book reading and contemplative space. Place for children; kid friendly, playground, children’s garden connected to children’s area. Green space. Native landscaping and materials. Landscape that celebrates the Pacific Northwest, the sun, rain, and wind. Low water use landscape with a few beautiful focal points. Limited maintenance landscaping. Lush landscaping. Mix of hardscape and green space. Remembering the fountain. Oriented to south sun. Open space/plaza to south Main entrance to the south. Civic Center/Library should be a park. Complimentary to civic center uses. At grade entry, level with Grand Ave. Locate building closer to City Hall. Close off Lottie St., remove paving. Easy to approach by car, bicycle, bus, and on foot. Place for bikes, roller blades, strollers. Covered bicycle racks. Bus stop on block. Place for bus drop off. Easy delivery access for outreach and movement of materials. Drive through book drop. Drive through pick-up area. Underground parking. On-grade parking. Lots of parking. Plaza in front of City Hall. Park area serving the entire CBD and arts district. Connection to CBD. Connection to City Hall. Connection to Children’s Museum and Art Museum; Grand Ave. and alley. Develop alley leading to children’s museum as a people space. Opportunity for connection of Children’s Museum to Children’s Library. Potential to extend waterfront and old town development up towards town.
-------------------------------------------------------
"A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy... a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
-James Madison, Author of the U.S Constitution and 4th President of the United States
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
South Hill Neighborhood: Views Become Vision
Last night the South Hill Neighborhood got some view protection as an official part of its Neighborhood Plan.
The Bellingham City Council approved that new policy last night, after reviewing the results of 18 months of effort and hearing many South Hill residents testify in support of it as one way to help preserve the Neighborhood's character.
This new policy doesn't actually change development regulations, but it does condition future development to the extent it represents the legitimate concerns of current residents, businesses and property owners.
And, it initiates the dialogue about what rules might be changed in the future to protect views, not only in South Hill, but other neighborhoods as well.
View preservation is one of those discussions that applies city wide in one way or another,
And, its a discussion the city needs to take to the next level, so everyone has fair a share in determining City policy.
Some thought the measure presented didn't go far enough.
Others thought it went too far.
Still others preferred to wait until a 'comprehensive' measure was developed and agreed to.
That one sounded like more of an attempt to not do anything for a long time!
But, all of these opinions had some merit!
By the advocates own admission the measure neglected to address some major issues that impact view preservation.
Some of the more obvious omissions like trees & vegetation [which grow according nature's rules],
and solar access [whether the sun is shining or not, there are stars, weather/clouds and birds in the air].
Also, different people have their own definitions of what 'view' means to them!
Like beauty, 'view' is often in the eyes of the beholder!
Those are serious omissions that will need to be addressed at other times and in other venues.
But, I say let this discussion begin!
The City has fretted about these discussions for years without doing much about having them.
It's past time for these discussions to happen!
The City's enabling of its neighborhoods to initiate such discussions was a wise thing to do.
Now, that the neighborhoods are having such discussions, it is wise of the City to listen!
They are doing the type of critical, grassroots work that is necessary to forge City policy that works.
Without this type of effort, these discussions would likely continue to languish, until some staffer got time to fit it in.
But, the City doesn't have enough staffers to do the work we have, in a consistent and timely fashion.
That means to me that subjects like view preservation, despite the talk, have a de facto low priority.
If the Neighborhoods want to assign a higher priority to view preservation, why not let them do it?
Is the view protection language generated by South Hill perfect?
No, but its a good start.
Is this view protection language controversial?
You bet it is! That's why addressing it earlier rather than later is better.
Is this view protection language comprehensive?
No, but it gets the process started, and sometimes inertia represents the biggest hurdle in such matters.
I hope other Neighborhoods will take heart in this early success and be encouraged to add to it from their own perspectives.
That way, we can slowly build a more comprehensive body of information to represent common Neighborhood values that will do nothing but help us in the future.
Thanks, South Hill!
Keep up the good work.
The Bellingham City Council approved that new policy last night, after reviewing the results of 18 months of effort and hearing many South Hill residents testify in support of it as one way to help preserve the Neighborhood's character.
This new policy doesn't actually change development regulations, but it does condition future development to the extent it represents the legitimate concerns of current residents, businesses and property owners.
And, it initiates the dialogue about what rules might be changed in the future to protect views, not only in South Hill, but other neighborhoods as well.
View preservation is one of those discussions that applies city wide in one way or another,
And, its a discussion the city needs to take to the next level, so everyone has fair a share in determining City policy.
Some thought the measure presented didn't go far enough.
Others thought it went too far.
Still others preferred to wait until a 'comprehensive' measure was developed and agreed to.
That one sounded like more of an attempt to not do anything for a long time!
But, all of these opinions had some merit!
By the advocates own admission the measure neglected to address some major issues that impact view preservation.
Some of the more obvious omissions like trees & vegetation [which grow according nature's rules],
and solar access [whether the sun is shining or not, there are stars, weather/clouds and birds in the air].
Also, different people have their own definitions of what 'view' means to them!
Like beauty, 'view' is often in the eyes of the beholder!
Those are serious omissions that will need to be addressed at other times and in other venues.
But, I say let this discussion begin!
The City has fretted about these discussions for years without doing much about having them.
It's past time for these discussions to happen!
The City's enabling of its neighborhoods to initiate such discussions was a wise thing to do.
Now, that the neighborhoods are having such discussions, it is wise of the City to listen!
They are doing the type of critical, grassroots work that is necessary to forge City policy that works.
Without this type of effort, these discussions would likely continue to languish, until some staffer got time to fit it in.
But, the City doesn't have enough staffers to do the work we have, in a consistent and timely fashion.
That means to me that subjects like view preservation, despite the talk, have a de facto low priority.
If the Neighborhoods want to assign a higher priority to view preservation, why not let them do it?
Is the view protection language generated by South Hill perfect?
No, but its a good start.
Is this view protection language controversial?
You bet it is! That's why addressing it earlier rather than later is better.
Is this view protection language comprehensive?
No, but it gets the process started, and sometimes inertia represents the biggest hurdle in such matters.
I hope other Neighborhoods will take heart in this early success and be encouraged to add to it from their own perspectives.
That way, we can slowly build a more comprehensive body of information to represent common Neighborhood values that will do nothing but help us in the future.
Thanks, South Hill!
Keep up the good work.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Politics Without Principle? We Can Do Much Better Than That!
-----------------------------------
'Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one.' - Dwight D. Eisenhower
'It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it's the parts that I do understand.' -Mark Twain-
-------------------------------------
Earlier blogs have addressed the discrepancies that exist between election claims and candidates actual performance history.
This one deals with how candidates and elected officials act in their pursuit of office.
People who want to get elected, or re-elected badly enough will sometimes do almost anything to achieve that goal.
That sometimes means using methods they would not imagine using when dealing with friends and family.
That behavior has been rightly termed 'dirty politics', because it deals with intentional lies, distortion of facts, rumor mongering and maybe worse.
But, because of our First Amendment right of free speech, all but the most egregious of these acts are considered 'legal'.
American history is full of examples of this behavior, so desperate are people in things political.
But, rather than celebrate our exercising this 'freedom' by using questionable practices, I find it appalling that some people would squander their freedom in this way!
After all, they are also 'free' to practice common decency and those other good traits that people hold so dear!
Why is that dirty politics is seen as OK? Especially when those practicing it say they all they really want is to represent us fairly?
I find that inherent contradiction very troubling, to say the least.
It says to me that if someone is willing to lie to get elected, they are likely to keep lying when they are in office!
That is exactly what has made politics a 'dirty word'! Dirty politics!
Going negative in a campaign should be an indication of what will likely happen in office, if that candidate gets elected.
Sometimes doing that is part of campaign strategy, but it can also be seen as a act of desperation in which anything goes.
Unfortunately, all such established patterns of conduct or habits are hard to break - particularly bad ones.
It's just that simple.
My choice has always been to try and conduct myself in a straightforward and respectful manner.
I may not always succeed in this, but I try hard to do it, because that was the standard of conduct I was taught many years ago.
Sometimes, I am still tempted to act in ways that I know my own Mother would not be proud of.
When that happens, it is a sign that I need to calm down, rethink what I'm doing, and get back to basics!
That's hard to do, especially in the heat of a grueling, high stakes campaign with an uncertain outcome.
I know that because I've been a candidate for office myself.
But, the first time I was a candidate, it was for appointment to office to fill a seat vacated by the death of a Council member.
Because I had been a good citizen, paid my debts and generally stayed out of trouble, I was as qualified for that office as anyone. At least by the requirements of our City Charter, first passed in 1972.
And, because I was educated, healthy, retired from a long professional career, and willing to spend the time necessary to learn and perform in that public office, all that helped me gain sufficient confidence from the six people already serving as Councilors who would determine who would fill the vacant seat.
But, they had other choices too.
Nine qualified people applied for that vacant seat back in December of 1998, and some were far better known or qualified than me.
Two of the applicants were considered favorites for the appointment, but the Council was evenly split between them.
So, I eventually got the nod, as the 'unanimous' second choice, which as surprise that was but OK by me.
That 6-0 vote was enough to launch me into serving in local government, in a public office I had never aspired to.
I had no public record before that moment, except for the time I served in the US Navy.
But, I had lived in Bellingham for several years, worked here, and my wife and I had gotten to know a number of people.
Knowing people here was helpful too, because they knew other people and the word got spread that I was probably OK for that job.
Now, almost nine years later, I've been through two public elections - one to be elected -not appointed- the first time, and the other to be re-elected.
Each election was a lot of work, even though in the first one it turned out I ran unopposed.
The second election was unplanned, but others convinced me to run again - so I could help bring some unfinished issues closer to resolution.
The 'fun' part of those elections for me was the real focus they required on issues, on future visions for our community, and on how to improve our public process.
These things require tremendous effort to learn and understand enough to even begin effectively addressing them.
Because of the time I had spent in office studying the issues facing the City, I was pretty well prepared to speak to them.
That experience came in handy at forums and when my opponent made claims that were not grounded in fact.
But, how can a citizen -even a part time public official- really learn enough to be effective in resolving big issues?
One way is to study hard, by reading, attending conferences, and visiting other places, all of which I tried to do.
Another way is to spend time in discussion with others, including experienced staff and those who are professionally trained.
But, listening to citizens and hearing their ideas and concerns is every bit as important as knowledge and experience!
That is simply because public problems have to be resolved in a public setting and with the public involved!
That's also why political science is called a 'practical science', and not an exact science.
Believe me, it ain't exact, but it is exacting!
Understanding how to deal with that dynamic is critical.
Most people never have to subject themselves to that degree of public scrutiny, and that intense sunlight can be very uncomfortable at times!
But, who said politics, or serving in public office -elected or not- has to be comfortable?
Under these conditions, 'progress' is defined very differently from what we usually expect.
That's because by their very nature public issues rarely ever get completely 'finished'.
They tend to re-occur again and again, because things do change and people in office also change from time to time.
And, any measurement of progress on public issues, has to include a measurement of 'public process'.
That usually means whether people are satisfied they have been properly heard and the decisions made are fair.
That is why the work of any elected official is never over; it requires continuously satisfying the public's need for open, honest and fair public process!
I never planned a career in public service, either as a professional or an elected.
But others have, some from an early enough time in their life to actually train for it.
And, there is an enormous need for such people, and their talents.
Thank goodness Dan Pike was one of those people!
Like several others now running for office, Dan Pike has not taken the path to public service through the ballot box, until now.
But, unlike me and other appointees, he will need to first attain office by being voted into it by the public.
And like me and others, Dan Pike's education in Planning & Public Administration helped him get the jobs he has held, and perform well the work he has chosen.
Unlike me, Dan Pike already has important public accomplishments to his credit, and has gained valuable real life experience in the process.
He is well-respected by his peers, and the many elected officials -from diverse jurisdictions- that he works with regularly.
Pike understands what it takes to get difficult and complicated jobs done, despite funding uncertainties, competing priorities, the public spotlight, and differences of opinion.
In other words, he has been put to the test for which he was trained, and has passed it with flying colors!
Now, he is ready for a different challenge.
Dan Pike has all the training, work experience, and temperment he needs to succeed as our next Mayor.
But, more importantly, Dan Pike has the habits of honesty, openess as well as the capacity to include everyone in the public process.
Dan Pike also has the good habit of putting principle before politics, whether it is during an election, or while he is serving in office!
He has what it takes to become not just a good, but a great Mayor!
I'm willing to give him that chance.
Our issues are real.
The time is short.
Bellingham's future is at a cross-roads.
The choice is ours!
I will vote for Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
Please join me in helping elect him to that office.
BTW, I am grateful that Seth Fleetwood has also decided to endorse Dan Pike!
-------------------------------
Worrying about what's right is always more important than worrying about who's right.
"It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary." -Winston Churchill
'Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one.' - Dwight D. Eisenhower
'It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it's the parts that I do understand.' -Mark Twain-
-------------------------------------
Earlier blogs have addressed the discrepancies that exist between election claims and candidates actual performance history.
This one deals with how candidates and elected officials act in their pursuit of office.
People who want to get elected, or re-elected badly enough will sometimes do almost anything to achieve that goal.
That sometimes means using methods they would not imagine using when dealing with friends and family.
That behavior has been rightly termed 'dirty politics', because it deals with intentional lies, distortion of facts, rumor mongering and maybe worse.
But, because of our First Amendment right of free speech, all but the most egregious of these acts are considered 'legal'.
American history is full of examples of this behavior, so desperate are people in things political.
But, rather than celebrate our exercising this 'freedom' by using questionable practices, I find it appalling that some people would squander their freedom in this way!
After all, they are also 'free' to practice common decency and those other good traits that people hold so dear!
Why is that dirty politics is seen as OK? Especially when those practicing it say they all they really want is to represent us fairly?
I find that inherent contradiction very troubling, to say the least.
It says to me that if someone is willing to lie to get elected, they are likely to keep lying when they are in office!
That is exactly what has made politics a 'dirty word'! Dirty politics!
Going negative in a campaign should be an indication of what will likely happen in office, if that candidate gets elected.
Sometimes doing that is part of campaign strategy, but it can also be seen as a act of desperation in which anything goes.
Unfortunately, all such established patterns of conduct or habits are hard to break - particularly bad ones.
It's just that simple.
My choice has always been to try and conduct myself in a straightforward and respectful manner.
I may not always succeed in this, but I try hard to do it, because that was the standard of conduct I was taught many years ago.
Sometimes, I am still tempted to act in ways that I know my own Mother would not be proud of.
When that happens, it is a sign that I need to calm down, rethink what I'm doing, and get back to basics!
That's hard to do, especially in the heat of a grueling, high stakes campaign with an uncertain outcome.
I know that because I've been a candidate for office myself.
But, the first time I was a candidate, it was for appointment to office to fill a seat vacated by the death of a Council member.
Because I had been a good citizen, paid my debts and generally stayed out of trouble, I was as qualified for that office as anyone. At least by the requirements of our City Charter, first passed in 1972.
And, because I was educated, healthy, retired from a long professional career, and willing to spend the time necessary to learn and perform in that public office, all that helped me gain sufficient confidence from the six people already serving as Councilors who would determine who would fill the vacant seat.
But, they had other choices too.
Nine qualified people applied for that vacant seat back in December of 1998, and some were far better known or qualified than me.
Two of the applicants were considered favorites for the appointment, but the Council was evenly split between them.
So, I eventually got the nod, as the 'unanimous' second choice, which as surprise that was but OK by me.
That 6-0 vote was enough to launch me into serving in local government, in a public office I had never aspired to.
I had no public record before that moment, except for the time I served in the US Navy.
But, I had lived in Bellingham for several years, worked here, and my wife and I had gotten to know a number of people.
Knowing people here was helpful too, because they knew other people and the word got spread that I was probably OK for that job.
Now, almost nine years later, I've been through two public elections - one to be elected -not appointed- the first time, and the other to be re-elected.
Each election was a lot of work, even though in the first one it turned out I ran unopposed.
The second election was unplanned, but others convinced me to run again - so I could help bring some unfinished issues closer to resolution.
The 'fun' part of those elections for me was the real focus they required on issues, on future visions for our community, and on how to improve our public process.
These things require tremendous effort to learn and understand enough to even begin effectively addressing them.
Because of the time I had spent in office studying the issues facing the City, I was pretty well prepared to speak to them.
That experience came in handy at forums and when my opponent made claims that were not grounded in fact.
But, how can a citizen -even a part time public official- really learn enough to be effective in resolving big issues?
One way is to study hard, by reading, attending conferences, and visiting other places, all of which I tried to do.
Another way is to spend time in discussion with others, including experienced staff and those who are professionally trained.
But, listening to citizens and hearing their ideas and concerns is every bit as important as knowledge and experience!
That is simply because public problems have to be resolved in a public setting and with the public involved!
That's also why political science is called a 'practical science', and not an exact science.
Believe me, it ain't exact, but it is exacting!
Understanding how to deal with that dynamic is critical.
Most people never have to subject themselves to that degree of public scrutiny, and that intense sunlight can be very uncomfortable at times!
But, who said politics, or serving in public office -elected or not- has to be comfortable?
Under these conditions, 'progress' is defined very differently from what we usually expect.
That's because by their very nature public issues rarely ever get completely 'finished'.
They tend to re-occur again and again, because things do change and people in office also change from time to time.
And, any measurement of progress on public issues, has to include a measurement of 'public process'.
That usually means whether people are satisfied they have been properly heard and the decisions made are fair.
That is why the work of any elected official is never over; it requires continuously satisfying the public's need for open, honest and fair public process!
I never planned a career in public service, either as a professional or an elected.
But others have, some from an early enough time in their life to actually train for it.
And, there is an enormous need for such people, and their talents.
Thank goodness Dan Pike was one of those people!
Like several others now running for office, Dan Pike has not taken the path to public service through the ballot box, until now.
But, unlike me and other appointees, he will need to first attain office by being voted into it by the public.
And like me and others, Dan Pike's education in Planning & Public Administration helped him get the jobs he has held, and perform well the work he has chosen.
Unlike me, Dan Pike already has important public accomplishments to his credit, and has gained valuable real life experience in the process.
He is well-respected by his peers, and the many elected officials -from diverse jurisdictions- that he works with regularly.
Pike understands what it takes to get difficult and complicated jobs done, despite funding uncertainties, competing priorities, the public spotlight, and differences of opinion.
In other words, he has been put to the test for which he was trained, and has passed it with flying colors!
Now, he is ready for a different challenge.
Dan Pike has all the training, work experience, and temperment he needs to succeed as our next Mayor.
But, more importantly, Dan Pike has the habits of honesty, openess as well as the capacity to include everyone in the public process.
Dan Pike also has the good habit of putting principle before politics, whether it is during an election, or while he is serving in office!
He has what it takes to become not just a good, but a great Mayor!
I'm willing to give him that chance.
Our issues are real.
The time is short.
Bellingham's future is at a cross-roads.
The choice is ours!
I will vote for Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
Please join me in helping elect him to that office.
BTW, I am grateful that Seth Fleetwood has also decided to endorse Dan Pike!
-------------------------------
Worrying about what's right is always more important than worrying about who's right.
"It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary." -Winston Churchill
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Campaign Rhetoric Versus Institutional Memory: A Litany of Concerns - Part 4
Everyone has his day and some days last longer than others.
- Winston Churchill
The activist is not the man who says the river is dirty.
The activist is the man who cleans up the river. - Ross Perot
----------------------------------------------
Since this blog continues earlier blogs on the same theme, I am once again repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
An earlier blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
---------------------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
4. Waterfront Redevelopment - The Mother of all Flip-Flops, or Manchurian Candidate?:
Early on, Dan McShane strongly expressed his opposition to this ambitious undertaking in multiple ways, some more directly than others.
On no other major City issue has his record been so adverse and so consistent!
• First, he was been critical of the Port of Bellingham's acquisition of the entire former G-P site, especially because of the Port's interest in converting the former G-P ASB Lagoon into a state-of-the-art 'Clean Ocean' Marina.
I don't know the origins or depth of his concerns over this idea, but since others have expressed similar concerns, suffice to say he shares those in common with them, including the so-called 'Bellingham Bay Foundation'.
Maybe his main problem is a lack of vision -on a big scale- of what our Community can become in the future?
• He has been critical of the Interlocal Agreement between the City and the Port to partner on this project to achieve multiple goals for the benefit of the entire Community.
A number of people, including me, share this concern but have expressed it differently, with positive ideas instead of negative criticisms.
But, as someone intimately involved with making the decision to approve this Interlocal, I do clearly understand why this Interlocal was needed and what it means.
It was needed to enable the Port to have sufficient confidence to go forward with the acquisition of the entire G-P property, and to give them the necessary incentive to seek a higher and better use than what it formerly was.
It means that the City and the Port will 'agree to agree' as long as that remains feasible for both parties.
It has the capability to be modified as often as may become necessary.
It allows the City to cleanup some old landfills at the same time that contaminated industrial sites are cleaned up, but assigns the Port to manage this work as part of the entire cleanup for efficiency.
It provides an opportunity to make an investment for our community's long term benefit, with the amount of that investment and its timing and disposition to be determined after careful consideration.
It provides a tangible means of turning our community's vision for redeveloping the waterfront into a reality; turning the Waterfront Futures Group's recommendations into an exciting plan for action instead of inert and unproductive shelf art.
It holds the prospect for the type of economic development that every community dreams of having; clean, living wage jobs that employ people who have or develop roots here and positively contribute to sustain us as a vibrant, progressive area.
It promises ample public access to our marine waterfront in a way that will make Bellingham Bay our 'front door' again.
It will provide for the most desirable mixed use redevelopment imagineable, allowing people to live, work. learn and play in close proximity to downtown, without necessity for single occupancy cars.
It will become a magnet for innovative, green technology; a living demonstration of what future life can become and sustain.
Those are the things I see being made possible by this Partnership between the City and Port.
Of course, we must be cautious and responsible!
That is implicit in the entire undertaking, and I am tempted to resent people even thinking otherwise.
But, that is their right if they choose to do that, and we must respect that right.
I just have a problem with unfounded criticisms, particularly the kind that has the smell of petty or self-centered politics!
Tonight I heard the phrase "the tyranny of 'or'".
That seems to fit this discussion.
Instead of using the word 'and', people of limited vision prefer to use the word 'or'.
By that method, a system of false choices is established which can severely limit progress toward big, visionary goals.
I think that limited vision is exactly what is at work with the County, and unfortunately, Dan McShane has been its spokesman.
That is a position that I still have difficulty in properly understanding, despite several attempts at getting an explanation.
• Dan McShane has, and continues to strongly oppose Whatcom County's participation in the Local Infrastructure Financing Toll [LIFT] to help self-finance waterfront redevelopment.
He has chosen to take this position despite clear County Economic Goals to contrary, which seem to be written to support exactly this type of redevelopment!
Instead, he thinks of it as 'evergreen' funding that mainly 'robs' the County's future general fund.
So does Pete Kremen, but we've come to expect that kind of non-visionary thinking from him.
What is this attitude about, really?
Wasn't the concept of tax-increment financing explained well enough?
After all, our State Representative, Kelli Linville, worked very hard to get this legislation passed, with Bellingham the first City in line to benefit from it!
Both the City and the Port saw the obvious advantages of LIFT and were very glad it became available as a new funding option, but one that only happens as redevelopment actually occurs!
No redevelopment, no LIFT, means nothing is lost if nothing is gained.
But McShane and the County choose to see it only as potentially lost revenue!
What's with that?
Don't they want to see Waterfront Redevelopment happen?
Or, are they so cynical that they would rather just receive a future windfall than invest in making it happen?
Can't they see what a huge REGIONAL advantage a redeveloped Waterfront would be?
I won't repeat my earlier blog on this subject now, except to say it is consistent with what I'm saying now.
Limited vision!
Maybe some other reasons are at work, like some kind of a lose-lose competition, or maybe the County's long simmering animosity toward the Port.
All I know is we've got to get above that kind of thinking.
Or, non-thinking!
• Dan McShane has actively promoted the the agenda of the Bellingham Bay Foundation, to oppose and undermine waterfront redevelopment efforts by the Port of Bellingham the City of Bellingham, seemingly, by whatever means possible.
Conservation Northwest actually housed the BBF, which became the public face of some clever, but deceptive activities disguised as popular 'issues'.
One of these was the so-called 'Healthy Bay Initiative' which actually attracted enough signatures to get on the ballot, but was thrown out -when challenged- as illegal.
Now, why would otherwise sensible folks spend the time and effort on such an exercise?
Why try so hard to deceive unsuspecting, but caring citizens?
And, why would the BBF, with it's hired hand 'Director', try so hard to influence popular opinion to actually undermine the Waterfront Redevelopment effort?
Whose interest is served by that?
That will remain a mystery to me, but also a testament to the futility of common sense when it comes to things considered 'political'.
Again, Dan McShane actively supported this attempted clever, but ill-fated initiative.
And, he hasn't yet explained why?
Did he think that attitude would help him get elected mayor?
Since the BBF debacle, Dan McShane has 'reassessed' his position, but speaks of it only when he has no other choice.
Now, that I can understand!
The 'Healthy Bay' 'initiative' had a disagreeable odor to it, despite the cachet suggested by its title.
But, that 'initiative' just did not square with the public's expectation of realizing the wonderful vision of redeveloping the waterfront in way that is productive and benefits the community.
What were McShane and his supporters thinking?
I do not envy his present discomfort on this issue!
But, I'm not convinced he would act any differently than he has, if he were to become Mayor.
As mayor, he could do real damage to our Waterfront Redevelopment efforts in ways that he couldn't before!
That is a prospect that I would like to avoid.
A 'Manchurian Candidate' with a pre-programmed agenda is not what I want in a Mayor!
And, I believe many others feel the same way!
Why would anyone want to throw away this opportunity of a lifetime?
What community wouldn't enthusiastically support it?
I can't think of one.
And, if I could, I wouldn't want to live there!
--------------------
Dan Pike has legitimate concerns about the Waterfront Redevelopment too.
But, unlike the other Dan, he wants to see this ambitious undertaking actually succeed!
There will be challenges, but these are primarily financial in nature.
There is no question that environmental and social matters will be greatly improved.
I have confidence that these can be reasonably resolved, with the risks and rewards shared equitably between the City, Port and those who will be attracted as anchor tenants and developers.
Of course, this is a very big challenge with risks.
But its also a big opportunity!
Just think about the alternative.
If there was ever an opportunity for positive, open, visionary and responsible leadership for the City of Bellingham, it is now!
I think Dan Pike fits that role much better than Dan McShane.
I would like to look back to this moment in time 20 years from now, and see a Bellingham Waterfront District that citizens are understandably proud of!
One that serves as an inviting front door to our City.
One that continues to set the standard for what a 'Green' sustainable Neighborhood can be.
One that provides the jobs, business opportunities, learning venues, living space and recreational enjoyment that are now envisioned.
It makes a difference who you vote for as Mayor!
Please think of this election season as more than just 'politics as usual'!
That's a game that everyone loses.
Instead, think of our future, and which Mayor is more likely to get where we want to go.
--------------------------------
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years.
To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day. - Winston Churchill
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
- Winston Churchill
The activist is not the man who says the river is dirty.
The activist is the man who cleans up the river. - Ross Perot
----------------------------------------------
Since this blog continues earlier blogs on the same theme, I am once again repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
An earlier blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
---------------------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
4. Waterfront Redevelopment - The Mother of all Flip-Flops, or Manchurian Candidate?:
Early on, Dan McShane strongly expressed his opposition to this ambitious undertaking in multiple ways, some more directly than others.
On no other major City issue has his record been so adverse and so consistent!
• First, he was been critical of the Port of Bellingham's acquisition of the entire former G-P site, especially because of the Port's interest in converting the former G-P ASB Lagoon into a state-of-the-art 'Clean Ocean' Marina.
I don't know the origins or depth of his concerns over this idea, but since others have expressed similar concerns, suffice to say he shares those in common with them, including the so-called 'Bellingham Bay Foundation'.
Maybe his main problem is a lack of vision -on a big scale- of what our Community can become in the future?
• He has been critical of the Interlocal Agreement between the City and the Port to partner on this project to achieve multiple goals for the benefit of the entire Community.
A number of people, including me, share this concern but have expressed it differently, with positive ideas instead of negative criticisms.
But, as someone intimately involved with making the decision to approve this Interlocal, I do clearly understand why this Interlocal was needed and what it means.
It was needed to enable the Port to have sufficient confidence to go forward with the acquisition of the entire G-P property, and to give them the necessary incentive to seek a higher and better use than what it formerly was.
It means that the City and the Port will 'agree to agree' as long as that remains feasible for both parties.
It has the capability to be modified as often as may become necessary.
It allows the City to cleanup some old landfills at the same time that contaminated industrial sites are cleaned up, but assigns the Port to manage this work as part of the entire cleanup for efficiency.
It provides an opportunity to make an investment for our community's long term benefit, with the amount of that investment and its timing and disposition to be determined after careful consideration.
It provides a tangible means of turning our community's vision for redeveloping the waterfront into a reality; turning the Waterfront Futures Group's recommendations into an exciting plan for action instead of inert and unproductive shelf art.
It holds the prospect for the type of economic development that every community dreams of having; clean, living wage jobs that employ people who have or develop roots here and positively contribute to sustain us as a vibrant, progressive area.
It promises ample public access to our marine waterfront in a way that will make Bellingham Bay our 'front door' again.
It will provide for the most desirable mixed use redevelopment imagineable, allowing people to live, work. learn and play in close proximity to downtown, without necessity for single occupancy cars.
It will become a magnet for innovative, green technology; a living demonstration of what future life can become and sustain.
Those are the things I see being made possible by this Partnership between the City and Port.
Of course, we must be cautious and responsible!
That is implicit in the entire undertaking, and I am tempted to resent people even thinking otherwise.
But, that is their right if they choose to do that, and we must respect that right.
I just have a problem with unfounded criticisms, particularly the kind that has the smell of petty or self-centered politics!
Tonight I heard the phrase "the tyranny of 'or'".
That seems to fit this discussion.
Instead of using the word 'and', people of limited vision prefer to use the word 'or'.
By that method, a system of false choices is established which can severely limit progress toward big, visionary goals.
I think that limited vision is exactly what is at work with the County, and unfortunately, Dan McShane has been its spokesman.
That is a position that I still have difficulty in properly understanding, despite several attempts at getting an explanation.
• Dan McShane has, and continues to strongly oppose Whatcom County's participation in the Local Infrastructure Financing Toll [LIFT] to help self-finance waterfront redevelopment.
He has chosen to take this position despite clear County Economic Goals to contrary, which seem to be written to support exactly this type of redevelopment!
Instead, he thinks of it as 'evergreen' funding that mainly 'robs' the County's future general fund.
So does Pete Kremen, but we've come to expect that kind of non-visionary thinking from him.
What is this attitude about, really?
Wasn't the concept of tax-increment financing explained well enough?
After all, our State Representative, Kelli Linville, worked very hard to get this legislation passed, with Bellingham the first City in line to benefit from it!
Both the City and the Port saw the obvious advantages of LIFT and were very glad it became available as a new funding option, but one that only happens as redevelopment actually occurs!
No redevelopment, no LIFT, means nothing is lost if nothing is gained.
But McShane and the County choose to see it only as potentially lost revenue!
What's with that?
Don't they want to see Waterfront Redevelopment happen?
Or, are they so cynical that they would rather just receive a future windfall than invest in making it happen?
Can't they see what a huge REGIONAL advantage a redeveloped Waterfront would be?
I won't repeat my earlier blog on this subject now, except to say it is consistent with what I'm saying now.
Limited vision!
Maybe some other reasons are at work, like some kind of a lose-lose competition, or maybe the County's long simmering animosity toward the Port.
All I know is we've got to get above that kind of thinking.
Or, non-thinking!
• Dan McShane has actively promoted the the agenda of the Bellingham Bay Foundation, to oppose and undermine waterfront redevelopment efforts by the Port of Bellingham the City of Bellingham, seemingly, by whatever means possible.
Conservation Northwest actually housed the BBF, which became the public face of some clever, but deceptive activities disguised as popular 'issues'.
One of these was the so-called 'Healthy Bay Initiative' which actually attracted enough signatures to get on the ballot, but was thrown out -when challenged- as illegal.
Now, why would otherwise sensible folks spend the time and effort on such an exercise?
Why try so hard to deceive unsuspecting, but caring citizens?
And, why would the BBF, with it's hired hand 'Director', try so hard to influence popular opinion to actually undermine the Waterfront Redevelopment effort?
Whose interest is served by that?
That will remain a mystery to me, but also a testament to the futility of common sense when it comes to things considered 'political'.
Again, Dan McShane actively supported this attempted clever, but ill-fated initiative.
And, he hasn't yet explained why?
Did he think that attitude would help him get elected mayor?
Since the BBF debacle, Dan McShane has 'reassessed' his position, but speaks of it only when he has no other choice.
Now, that I can understand!
The 'Healthy Bay' 'initiative' had a disagreeable odor to it, despite the cachet suggested by its title.
But, that 'initiative' just did not square with the public's expectation of realizing the wonderful vision of redeveloping the waterfront in way that is productive and benefits the community.
What were McShane and his supporters thinking?
I do not envy his present discomfort on this issue!
But, I'm not convinced he would act any differently than he has, if he were to become Mayor.
As mayor, he could do real damage to our Waterfront Redevelopment efforts in ways that he couldn't before!
That is a prospect that I would like to avoid.
A 'Manchurian Candidate' with a pre-programmed agenda is not what I want in a Mayor!
And, I believe many others feel the same way!
Why would anyone want to throw away this opportunity of a lifetime?
What community wouldn't enthusiastically support it?
I can't think of one.
And, if I could, I wouldn't want to live there!
--------------------
Dan Pike has legitimate concerns about the Waterfront Redevelopment too.
But, unlike the other Dan, he wants to see this ambitious undertaking actually succeed!
There will be challenges, but these are primarily financial in nature.
There is no question that environmental and social matters will be greatly improved.
I have confidence that these can be reasonably resolved, with the risks and rewards shared equitably between the City, Port and those who will be attracted as anchor tenants and developers.
Of course, this is a very big challenge with risks.
But its also a big opportunity!
Just think about the alternative.
If there was ever an opportunity for positive, open, visionary and responsible leadership for the City of Bellingham, it is now!
I think Dan Pike fits that role much better than Dan McShane.
I would like to look back to this moment in time 20 years from now, and see a Bellingham Waterfront District that citizens are understandably proud of!
One that serves as an inviting front door to our City.
One that continues to set the standard for what a 'Green' sustainable Neighborhood can be.
One that provides the jobs, business opportunities, learning venues, living space and recreational enjoyment that are now envisioned.
It makes a difference who you vote for as Mayor!
Please think of this election season as more than just 'politics as usual'!
That's a game that everyone loses.
Instead, think of our future, and which Mayor is more likely to get where we want to go.
--------------------------------
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years.
To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day. - Winston Churchill
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Campaign Rhetoric Versus Institutional Memory: A Litany of Concerns - Part 3
---------------------------------------
Perhaps the most valuable result of all education is the ability to make yourself do the thing you have to do. --Thomas Henry Huxley - 1825-1895-
---------------------------------------
Since this blog continues earlier blogs on the same theme, I am again repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
An earlier blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
---------------------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
3. Stormwater Facilities - It's not just Erosion & Flood Control any more, it's Treatment and Removal of Pollutants!:
• Whatcom County has a Flood Tax which it collects from all property owners.
Forty per cent of these monies gets collected from property owners in the City of Bellingham, yet the County doesn't feel any obligation to share those funds with the City.
That is one reason the City needed to increase its Stormwater rates back in 2001.
Flood taxes were also used to fund the County wide WRIA-1 Process for several years until the going got rough, when these funds were simply cut off from being used for that purpose. [This was the subject of an earlier blog]
Flood taxes are old-fashioned taxes because they disproportionately fall on smaller property owners, favoring the wealthy.
But, they are only to be used for purposes related to flood and erosion control.
• The 1996 Clean Water Act Amendments required Stormwater treatment, in addition to flood and erosion control, which mandated rethinking what municipalities must do to comply.
Essentially, that meant building, operating and maintaining facilities to handle all Stormwater, including so-called 'non-point' source runoff from residential areas.
That was a big change that required a big effort to fund and achieve.
Yet, Dan McShane resisted the City's efforts to increase its Surface & Storm Water Utility rates to provide the adequate and stable funding needed for such an expanded program.
That despite new DOE regulations - applicable primarily to Cities.
Ostensibly, he argued against the rate increase on behalf of certain of his clients, who were in strong opposition.
Some of these folks weren't as concerned with the rates that were proposed, as they were with having any rates at all!
I still wonder if he really understands why this was necessary?
The City's Stormwater Utility is a big deal that any Mayor should understand.
And, it is an Enterprise Fund, which means it must totally support itself from Stormwater rates.
Anyone who considers themselves dedicated to protecting the environment will understand why such a program is needed.
But, a much simpler reason is that in 2001, the City Council fully authorized and committed to this program and the funding it requires.
The City is responsible -in perpetuity- for stormwater releases into Bellingham Bay regardless of source.
That even requires a separate NESHAPS permit, just like the permit the City must have to release treated wastewater effluent from the Post Point Treatment facility to Bellingham Bay.
Think about it.
That takes facilities, trained staff, maintenance and the adequate, stable funding to provide all of that - forever!
The City retained the services of CH2M Hill, an expert consultant on this subject, to help develop the program to be in compliance with regulations, and to be as fair to everyone as possible.
This resulted in a system based upon the amount of impervious area each property owner has, which is considered the best criteria available.
In fact, the Stormwater rates are fairer than the City's Water rates, because not everyone has a meter to measure water use.
• Criticism of the City's inability to effectively protect its urbanized 2 percent of Lake Whatcom has also been heard.
But, these Surface & Storm Water retrofits also depend on the same stormwater rates discussed above!
At least the City did take action, although no significant similar action was undertaken by the County to protect its 96 percent of this watershed.
Go figure.
Does it sound as if the pot is calling the kettle black?
Thankfully, the Cable Street drainage that enters Lake Whatcom close to the City's water intake is now finally being addressed by the County.
We can only hope it works better for Phosphorus removal than the City's 'Structural BMP' stormwater facilities do.
But, it would be a surprise if it does.
At least, the Cable Street facility will remove some heavy metals and other particulates, with is an improvement over what we have had for some time.
• Before leaving this topic, another important point needs to be re-emphasized.
By far the best -and cheapest- stormwater treatment that exists, is provided by Mother Nature!
That is the main point of watershed preservation; to reduce density as far as possible, and condition what occurs with buffers and retention of natural vegetation.
Those methods are called -maybe you guessed it- 'Non-Structural Best Management Practices [BMPs]'!
That's it!
Attack the problem before it occurs, at its source.
Ideally, that's before development happens.
• The County has talked about Stormwater systems around Lake Whatcom for some time, starting with the inadequate 'Entranco Report'.
But, so far, it's been almost only talk, with the exception of the Cable Street retrofit.
The issue of funding is a perpetual problem, regardless of jurisdiction.
And, because it is likely to be expensive and controversial, it will likely continue to be avoided as long as possible.
But the real problem, especially around Lake Whatcom, is that Structural Stormwater facilities just don't work very well.
That is why watershed preservation, the TDR program, the requirement for adequate buffers, native vegetation and better, lake-friendly living practices are so critical.
But, these concerns are critically important to the City as well.
It doesn't help to have polluted runoff, generated on County lands, drain into streams up-hill from where the City must then provide Stormwater facilities at its cost!
Correcting that problem is something only the County can address.
Yet, the County, during McShane's tenure, has done little to prevent this unmitigated pollution from occurring.
In fact, the County's Public Works Director and Assistant Public Works Director have left for greener pastures, so frustrated were they at the County's inaction on important water issues.
So, with no political leadership and a diminished technical staff, the County has just continued to equivocate on its Stormwater responsibilities.
Why hasn't this situation been addressed more forcefully by the County Council?
I hope the answer isn't the same one the City heard when it had the courage to raise its Stormwater rates back in 2001.
That answer amounted to nothing more than complaining about the City's action, denial that a problem exists, and the lack of courage required to willingly comply with the law!
Dan McShane was in a position to do better, but he didn't.
This information predictably won't be found in any campaign rhetoric.
But, it is part of the institutional memory of non-action on the part of the County regarding Stormwater management.
---------------------------------------
The world is divided into people who get things done, and people who get the credit.
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Perhaps the most valuable result of all education is the ability to make yourself do the thing you have to do. --Thomas Henry Huxley - 1825-1895-
---------------------------------------
Since this blog continues earlier blogs on the same theme, I am again repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
An earlier blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
---------------------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
3. Stormwater Facilities - It's not just Erosion & Flood Control any more, it's Treatment and Removal of Pollutants!:
• Whatcom County has a Flood Tax which it collects from all property owners.
Forty per cent of these monies gets collected from property owners in the City of Bellingham, yet the County doesn't feel any obligation to share those funds with the City.
That is one reason the City needed to increase its Stormwater rates back in 2001.
Flood taxes were also used to fund the County wide WRIA-1 Process for several years until the going got rough, when these funds were simply cut off from being used for that purpose. [This was the subject of an earlier blog]
Flood taxes are old-fashioned taxes because they disproportionately fall on smaller property owners, favoring the wealthy.
But, they are only to be used for purposes related to flood and erosion control.
• The 1996 Clean Water Act Amendments required Stormwater treatment, in addition to flood and erosion control, which mandated rethinking what municipalities must do to comply.
Essentially, that meant building, operating and maintaining facilities to handle all Stormwater, including so-called 'non-point' source runoff from residential areas.
That was a big change that required a big effort to fund and achieve.
Yet, Dan McShane resisted the City's efforts to increase its Surface & Storm Water Utility rates to provide the adequate and stable funding needed for such an expanded program.
That despite new DOE regulations - applicable primarily to Cities.
Ostensibly, he argued against the rate increase on behalf of certain of his clients, who were in strong opposition.
Some of these folks weren't as concerned with the rates that were proposed, as they were with having any rates at all!
I still wonder if he really understands why this was necessary?
The City's Stormwater Utility is a big deal that any Mayor should understand.
And, it is an Enterprise Fund, which means it must totally support itself from Stormwater rates.
Anyone who considers themselves dedicated to protecting the environment will understand why such a program is needed.
But, a much simpler reason is that in 2001, the City Council fully authorized and committed to this program and the funding it requires.
The City is responsible -in perpetuity- for stormwater releases into Bellingham Bay regardless of source.
That even requires a separate NESHAPS permit, just like the permit the City must have to release treated wastewater effluent from the Post Point Treatment facility to Bellingham Bay.
Think about it.
That takes facilities, trained staff, maintenance and the adequate, stable funding to provide all of that - forever!
The City retained the services of CH2M Hill, an expert consultant on this subject, to help develop the program to be in compliance with regulations, and to be as fair to everyone as possible.
This resulted in a system based upon the amount of impervious area each property owner has, which is considered the best criteria available.
In fact, the Stormwater rates are fairer than the City's Water rates, because not everyone has a meter to measure water use.
• Criticism of the City's inability to effectively protect its urbanized 2 percent of Lake Whatcom has also been heard.
But, these Surface & Storm Water retrofits also depend on the same stormwater rates discussed above!
At least the City did take action, although no significant similar action was undertaken by the County to protect its 96 percent of this watershed.
Go figure.
Does it sound as if the pot is calling the kettle black?
Thankfully, the Cable Street drainage that enters Lake Whatcom close to the City's water intake is now finally being addressed by the County.
We can only hope it works better for Phosphorus removal than the City's 'Structural BMP' stormwater facilities do.
But, it would be a surprise if it does.
At least, the Cable Street facility will remove some heavy metals and other particulates, with is an improvement over what we have had for some time.
• Before leaving this topic, another important point needs to be re-emphasized.
By far the best -and cheapest- stormwater treatment that exists, is provided by Mother Nature!
That is the main point of watershed preservation; to reduce density as far as possible, and condition what occurs with buffers and retention of natural vegetation.
Those methods are called -maybe you guessed it- 'Non-Structural Best Management Practices [BMPs]'!
That's it!
Attack the problem before it occurs, at its source.
Ideally, that's before development happens.
• The County has talked about Stormwater systems around Lake Whatcom for some time, starting with the inadequate 'Entranco Report'.
But, so far, it's been almost only talk, with the exception of the Cable Street retrofit.
The issue of funding is a perpetual problem, regardless of jurisdiction.
And, because it is likely to be expensive and controversial, it will likely continue to be avoided as long as possible.
But the real problem, especially around Lake Whatcom, is that Structural Stormwater facilities just don't work very well.
That is why watershed preservation, the TDR program, the requirement for adequate buffers, native vegetation and better, lake-friendly living practices are so critical.
But, these concerns are critically important to the City as well.
It doesn't help to have polluted runoff, generated on County lands, drain into streams up-hill from where the City must then provide Stormwater facilities at its cost!
Correcting that problem is something only the County can address.
Yet, the County, during McShane's tenure, has done little to prevent this unmitigated pollution from occurring.
In fact, the County's Public Works Director and Assistant Public Works Director have left for greener pastures, so frustrated were they at the County's inaction on important water issues.
So, with no political leadership and a diminished technical staff, the County has just continued to equivocate on its Stormwater responsibilities.
Why hasn't this situation been addressed more forcefully by the County Council?
I hope the answer isn't the same one the City heard when it had the courage to raise its Stormwater rates back in 2001.
That answer amounted to nothing more than complaining about the City's action, denial that a problem exists, and the lack of courage required to willingly comply with the law!
Dan McShane was in a position to do better, but he didn't.
This information predictably won't be found in any campaign rhetoric.
But, it is part of the institutional memory of non-action on the part of the County regarding Stormwater management.
---------------------------------------
The world is divided into people who get things done, and people who get the credit.
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Whatcom County Park, Recreation, & Open Space Plan: Draft or Daft?
"Sometimes it's easier to understand things than it is to figure them out" -Casey Stengel
'When there are two conflicting versions of the story, the wise course is to believe the one in which people appear at their worst.' --H. Allen Smith--
-----------------------
Today, let's take a short break from comparing campaign rhetoric with institutional memory, and return to the subject of the 'October Surprise.'
-----------------------
For those who aren't familiar with the 'ICT', it is the acronym for 'Inter-jurisdictional Coordinating Team', a small group of staff members from both City and County that meets regularly to discuss the Lake Whatcom Management Program [LWMP] and specifically those actions that are being planned and actually worked on.
Under the current LWMP, the County Executive & the Mayor assign people to this duty, most whom have been involved with Reservoir issues for some time.
That does sometimes help institutional memory.
But, ICT discussions are not open to the public, nor are elected officials -other than Exec & Mayor- welcomed.
I know this first hand from a few years ago when I tried to be included in these meetings.
Maybe, that is as it should be because of the sensitive and often controversial nature of things impacting our Reservoir.
But, it is frustrating and unnecessary to treat all these meetings as essentially 'executive privileged'.
One example, was an ICT meeting that occurred sometime in April 2006, when a Draft County Park Plan was made available for review to members of the ICT.
It turns out the ICT met with both Mike McFarland [County Parks Director] and Paul Leuthold [City Parks Director] and discussed its unfavorable evaluation of planning for more intense recreational use of the watershed.
The ICT was assured that both the Whatcom County Regional Park Plan [Lake Whatcom], and the Draft Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan were weighted towards watershed friendly activities and that a public process would accompany any proposal for building facilities or major improvements.
But, the ICT's concerns were not assuaged by these verbal assurances.
Instead, the ICT questioned why such non-compatible uses (as listed below) would even be included in the Park Plan, if they weren't going to be proposed.
That sounds like a pretty good question to me, that gets right to the heart of the matter!
Because the ICT meetings aren't public, and detailed minutes are not required, there appears to be no written record that can confirm this particular dialogue.
But, members of the ICT do recall both the questions and the responses given.
And, the ICT did develop a summary in May 2006 upon which their comments were based.
Essentially the ICT's comments were lumped in two categories:
1) Proposals the ICT felt should be removed from the Park Plan because they were not compatible with transportation objectives
2) Proposals that increased build-out, stormwater generation, erosion potential, and other high impact land use.
For example park facilities (day lodge probably similar to Samish Park) at the end of North Shore that will become an attraction and increase transportation.
Or, the RV Park option at the South end of Basin 3.
Or, 6 more boat launch ramps
Or, encouragement of retail activities on the lake.
The ICT concluded these are all great ideas for a lake that is primarily a recreation facility.
Anyone would love to have trails and water based facilities for kayaks and canoes, and trails to hike that connect with regional trails.
But someday, we will need to declare that drinking water protection is a much more important undertaking!
And, how well we succeed at achieving that primary goal will determine the future of our community!
The basic irony is that if such a Park does get built and enjoys great success, that very success will also create even bigger challenges as peoople flock here to play in our Water Supply watershed!
These serious concerns remain unacknowledged by the County, in its haste to gain an election Surprise.
Now that is truly troubling!
But, in fairness, I don't believe the County Council has been given the opportunity to review all of this information, especially the part about the Lake Whatcom Regional Park.
The last I heard was that the County Council was briefed early this year, but that briefing did not include the proposed Lake Whatcom Park.
Yet, the information that was shown to me last month at Conservation Northwest seemed far in excess of what the Council has seen
-------------------------------------
Here is the ICT summary of these two documents that was used to frame its questions.
I am publishing this for readers to review, digest and question:
(1) Whatcom County Regional Park Plans
Property Descriptions
Lake Whatcom County Park – North: 218.0 acre park property located on the northeast shoreline of Lake Whatcom and accessed from North Shore Drive. The park’s site includes 10,990 linear feet of shoreline along the route of the historic Bellingham Bay & Eastern Railroad (BB&E) right-of-way (3.0 mile Hertz Trail)
Lake Whatcom County Park – South: Undeveloped 80.3 (or 79.5) acre multi-use park property located on the southeast shoreline of Lake Whatcom accessed from South Bay Drive. The site includes 6,141 (or 7,142) linear feet of shoreline.
Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham, acquire the missing trail segment along the historic BB&E railroad corridor to complete development of the railroad corridor trail conversion around the lake and provide launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road.
Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham: In association with Bellingham, develop boat ramp, hand-carry launch sites, beachfront swimming and access sites, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for railroad trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley: Develop swimming beach, boat ramp and dock, swimming beach and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for lakeshore trail, group picnic facilities, , and lodge with meeting facilities off South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on southeast of shoreline.
1) Whatcom County Regional Park Plans in the Lake Whatcom Watershed (implemented over next 20 years, conceptual, further study may modify project particulars)
Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Possible Improvements
South End
- Develop boat launch ramps, dock, and pier into Lake Whatcom shoreline to support a water trail on the Lake
- Develop a swimming beach, picnic area, and group day-use of the waterfront activity area. Recruit concessionaires to provide canoe and kayak, crew and other hand-carry watercraft use of the shoreline and lake.
- Expand trailhead to provide parking for boat launch facilities, the waterfront beach, and an expanded use of trail opportunities along the shoreline and across Stewart Mountain from the park site
Northeast End
- Develop hike, bike, and horse trails from the park site north and south along the Stewart Mountain on ridgelines to connect with the Wickersham Truck Trail and others
Middle Site
- Eventually, develop rustic cabins, recreational vehicle campground, and possible a lodge facility with meeting rooms, educational exhibits and other family and large group retreat activities
Trail Corridor
- Acquire the last mile from DNR and develop Hertz Trail for multipurpose use along the shoreline from the park site south to Blue Canyon Road. Install interpretive signage and exhibits highlighting the trail’s historic heritage
- Develop water-access sites for a water trail along the shoreline from the park site south to Lake Whatcom County Park – South. Install anchoring buoys, landing platforms, and other improvements to support shared access to trailside picnic tables and shelters, local trails and other activity areas.
Lake Whatcom County Park – South (Hegg Park, Zorbrist and Richards property)
Possible Improvements
Southwest End
- Restore and enhance Brannian Creek through the site and into Lake Whatcom. Conserve the woodlands and wetlands in the south portion of the site along the creek corridor and along South Bay Road.
- Develop boat launch ramps, dock and pier into the Lake Whatcom shoreline to support water trails on the lake.
- Develop a swimming beach, picnic area, and group day-use of the waterfront activity area. Recruit concessionaires to provide canoe and kayak, crew and other hand-carry watercraft use of the shoreline and lake.
- Eventually, develop rustic cabins, recreational vehicle campground, and possible a lodge facility with meeting rooms, educational exhibits and other family and large group retreat activities
- Develop a trailhead to provide parking for boat launch facilities, the waterfront beach, and access to trail opportunities along the shoreline.
Hertz Trail
- Develop a multipurpose trail through the park and along the shoreline and north on Blue Canyon Road to Hertz Trail and north along the lake shoreline to Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Camp Road 2
- Develop a trail access across South Bay Road to Camp 2 Railroad Property, then south on a multipurpose trail towards Squires Lake and Anderson Mountain in Skagit County
Southeast End
- Develop a water-access site for a water trail along the shoreline from the park site north to Lake Whatcom County Park – North. Install anchoring buoys, landing platforms, and other improvements to support shared access to trailside picnic table and shelters, local trials and other activity areas. Consider designating a portion of the site for water trail overnight camping for hand-carry watercraft.
Olsen Property (City/County jointly owned with WLT conservation easement)
Possible Improvements
- Designate a trailhead parking areas on Lake Louise Road and link trail access to and through the site with other trail opportunities on Lookout Mountain.
Stimpson Family Nature Reserve & Anderson Property (Anderson Property = City/County jointly owned with WLT conservation easement; Stimpson Family Nature Reserve = DNR, COB, WLT, managed by WC)
Possible Improvements
- Expand the trailhead parking area on Lake Louise Road and link trail access east and west to and throughout the site with other trial opportunities on Lookout Mountain
-----------------------------
2) Draft Whatcom County, Washington Park, Recreation, & Open Space Plan
Section 2.4: Trail and Corridor Access Systems
Water trails – non-motorized craft
b. Develop freshwater trail network of hand-carry or car-top craft including launch sites for canoes, kayaks, and lorries…on Lake Whatcom
d. Develop and operate canoe, kayak, crew, and other non-motorized craft instruction, rental, and storage facilities…including Lake Whatcom
Section 2.5 Resource Parks
Waterfront access and facilities
b. Develop a mixture of salt and freshwater non-motorized and powerboat access opportunities - especially including additional sites and improvement to existing properties in…Lake Whatcom.
Picnicking and day-use activities
a. Acquire and develop additional countywide picnic sites, shelters, and day-use group picnic grounds and camps at major resource parks and along major off-road trail corridors throughout Whatcom County – especially including sties on…Lake Whatcom
Campgrounds and retreats
a. Acquire and develop a countywide system of tent, recreational vehicle, yurt, cabin, lodge and treat facilities at major resource parks and along major off-road trail corridors throughout Whatcom County – especially including sties on…Lake Whatcom
Section 3.1 Conservancies – natural resource areas
Freshwater shoreline and water bodies – existing
5 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – South
Freshwater shoreline and water bodies - Proposed
17 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham – acquire the missing trail segment along the railroad corridor and preserve the shoreline around the lake.
Regional watershed sites - existing
1 & 3 = same, counted twice
Regional watershed sites – proposed
6 Stewart Mountain Acquire additional watershed conservancy land on Stewart Mountain to protect the east shore and drainage into Lake Whatcom
Forestlands – existing
5 Stimpson Family Nature Reserve and Anderson Property – includes Lake Louise NRCA
6 Lookout Mountain - Undeveloped park property located on the south of Birch Street adjoining City of Bellingham property
Wildlife and other multipurpose resource conservancies - existing
2 Euclid Property (Lakeside Street)
Section 3.2 Conservancies – historical
Native American places of significance – existing
2 Lake Whatcom County Park – South (the description of the site differs from others)
Railroad era sites of significance – existing
4 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Section 3.3 Regional (multi-use parks)
Freshwater waterfront access sites – existing
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
7 Lake Whatcom County Park – South (description off)
19 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed under city?)
24 Bloedel Donovan Park
39 Lakewood (WWU)
41 Lakewood Lease (WWU)
44 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
55 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
Freshwater waterfront access sites – proposed
66 Lake Whatcom South – acquire missing trail segment along the railroad corridor and provide access to the lake shoreline
Hand-carry craft launch sites – freshwater – existing
5 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – South
10 Sunnyside Landing 6.2 acres park site located on the east shore of North Shore Drive with shoreline on Lake Whatcom and launch site opportunity
16 Connecticut Street end (COB)
17 Donald Ave Street end (COB)
18 Euclid Park
20 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed under city)
21 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
24 Lakewood (WWU)
25 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
33 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
Hand-carry craft launch sites – freshwater – proposed
35 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham, acquire the missing link along the railroad corridor and provide launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road
40 Bloedel Donovan (COB)
41 Euclid Park (COB)
Powerboat launch ramps – freshwater – existing
4 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
8 Whatcom Lake Access (DFW)
Powerboat launch ramps – freshwater – proposed
14 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – Develop a non-motorized boat ramp on North Shore Drive (Why is this in the powerboat launch ramps section?)
15 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop swimming beach, boat launch ramp and dock on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Day-use facilities - existing
8 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
Day-use facilities – proposed
20 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – In association with Bellingham, develop group picnic facilities and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
21 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop group picnic facilities and lodge with meeting rooms on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Campground facilities –existing
14 Wildwood – Sudden Valley Resort – Recreational Vehicle campground located on Lake Whatcom
Campground facilities – proposed
21 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – In association with Bellingham, develop boat ramp, hand-carry launch sites, beachfront swimming and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for railroad trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
22 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop swimming beach, boat ramp and dock, swimming beach and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for lakeshore trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Section 3.4 Water Trails
Freshwater Trail Heads – Lake Whatcom - existing
3 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
4 Lakewood (WWU)
Freshwater Trail Heads – Lake Whatcom – proposed trailhead improvements
1 Lake Whatcom County Park – North – Develop boat launch ramps, pier, and dock with kayak and canoe facility and rentals to access the west shoreline.
2 Lake Whatcom County Park – South – Develop boat launch ramps, pier and dock with kayak and canoe facility and rentals to access the south shoreline. Consider developing a satellite boat camping site on the southeast corner of the property away from other park activities.
Freshwater trail access sites – existing
5 Sunnyside Landing
6 Connecticut Street end (COB)
7 Donald Ave Street end (COB)
8 Euclid Park (COB)
9 George Street end (COB)
10 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed as city)
11 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
12 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
13 Wildwood – Sudden Valley Resort (Private)
Freshwater trail access site – proposed
14 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham – acquire missing the missing link along the railroad corridor and provide additional launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road
15 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR) – Develop additional launch sites to the east lake shoreline
Section 3.5 Multipurpose trails
Multipurpose trails – countywide system – existing
7 Lake Whatcom Hertz Trail
11 Railroad Trail (COB)
Multipurpose trails – countywide system – proposed
7 Lake Whatcom Trail – Blue Canyon Road Segment
19 Lake Whatcom – Samish – Chuckanut Trail
Section 3.6 Walking and Hiking Trails
Day-hiking trails – existing
24 Olsen Property
Day-hiking trails – proposed
55 Lookout-Galbraith Mountain Trail
Section 3.12 Scenic Corridors
Scenic corridors – proposed
9 Lake Whatcom – View from the road, trail, and water of shoreline, beaches, and wooded bluffs and hillsides, particularly the south end of the lake from Towanda to Sudden Valley
County scenic road touring routes – proposed
12 Electric-North Shore Drive – Scenic road touring route to be designated from Whatcom Falls Park on Electric Avenue north past Bloedel Donovan Park then north on North Shore Drive around Lake Whatcom to the end of the paved road.
13 Lakeway-Lake Whatcom-South bay- Park Road – Scenic road touring route to be designated from Whatcom Falls Park in Bellingham south on Lakeway Drive to Lake Whatcom then south on Lake Whatcom BLVD and around the south end of the lake on South Bay Drive to Park Road and SR-9.
3.14 Community facilities or centers
Senior/community centers – proposed
11 Lake Whatcom/Sudden Valley
------------------------
The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.
--H. L. Mencken--
It is always the best policy to tell the truth, unless of course, you are an exceptionally good liar.
--Jerome K. Jerome--
'When there are two conflicting versions of the story, the wise course is to believe the one in which people appear at their worst.' --H. Allen Smith--
-----------------------
Today, let's take a short break from comparing campaign rhetoric with institutional memory, and return to the subject of the 'October Surprise.'
-----------------------
For those who aren't familiar with the 'ICT', it is the acronym for 'Inter-jurisdictional Coordinating Team', a small group of staff members from both City and County that meets regularly to discuss the Lake Whatcom Management Program [LWMP] and specifically those actions that are being planned and actually worked on.
Under the current LWMP, the County Executive & the Mayor assign people to this duty, most whom have been involved with Reservoir issues for some time.
That does sometimes help institutional memory.
But, ICT discussions are not open to the public, nor are elected officials -other than Exec & Mayor- welcomed.
I know this first hand from a few years ago when I tried to be included in these meetings.
Maybe, that is as it should be because of the sensitive and often controversial nature of things impacting our Reservoir.
But, it is frustrating and unnecessary to treat all these meetings as essentially 'executive privileged'.
One example, was an ICT meeting that occurred sometime in April 2006, when a Draft County Park Plan was made available for review to members of the ICT.
It turns out the ICT met with both Mike McFarland [County Parks Director] and Paul Leuthold [City Parks Director] and discussed its unfavorable evaluation of planning for more intense recreational use of the watershed.
The ICT was assured that both the Whatcom County Regional Park Plan [Lake Whatcom], and the Draft Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan were weighted towards watershed friendly activities and that a public process would accompany any proposal for building facilities or major improvements.
But, the ICT's concerns were not assuaged by these verbal assurances.
Instead, the ICT questioned why such non-compatible uses (as listed below) would even be included in the Park Plan, if they weren't going to be proposed.
That sounds like a pretty good question to me, that gets right to the heart of the matter!
Because the ICT meetings aren't public, and detailed minutes are not required, there appears to be no written record that can confirm this particular dialogue.
But, members of the ICT do recall both the questions and the responses given.
And, the ICT did develop a summary in May 2006 upon which their comments were based.
Essentially the ICT's comments were lumped in two categories:
1) Proposals the ICT felt should be removed from the Park Plan because they were not compatible with transportation objectives
2) Proposals that increased build-out, stormwater generation, erosion potential, and other high impact land use.
For example park facilities (day lodge probably similar to Samish Park) at the end of North Shore that will become an attraction and increase transportation.
Or, the RV Park option at the South end of Basin 3.
Or, 6 more boat launch ramps
Or, encouragement of retail activities on the lake.
The ICT concluded these are all great ideas for a lake that is primarily a recreation facility.
Anyone would love to have trails and water based facilities for kayaks and canoes, and trails to hike that connect with regional trails.
But someday, we will need to declare that drinking water protection is a much more important undertaking!
And, how well we succeed at achieving that primary goal will determine the future of our community!
The basic irony is that if such a Park does get built and enjoys great success, that very success will also create even bigger challenges as peoople flock here to play in our Water Supply watershed!
These serious concerns remain unacknowledged by the County, in its haste to gain an election Surprise.
Now that is truly troubling!
But, in fairness, I don't believe the County Council has been given the opportunity to review all of this information, especially the part about the Lake Whatcom Regional Park.
The last I heard was that the County Council was briefed early this year, but that briefing did not include the proposed Lake Whatcom Park.
Yet, the information that was shown to me last month at Conservation Northwest seemed far in excess of what the Council has seen
-------------------------------------
Here is the ICT summary of these two documents that was used to frame its questions.
I am publishing this for readers to review, digest and question:
(1) Whatcom County Regional Park Plans
Property Descriptions
Lake Whatcom County Park – North: 218.0 acre park property located on the northeast shoreline of Lake Whatcom and accessed from North Shore Drive. The park’s site includes 10,990 linear feet of shoreline along the route of the historic Bellingham Bay & Eastern Railroad (BB&E) right-of-way (3.0 mile Hertz Trail)
Lake Whatcom County Park – South: Undeveloped 80.3 (or 79.5) acre multi-use park property located on the southeast shoreline of Lake Whatcom accessed from South Bay Drive. The site includes 6,141 (or 7,142) linear feet of shoreline.
Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham, acquire the missing trail segment along the historic BB&E railroad corridor to complete development of the railroad corridor trail conversion around the lake and provide launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road.
Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham: In association with Bellingham, develop boat ramp, hand-carry launch sites, beachfront swimming and access sites, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for railroad trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley: Develop swimming beach, boat ramp and dock, swimming beach and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for lakeshore trail, group picnic facilities, , and lodge with meeting facilities off South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on southeast of shoreline.
1) Whatcom County Regional Park Plans in the Lake Whatcom Watershed (implemented over next 20 years, conceptual, further study may modify project particulars)
Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Possible Improvements
South End
- Develop boat launch ramps, dock, and pier into Lake Whatcom shoreline to support a water trail on the Lake
- Develop a swimming beach, picnic area, and group day-use of the waterfront activity area. Recruit concessionaires to provide canoe and kayak, crew and other hand-carry watercraft use of the shoreline and lake.
- Expand trailhead to provide parking for boat launch facilities, the waterfront beach, and an expanded use of trail opportunities along the shoreline and across Stewart Mountain from the park site
Northeast End
- Develop hike, bike, and horse trails from the park site north and south along the Stewart Mountain on ridgelines to connect with the Wickersham Truck Trail and others
Middle Site
- Eventually, develop rustic cabins, recreational vehicle campground, and possible a lodge facility with meeting rooms, educational exhibits and other family and large group retreat activities
Trail Corridor
- Acquire the last mile from DNR and develop Hertz Trail for multipurpose use along the shoreline from the park site south to Blue Canyon Road. Install interpretive signage and exhibits highlighting the trail’s historic heritage
- Develop water-access sites for a water trail along the shoreline from the park site south to Lake Whatcom County Park – South. Install anchoring buoys, landing platforms, and other improvements to support shared access to trailside picnic tables and shelters, local trails and other activity areas.
Lake Whatcom County Park – South (Hegg Park, Zorbrist and Richards property)
Possible Improvements
Southwest End
- Restore and enhance Brannian Creek through the site and into Lake Whatcom. Conserve the woodlands and wetlands in the south portion of the site along the creek corridor and along South Bay Road.
- Develop boat launch ramps, dock and pier into the Lake Whatcom shoreline to support water trails on the lake.
- Develop a swimming beach, picnic area, and group day-use of the waterfront activity area. Recruit concessionaires to provide canoe and kayak, crew and other hand-carry watercraft use of the shoreline and lake.
- Eventually, develop rustic cabins, recreational vehicle campground, and possible a lodge facility with meeting rooms, educational exhibits and other family and large group retreat activities
- Develop a trailhead to provide parking for boat launch facilities, the waterfront beach, and access to trail opportunities along the shoreline.
Hertz Trail
- Develop a multipurpose trail through the park and along the shoreline and north on Blue Canyon Road to Hertz Trail and north along the lake shoreline to Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Camp Road 2
- Develop a trail access across South Bay Road to Camp 2 Railroad Property, then south on a multipurpose trail towards Squires Lake and Anderson Mountain in Skagit County
Southeast End
- Develop a water-access site for a water trail along the shoreline from the park site north to Lake Whatcom County Park – North. Install anchoring buoys, landing platforms, and other improvements to support shared access to trailside picnic table and shelters, local trials and other activity areas. Consider designating a portion of the site for water trail overnight camping for hand-carry watercraft.
Olsen Property (City/County jointly owned with WLT conservation easement)
Possible Improvements
- Designate a trailhead parking areas on Lake Louise Road and link trail access to and through the site with other trail opportunities on Lookout Mountain.
Stimpson Family Nature Reserve & Anderson Property (Anderson Property = City/County jointly owned with WLT conservation easement; Stimpson Family Nature Reserve = DNR, COB, WLT, managed by WC)
Possible Improvements
- Expand the trailhead parking area on Lake Louise Road and link trail access east and west to and throughout the site with other trial opportunities on Lookout Mountain
-----------------------------
2) Draft Whatcom County, Washington Park, Recreation, & Open Space Plan
Section 2.4: Trail and Corridor Access Systems
Water trails – non-motorized craft
b. Develop freshwater trail network of hand-carry or car-top craft including launch sites for canoes, kayaks, and lorries…on Lake Whatcom
d. Develop and operate canoe, kayak, crew, and other non-motorized craft instruction, rental, and storage facilities…including Lake Whatcom
Section 2.5 Resource Parks
Waterfront access and facilities
b. Develop a mixture of salt and freshwater non-motorized and powerboat access opportunities - especially including additional sites and improvement to existing properties in…Lake Whatcom.
Picnicking and day-use activities
a. Acquire and develop additional countywide picnic sites, shelters, and day-use group picnic grounds and camps at major resource parks and along major off-road trail corridors throughout Whatcom County – especially including sties on…Lake Whatcom
Campgrounds and retreats
a. Acquire and develop a countywide system of tent, recreational vehicle, yurt, cabin, lodge and treat facilities at major resource parks and along major off-road trail corridors throughout Whatcom County – especially including sties on…Lake Whatcom
Section 3.1 Conservancies – natural resource areas
Freshwater shoreline and water bodies – existing
5 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – South
Freshwater shoreline and water bodies - Proposed
17 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham – acquire the missing trail segment along the railroad corridor and preserve the shoreline around the lake.
Regional watershed sites - existing
1 & 3 = same, counted twice
Regional watershed sites – proposed
6 Stewart Mountain Acquire additional watershed conservancy land on Stewart Mountain to protect the east shore and drainage into Lake Whatcom
Forestlands – existing
5 Stimpson Family Nature Reserve and Anderson Property – includes Lake Louise NRCA
6 Lookout Mountain - Undeveloped park property located on the south of Birch Street adjoining City of Bellingham property
Wildlife and other multipurpose resource conservancies - existing
2 Euclid Property (Lakeside Street)
Section 3.2 Conservancies – historical
Native American places of significance – existing
2 Lake Whatcom County Park – South (the description of the site differs from others)
Railroad era sites of significance – existing
4 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
Section 3.3 Regional (multi-use parks)
Freshwater waterfront access sites – existing
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
7 Lake Whatcom County Park – South (description off)
19 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed under city?)
24 Bloedel Donovan Park
39 Lakewood (WWU)
41 Lakewood Lease (WWU)
44 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
55 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
Freshwater waterfront access sites – proposed
66 Lake Whatcom South – acquire missing trail segment along the railroad corridor and provide access to the lake shoreline
Hand-carry craft launch sites – freshwater – existing
5 Lake Whatcom County Park – North
6 Lake Whatcom County Park – South
10 Sunnyside Landing 6.2 acres park site located on the east shore of North Shore Drive with shoreline on Lake Whatcom and launch site opportunity
16 Connecticut Street end (COB)
17 Donald Ave Street end (COB)
18 Euclid Park
20 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed under city)
21 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
24 Lakewood (WWU)
25 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
33 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
Hand-carry craft launch sites – freshwater – proposed
35 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham, acquire the missing link along the railroad corridor and provide launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road
40 Bloedel Donovan (COB)
41 Euclid Park (COB)
Powerboat launch ramps – freshwater – existing
4 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
8 Whatcom Lake Access (DFW)
Powerboat launch ramps – freshwater – proposed
14 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – Develop a non-motorized boat ramp on North Shore Drive (Why is this in the powerboat launch ramps section?)
15 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop swimming beach, boat launch ramp and dock on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Day-use facilities - existing
8 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
Day-use facilities – proposed
20 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – In association with Bellingham, develop group picnic facilities and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
21 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop group picnic facilities and lodge with meeting rooms on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Campground facilities –existing
14 Wildwood – Sudden Valley Resort – Recreational Vehicle campground located on Lake Whatcom
Campground facilities – proposed
21 Lake Whatcom North – Bellingham – In association with Bellingham, develop boat ramp, hand-carry launch sites, beachfront swimming and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for railroad trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on North Shore Drive.
22 Lake Whatcom South – Sudden Valley – Develop swimming beach, boat ramp and dock, swimming beach and access site, woodland and waterfront access trails, trailhead for lakeshore trail, group picnic facilities, and lodge with meeting facilities on South Bay Drive. Develop a satellite hand-carry launch and campsite on the southeast shoreline.
Section 3.4 Water Trails
Freshwater Trail Heads – Lake Whatcom - existing
3 Bloedel Donovan Park (COB)
4 Lakewood (WWU)
Freshwater Trail Heads – Lake Whatcom – proposed trailhead improvements
1 Lake Whatcom County Park – North – Develop boat launch ramps, pier, and dock with kayak and canoe facility and rentals to access the west shoreline.
2 Lake Whatcom County Park – South – Develop boat launch ramps, pier and dock with kayak and canoe facility and rentals to access the south shoreline. Consider developing a satellite boat camping site on the southeast corner of the property away from other park activities.
Freshwater trail access sites – existing
5 Sunnyside Landing
6 Connecticut Street end (COB)
7 Donald Ave Street end (COB)
8 Euclid Park (COB)
9 George Street end (COB)
10 Lake Whatcom Beach Site (DNR, listed as city)
11 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR)
12 Lake Whatcom Access (DFW)
13 Wildwood – Sudden Valley Resort (Private)
Freshwater trail access site – proposed
14 Lake Whatcom South – In association with Bellingham – acquire missing the missing link along the railroad corridor and provide additional launch sites to the lake shoreline from Blue Canyon Road
15 Blue Canyon Park Road (DNR) – Develop additional launch sites to the east lake shoreline
Section 3.5 Multipurpose trails
Multipurpose trails – countywide system – existing
7 Lake Whatcom Hertz Trail
11 Railroad Trail (COB)
Multipurpose trails – countywide system – proposed
7 Lake Whatcom Trail – Blue Canyon Road Segment
19 Lake Whatcom – Samish – Chuckanut Trail
Section 3.6 Walking and Hiking Trails
Day-hiking trails – existing
24 Olsen Property
Day-hiking trails – proposed
55 Lookout-Galbraith Mountain Trail
Section 3.12 Scenic Corridors
Scenic corridors – proposed
9 Lake Whatcom – View from the road, trail, and water of shoreline, beaches, and wooded bluffs and hillsides, particularly the south end of the lake from Towanda to Sudden Valley
County scenic road touring routes – proposed
12 Electric-North Shore Drive – Scenic road touring route to be designated from Whatcom Falls Park on Electric Avenue north past Bloedel Donovan Park then north on North Shore Drive around Lake Whatcom to the end of the paved road.
13 Lakeway-Lake Whatcom-South bay- Park Road – Scenic road touring route to be designated from Whatcom Falls Park in Bellingham south on Lakeway Drive to Lake Whatcom then south on Lake Whatcom BLVD and around the south end of the lake on South Bay Drive to Park Road and SR-9.
3.14 Community facilities or centers
Senior/community centers – proposed
11 Lake Whatcom/Sudden Valley
------------------------
The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.
--H. L. Mencken--
It is always the best policy to tell the truth, unless of course, you are an exceptionally good liar.
--Jerome K. Jerome--
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Campaign Rhetoric Versus Institutional Memory: A Litany of Concerns - Part 2
I'm sorry to conclude that the Weakly's October 17 Gristle was yet another quasi-nasty little piece of pulp fiction that diminishes and demeans every one involved in its production; the candidate it was intended to benefit, the writer, the editor (assuming there is a difference), the owner/publisher, and -most particularly- the two fine people who were so casually implicated by deceptive hearsay, thinly veiled insinuation, and innuendo by association with other people, places and times.
I refuse to reward this type of conduct with any more words than that.
Except, I can't help but wonder, if the Gristle's candidate condones such tactics to get himself elected, what tactics might we expect if he were actually elected?
---------------------------------------
"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."
- Oscar Wilde
'Politics....Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.'
--Ambrose Bierce--
'The Irish are a fair people -- they never speak well of one another.'
--Samuel Johnson--
-----------------------------------------
Since this blog continues yesterday's blog, I am repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
Yesterday's blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
2. Lake Whatcom Reservoir - Good & Not So Good News:
• Unquestionably, some good things have happened on Dan McShane's watch, like the downzone to remove over 2500 units of future residential development in this watershed.
Unfortunately, this was done in such a way that it caused an unprecedented panic and growth explosion!
That is the polar opposite of what is good for the Reservoir - a building boom without adequate mitigation.
But, the Sudden Valley Community Association did also voluntarily adopt a density reduction of 1400 units, which, contrary to campaign rhetoric, was actually motivated by reasons other than strictly watershed concerns.
But, giving credit where it is due, that reduction is significant and will help protect the Lake.
Despite both these density reduction efforts, over 3200 additional homes can still be built -per existing zoning- in the watershed, which could bring another 16,000 people living around our Reservoir.
That prospect is troubling.
• But, aside from density reductions, better development regulations were also implemented by the County during McShane's watch.
Unfortunately again, the County Council refused to learn from the City's recent experience and failed to adopt seasonal construction clearing and grading limits, although this was strongly recommended.
Instead, McShane and the County adopted an unenforceable system advocated by the BIA, which resulted in large quantities of runoff into the Lake during the intense 18-month building frenzy mentioned above!
Only after much avoidable damage had already occurred, was the County Council convinced to change over to seasonal construction limits -simply based on the calendar- that mirrored the regulations the City had adopted in 2000.
• In a pattern that often seemed to consistently discount City efforts, Dan McShane criticized the the City's 2001 water rate surcharge as 'too regressive', even though its purpose was to preserve sensitive watershed.
A few other County officials simply called the City's Watershed Acquisition 'non-collaborative'.
And, predictably, the Water District had even stronger criticisms.
I found it troubling that these reactions occurred despite the fact Watershed Preservation was one of the three priority goals that the Lake Whatcom Management Program had officially adopted!
It seems like just 'talking' is a lot easier than 'walking that talk', doesn't it?
Subsequently, and to its credit, the County did acquire watershed property using its county-wide Conservation Futures funds, and also participated in significant joint watershed property purchases with the City.
• McShane and the County did participate Dept of Natural Resources [DNR] Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan -a 3-plus year effort- which did eventually result in better Forest Practices being adopted, which was good.
But now, McShane wants to transfer some of these same forest lands back to the the County by reconveyance to create a County Park.
This occurred despite the City's concerns with planning for more intense recreational uses in this watershed.
If the County Park does happen, replacement revenues must be found to compensate the various trusts -including schools- that traditionally rely upon funding from DNR timber harvests on these forest lands.
Also, additional monies must be raised to develop, operate and maintain this proposed Park.
Because the County has such a history of penny-pinching, even on matters as important as Sheriff's deputies and Planning Staff, I have concerns about its ability to adequately fund a large amenity like the proposed Park.
Don't you?
So, I have to question whether McShane and the County really understand what it is that needs doing, to better protect this watershed!
Others are also concerned and confused over the uncertain course being pursued regarding DNR forestlands around Lake Whatcom.
Some serious explanations are due the public on this issue.
And, it should be presented much better than under the guise of an election season 'Surprise', designed to help get the announcing heroes elected!
• It remains very hard to see how the County has been effective in requiring Water District 10 to tighten its oversight of environmental matters around Lake Whatcom.
What is the problem in notifying the City, especially when the Water District tries to aid and abet questionable development proposals -outside its jurisdiction- on Squalicum Mountain and elsewhere?
What's up with that?
Can't the County do a better job of monitoring its own development, and notifying the City whenever something unusual occurs?
• The spectacle of the new, County proposed Boating regulations was ugly too.
But, more than enough has been said about that already.
• One last matter.
McShane wants to establish a new City 'Department' focused on Lake Whatcom.
I think that focus has already been covered -at least for the moment- with a shared County/City Management Team.
Let's see how that works out before setting up any more bureaucracy.
Besides, such an action by the City might be considered 'non-collaborative' by some in the County, as has happened before.
After all, whether the required work gets done in a separate Department or drawn from several existing Departments, the critical staff involved would all ultimately report to the Mayor.
I've worked for enough companies and organizations to know that while organizational structure is important, it is not nearly as important as effective leadership, competent people and sufficient funding toward a clear goal.
If those other things are in place, the organization structure will become obvious.
As the County's main water purveyor, the City unquestionably has a large responsibility in protecting its water supply.
But, it will certainly need the active cooperation of both the County and the Water District to provide the protections that are adequate.
----------------------
I sincerely hope Dan McShane develops a better habit for consulting Lake Whatcom's institutional history, and the wisdom to follow its hard lessons before enploying more campaign rhetoric that promises more than can be delivered.
But I have my doubts about that transformation happening, whether he is elected mayor or not.
Nothing in his history suggests that McShane is likely to change some aspects of his personality that tend to inhibit the inclusion of others, and of ideas different from his own.
Instead, Dan McShane comes across as essentially a well-informed loner, who is pretty good at the small geo-technical business he runs.
But, being well informed about the science of geology is not necessarily a plus in performing well in a very visible office like Mayor.
That office operates in a fishbowl, and requires of its occupant the interpersonal skills necessary to deal with a constant stream of people and problems.
Typically, that particular job demands more practical people skills than any other in a City.
Mayor is a job in which inclusiveness is not an option.
It is also a job in which anger management skills are a requirement.
That has also been a concern I've had about Dan McShane, because it has been a problem for him in the past.
We have learned from prior elected officials that being overly secretive, getting mad at people, holding grudges, and developing a bunker mentality of 'us and them' just don't work.
Most people expect much more of their elected officials than excuses for failure in resolving problems and business as usual that perpetrates mediocrity.
As the famous quotes states 'those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it'.
I hope we do learn from history and use those lessons wisely.
Let's make sure who we elect as Mayor has a much better chance at succeeding than at failing.
It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
------------------------------
The Truth Be Known!: At a political dinner the famous newspaper columnist, Ann Landers, was introduced to a rather pompous Senator.
"So, you're Ann Landers," he drawled. "Say something funny."
Without hesitation Ann replied, "Well, you're a politician...tell me a lie."
I refuse to reward this type of conduct with any more words than that.
Except, I can't help but wonder, if the Gristle's candidate condones such tactics to get himself elected, what tactics might we expect if he were actually elected?
---------------------------------------
"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."
- Oscar Wilde
'Politics....Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.'
--Ambrose Bierce--
'The Irish are a fair people -- they never speak well of one another.'
--Samuel Johnson--
-----------------------------------------
Since this blog continues yesterday's blog, I am repeating the introduction:
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
Yesterday's blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
2. Lake Whatcom Reservoir - Good & Not So Good News:
• Unquestionably, some good things have happened on Dan McShane's watch, like the downzone to remove over 2500 units of future residential development in this watershed.
Unfortunately, this was done in such a way that it caused an unprecedented panic and growth explosion!
That is the polar opposite of what is good for the Reservoir - a building boom without adequate mitigation.
But, the Sudden Valley Community Association did also voluntarily adopt a density reduction of 1400 units, which, contrary to campaign rhetoric, was actually motivated by reasons other than strictly watershed concerns.
But, giving credit where it is due, that reduction is significant and will help protect the Lake.
Despite both these density reduction efforts, over 3200 additional homes can still be built -per existing zoning- in the watershed, which could bring another 16,000 people living around our Reservoir.
That prospect is troubling.
• But, aside from density reductions, better development regulations were also implemented by the County during McShane's watch.
Unfortunately again, the County Council refused to learn from the City's recent experience and failed to adopt seasonal construction clearing and grading limits, although this was strongly recommended.
Instead, McShane and the County adopted an unenforceable system advocated by the BIA, which resulted in large quantities of runoff into the Lake during the intense 18-month building frenzy mentioned above!
Only after much avoidable damage had already occurred, was the County Council convinced to change over to seasonal construction limits -simply based on the calendar- that mirrored the regulations the City had adopted in 2000.
• In a pattern that often seemed to consistently discount City efforts, Dan McShane criticized the the City's 2001 water rate surcharge as 'too regressive', even though its purpose was to preserve sensitive watershed.
A few other County officials simply called the City's Watershed Acquisition 'non-collaborative'.
And, predictably, the Water District had even stronger criticisms.
I found it troubling that these reactions occurred despite the fact Watershed Preservation was one of the three priority goals that the Lake Whatcom Management Program had officially adopted!
It seems like just 'talking' is a lot easier than 'walking that talk', doesn't it?
Subsequently, and to its credit, the County did acquire watershed property using its county-wide Conservation Futures funds, and also participated in significant joint watershed property purchases with the City.
• McShane and the County did participate Dept of Natural Resources [DNR] Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan -a 3-plus year effort- which did eventually result in better Forest Practices being adopted, which was good.
But now, McShane wants to transfer some of these same forest lands back to the the County by reconveyance to create a County Park.
This occurred despite the City's concerns with planning for more intense recreational uses in this watershed.
If the County Park does happen, replacement revenues must be found to compensate the various trusts -including schools- that traditionally rely upon funding from DNR timber harvests on these forest lands.
Also, additional monies must be raised to develop, operate and maintain this proposed Park.
Because the County has such a history of penny-pinching, even on matters as important as Sheriff's deputies and Planning Staff, I have concerns about its ability to adequately fund a large amenity like the proposed Park.
Don't you?
So, I have to question whether McShane and the County really understand what it is that needs doing, to better protect this watershed!
Others are also concerned and confused over the uncertain course being pursued regarding DNR forestlands around Lake Whatcom.
Some serious explanations are due the public on this issue.
And, it should be presented much better than under the guise of an election season 'Surprise', designed to help get the announcing heroes elected!
• It remains very hard to see how the County has been effective in requiring Water District 10 to tighten its oversight of environmental matters around Lake Whatcom.
What is the problem in notifying the City, especially when the Water District tries to aid and abet questionable development proposals -outside its jurisdiction- on Squalicum Mountain and elsewhere?
What's up with that?
Can't the County do a better job of monitoring its own development, and notifying the City whenever something unusual occurs?
• The spectacle of the new, County proposed Boating regulations was ugly too.
But, more than enough has been said about that already.
• One last matter.
McShane wants to establish a new City 'Department' focused on Lake Whatcom.
I think that focus has already been covered -at least for the moment- with a shared County/City Management Team.
Let's see how that works out before setting up any more bureaucracy.
Besides, such an action by the City might be considered 'non-collaborative' by some in the County, as has happened before.
After all, whether the required work gets done in a separate Department or drawn from several existing Departments, the critical staff involved would all ultimately report to the Mayor.
I've worked for enough companies and organizations to know that while organizational structure is important, it is not nearly as important as effective leadership, competent people and sufficient funding toward a clear goal.
If those other things are in place, the organization structure will become obvious.
As the County's main water purveyor, the City unquestionably has a large responsibility in protecting its water supply.
But, it will certainly need the active cooperation of both the County and the Water District to provide the protections that are adequate.
----------------------
I sincerely hope Dan McShane develops a better habit for consulting Lake Whatcom's institutional history, and the wisdom to follow its hard lessons before enploying more campaign rhetoric that promises more than can be delivered.
But I have my doubts about that transformation happening, whether he is elected mayor or not.
Nothing in his history suggests that McShane is likely to change some aspects of his personality that tend to inhibit the inclusion of others, and of ideas different from his own.
Instead, Dan McShane comes across as essentially a well-informed loner, who is pretty good at the small geo-technical business he runs.
But, being well informed about the science of geology is not necessarily a plus in performing well in a very visible office like Mayor.
That office operates in a fishbowl, and requires of its occupant the interpersonal skills necessary to deal with a constant stream of people and problems.
Typically, that particular job demands more practical people skills than any other in a City.
Mayor is a job in which inclusiveness is not an option.
It is also a job in which anger management skills are a requirement.
That has also been a concern I've had about Dan McShane, because it has been a problem for him in the past.
We have learned from prior elected officials that being overly secretive, getting mad at people, holding grudges, and developing a bunker mentality of 'us and them' just don't work.
Most people expect much more of their elected officials than excuses for failure in resolving problems and business as usual that perpetrates mediocrity.
As the famous quotes states 'those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it'.
I hope we do learn from history and use those lessons wisely.
Let's make sure who we elect as Mayor has a much better chance at succeeding than at failing.
It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
------------------------------
The Truth Be Known!: At a political dinner the famous newspaper columnist, Ann Landers, was introduced to a rather pompous Senator.
"So, you're Ann Landers," he drawled. "Say something funny."
Without hesitation Ann replied, "Well, you're a politician...tell me a lie."
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Campaign Rhetoric Versus Institutional Memory: A Litany of Concerns - Part 1
Esse Quam Videri - "to be rather than to seem"
-----------------------------------------
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
Yesterday's blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
1. Growth Management Policy - From Inconsistency to Intransigence:
• Dan McShane initially advocated for highest State [OFM] population projection estimate!
His position was modified only after when the City of Bellingham and other concerned groups demanded a more moderate estimate closer to the mid-range.
A high growth projection would have meant unduly spurring growth at greater expense to current residents of Whatcom County.
I'm glad, Dan changed his mind on this, because a much more moderate growth policy, is what most Whatcom County citizens want.
• But now, he has also actively opposed the City's request for sufficient additional new Urban Growth Area land, despite the agreed clear goal of reducing sprawl in unicorporated Whatcom County!
This particular point may not ultimately make a lot of difference that people will notice, but I will!
That is because the apportionment of projected growth was undertaken in what I thought was a good faith effort between the City and the County.
The City did a very detailed. public analysis over 3 years, based on what history has shown to be possible without significant changes in zoning or control of it.
That effort identified an approximate 1400 acre shortage of new UGA land over the next 20 years.
The County did very little analysis, yet is being persuaded by McShane and others that the City's request is excessive!
While it is certainly the County's right to set whatever additional UGA land will be granted, the position taken by McShane and others essentially dismisses the City's effort in favor of its own wishes!
That, my friends, is not what I call a 'collaborative' effort. Would you?
This type if arrogance and lack of follow-through typifies what is wrong with the so-called 'collaborative' effort between the City and County.
I am very tired of that, but this is not about me.
Of course, absorbing more sprawl also does provide more short-term revenue for the County, but at what cost?
And, the County already has enough 5-acre vested lots in rural areas to take all the anticipated growth for Whatcom County over the next 20 years!
That is without another home being built in any established City.
So, what's the problem you might ask?
There is no problem according to the County's history and current situation, unless one is really serious about meeting the goals of the Growth Management Act in both spirit and deed!
• Also troubling is the failure of the County Council to enact any meaningful Purchase of Development Rights [PDR] program with the funding to substantially save valuble farmland.
Where was Dan M. in that discussion?
What was the result?
Anything to report?
• And, McShane's tenative support of very questionable rezones of forested land on Galbraith Mountain and near Cherry Point, is a concern.
• Over the last few years the County Planning Staff has been seriously decimated, leading one to wonder why did the County Council allow this happen?
It didn't happen overnight, did it?
The excuses given were that private industry lured all these talented folks away for more money.
I hear different reasons.
Like working for the County and under Pete isn't exactly a rewarding experience?
Like ad hoc direction from the top via their appointed 'at will' employees?
Am I getting warm?
Why wasn't more forceful action taken to require the Executive to hire and retain adequate staff?
And, to set better wages & benefits, work standards, performance reviews and working conditions that value competent employees?
There are some additional sub-topics to this general area of concern, but these will be addressed later, in another blog.
-----------------------
Part 2 will be on a different issue, probably tomorrow.
'The Peter Principle is bad enough, but the Peter, Paul & mary Principle is much worse!'
-----------------------------------------
Sometimes there are discrepancies between what candidates claim -or choose to ignore- and what a more comprehensive recollection of history reveals.
If you want to prove a point, or get elected, you choose carefully what you want to talk about.
And, you know what subjects are to be avoided!
That is the subject of today's blog.
Yesterday's blog listed some reasons why I have chosen to support Dan Pike as our next Mayor.
This one lists some specific reasons that make it difficult for me to support Dan McShane as Mayor.
All of these relate directly to positions he has taken -or not taken- on some important issues, while serving on the County Council.
------------------------
Here is a synopsis of these concerns as related to:
1. Growth Management Policy - From Inconsistency to Intransigence:
• Dan McShane initially advocated for highest State [OFM] population projection estimate!
His position was modified only after when the City of Bellingham and other concerned groups demanded a more moderate estimate closer to the mid-range.
A high growth projection would have meant unduly spurring growth at greater expense to current residents of Whatcom County.
I'm glad, Dan changed his mind on this, because a much more moderate growth policy, is what most Whatcom County citizens want.
• But now, he has also actively opposed the City's request for sufficient additional new Urban Growth Area land, despite the agreed clear goal of reducing sprawl in unicorporated Whatcom County!
This particular point may not ultimately make a lot of difference that people will notice, but I will!
That is because the apportionment of projected growth was undertaken in what I thought was a good faith effort between the City and the County.
The City did a very detailed. public analysis over 3 years, based on what history has shown to be possible without significant changes in zoning or control of it.
That effort identified an approximate 1400 acre shortage of new UGA land over the next 20 years.
The County did very little analysis, yet is being persuaded by McShane and others that the City's request is excessive!
While it is certainly the County's right to set whatever additional UGA land will be granted, the position taken by McShane and others essentially dismisses the City's effort in favor of its own wishes!
That, my friends, is not what I call a 'collaborative' effort. Would you?
This type if arrogance and lack of follow-through typifies what is wrong with the so-called 'collaborative' effort between the City and County.
I am very tired of that, but this is not about me.
Of course, absorbing more sprawl also does provide more short-term revenue for the County, but at what cost?
And, the County already has enough 5-acre vested lots in rural areas to take all the anticipated growth for Whatcom County over the next 20 years!
That is without another home being built in any established City.
So, what's the problem you might ask?
There is no problem according to the County's history and current situation, unless one is really serious about meeting the goals of the Growth Management Act in both spirit and deed!
• Also troubling is the failure of the County Council to enact any meaningful Purchase of Development Rights [PDR] program with the funding to substantially save valuble farmland.
Where was Dan M. in that discussion?
What was the result?
Anything to report?
• And, McShane's tenative support of very questionable rezones of forested land on Galbraith Mountain and near Cherry Point, is a concern.
• Over the last few years the County Planning Staff has been seriously decimated, leading one to wonder why did the County Council allow this happen?
It didn't happen overnight, did it?
The excuses given were that private industry lured all these talented folks away for more money.
I hear different reasons.
Like working for the County and under Pete isn't exactly a rewarding experience?
Like ad hoc direction from the top via their appointed 'at will' employees?
Am I getting warm?
Why wasn't more forceful action taken to require the Executive to hire and retain adequate staff?
And, to set better wages & benefits, work standards, performance reviews and working conditions that value competent employees?
There are some additional sub-topics to this general area of concern, but these will be addressed later, in another blog.
-----------------------
Part 2 will be on a different issue, probably tomorrow.
'The Peter Principle is bad enough, but the Peter, Paul & mary Principle is much worse!'
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Mayoral Elections: Which Dan and Why?
Many thanks are due to the Women's League of Voters, the Whatcom Independent and KGMI for sponsoring and producing tonight's Candidates Forum at the County Courthouse as a public service event!
Rather than duplicate the detailed media information disseminated via KGMI's listeners and the Herald's readers, I will limit these comments to my own observations regarding the Bellingham Mayor's race.
While this particular forum may not have changed many minds among those physically present, there were some clear winners and losers in my book.
One clear winner tonight was the Dan named Pike.
Dan Pike is a fine choice for Bellingham, because of his training, temperment and truthfulness.
Each of these qualities are essential to have in a truly responsible leader.
With such diverse issues all deserving of serious, fair and effective leadership, I trust Dan Pike to provide that combination of qualities, consistently.
Pike knows how critical it will be to reach out to all sectors of our community and incorporate both their concerns and constructive ideas into effective policy that citizens and the City Council will willingly support.
But, do not make the mistake of forgetting the City Council's role in all of this!
Because that elected body is comprised of public officials who also represent not only their constituencies, but this community as a whole.
It is the Council that must consider and approve any change in policy the Mayor may want.
And, the Council also controls the purse strings on the City Budget.
Any Mayor will need to have a good, mutually respectful, relationship with the Council in order to be effective in setting and carrying out City policy.
That is an important point to keep in mind.
I think Dan Pike exhibits really good potential to achieve that good relationship.
But, I'm not as confident about the other Dan's ability to do that as well, based on what has happened during the last 8 years.
I have supported Dan McShane in both of his last campaigns for County Council, and was very glad he was elected each time.
A big part of his strong support was that the quality of his opposition was so questionable.
Also, the County Council prior to Dan McShane's entry had been dysfunctional and woefully ineffective.
So, unquestionably, even as a relative unknown, his election helped that situation.
But, he also had help because some other good folks got elected too!
Council is a team thing in which leadership is only as good as attracting enough support to get something considered - and passed.
If you were to ask me -and many people have- what is it that gives me pause in endorsing Dan McShane for Mayor, I would be hard pressed to give a simple answer.
But, I can try.
One is the skills sets that make an effective Mayor go beyond what it takes to be a Council member.
I know that first hand!
While I certainly consider myself capable of performing the duties of Mayor, I recognize that I lack the patience, the youthful energy and the willingness to commit time required to do that job.
I may lack some other qualities as well, but those three are enough to illustrate the point.
The skill set required of a Mayor, especially an effective one, usually substantially exceeds the skill set required of a Council member, because of both the full-time management and leadership responsibilities involved.
Just look at the current salary differential, for example, because that is substantially based on relative job descriptions.
It is a recognized fact that a full time Bellingham Mayor now earns six times what a part time Council member earns.
That is as it should be, because the Mayor is essentially acting as a CEO, and managing a Municipal Corporation with an annual budget now exceeding $200 Million in public dollars.
That is not a job just anyone can do!
These arguments relate mainly to potential job performance based on professional training and job experience.
The other side of my evaluation relates to observations over time of the two Dan's.
In Pike's case, I can't say that I can directly attest to his performance on the job.
But other respected officials can, because Pike has already established an excellent reputation in responsible, highly visible, successful, public sector roles.
That kind of reference should be pretty directly applicable to an elected official with administrative duties.
With the other Dan, let's just say I have been underwhelmed - even disappointed- on several occasions with the lack of collaboration he has shown in working on issues involving the City of Bellingham since 2000.
Of course, there have been some notable successes too, although maybe not as many as claimed, or could have happened.
Unfortunately, a steady accumulation of criticism of 'the City' seems to characterize much of this Dan's tenure in office.
And be assured, that is not just what I remember!
Some of these criticisms may have been warranted, because the City is not perfect!
But, the criticism has continued to the point that some legitimate doubt exists over whether he truly understands the issues 'the City' faces.
They are similar to County issues, but certainly not the same.
Yet, he is now seeking the highest office in the same City he has repeatedly derided!
That just doesn't seem like a healthy marriage to me.
Heck, it might not be even a good blind date!
Sometimes history in local office can help a candidate, but sometimes it does not.
Suffice to say I was a stronger supporter of this Dan in 1999 than I am now, in 2007.
But, he has made a good County Council member and I sincerely thank him for stepping up to that job.
I would support him again in that endeavor, but not as Mayor.
At least not with Dan Pike in the race.
Dan Pike has a positive attitude that is oriented toward a better future.
He is not consumed with negativity from the past.
He is more inclusive in his approach, and I think that is what most people want.
He will be thorough in developing enough factual information on which to make an intelligent decision.
He will challenge people to bring forth good ideas, and enable City staff to perform by delegating responsibility and trusting them to perform well.
This is a critical time,
The issues are important.
Good leadership is needed.
I still like Pike.
Now, more than ever!
The guy will make us a great Mayor.
Remember, ballots get mailed tomorrow, Oct 17.
Be sure to vote.
Cheery bye for now...
Rather than duplicate the detailed media information disseminated via KGMI's listeners and the Herald's readers, I will limit these comments to my own observations regarding the Bellingham Mayor's race.
While this particular forum may not have changed many minds among those physically present, there were some clear winners and losers in my book.
One clear winner tonight was the Dan named Pike.
Dan Pike is a fine choice for Bellingham, because of his training, temperment and truthfulness.
Each of these qualities are essential to have in a truly responsible leader.
With such diverse issues all deserving of serious, fair and effective leadership, I trust Dan Pike to provide that combination of qualities, consistently.
Pike knows how critical it will be to reach out to all sectors of our community and incorporate both their concerns and constructive ideas into effective policy that citizens and the City Council will willingly support.
But, do not make the mistake of forgetting the City Council's role in all of this!
Because that elected body is comprised of public officials who also represent not only their constituencies, but this community as a whole.
It is the Council that must consider and approve any change in policy the Mayor may want.
And, the Council also controls the purse strings on the City Budget.
Any Mayor will need to have a good, mutually respectful, relationship with the Council in order to be effective in setting and carrying out City policy.
That is an important point to keep in mind.
I think Dan Pike exhibits really good potential to achieve that good relationship.
But, I'm not as confident about the other Dan's ability to do that as well, based on what has happened during the last 8 years.
I have supported Dan McShane in both of his last campaigns for County Council, and was very glad he was elected each time.
A big part of his strong support was that the quality of his opposition was so questionable.
Also, the County Council prior to Dan McShane's entry had been dysfunctional and woefully ineffective.
So, unquestionably, even as a relative unknown, his election helped that situation.
But, he also had help because some other good folks got elected too!
Council is a team thing in which leadership is only as good as attracting enough support to get something considered - and passed.
If you were to ask me -and many people have- what is it that gives me pause in endorsing Dan McShane for Mayor, I would be hard pressed to give a simple answer.
But, I can try.
One is the skills sets that make an effective Mayor go beyond what it takes to be a Council member.
I know that first hand!
While I certainly consider myself capable of performing the duties of Mayor, I recognize that I lack the patience, the youthful energy and the willingness to commit time required to do that job.
I may lack some other qualities as well, but those three are enough to illustrate the point.
The skill set required of a Mayor, especially an effective one, usually substantially exceeds the skill set required of a Council member, because of both the full-time management and leadership responsibilities involved.
Just look at the current salary differential, for example, because that is substantially based on relative job descriptions.
It is a recognized fact that a full time Bellingham Mayor now earns six times what a part time Council member earns.
That is as it should be, because the Mayor is essentially acting as a CEO, and managing a Municipal Corporation with an annual budget now exceeding $200 Million in public dollars.
That is not a job just anyone can do!
These arguments relate mainly to potential job performance based on professional training and job experience.
The other side of my evaluation relates to observations over time of the two Dan's.
In Pike's case, I can't say that I can directly attest to his performance on the job.
But other respected officials can, because Pike has already established an excellent reputation in responsible, highly visible, successful, public sector roles.
That kind of reference should be pretty directly applicable to an elected official with administrative duties.
With the other Dan, let's just say I have been underwhelmed - even disappointed- on several occasions with the lack of collaboration he has shown in working on issues involving the City of Bellingham since 2000.
Of course, there have been some notable successes too, although maybe not as many as claimed, or could have happened.
Unfortunately, a steady accumulation of criticism of 'the City' seems to characterize much of this Dan's tenure in office.
And be assured, that is not just what I remember!
Some of these criticisms may have been warranted, because the City is not perfect!
But, the criticism has continued to the point that some legitimate doubt exists over whether he truly understands the issues 'the City' faces.
They are similar to County issues, but certainly not the same.
Yet, he is now seeking the highest office in the same City he has repeatedly derided!
That just doesn't seem like a healthy marriage to me.
Heck, it might not be even a good blind date!
Sometimes history in local office can help a candidate, but sometimes it does not.
Suffice to say I was a stronger supporter of this Dan in 1999 than I am now, in 2007.
But, he has made a good County Council member and I sincerely thank him for stepping up to that job.
I would support him again in that endeavor, but not as Mayor.
At least not with Dan Pike in the race.
Dan Pike has a positive attitude that is oriented toward a better future.
He is not consumed with negativity from the past.
He is more inclusive in his approach, and I think that is what most people want.
He will be thorough in developing enough factual information on which to make an intelligent decision.
He will challenge people to bring forth good ideas, and enable City staff to perform by delegating responsibility and trusting them to perform well.
This is a critical time,
The issues are important.
Good leadership is needed.
I still like Pike.
Now, more than ever!
The guy will make us a great Mayor.
Remember, ballots get mailed tomorrow, Oct 17.
Be sure to vote.
Cheery bye for now...
Monday, October 15, 2007
What is Consensus Decision-Making?
Some of my recent blogs have dealt with the role of Neighborhood Associations in helping determine policy to preserve quality of life by conditioning future development and by other means.
These have attracted several comments, some of which were quite agitated.
That made me wonder whether it was something I said, or because I said something at all on this subject!
It seems a very sensitive subject, doesn't it?
Consistently, my focus has been on seeking 'consensus'.
What does that mean, you might ask?
Here's the definition from Wikipedia:
-----------------
"The word 'consensus' derives from the Latin cum meaning 'with' or 'together with', and sentire meaning to 'think' or 'feel'.
Thus, etymologically, 'consensus' means to 'think or feel together'.
As a decision-making process, consensus aims to be:
• Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process.
• Participatory: The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers.
• Co-operative: Participants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members, rather than opt to pursue a majority opinion, potentially to the detriment of a minority.
• Egalitarian: All members of a consensus decision-making body should be afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process.
All members have the opportunity to table, amend and veto or "block" proposals.
• Solution-oriented: An effective consensus decision-making body strives to emphasize common agreement over differences and reach effective decisions using compromise and other techniques to avoid or resolve mutually-exclusive positions within the group.
-------------------
That sounds pretty simple, doesn't it?
In practice, and on controversial subjects, it is not simple!
It is often impossible.
When complete consensus is not possible, what happens?
Life goes on anyway.
But, maybe a partial consensus is possible.
The exercise is to figure out what can be agreed upon first.
Then identify the 'sticky wickets' that comprise the main barriers to reaching agreement.
Both sides of the equation are valuable things to know, especially when the time comes for decisions to be made.
And, one way or another, decisions will be made!
Those decisions may be difficult, time consuming and contentious, but they will be made.
Hopefully, they will be made fairly and will stand up to the tests of time.
If a decision can't stand the test of time, other decisions must be made that will.
No one ever said this was easy!
Like the Midas Muffler Ad said, 'you can pay me now, or pay me later'.
Earlier input is better in my book.
These have attracted several comments, some of which were quite agitated.
That made me wonder whether it was something I said, or because I said something at all on this subject!
It seems a very sensitive subject, doesn't it?
Consistently, my focus has been on seeking 'consensus'.
What does that mean, you might ask?
Here's the definition from Wikipedia:
-----------------
"The word 'consensus' derives from the Latin cum meaning 'with' or 'together with', and sentire meaning to 'think' or 'feel'.
Thus, etymologically, 'consensus' means to 'think or feel together'.
As a decision-making process, consensus aims to be:
• Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process.
• Participatory: The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers.
• Co-operative: Participants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members, rather than opt to pursue a majority opinion, potentially to the detriment of a minority.
• Egalitarian: All members of a consensus decision-making body should be afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process.
All members have the opportunity to table, amend and veto or "block" proposals.
• Solution-oriented: An effective consensus decision-making body strives to emphasize common agreement over differences and reach effective decisions using compromise and other techniques to avoid or resolve mutually-exclusive positions within the group.
-------------------
That sounds pretty simple, doesn't it?
In practice, and on controversial subjects, it is not simple!
It is often impossible.
When complete consensus is not possible, what happens?
Life goes on anyway.
But, maybe a partial consensus is possible.
The exercise is to figure out what can be agreed upon first.
Then identify the 'sticky wickets' that comprise the main barriers to reaching agreement.
Both sides of the equation are valuable things to know, especially when the time comes for decisions to be made.
And, one way or another, decisions will be made!
Those decisions may be difficult, time consuming and contentious, but they will be made.
Hopefully, they will be made fairly and will stand up to the tests of time.
If a decision can't stand the test of time, other decisions must be made that will.
No one ever said this was easy!
Like the Midas Muffler Ad said, 'you can pay me now, or pay me later'.
Earlier input is better in my book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
