"My experience in government is that when things are non-controversial and beautifully coordinated, there is not much going on." - JFK
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Kites rise highest against the wind - not with it.' - Winston Churchill
---------------------------
Some recent discussions seem to forget -or simply ignore- the impetus for the City's renewed emphasis on its neighborhoods.
Maybe its worth a few lines to revisit the conditions which spurred this renewed emphasis.
The main condition was the unprecedented growth that has occurred in recent years that has affected congestion, costs and quality of life for citizens.
To deny this has happened would require an unusual level of ignorance, or dishonesty!
That said, the community has awakened to the realities of what has happened, and what is likely to continue happening.
Many are concerned with these changes and have expressed this concern in no uncertain terms!
To deny this would require an unusual level of deafness or physical absence from this town!
But for those who would like a little refresher course, here is a letter -rather mild by comparison to others- that expressed the widely held concerns that someone absent from here -or deaf- might have missed.
Do not be mistaken in assuming these concerns don't always exist in some degree of fashion, because they do.
What was different two years ago was the unusually high level of common concern.
That level of noise is something no public official can ignore!
So, putting this into perspective, the Mayor and City Council decided to significantly re-emphasize neighborhood involvement as a direct result of this public outcry.
[Note: A version of the draft letter excerpted below was submitted by the Puget Neighborhood Association, as it's alternate to a much more strident letter that was proposed and promoted by the independently formed Association of Bellingham Neighborhoods (ABN). At that time, this letter was considered mild by comparison!]
======================================================================
In reference to the ABN letter expressing serious concerns over the City's process and actions to update its Comprehensive Plan, the Puget Neighborhood Association [PNA] wishes to register its own perspective and recommendations to the Mayor and City Council.
The PNA sincerely hopes its elected officials will carefully listen to these expressions of genuine and widespread frustration from many involved citizens who have strong interests in maintaining the future viability of Bellingham and the intrinsic character of its several distinctive neighborhoods.
Necessarily, a thorough treatment of this subject is difficult to easily summarize with the accuracy and in-depth understanding it deserves.
Rather, the PNA poses a short list of readily observable concerns and proposes a few conceptual ideas on how to best address these concerns.
Major concerns:
• An atmosphere of general agitation and distrust has been allowed to develop and grow, coalescing around the process of updating the City's Comprehensive Plan and related regulatory requirements such as the updates to the Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Management Program.
People are angry!
• Several major development applications have occurred recently, taking advantage of vesting under existing regulations and creating an overload on an already stressed Planning Department.
This has increased public anxiety over rapid in-fill growth and its impacts on the surrounding community at the very time critical decisions are being deliberated.
People are distressed!
• Members of the City's professional staff, including Planning, have allowed themselves to act in less than a professional manner to members of the public.
This is inexcusable behavior from public servants, regardless of cause, and undermines their efficacy and credibility.
People are offended!
• Accusations, assertions and questions made in public and through various media have been allowed to fester too long without adequate response, thereby contributing to the atmosphere of confusion and hearsay that now exists.
People are confused!
• There is a perception that public officials have been stalling the implementation of previously adopted policy, and are now manipulating the process to satisfy some secret agenda to benefit the building industry.
People are suspicious!
• Inadequate follow through has been observed on a number of complaints and issues, despite promises of notice, incorporation of public input, additional time, clear explanations and legal constraints.
People feel left out!
The clear common denominator in all of these general concerns is that they are already strongly held perceptions.
While specific incidents may be argued using relevant facts, these opinions remain inescapably entrenched in many people's minds.
This battle is all but over; only a truce and a negotiated settlement will likely re-engage citizens in a productive manner.
It makes no difference whether the City's arguments are plausible, legal or accurate, a fresh start is needed.
Suggested proposals:
• The current mayor-appointed Neighborhood Advisory Commission has been largely ineffectual, typified by one-way, top-down communication and dominated by political appointees.
The formation of the Association of Bellingham Neighborhoods [ABN] speaks volumes about the need to have a more effective group focused on neighborhood issues.
Perhaps the Council could act to create its own advisory group, along with appropriating funds for staff assistance and identifying specific assignments to be pursued for a defined period of time.
For example, convene the group to work on Neighborhood issues during 2006, such as periodic updates, design standards, view regulations, guidelines for in-fill, traffic management, amenities, affordable housing, parking and the like.
• Council should establish a goal to complete Neighborhood Plan updates by a fixed timetable starting in 2006, using regular input from the Neighborhoods and assigned staff.
If current staff is unavailable or untrained for this service, a consultant could be hired for this purpose.
After all Neighborhood Plans are updated, an annual review could be initiated for continuous fine tuning.
First emphasis should be on those issues which are common to all neighborhoods, including anticipated new neighborhoods in the UGAs.
• Communications with the public need to be further improved and made to include some form of two-way communication on current issues.
This could involve the new BTV10 capabilities as well as the City's web site, plus a rotating 'speakers' team to attend neighborhood and other public meetings and present factual information on current topics and issues.
Televising all Council and Planning Commission Work Sessions would also be helpful to the interested public.
Additional staff may be required to accomplish this extra work which might be partially funded by increasing the Cable Franchise Tax.
• The City needs to communicate clearly its intent to complete its updates to the Comprehensive Plan, Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program in December, 2005, with the promise to annually revisit these plans for fine tuning each year.
• The City needs to establish a code of conduct for its employees, which provides for respectful treatment of citizens in all settings. Failure to abide by these rules should result in consistent and appropriate disciplinary action.
PNA respectfully asks the Mayor and City Council to carefully review these concerns and suggested proposals with the intent of substantially improving the current situation.
We trust that you will see the merit in adopting the suggestions offered to whatever extent you can.
These are being offered in the spirit of constructive cooperation with our elected officials, recognizing that this path provides the best chance of immediate and lasting improvement.
By no means does this mean that we, the PNA, do not share the same serious concerns outlined in the ABN letter, merely that we choose a different method to express them.
====================
So, is there still any doubt that there should have been more re-emphasis on neighborhoods?
If the current, stepped-up efforts still aren't deemed adequate, let's hear some other ideas.
It is a given that everyone will not agree on everything, but there is a way to disagree without being disagreeable!
Civil discourse should be one thing we could agree upon, regardless of degree of frustration or criticality of issue.
Without civility, any process will be ugly and fall short of its potential.
There are already more than enough opportunities for division in our community.
Let's develop more ways to seek unity!
====================
A few weeks ago I was asked to attend a meeting of the Mayor's Neighborhoods Neighborhood Advisory Commission [MNAC] as a member of the City Council.
What a great meeting!
The Mayor's Board Room was packed with representatives from 18 Neighborhood Associations, all of whom contributed a few concerns and ideas to the discussion.
Having these people meet together with each other and staff is a valuable exercise in itself.
Because many issues and problems are common to more than one neighborhood, these meetings serve to share what works and what doesn't work.
It also serves as a 'heads up' opportunity for neighbors to be alerted to new issues and opportunities.
One good example that has enjoyed success is the 'National Night Out Against Crime', with its emphasis on knowing your neighbors and what to do when the unexpected or unwanted happens.
Our Block Watch program and the assigned neighborhood Police Liaisons are visible steps that help neighbors help themselves, and each other.
That's a good thing, that can also help in resolving other issues - maybe even things like 'Landlord Accountability'?
That is because every issue can benefit from neighbors talking to neighbors!
I believe that kind of relationship and discourse is really what knits our town together.
====================
For those want to read further, here are some notes from which I prepared my much briefer comments to the MNAC:
1. Thanks to all you Neighborhood Representatives for participating in MNAC and thereby making it work better.
This organization's goals go far beyond registering complaints, which are many, and continuing as it is in life generally.
YOU BRING US YOUR ISSUES, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE IN GETTING OUR INFORMATION OUT TO YOUR BROADER MEMBERSHIP.
MNAC's real mission is seek out the root causes of problems and recommend positive solutions that can be applied to every
neighborhood, to minimize repeat problems as much as possible, and to prevent small problems from growing bigger.
Ultimately, a collaborative approach is the one that usually works better, but that is difficult to sustain without your willing support.
YOUR WORK HAS BEEN KEY TO A MORE COLLABORATIVE APPROACH WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
We are going through some rough times now, with rapid growth and uneven prosperity the main culprits.
Progress is sometimes difficult to discern, and it is frustrating, tiring and time consuming to boot!
Many may feel a lack of trust in the effectiveness, timeliness and fairness of the solutions that are tried, but we must never give up trying!
Each year brings its own challenges, changes in elected representation and opportunities that seem endless.
They seem endless because they are!
There aren't many silver bullets, since the Lone Ranger went off the air!
It is inherently a continuous improvement process, with the chief variable being the people involved.
Since grassroots involvement is the way quality of life problems get identified and addressed, you folks represent the front line troops combatting them.
2. Changes are imminent in who will become Mayor, and for at least 3 Council seats, with a possibility of 5!
There will be new people in several key City Staff roles, including CAO, Finance Director, Human Resources Director and Museum Director.
Depending on our new Mayor's wishes, there maybe other vacancies to fill as well.
All these changes will happen despite the City's obligation to provide essential public services throughout this transition.
This is a time when the MNAC needs to stay involved!
3. The City Council has set the goal of developing a better, Neighborhood based system to integrate into its decision-making
process.
This process will take time to evolve, plus the cooperative engagement of the NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, because this not the only activity that requires time and attention.
* City Codes are badly outdated and will require about 3 years to fix, providing we assign appropriate senior staff to do the job.
* Neighborhoods will need to define:
• what is most important about their 'character' that needs preserving;
• who represents them, and by what process this determined?;
• who speaks for neighborhoods that have yet to be developed?;
• how parking, views, landlords, safety considerations, noise, litter, amenities, new in-fill, enforcement and the like will be handled.
None of these are small issues, and neighbors have told us they are important, and they should be considered.
* All during this time, regular business must be conducted to process permits, maintain facilities and provide the service citizens deserve and expect.
4. Neighborhood Plan Updates were put on hold a few years ago, not because the Mayor or Staff to do it, but, because I -and the Council- felt it was necessary to do so for several reasons:
* The process was taking too long, and the actual results were less than satisfactory.
Example: Happy Valley & WWU Plans took over 3 years and still people weren't happy.
* City Code was embedded in the NH Plans and needed to be legally separated out for consistency and simplicity.
Note a 3-year effort still required just to update codes!
NH Plans are still part of the Comprehensive Plan, which define character and special considerations and visions.
* Many NH sticking points were actually citywide issues.
Solving these one at a time for 23 NHs just did not seem very smart
* The effects of the building boom was beginning to be felt, which meant Staff resources needed to be used more efficiently to fulfill the City's legal requirements for timeliness in processing permits and the like.
Juggling fixed resources to respond to a heavy and changeable workload remains a problem for the City.
5. Future goal is to require early Neighborhood input to proposed development, along with meeting City codes and regulations, which themselves are becoming more stringent and time consuming.
The development community needs to understand and accept that new reality.
But, Neighborhoods also need to understand that excessive NIMBYism can come at the expense of citywide fairness and overall public good.
TO BE EFFECTIVE, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS NEED TO AVOID APPEARING AS NIMBY'S AS THEY WORK WITH DEVELOPERS, BUT INSTEAD TRY TO FIND MUTUALLY AGREEABLE SOLUTION THAT CAN MEET BOTH PARTIES GOALS AND NOT USE PROVISIONS OF THE COMP PLAN AS FODDER FOR DISPUTES.
USE THE COMP PLAN TO FIND COMMON GROUND!
The easiest way to explain this position and put it into context is to say that Neighborhoods need to align their expectations with reality, and not popular wishes.
I don't believe the City Council will willingly abrogate its responsibility and authority in having the final say in these matters.
That does not mean the Council will be a rubber stamp or a rubber band, but will continue to make its decisions based upon reasoned arguments that consider the totality of our community's goals and system of laws and regulations.
One really good way for Neighborhoods to influence Council decisions is to be continuously represented on the Planning Commission.
Council often considers the PC its first line of defense in conditioning major development proposals and potentially controversial issues.
And, its a good place to learn and position oneself for elected office.
Our single main challenge going forward is to manage change so as to sustain our quality of life.
That is a citywide mission of which Neighborhoods are an essential part!
-----------------------
'Let our advance worrying become advance thinking and planning.' - Winston Churchill
And, ancient wisdom from Aristotle:
'It is just that we should be grateful, not only to those with whose views we may agree, but also to those who have expressed more superficial views; for these also contributed something, by developing before us the powers of thought.'
'It is not once nor twice but times without number that the same ideas make their appearance in the world.'
'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.'
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Growth Management: Neighborhood Planning - Whose Job Is It?
'I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past' - Thomas Jefferson
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." – Thomas Edison
"You can't teach what you don't know, and you can't lead where you won't go" - Jesse Jackson
"There are two stages to the public policy process; too early to tell, and too late to do anything about it." - Anonymous
------------------------
The Oct, 12, 2007 Herald OUR VIEW Editorial trumpeted this headline:
'City planning isn’t only a job for neighbors'
No kidding! Does anyone think it should be?
I don't know why such a statement would even be made, and I haven't heard it made anywhere else.
Perhaps, it was dreamed up just to get people to react?
If so, that plan worked!
I do agree it is the lack of strong leadership on growth issues that has brought Bellingham and Whatcom County to the difficult situation we find ourselves in now.
But, as Winston Churchill said, 'If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we have lost the future'.
The point is, while its important to know what happened in the past, its even more important to take appropriate action now to better influence the future.
Although the neighborhood initiative process the City is supporting may be uncomfortable at times, what is the real alternative?
Think about it!
By NOT involving neighborhoods early and often, we are continuing the same weak leadership of the past.
Maybe some prefer just waiting for something to happen without asking for it?
Or, waiting until some ideas come forward that have not been reviewed in advance?
The Neighborhood initiative is NOT trying to push neighbors to come up with a consensus they may never reach.
It is allowing them to try, and actively facilitating that effort.
Consensus is always a proper goal, but how often is it met?
The City Council certainly doesn't reach consensus on every issue, especially those that are new, or which try to change some existing practice.
When the Silver Beach Ordinance was passed in 2000, we set up a Citizens Task Force to review it and determine ways to make it more fair and flexible.
It was a stated goal of that Task Force to seek and reach consensus whenever possible, yet that certainly did not happen on every issue.
But, on over half the issues considered, we did!
What did happen was that those ideas that did reach consensus -or close to it- were the ones that got forwarded as group recommendations.
In other words, we agreed on what we could agree upon and saved the areas of disagreement for further debate by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Hey, that's why those folks get the big bucks!
The current Fairhaven example is certainly nothing new.
It is a power struggle for control of both the process and the ideas considered to be considered.
Hey folks, that ain't all bad!
One can see that struggle as a problem or an opportunity.
Because it spotlights real issues of disagreement early, it should be seen as primarily an opportunity.
The Fairhaven Neighbors Neighborhood Association of homeowners has been the recognized entity that has participated in the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Commission and other related City-sponsored activities for some time.
As such, I see no valid reason why that role should not continue.
The business-dominated Fairhaven Village Association also has valid interests in the future of Fairhaven and its historic district.
Since Fairhaven is considered a poster child of what an Urban Village ought to be, I think its healthy to have this group also actively involved in the Neighborhood Plan updating process.
The question is how this should be done?
Since what happens often has little to do with what people think should happen, here's my thought.
Neither association's existence is threatened, nor is there any need to merge them together entirely.
But some sort of merging must happen, and this can take more than one form.
Members of the Village Association can join the Neighborhood Association, or at least participate in its activities.
And, the Village Association can continue to deliberate on its own and submit its own recommendations and concerns to the City.
Either way, all these expressions will be heard and considered.
Despite what some might think, all of these recommendations are advisory in nature, but do carry some weight.
The ones which both the Village Association and Neighborhood Association can agree on carry even more weight, but they are still recommendations that need to be heard and considered.
Some City funds are being used to facilitate discussions between the two groups, but if creating one organization that speaks for the entire neighborhood is not possible -as now seems likely- it will still be worth the effort.
Those funds were earmarked specifically for the purpose of facilitating the neighborhood initiative effort, which was something the City heard clearly that was desired by many citizens.
If everything this process tries doesn't work out to everyone's expectations, well that's democracy!
The height limits issue has existed for some time in the district, even well before the current growth spurt.
It should be no surprise that the Neighbors group favors more strict limits than does the Village Association!
The question still remains how to resolve the issue.
Maybe there is a skillful means to be explored, like the father's solution as to how the last piece of pie would be shared by his two hungry sons; one was to cut the pie and the other was to choose first the piece he wanted.
Nah, probably not that simple.
But, you get the idea; compromise where you can, then leave final decision to the decision makers.
But also give them that feedback.
So, because the groups didn't emerge smiling, holding hands and singing kumbaya, the Herald concludes 'the taxpayer-funded talks have already fallen apart'.
Get real! If there hadn't already been serious disagreements expressed, there would not have been the need for facilitation!
I'm glad the Herald approves 'of the city’s desire for input from neighbors as it plans for the future'.
But, it also concludes 'the current neighborhood model is too limited'.
What additional limits might help?
After all, this is a voluntary exercise designed to provide a mechanism for feedback, the earlier and more representative the better.
What would the Herald do if it were considered a 'neighborhood'?
-----------
As this editorial goes on to pontificate, it also sounds like its having a little conversation with itself, and may not completely understand the subject it is addressing:
'We are skeptical that any group of neighbors from a neighborhood of single family homes will ever meet and decide some of their community should be rezoned for more intense development.
Yet as Bellingham grows, that is exactly what must happen.
The underutilized sections of every part of the city must be in play as the city decides how to push more of our increasing population inside current city limits.
The ugly alternative is a city that continues to sprawl and eat up the precious open spaces, agricultural lands and forests that make Whatcom County unique among counties from Olympia to the Canadian border.
Sprawl into the county is never the right answer. More dense development in the city is necessary. A “not-in-my backyard” attitude is unacceptable.
Meanwhile, city officials are falling short in their part of the job.
Turning planning over to neighborhood groups doesn’t work unless you provide the groups with the expertise it takes to plan for the future, and a deadline with consequences for failure.
We hope as a new mayor and City Council members are elected, city officials will return to leading this process.
There is no more important work in the city of Bellingham than planning how our community will change as the population grows. Tough decisions will have to be made. Neighbors must be consulted.
But it seems unrealistic — even a shirking of duties — for elected officials to force neighborhood groups to make those decisions for them.'
-----------------------------
You decide if the Herald has got it right on this issue.
BTW, I haven't seen Editorial Board Members at any neighborhood meetings, have you?
Last word(s):
• No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Maybe that would work better, but that's not possible.
Of course its not comfortable being a 'human shield' for decision makers, having to attend contentitious meetings and not being anonymous!
• Bellingham has had a neighborhood structure in place since at least 1980 when the first plans were written.
But just having a structure in place doesn't do much to make it work.
That takes the voluntary efforts of citizens to talk to each other and come up with ideas on how to do things better.
Absent that, the City Council will continue to make decisions based on whatever information presents itself.
• All 23 existing Neighborhood Plans are a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
As such, they represent statements of the values and attributes desired by citizens, existing and future.
It is important to revisit these periodically and gain new ideas and perspectives from new residents and businesses.
The sooner this information is generated, the better it can be considered by Planning Commission and Council.
• Because some of the comments responding to this editorial were particularly well considered, these are also printed below for those who might have missed them.
==========================
The Herald’s opinion assumes that, after the quality of life and character of our unique city neighborhoods are destroyed by “more intense development,” then our rural county lands will be spared from sprawl. In other words, the Herald’s editors apparently believe that all future growth can be crammed into our cities, thereby preventing the destruction of our rural and agricultural lands.
Any reasonable person can see how preposterous this assumption is. As we all know, once city neighborhoods are decimated by over-development, new development into the county will not cease; it will continue in perpetuity until someone takes power who understands that we cannot grow to infinity. In fact, if we follow the Herald’s suggestion to its natural conclusion, not only will every neighborhood suffer drastic consequences; but we will lose our rural and ag lands as well.
It is clear that we cannot grow forever. Once we all agree, we can begin to determine the appropriate level of growth that will preserve the quality of life in our neighborhoods as well as our “precious open spaces, agricultural lands and forests that make Whatcom County unique.” We need to begin evaluating our ideal carrying capacity now so we can realistically plan for our future.
The Herald editors also fail to comprehend that the rights of current residents, citizens, taxpayers, and voters (not to mention Herald subscribers) are paramount to the rights of people who may (or may not) relocate to Bellingham in the future. Current residents are uniquely qualified to determine their own destiny. If Herald editors disagree, perhaps it’s time for some new ones.
If neighborhoods comprised of single family homes desire to retain that character, so be it. In fact, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that cities’ comprehensive plans must ensure “the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods.” [RCW 36.70A.070(2)] This is not a goal of the GMA; it is a requirement. The Herald’s recommendation essentially amounts to a violation of the GMA.
Hopefully whichever Mayor Dan is elected will understand the need for long-term legacy planning throughout Whatcom County and will work with the County Executive and the mayors of other cities to help determine our ideal size before it is too late.
In the meantime, Bellingham residents must continue to be vigilant to preserve the unique quality of life we have inherited from those who came before us so we may pass it on to future generations.
--------------------
The writer misunderstands the Act when they suggest ensuring neighborhood vitality and character has some priority greater than protecting rural and resource lands, and the quality and quantity of our water.
The Act merely mandates that this be an element of the comprehensive plan. Like all goals of the Act, ensuring neighborhood character is to be pursued harmoniously with the other goals.
The need for our elected officials to take responsibility, rather than delegate it to neighborhoods ready to transfer growth to other backyards, includes recognizing that the majority of our current residents do not desire more growth and the changes it entails.
If those elected officials' urban constituents do not desire growth, because we can not put urban growth in rural lands, it seems that we would elect officials who understand that we can not continue to accept urban growth.
Expanding the urban area and converting rural land to more low density urban development, apparently the present choice of officials faced with constituents unwilling to accept change in their backyards, is not the answer.
----------------
I would like to see an article that accurately describes what happened in Fairhaven. In fact, the City approached the Fairhaven Neighbors about updating the plan without notifying the Fairhaven Village Association about the process. The Fairhaven Neighbors developed a revised plan that included draconian height limits and other restrictions, presenting it to the Village Association as a fait accompli.
---------------
I repeat my thesis of last Monday: the City's mewing about Neighborhood plans will only veil our view of the vested development projects to come - King & Queen Mts., West Cordata, Chuckanut Ridge, CAITAC etc. It appears that City and Planning are shirking their elected and paid duty by keepings the peasants all riled up and at each other's throats, However the building continues. As of Oct. 1, there is a posted moratorium on ground work being done on watershed land. Why did I see bulldozers on lots when I drove south to Sudden Valley on Tuesday? Making the Neighborhood Associations into the NIMBY-man, as suggested by this editorial, is unfair and reflective of the Herald's vascillating stance on growth - you are all for it with your printed rah-rah because of our destination image but then wring your editorial hands when it becomes apparent that your readers are of a different mind. Regardless of which Mayor Dan is crowned, the City is still our City - not his, not his friends in development, not the IOC, not even Horizon Bank's! My vote wobbled a bit yesterday when I read the endorsement lists of both mayoral candidates. Even after attending forums and reading their statements, I fear that I still know too little about them but too much about their respective supporters. I read similar statements from all the candidates, particularly about watershed protection and infill. However if tha candidates all sound the same and they represent us, then why are we unraveling over the issue of growth? The City is afraid to make some planning decisions so they foist the process onto Neighborhoods however making sure they have removed any regulatory teeth from the Associations. Why else is there no solution being found for violation of single-family dwelling zoning and student housing? Why is there no pressure being brought to bear on WWU's "sprawl"? Why is Fairhaven splintering and sadly one of the most unpleasant parts of town? Why else are Lakeway and Bakerview parking lots? Why else are there empty storefronts and residential units all over town but the hammering continues? Why does the City focus on froo-froo sidewalk designs? Why does my water quality decline? Why are mobile home owners being forced out? Because Planning and the City have never learned to say "no" to developers. When we as taxpayers say it loudly and clearly, we become NIMBY's. As a young friend said the other day: "what a sucky City" but always thought we were the City. When did we lose control?
------------
No wonder young professionals do not want to live here. All of the established professionals and retired folks are preventing this city from becoming more modern, and in the process are driving away the tax base that will end up providing the goods and services to you in twenty to thirty years. Although owning a single family home with a 1/4 acre of land sounds nice, it is not necessary for a young person or couple, or even a starting family to aspire to owning a property like that. Without growth within the city limits, the quality of life for the people who cannot afford your $400,000 Edgemoore home is lacking.
No one questions that this area is a great place to live. You and I live here for a reason. There are responsible ways to provide the housing that is needed, while catering to the people who want a certain type of neighborhood. Also, the business owners are not fighting to damage the quality of life; instead, they are fighting in order to give themselves and their families more of an opportunity to make the money needed to live in this area.
Please, stop the bickering. I'm sure there was a time when a compromise could be reached. In regards to the Fairhaven area, I always assumed that is where the nicest and most intellegent people in our community lived and worked. Please prove me right.
------------
If one had to choose one city whose surrounding lands were to be developed; Bellingham's, Everson's, Nooksack's, Lynden's, Sumas', or Ferndales; which would it be?
One cannot have it all. We do not live in a perfect society. We use compromise as a way to strive towards perfection.
Which city least impacts intrusion into long term economically sustainable resource lands?
Which city can most efficiently service an increasing population with alternative transportation options, fire protection, hospitals, government buildings, supportive community services, goods, entertainment, and higher education?
Which city can best respond to civil defense needs?
Which city is not immediately influenced by the crossing of the Nooksack River either as access to a city or evacuation from a city?
Which city in times of global warming can build upon its hills, rather than watch its lowlands fill with water?
Other than govt. required populaion control or a gate on I5, which City's expansion would least impact us?
------------
My neighborhood association is a joke. I attended a few meetings and soon realized these folks are an unreasonable bunch of NIMBYs. The folks running the meeting have their own agenda and they do not want any other opinions. I think the City should end this group's reign. My neighborhood would be better off without them.
-----------
Regarding my interpretation of the GMA's requirement to ensure neighborhood character, perhaps you need to argue your point with land use attorneys Bob Tull and Dominique Zervas. The following is a quote from their October 27, 2005 memo to the Whatcom County Planning Commission:
"The Legislature has mandated that cities' land-supply element must ensure 'the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods.' This is not a goal of the GMA; it is a requirement."
Clearly, these experienced attorneys believe there is a difference. If you know better, please share with the rest of us.
---------------
How refreshing to have an intelligent discussion!
Every comment made so far has validity.
That is both a blessing and a curse.
The views expressed serve to frame the issues pretty well, but in the end we will have to work them out -one by one.
The exercise is to find which areas exist that we can agree upon and use those to move forward.
There will be no substitute for neighborhood involvement, because that is where every citizen lives.
And, there is no substitute for every one being heard. But, in the end, decisions will be made. The question is, do citizens want thir input to happen sooner or later?
One sure answer is that no one is likely to get everything they want!
The competing goals of the GMA guarantee that outcome.
======================
'It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link of the chain of destiny can be handled at a time.' - Winston Churchill
'In war as in life, it is often necessary when some cherished scheme has failed, to take up the best alternative open, and if so, it is folly not to work for it with all your might.' - Winston Churchill
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." – Thomas Edison
"You can't teach what you don't know, and you can't lead where you won't go" - Jesse Jackson
"There are two stages to the public policy process; too early to tell, and too late to do anything about it." - Anonymous
------------------------
The Oct, 12, 2007 Herald OUR VIEW Editorial trumpeted this headline:
'City planning isn’t only a job for neighbors'
No kidding! Does anyone think it should be?
I don't know why such a statement would even be made, and I haven't heard it made anywhere else.
Perhaps, it was dreamed up just to get people to react?
If so, that plan worked!
I do agree it is the lack of strong leadership on growth issues that has brought Bellingham and Whatcom County to the difficult situation we find ourselves in now.
But, as Winston Churchill said, 'If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we have lost the future'.
The point is, while its important to know what happened in the past, its even more important to take appropriate action now to better influence the future.
Although the neighborhood initiative process the City is supporting may be uncomfortable at times, what is the real alternative?
Think about it!
By NOT involving neighborhoods early and often, we are continuing the same weak leadership of the past.
Maybe some prefer just waiting for something to happen without asking for it?
Or, waiting until some ideas come forward that have not been reviewed in advance?
The Neighborhood initiative is NOT trying to push neighbors to come up with a consensus they may never reach.
It is allowing them to try, and actively facilitating that effort.
Consensus is always a proper goal, but how often is it met?
The City Council certainly doesn't reach consensus on every issue, especially those that are new, or which try to change some existing practice.
When the Silver Beach Ordinance was passed in 2000, we set up a Citizens Task Force to review it and determine ways to make it more fair and flexible.
It was a stated goal of that Task Force to seek and reach consensus whenever possible, yet that certainly did not happen on every issue.
But, on over half the issues considered, we did!
What did happen was that those ideas that did reach consensus -or close to it- were the ones that got forwarded as group recommendations.
In other words, we agreed on what we could agree upon and saved the areas of disagreement for further debate by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Hey, that's why those folks get the big bucks!
The current Fairhaven example is certainly nothing new.
It is a power struggle for control of both the process and the ideas considered to be considered.
Hey folks, that ain't all bad!
One can see that struggle as a problem or an opportunity.
Because it spotlights real issues of disagreement early, it should be seen as primarily an opportunity.
The Fairhaven Neighbors Neighborhood Association of homeowners has been the recognized entity that has participated in the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Commission and other related City-sponsored activities for some time.
As such, I see no valid reason why that role should not continue.
The business-dominated Fairhaven Village Association also has valid interests in the future of Fairhaven and its historic district.
Since Fairhaven is considered a poster child of what an Urban Village ought to be, I think its healthy to have this group also actively involved in the Neighborhood Plan updating process.
The question is how this should be done?
Since what happens often has little to do with what people think should happen, here's my thought.
Neither association's existence is threatened, nor is there any need to merge them together entirely.
But some sort of merging must happen, and this can take more than one form.
Members of the Village Association can join the Neighborhood Association, or at least participate in its activities.
And, the Village Association can continue to deliberate on its own and submit its own recommendations and concerns to the City.
Either way, all these expressions will be heard and considered.
Despite what some might think, all of these recommendations are advisory in nature, but do carry some weight.
The ones which both the Village Association and Neighborhood Association can agree on carry even more weight, but they are still recommendations that need to be heard and considered.
Some City funds are being used to facilitate discussions between the two groups, but if creating one organization that speaks for the entire neighborhood is not possible -as now seems likely- it will still be worth the effort.
Those funds were earmarked specifically for the purpose of facilitating the neighborhood initiative effort, which was something the City heard clearly that was desired by many citizens.
If everything this process tries doesn't work out to everyone's expectations, well that's democracy!
The height limits issue has existed for some time in the district, even well before the current growth spurt.
It should be no surprise that the Neighbors group favors more strict limits than does the Village Association!
The question still remains how to resolve the issue.
Maybe there is a skillful means to be explored, like the father's solution as to how the last piece of pie would be shared by his two hungry sons; one was to cut the pie and the other was to choose first the piece he wanted.
Nah, probably not that simple.
But, you get the idea; compromise where you can, then leave final decision to the decision makers.
But also give them that feedback.
So, because the groups didn't emerge smiling, holding hands and singing kumbaya, the Herald concludes 'the taxpayer-funded talks have already fallen apart'.
Get real! If there hadn't already been serious disagreements expressed, there would not have been the need for facilitation!
I'm glad the Herald approves 'of the city’s desire for input from neighbors as it plans for the future'.
But, it also concludes 'the current neighborhood model is too limited'.
What additional limits might help?
After all, this is a voluntary exercise designed to provide a mechanism for feedback, the earlier and more representative the better.
What would the Herald do if it were considered a 'neighborhood'?
-----------
As this editorial goes on to pontificate, it also sounds like its having a little conversation with itself, and may not completely understand the subject it is addressing:
'We are skeptical that any group of neighbors from a neighborhood of single family homes will ever meet and decide some of their community should be rezoned for more intense development.
Yet as Bellingham grows, that is exactly what must happen.
The underutilized sections of every part of the city must be in play as the city decides how to push more of our increasing population inside current city limits.
The ugly alternative is a city that continues to sprawl and eat up the precious open spaces, agricultural lands and forests that make Whatcom County unique among counties from Olympia to the Canadian border.
Sprawl into the county is never the right answer. More dense development in the city is necessary. A “not-in-my backyard” attitude is unacceptable.
Meanwhile, city officials are falling short in their part of the job.
Turning planning over to neighborhood groups doesn’t work unless you provide the groups with the expertise it takes to plan for the future, and a deadline with consequences for failure.
We hope as a new mayor and City Council members are elected, city officials will return to leading this process.
There is no more important work in the city of Bellingham than planning how our community will change as the population grows. Tough decisions will have to be made. Neighbors must be consulted.
But it seems unrealistic — even a shirking of duties — for elected officials to force neighborhood groups to make those decisions for them.'
-----------------------------
You decide if the Herald has got it right on this issue.
BTW, I haven't seen Editorial Board Members at any neighborhood meetings, have you?
Last word(s):
• No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Maybe that would work better, but that's not possible.
Of course its not comfortable being a 'human shield' for decision makers, having to attend contentitious meetings and not being anonymous!
• Bellingham has had a neighborhood structure in place since at least 1980 when the first plans were written.
But just having a structure in place doesn't do much to make it work.
That takes the voluntary efforts of citizens to talk to each other and come up with ideas on how to do things better.
Absent that, the City Council will continue to make decisions based on whatever information presents itself.
• All 23 existing Neighborhood Plans are a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
As such, they represent statements of the values and attributes desired by citizens, existing and future.
It is important to revisit these periodically and gain new ideas and perspectives from new residents and businesses.
The sooner this information is generated, the better it can be considered by Planning Commission and Council.
• Because some of the comments responding to this editorial were particularly well considered, these are also printed below for those who might have missed them.
==========================
The Herald’s opinion assumes that, after the quality of life and character of our unique city neighborhoods are destroyed by “more intense development,” then our rural county lands will be spared from sprawl. In other words, the Herald’s editors apparently believe that all future growth can be crammed into our cities, thereby preventing the destruction of our rural and agricultural lands.
Any reasonable person can see how preposterous this assumption is. As we all know, once city neighborhoods are decimated by over-development, new development into the county will not cease; it will continue in perpetuity until someone takes power who understands that we cannot grow to infinity. In fact, if we follow the Herald’s suggestion to its natural conclusion, not only will every neighborhood suffer drastic consequences; but we will lose our rural and ag lands as well.
It is clear that we cannot grow forever. Once we all agree, we can begin to determine the appropriate level of growth that will preserve the quality of life in our neighborhoods as well as our “precious open spaces, agricultural lands and forests that make Whatcom County unique.” We need to begin evaluating our ideal carrying capacity now so we can realistically plan for our future.
The Herald editors also fail to comprehend that the rights of current residents, citizens, taxpayers, and voters (not to mention Herald subscribers) are paramount to the rights of people who may (or may not) relocate to Bellingham in the future. Current residents are uniquely qualified to determine their own destiny. If Herald editors disagree, perhaps it’s time for some new ones.
If neighborhoods comprised of single family homes desire to retain that character, so be it. In fact, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that cities’ comprehensive plans must ensure “the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods.” [RCW 36.70A.070(2)] This is not a goal of the GMA; it is a requirement. The Herald’s recommendation essentially amounts to a violation of the GMA.
Hopefully whichever Mayor Dan is elected will understand the need for long-term legacy planning throughout Whatcom County and will work with the County Executive and the mayors of other cities to help determine our ideal size before it is too late.
In the meantime, Bellingham residents must continue to be vigilant to preserve the unique quality of life we have inherited from those who came before us so we may pass it on to future generations.
--------------------
The writer misunderstands the Act when they suggest ensuring neighborhood vitality and character has some priority greater than protecting rural and resource lands, and the quality and quantity of our water.
The Act merely mandates that this be an element of the comprehensive plan. Like all goals of the Act, ensuring neighborhood character is to be pursued harmoniously with the other goals.
The need for our elected officials to take responsibility, rather than delegate it to neighborhoods ready to transfer growth to other backyards, includes recognizing that the majority of our current residents do not desire more growth and the changes it entails.
If those elected officials' urban constituents do not desire growth, because we can not put urban growth in rural lands, it seems that we would elect officials who understand that we can not continue to accept urban growth.
Expanding the urban area and converting rural land to more low density urban development, apparently the present choice of officials faced with constituents unwilling to accept change in their backyards, is not the answer.
----------------
I would like to see an article that accurately describes what happened in Fairhaven. In fact, the City approached the Fairhaven Neighbors about updating the plan without notifying the Fairhaven Village Association about the process. The Fairhaven Neighbors developed a revised plan that included draconian height limits and other restrictions, presenting it to the Village Association as a fait accompli.
---------------
I repeat my thesis of last Monday: the City's mewing about Neighborhood plans will only veil our view of the vested development projects to come - King & Queen Mts., West Cordata, Chuckanut Ridge, CAITAC etc. It appears that City and Planning are shirking their elected and paid duty by keepings the peasants all riled up and at each other's throats, However the building continues. As of Oct. 1, there is a posted moratorium on ground work being done on watershed land. Why did I see bulldozers on lots when I drove south to Sudden Valley on Tuesday? Making the Neighborhood Associations into the NIMBY-man, as suggested by this editorial, is unfair and reflective of the Herald's vascillating stance on growth - you are all for it with your printed rah-rah because of our destination image but then wring your editorial hands when it becomes apparent that your readers are of a different mind. Regardless of which Mayor Dan is crowned, the City is still our City - not his, not his friends in development, not the IOC, not even Horizon Bank's! My vote wobbled a bit yesterday when I read the endorsement lists of both mayoral candidates. Even after attending forums and reading their statements, I fear that I still know too little about them but too much about their respective supporters. I read similar statements from all the candidates, particularly about watershed protection and infill. However if tha candidates all sound the same and they represent us, then why are we unraveling over the issue of growth? The City is afraid to make some planning decisions so they foist the process onto Neighborhoods however making sure they have removed any regulatory teeth from the Associations. Why else is there no solution being found for violation of single-family dwelling zoning and student housing? Why is there no pressure being brought to bear on WWU's "sprawl"? Why is Fairhaven splintering and sadly one of the most unpleasant parts of town? Why else are Lakeway and Bakerview parking lots? Why else are there empty storefronts and residential units all over town but the hammering continues? Why does the City focus on froo-froo sidewalk designs? Why does my water quality decline? Why are mobile home owners being forced out? Because Planning and the City have never learned to say "no" to developers. When we as taxpayers say it loudly and clearly, we become NIMBY's. As a young friend said the other day: "what a sucky City" but always thought we were the City. When did we lose control?
------------
No wonder young professionals do not want to live here. All of the established professionals and retired folks are preventing this city from becoming more modern, and in the process are driving away the tax base that will end up providing the goods and services to you in twenty to thirty years. Although owning a single family home with a 1/4 acre of land sounds nice, it is not necessary for a young person or couple, or even a starting family to aspire to owning a property like that. Without growth within the city limits, the quality of life for the people who cannot afford your $400,000 Edgemoore home is lacking.
No one questions that this area is a great place to live. You and I live here for a reason. There are responsible ways to provide the housing that is needed, while catering to the people who want a certain type of neighborhood. Also, the business owners are not fighting to damage the quality of life; instead, they are fighting in order to give themselves and their families more of an opportunity to make the money needed to live in this area.
Please, stop the bickering. I'm sure there was a time when a compromise could be reached. In regards to the Fairhaven area, I always assumed that is where the nicest and most intellegent people in our community lived and worked. Please prove me right.
------------
If one had to choose one city whose surrounding lands were to be developed; Bellingham's, Everson's, Nooksack's, Lynden's, Sumas', or Ferndales; which would it be?
One cannot have it all. We do not live in a perfect society. We use compromise as a way to strive towards perfection.
Which city least impacts intrusion into long term economically sustainable resource lands?
Which city can most efficiently service an increasing population with alternative transportation options, fire protection, hospitals, government buildings, supportive community services, goods, entertainment, and higher education?
Which city can best respond to civil defense needs?
Which city is not immediately influenced by the crossing of the Nooksack River either as access to a city or evacuation from a city?
Which city in times of global warming can build upon its hills, rather than watch its lowlands fill with water?
Other than govt. required populaion control or a gate on I5, which City's expansion would least impact us?
------------
My neighborhood association is a joke. I attended a few meetings and soon realized these folks are an unreasonable bunch of NIMBYs. The folks running the meeting have their own agenda and they do not want any other opinions. I think the City should end this group's reign. My neighborhood would be better off without them.
-----------
Regarding my interpretation of the GMA's requirement to ensure neighborhood character, perhaps you need to argue your point with land use attorneys Bob Tull and Dominique Zervas. The following is a quote from their October 27, 2005 memo to the Whatcom County Planning Commission:
"The Legislature has mandated that cities' land-supply element must ensure 'the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods.' This is not a goal of the GMA; it is a requirement."
Clearly, these experienced attorneys believe there is a difference. If you know better, please share with the rest of us.
---------------
How refreshing to have an intelligent discussion!
Every comment made so far has validity.
That is both a blessing and a curse.
The views expressed serve to frame the issues pretty well, but in the end we will have to work them out -one by one.
The exercise is to find which areas exist that we can agree upon and use those to move forward.
There will be no substitute for neighborhood involvement, because that is where every citizen lives.
And, there is no substitute for every one being heard. But, in the end, decisions will be made. The question is, do citizens want thir input to happen sooner or later?
One sure answer is that no one is likely to get everything they want!
The competing goals of the GMA guarantee that outcome.
======================
'It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link of the chain of destiny can be handled at a time.' - Winston Churchill
'In war as in life, it is often necessary when some cherished scheme has failed, to take up the best alternative open, and if so, it is folly not to work for it with all your might.' - Winston Churchill
Friday, October 12, 2007
Silver Beach Neighborhood: Wading Into Uncharted Waters - Again
'Freedom is when people can speak, democracy is when the government listens' - Alastair Farrugia
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
-----------------------------
A renewed focus on Neighborhoods and hearing their input for updating Neighborhood Plans has begun in earnest.
Predictably, there are some 'issues' to be worked out in this process, but there are always 'issues' in such matters that affect people.
Getting these 'issues' identified and on the table is an important part of this process.
Maybe its equally -or more- important than any other objective.
Suffice to say this is a rich vein to be mined, that the prospectors hope will become a 'Mother Lode' of value to our community.
Others may have different ideas, and want to see this claim played out before it pays off.
That outcome would be unfortunate for our community, and I hope it doesn't happen.
But, the outcome and effectiveness of this Neighborhood initiative are still in question.
While each Neighborhood has its own unique blend of problems and opportunities, there are many commonalities as well.
Silver Beach is unique because it is the Neighborhood that occupies almost the entire portion of the City that falls within the Lake Whatcom Reservoir watershed.
That, in itself, is enough to set Silver Beach in a special category of importance.
It happens to be where the 'rubber meets the road' in applying best policy and practices to preserve our drinking water supply!
Stay tuned.
-------------------------
The Silver Beach Neighborhood Plan Update was the subject of a well attended meeting last night [Oct 11] at the Bloedel Donovan Park Gym.
Probably close to 200 people were there to weigh in on a set of proposals the Neighborhood Association had hammered out during past months.
Seeing all the cars in the parking lot made me wonder if I had the right address!
Most attending had participated earlier in some fashion, but there were quite a few who were there just to oppose something, either some of the proposals, or the process used to develop them for consideration.
Others seemed to be there mainly to express concerns, complain about things they didn't understand, or make requests to deny, decry and delay the process.
Somehow the stridency and lack of clear understanding about what was going on served to mark many of these folks as last minute recruits to a generally 'anti' agenda.
I may be mistaken, but I'd have to be convinced otherwise.
The meeting's object was to get direct feedback -in the form of ballot votes- from residents of that Neighborhood on a list of measures designed to reasonably represent the NH Plan changes the Neighborhood wants.
These recommendations agreed upon would then be considered by City staff and the Planning Commission before the City Council decides which will be approved.
If you were to think these are mostly advisory in nature, you'd be correct.
But, advisory or not, anytime good ideas are advanced and vetted by a fair process, the Council listens to them carefully.
It's much preferred to have these become part of early discussions and not last minute, disjointed after thoughts.
The point is, this is an attempt at bottoms-up democracy, where citizens get their input early in the process.
That in itself is a bit of a welcome change, don't you think?
But, some didn't seem to welcome this new process!
They saw it as their activist neighbors trying to push their agendas, and forcing them to also participate in order to protect whatever it is they think needs protecting.
Phony property rights claims maybe?
Some even stated resentment at having to interrupt their busy lives for this kind of exercise!
Some claimed foul because they were not notified.
Some claimed the process was bogus because all residents weren't voting
Some wanted to submit absentee ballots
Some wanted a ballot that allowed voting 'no' with a single check-mark, thereby gutting all the good work done
Some didn't know what they wanted but they complained anyway.
Now, why would such folks show up at this meeting when they claimed they didn't know about it?
Anyway, Silver Beach will be one of the first to go through the new Neighborhood Update process and test its efficacy.
We'll learn from this experience and be able to anticipate not always repeating the same learning curve later.
Thanks, Silver Beach!
----------------------
Actually, the Silver Beach Neighborhood has already been a courageous trailblazer before, back in the year 2000.
That was the time the so-called 'Silver Beach Ordinance' was enacted on an emergency interim basis, in response to the Department of Ecology's 303 (d) listing of Lake Whatcom for fecal coliform and low dissolved Oxygen.
Since then, and after a very significant, contentious public process, that Ordinance has become a model for watershed protection within an already urbanized area.
It marked a departure from business as usual in this critical watershed, despite some of the same people who opposed that measure then, also showed up last night to oppose whatever it was they thought the Neighborhood Association was trying to do that they might not agree with.
Is it something in the water?
That's a different story, even though it did have some common challenges.
----------------
Back in 2000, the City Council heard many hours of testimony from dozens of people.
Among those who opposed the 'Silver Beach Ordinance', the comments listed were the common themes of complaint.
Many of these categories of concern are now being heard again:
The following 'generic' concerns are likely to be echoed over and over again, like a mantra, every time significant action is undertaken or even seriously discussed:
Why is this necessary; can't something else be done instead?
Convince us that this action will actually help solve the problem.
Unfair! -why pick on just us?
Others need to share the burden of watershed protection!
Our property values are being reduced or taken away; we want restitution!
We need more debate/proof; delay this for another time.
Existing owners caused the problem; let them fix it!
Why aren't existing regulations being enforced?
Our accustomed life-style is being threatened!
This constitutes a special hardship!
Dueling scientists.
This situation is already out of hand and can't be resolved.
We retired to "the lake" and want to build our dream home.
The water is clean enough; the City treats it anyway.
These new taxes/fees/assessments are too high.
More bureacracy!
We've already got a program to address this problem; this is unecessary/not being collaborative!
All we need is a retrofitted regional stormwater system and water & sewer services extended further.
That's [another jurisdiction]'s problem.
I don't want to feel guilty about living/working/building/playing here.
I can remember when the lake was really bad; it's clean now.
We're grandfathered into our rights; this is America!
Those [environmentalists/developers/bureaucrats] are only concerned with their special interests.
Why can't I build this, my neighbor's got one?
OK, how much do I have to pay to get this done?
And, on and on.... to the point that you could create a checklist of these and simply add names, dates & the issue 'du jour', to have a coded, concise summary of concerns.
Does anyone doubt that history has a habit of repeating itself?
-------------
'It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried' - Winston Churchill
'Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts' - Winston Churchill
"If the nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
-----------------------------
A renewed focus on Neighborhoods and hearing their input for updating Neighborhood Plans has begun in earnest.
Predictably, there are some 'issues' to be worked out in this process, but there are always 'issues' in such matters that affect people.
Getting these 'issues' identified and on the table is an important part of this process.
Maybe its equally -or more- important than any other objective.
Suffice to say this is a rich vein to be mined, that the prospectors hope will become a 'Mother Lode' of value to our community.
Others may have different ideas, and want to see this claim played out before it pays off.
That outcome would be unfortunate for our community, and I hope it doesn't happen.
But, the outcome and effectiveness of this Neighborhood initiative are still in question.
While each Neighborhood has its own unique blend of problems and opportunities, there are many commonalities as well.
Silver Beach is unique because it is the Neighborhood that occupies almost the entire portion of the City that falls within the Lake Whatcom Reservoir watershed.
That, in itself, is enough to set Silver Beach in a special category of importance.
It happens to be where the 'rubber meets the road' in applying best policy and practices to preserve our drinking water supply!
Stay tuned.
-------------------------
The Silver Beach Neighborhood Plan Update was the subject of a well attended meeting last night [Oct 11] at the Bloedel Donovan Park Gym.
Probably close to 200 people were there to weigh in on a set of proposals the Neighborhood Association had hammered out during past months.
Seeing all the cars in the parking lot made me wonder if I had the right address!
Most attending had participated earlier in some fashion, but there were quite a few who were there just to oppose something, either some of the proposals, or the process used to develop them for consideration.
Others seemed to be there mainly to express concerns, complain about things they didn't understand, or make requests to deny, decry and delay the process.
Somehow the stridency and lack of clear understanding about what was going on served to mark many of these folks as last minute recruits to a generally 'anti' agenda.
I may be mistaken, but I'd have to be convinced otherwise.
The meeting's object was to get direct feedback -in the form of ballot votes- from residents of that Neighborhood on a list of measures designed to reasonably represent the NH Plan changes the Neighborhood wants.
These recommendations agreed upon would then be considered by City staff and the Planning Commission before the City Council decides which will be approved.
If you were to think these are mostly advisory in nature, you'd be correct.
But, advisory or not, anytime good ideas are advanced and vetted by a fair process, the Council listens to them carefully.
It's much preferred to have these become part of early discussions and not last minute, disjointed after thoughts.
The point is, this is an attempt at bottoms-up democracy, where citizens get their input early in the process.
That in itself is a bit of a welcome change, don't you think?
But, some didn't seem to welcome this new process!
They saw it as their activist neighbors trying to push their agendas, and forcing them to also participate in order to protect whatever it is they think needs protecting.
Phony property rights claims maybe?
Some even stated resentment at having to interrupt their busy lives for this kind of exercise!
Some claimed foul because they were not notified.
Some claimed the process was bogus because all residents weren't voting
Some wanted to submit absentee ballots
Some wanted a ballot that allowed voting 'no' with a single check-mark, thereby gutting all the good work done
Some didn't know what they wanted but they complained anyway.
Now, why would such folks show up at this meeting when they claimed they didn't know about it?
Anyway, Silver Beach will be one of the first to go through the new Neighborhood Update process and test its efficacy.
We'll learn from this experience and be able to anticipate not always repeating the same learning curve later.
Thanks, Silver Beach!
----------------------
Actually, the Silver Beach Neighborhood has already been a courageous trailblazer before, back in the year 2000.
That was the time the so-called 'Silver Beach Ordinance' was enacted on an emergency interim basis, in response to the Department of Ecology's 303 (d) listing of Lake Whatcom for fecal coliform and low dissolved Oxygen.
Since then, and after a very significant, contentious public process, that Ordinance has become a model for watershed protection within an already urbanized area.
It marked a departure from business as usual in this critical watershed, despite some of the same people who opposed that measure then, also showed up last night to oppose whatever it was they thought the Neighborhood Association was trying to do that they might not agree with.
Is it something in the water?
That's a different story, even though it did have some common challenges.
----------------
Back in 2000, the City Council heard many hours of testimony from dozens of people.
Among those who opposed the 'Silver Beach Ordinance', the comments listed were the common themes of complaint.
Many of these categories of concern are now being heard again:
The following 'generic' concerns are likely to be echoed over and over again, like a mantra, every time significant action is undertaken or even seriously discussed:
Why is this necessary; can't something else be done instead?
Convince us that this action will actually help solve the problem.
Unfair! -why pick on just us?
Others need to share the burden of watershed protection!
Our property values are being reduced or taken away; we want restitution!
We need more debate/proof; delay this for another time.
Existing owners caused the problem; let them fix it!
Why aren't existing regulations being enforced?
Our accustomed life-style is being threatened!
This constitutes a special hardship!
Dueling scientists.
This situation is already out of hand and can't be resolved.
We retired to "the lake" and want to build our dream home.
The water is clean enough; the City treats it anyway.
These new taxes/fees/assessments are too high.
More bureacracy!
We've already got a program to address this problem; this is unecessary/not being collaborative!
All we need is a retrofitted regional stormwater system and water & sewer services extended further.
That's [another jurisdiction]'s problem.
I don't want to feel guilty about living/working/building/playing here.
I can remember when the lake was really bad; it's clean now.
We're grandfathered into our rights; this is America!
Those [environmentalists/developers/bureaucrats] are only concerned with their special interests.
Why can't I build this, my neighbor's got one?
OK, how much do I have to pay to get this done?
And, on and on.... to the point that you could create a checklist of these and simply add names, dates & the issue 'du jour', to have a coded, concise summary of concerns.
Does anyone doubt that history has a habit of repeating itself?
-------------
'It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried' - Winston Churchill
'Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts' - Winston Churchill
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Operation Overlord & Landlord Accountability
Laws too gentle are seldom obeyed; too severe, seldom executed.
- Benjamin Franklin
"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
"If we are to solve the problems that plague us, our thinking must evolve beyond the level we were using when we created those problems in the first place." --Albert Einstein
`tunnel' history, the kind that can lead an investigator to know more and more about less and less
"My experience in government is that when things are non-controversial and beautifully coordinated, there is not much going on." - JFK
“Opinion is power.” - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1816
It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary. - Winston Churchill
That government is best which governs least. - Thomas Paine
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force.
Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
The secret of getting things done is to act! - Dante Alighieri
Peter's Placebo: An ounce of image is worth a pound of performance.
Grossman's Misquote: Complex problems have simple, easy to understand wrong answers.
Cohen's Law: What really matters is the name you succeed in imposing on the facts, not the facts themselves.
Goldwyn's Law of Contracts: A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Mencken's Metalaw: For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong.
“Demagoguery beats data in making public policy."
-US House of Representatives Majority Leader
"But we must remember that good laws, if they are not obeyed, do not constitute good government.
Hence there are two parts of good government; one is the actual obedience of citizens to the laws, the other part is the goodness of the laws which they obey..." -- (Aristotle, Politics).
--------------------
Operation Overlord was the code name for the main Allied D-Day invasion of Europe during World War II.
It's mission was reclaim ground that the Axis had occupied.
And, to open a western front that would have to be defended on the ground
Like most conflicts, this one was ugly and terrible in its effects, but very necessary.
Fortunately, it was successful - for our side!
And, like many wars and other games of violence, it got romanticized and became entertainment.
The issue of 'Landlord Accountability' is different.
There is no sinister cause at work behind the scattered nuisances which some parts of our City experience from time to time.
Noise, litter, parking congestion and the complaints that result therefrom are relatively benign, and while annoying, do not lend themselves to an easy solution.
That is not to say no solution is possible or necessary, but any solution will be inherently partial and fleeting in nature.
And, it will require a large element of neighbors uniting with each other and actively working to make more socially acceptable, the periodic thoughlessness of fellow human beings.
That has been my experience in almost 70 years of living in this country - eight different States worth.
The reason problems like these exist is essentially based in human nature itself, not some major planning error or a failure of policing the community.
Yet, those are the things that are getting most of the blame.
Why, there is even a single issue blog devoted to this subject!
In my brief review, that blog seems have the equivalent to 60 to 70 pages of information all related to complaints on this one topic.
Why not ask the people complaining -many anonymously- to offer any solutions they might have?
Isn't that the way most problems get resolved?
The lack of curiosity is troubling, because identifying the factors that combine and contribute to the nuisance of concern is important if we are to understand what can be done about this situation.
Instead, there is a simplistic view -consistently expressed- that it is the 'City's' sole duty to make these problems just go away.
I agree it is the City's responsibility to facilitate a community discussion and then implement those recommendations which seem most reasonable and have the most potential for long term success.
But, I doubt that will mean just hiring more enforcement officers and assigning them the mission of rooting out those deemed to be the offenders.
It is the worst form of demogoguery to just throw money at a problem like this and expect a favorable result.
No sensible person uses a sledgehammer to swat a fly!
Let's also not forget the efforts that have already gone into resolving this problem, including the vigorous discussions held in 2004.
Without those efforts, we would certainly have more than the six documented complaints that are on file for this year!
While it is time consuming, uncomfortable and frustrating to actually document complaints, that is an essential part of getting this situation identified and under control.
If citizens aren't willing to undertake this effort, no meaningful solution is possible.
Basically, I see Landlord Accountability as yet another three-legged stool.
It must necessarily involve the personal responsibility [of all of those living in an area, government entities [like the city and WWU], as well as landlords and property management companies.
Without the active cooperation of all affected parties, any approach to resolution of this issue is doomed to become a wasteful and expensive failure.
Instead, let's all work to come up with ideas that are reasonable and achievable.
And, resist the temptation toward election year pandering while we're at it!
-------------------
In Operation Overlord, the enemy and its mission of world domination was a very well known threat, and most of the free world willingly united together to defeat this awful prospect from occurring.
For that reason, there really is no comparison between WWII and 'Landlord Accountability', except the obvious play on words.
In ancient feudalism, an overlord was a lord having authority over other lords.
Operation Overlord was coined to connote that meaning.
The free world was not going to submit to domination by lesser 'lords', like nazism and othe dark and repressive 'isms'.
Overlord meant freedom was going to maintain its world order over repression.
Fortunately, it did prevail.
I don't believe the issue of 'Landlord Accountability' rises to any where near the level that an Operation Overlord is necessary.
The City doesn't need to become an Overlord police state bureacracy over this issue.
If it is considered desirable to test the 'family definition', that can be done by carefully pursuing one of the documented complaints with our existing enforcement officer.
Then, that particular element will be up to the courts to decide.
When that information is known, we can move to improve other definitions, requirements and means of enforcement.
In the meantime, let's keep doing what we are doing now, but do more of it.
That point seemed to be totally missed during the Council's Oct 8 meeting.
Of course, what we are currently doing is obviously not up to the job of meeting every one's expectations!
Is there any area where that does happen?
Of course, we can improve!
But, what are our priorities?
I can tell you mine.
If I have a choice between pursuing criminals or nuisances, it will be criminals every time!
That is the type of direction the Police Chief asked for, because without a budget addition those are the choices we have.
But, often those types of choices are false ones, because there are many diverse services and programs the City provides which are considered valuable by citizens.
I would hate to be put in the position of choosing between Police & Parks, for example.
Or, between Firefighters & Janitors.
All of those functions are necessary in some proportional ratio of expense.
Let's try to keep our perspective on 'Landlord Accountability', shall we?
And in doing so, recognize there really are no silver bullets.
There is only the hard work of becoming informed about the root causes at play, and the cooperative solutions that must be accepted and practiced by all parties involved.
Boy, this democracy thing sure takes a lot of effort, doesn't it?
You bet it does!
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
And maybe a little growing up, and accepting the responsibilities of being engaged citizens!
--------------------------------
From Wikipedia are 3 categories in which the word 'lord' is mainly known:
Feudalism:
' an overlord was a lord having authority over other lords'
Religion:
'A Lord is a person who has power and authority.
It can have different meanings depending on the context of use.
Women will usually (but not universally) take the title 'Lady' instead of Lord'
Title:
Five ranks of peer exist in the UK, namely Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, and Baron; and all male peers except dukes use the style "Lord X".
Various high offices of state may carry the cachet of honorary lords:
thus we find titles such as Lord High Chancellor or Lord Mayor.
- Benjamin Franklin
"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
"If we are to solve the problems that plague us, our thinking must evolve beyond the level we were using when we created those problems in the first place." --Albert Einstein
`tunnel' history, the kind that can lead an investigator to know more and more about less and less
"My experience in government is that when things are non-controversial and beautifully coordinated, there is not much going on." - JFK
“Opinion is power.” - Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1816
It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary. - Winston Churchill
That government is best which governs least. - Thomas Paine
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force.
Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
The secret of getting things done is to act! - Dante Alighieri
Peter's Placebo: An ounce of image is worth a pound of performance.
Grossman's Misquote: Complex problems have simple, easy to understand wrong answers.
Cohen's Law: What really matters is the name you succeed in imposing on the facts, not the facts themselves.
Goldwyn's Law of Contracts: A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Mencken's Metalaw: For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong.
“Demagoguery beats data in making public policy."
-US House of Representatives Majority Leader
"But we must remember that good laws, if they are not obeyed, do not constitute good government.
Hence there are two parts of good government; one is the actual obedience of citizens to the laws, the other part is the goodness of the laws which they obey..." -- (Aristotle, Politics).
--------------------
Operation Overlord was the code name for the main Allied D-Day invasion of Europe during World War II.
It's mission was reclaim ground that the Axis had occupied.
And, to open a western front that would have to be defended on the ground
Like most conflicts, this one was ugly and terrible in its effects, but very necessary.
Fortunately, it was successful - for our side!
And, like many wars and other games of violence, it got romanticized and became entertainment.
The issue of 'Landlord Accountability' is different.
There is no sinister cause at work behind the scattered nuisances which some parts of our City experience from time to time.
Noise, litter, parking congestion and the complaints that result therefrom are relatively benign, and while annoying, do not lend themselves to an easy solution.
That is not to say no solution is possible or necessary, but any solution will be inherently partial and fleeting in nature.
And, it will require a large element of neighbors uniting with each other and actively working to make more socially acceptable, the periodic thoughlessness of fellow human beings.
That has been my experience in almost 70 years of living in this country - eight different States worth.
The reason problems like these exist is essentially based in human nature itself, not some major planning error or a failure of policing the community.
Yet, those are the things that are getting most of the blame.
Why, there is even a single issue blog devoted to this subject!
In my brief review, that blog seems have the equivalent to 60 to 70 pages of information all related to complaints on this one topic.
Why not ask the people complaining -many anonymously- to offer any solutions they might have?
Isn't that the way most problems get resolved?
The lack of curiosity is troubling, because identifying the factors that combine and contribute to the nuisance of concern is important if we are to understand what can be done about this situation.
Instead, there is a simplistic view -consistently expressed- that it is the 'City's' sole duty to make these problems just go away.
I agree it is the City's responsibility to facilitate a community discussion and then implement those recommendations which seem most reasonable and have the most potential for long term success.
But, I doubt that will mean just hiring more enforcement officers and assigning them the mission of rooting out those deemed to be the offenders.
It is the worst form of demogoguery to just throw money at a problem like this and expect a favorable result.
No sensible person uses a sledgehammer to swat a fly!
Let's also not forget the efforts that have already gone into resolving this problem, including the vigorous discussions held in 2004.
Without those efforts, we would certainly have more than the six documented complaints that are on file for this year!
While it is time consuming, uncomfortable and frustrating to actually document complaints, that is an essential part of getting this situation identified and under control.
If citizens aren't willing to undertake this effort, no meaningful solution is possible.
Basically, I see Landlord Accountability as yet another three-legged stool.
It must necessarily involve the personal responsibility [of all of those living in an area, government entities [like the city and WWU], as well as landlords and property management companies.
Without the active cooperation of all affected parties, any approach to resolution of this issue is doomed to become a wasteful and expensive failure.
Instead, let's all work to come up with ideas that are reasonable and achievable.
And, resist the temptation toward election year pandering while we're at it!
-------------------
In Operation Overlord, the enemy and its mission of world domination was a very well known threat, and most of the free world willingly united together to defeat this awful prospect from occurring.
For that reason, there really is no comparison between WWII and 'Landlord Accountability', except the obvious play on words.
In ancient feudalism, an overlord was a lord having authority over other lords.
Operation Overlord was coined to connote that meaning.
The free world was not going to submit to domination by lesser 'lords', like nazism and othe dark and repressive 'isms'.
Overlord meant freedom was going to maintain its world order over repression.
Fortunately, it did prevail.
I don't believe the issue of 'Landlord Accountability' rises to any where near the level that an Operation Overlord is necessary.
The City doesn't need to become an Overlord police state bureacracy over this issue.
If it is considered desirable to test the 'family definition', that can be done by carefully pursuing one of the documented complaints with our existing enforcement officer.
Then, that particular element will be up to the courts to decide.
When that information is known, we can move to improve other definitions, requirements and means of enforcement.
In the meantime, let's keep doing what we are doing now, but do more of it.
That point seemed to be totally missed during the Council's Oct 8 meeting.
Of course, what we are currently doing is obviously not up to the job of meeting every one's expectations!
Is there any area where that does happen?
Of course, we can improve!
But, what are our priorities?
I can tell you mine.
If I have a choice between pursuing criminals or nuisances, it will be criminals every time!
That is the type of direction the Police Chief asked for, because without a budget addition those are the choices we have.
But, often those types of choices are false ones, because there are many diverse services and programs the City provides which are considered valuable by citizens.
I would hate to be put in the position of choosing between Police & Parks, for example.
Or, between Firefighters & Janitors.
All of those functions are necessary in some proportional ratio of expense.
Let's try to keep our perspective on 'Landlord Accountability', shall we?
And in doing so, recognize there really are no silver bullets.
There is only the hard work of becoming informed about the root causes at play, and the cooperative solutions that must be accepted and practiced by all parties involved.
Boy, this democracy thing sure takes a lot of effort, doesn't it?
You bet it does!
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
And maybe a little growing up, and accepting the responsibilities of being engaged citizens!
--------------------------------
From Wikipedia are 3 categories in which the word 'lord' is mainly known:
Feudalism:
' an overlord was a lord having authority over other lords'
Religion:
'A Lord is a person who has power and authority.
It can have different meanings depending on the context of use.
Women will usually (but not universally) take the title 'Lady' instead of Lord'
Title:
Five ranks of peer exist in the UK, namely Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, and Baron; and all male peers except dukes use the style "Lord X".
Various high offices of state may carry the cachet of honorary lords:
thus we find titles such as Lord High Chancellor or Lord Mayor.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
A Political Rant: It's Not the Cream of the Crop, It's the Pick of the Lot!
Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote - George Jean Nathan
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter - Winston Churchill
The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them - Karl Marx
The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis - Dante Alighieri
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues - George Will
-------------------------
Today was an unusual day.
It was unusual, not because I attended 2 different political forums, but because of what I heard said.
One person, a liberal, said she couldn't decide between two candidates, so she wasn't going to vote.
Another, a conservative, said she didn't like either candidate, so she wasn't going to vote.
Huh and huh? Why do these people even go to a political forum?
Not voting for any reasons dishonors our very heritage!
Our founding fathers -and mothers- fought the revolution so we could determine our own destiny as a nation!
Originally, only landed men could vote.
Then other groups, including women, were allowed to vote, but only after struggles that lasted for years.
And now they don't want to vote?
What is that about?
If we get the government we deserve, don't we deserve the best?
I don't get it.
Here we are the land of the free, and we use that freedom NOT to vote!
Amazing, but not illegal.
And, not a rare occurrence these days.
Maybe we should give tax breaks for those that vote?
That would be better than penalties for those that don't vote, wouldn't it?
But, by not voting, we are all getting penalized - every one of us!
For example, my liberal friend who couldn't decide and therefore won't vote, is essentially deferring her choice and letting others determine who will represent her.
If she's later not happy with who gets elected, whose fault is that?
Not voting at all is even worse than voting for a 3rd party candidate with no chance of winning, which allows someone she doesn't like to win out over someone who was her second choice.
Then, if she is unhappy with who is elected, whose fault was it?
REMIND YOU OF ANY RECENT ELECTION?
[HINT: Ralph Nader was the 3rd Party Candidate]
It's almost as if my liberal friend would like a chance to become a victim, isn't it?
You know, maybe by not voting, it will turn out OK.
But, if it doesn't, she will become an instant victim of the 'system'.
What an awful chance to take!
Then, let's take my conservative friend, who is not going to vote for either of the candidates because they are 'too liberal'.
I'm willing to bet this person rarely gets any candidate she's willing to vote for, who has half a chance of winning.
Sound familiar?
Know where I'm going with this?
You got it!
This one gets to be a permanent victim!
How nice.
Because no one is elected whom she can support, she has endless reasons to complain about her representation!
Now, I ask you, is that what our democracy is about?
Is that why untold thousands of brave souls have fought and died for our freedom?
So we can waste it by playing victim?
That is what my two friends have in common -they are both victims!
And, by their own choice.
Now, that my friends is true freedom!
And, its wasted.
What a crying shame.
Please don't choose to be a victim.
Not only because it might not be fun for you, but not fun others as well.
Everybody loses when enough people decide to exercise their freedom in non-productive ways.
Under those conditions, not even the 'pick of the lot' are elected sometimes.
That affects all of us.
And if we don't use our freedom carefully, it atrophies.
After enough weakening, it can die.
Then we are all victims.
And without a choice.
Please don't let that happen!
This is serious business folks, just like IKE said over 50 years ago:
'Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one' - Dwight D. Eisenhower
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter - Winston Churchill
The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them - Karl Marx
The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis - Dante Alighieri
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues - George Will
-------------------------
Today was an unusual day.
It was unusual, not because I attended 2 different political forums, but because of what I heard said.
One person, a liberal, said she couldn't decide between two candidates, so she wasn't going to vote.
Another, a conservative, said she didn't like either candidate, so she wasn't going to vote.
Huh and huh? Why do these people even go to a political forum?
Not voting for any reasons dishonors our very heritage!
Our founding fathers -and mothers- fought the revolution so we could determine our own destiny as a nation!
Originally, only landed men could vote.
Then other groups, including women, were allowed to vote, but only after struggles that lasted for years.
And now they don't want to vote?
What is that about?
If we get the government we deserve, don't we deserve the best?
I don't get it.
Here we are the land of the free, and we use that freedom NOT to vote!
Amazing, but not illegal.
And, not a rare occurrence these days.
Maybe we should give tax breaks for those that vote?
That would be better than penalties for those that don't vote, wouldn't it?
But, by not voting, we are all getting penalized - every one of us!
For example, my liberal friend who couldn't decide and therefore won't vote, is essentially deferring her choice and letting others determine who will represent her.
If she's later not happy with who gets elected, whose fault is that?
Not voting at all is even worse than voting for a 3rd party candidate with no chance of winning, which allows someone she doesn't like to win out over someone who was her second choice.
Then, if she is unhappy with who is elected, whose fault was it?
REMIND YOU OF ANY RECENT ELECTION?
[HINT: Ralph Nader was the 3rd Party Candidate]
It's almost as if my liberal friend would like a chance to become a victim, isn't it?
You know, maybe by not voting, it will turn out OK.
But, if it doesn't, she will become an instant victim of the 'system'.
What an awful chance to take!
Then, let's take my conservative friend, who is not going to vote for either of the candidates because they are 'too liberal'.
I'm willing to bet this person rarely gets any candidate she's willing to vote for, who has half a chance of winning.
Sound familiar?
Know where I'm going with this?
You got it!
This one gets to be a permanent victim!
How nice.
Because no one is elected whom she can support, she has endless reasons to complain about her representation!
Now, I ask you, is that what our democracy is about?
Is that why untold thousands of brave souls have fought and died for our freedom?
So we can waste it by playing victim?
That is what my two friends have in common -they are both victims!
And, by their own choice.
Now, that my friends is true freedom!
And, its wasted.
What a crying shame.
Please don't choose to be a victim.
Not only because it might not be fun for you, but not fun others as well.
Everybody loses when enough people decide to exercise their freedom in non-productive ways.
Under those conditions, not even the 'pick of the lot' are elected sometimes.
That affects all of us.
And if we don't use our freedom carefully, it atrophies.
After enough weakening, it can die.
Then we are all victims.
And without a choice.
Please don't let that happen!
This is serious business folks, just like IKE said over 50 years ago:
'Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one' - Dwight D. Eisenhower
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Lake Whatcom: City's Stormwater Plan - Phocusing on Fosphorus
That title should read 'Focuses on Phosphorus', but maybe the misspelling will add a little humor to an otherwise pretty serious and sobering analysis.
Yesterday's blog promised more on this important subject, so here it is.
My review of the 58-page DRAFT Report recently produced by the consulting firm Parametrix, confirmed what I had suspected; the job we face in reducing the phosphorus level in our Reservoir will be difficult, costly and require many years to achieve.
But it can be done.
And, the sooner we get started, the shorter will be the time required, and the lower the overall costs.
That said, here is a synopsis.
The report is divided into 7 sections, subdivided as shown below:
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Structure of this Report
1.2 The Lake and its Watershed
1.3 Lake Phosphorus
1.3.1 Phosphorous and Lake Ecosystems
1.3.2 Lake Phosphorus Water Quality Criteria
1.3.3 Phosphorus in Lake Whatcom
1.4 Phosphorus Sources
1.4.1 Typical Sources and Pathways of Phosphorus to Lakes
1.4.2 Phosphorus Sources to Lake Whatcom
1.4.3 Future Source Identification
2. CURRENT CITY STORMWATER PHOSPHORUS CONTROL PROGRAM
2.1 Stormwater Retrofit Program
2.2 Mapping and BMP [Best Management Practice] Coverage
2.3 Monitoring and Maintenance Program
2.4 Ordinances
2.5 Acquisition/Easement/Transfrable Development Rights Programs
2.6 Enactment and Enforcement of Strict Development Restrictions
2.7 Yard Debris Collection Program
2.8 Street Sweeping Program
2.9 Incentives to Discourage Personal Motor Vehicle Use
2.10 Septic System Inspection and Certification Program
2.11 Planned Future Efforts
3. AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT BMPS AND CITY BMP PERFORMANCE
3.1 Infiltration/Bioretention
3.2 Filtration
3.3 Wet/Dry Ponds
3.4 Swales
3.5 Wetlands
3.6 Review of City BMP Monitoring Data
3.7 Performance of City BMPS
4. PHOSPHORUS LOADING TO LAKE WHATCOM: PRELIMINARY APPROACH
4.1 Establishing Target Phosphorus Loading
4.2 Estimating Phosphorus Loading Rates by Land Use
4.2.1 Undeveloped Land Loading Rates (Smith Creek)
4.2.2 Developed Land Loading Rates (Silver Beach Creek)
4.3 Estimating Current and Future Phosphorus Loading Rates
4.3.1 Current Loading Estimate
4.3.2 Future Loading Estimate
4.4 Estimating Future Phosphorus Loading Rates Using Treatment BMPS
4.4.1 Future Development and Existing Development with South Campus BMP
4.4.2 Future Development with South Campus BMP, Existing Development with Current BMPS
4.4 Method Assumptions
5. OPPORTUNITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENHANCING THE CITY'S PHOSPHORUS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
5.1 Enhancing Phosphorus Treatment BMPS
5.2 Applying BMPS to Single Lots
5.3 Updating and/or Adding Phosphorus Control Policies
5.4 Homeowner Policies
5.5 Waterfowl Control Options
5.6 Phosphorus Control Incentive Programs
5.7 Education Programs
5.8 Compliance Enforcement Programs
5.9 Stormwater Retrofit Program
5.10 Discontinue Deficit Financing of Infrastructure
5.11 Develop a Stormwater Index
5.12 Inventory/Mapping of TDR, Acquisition, and Easement Programs
5.13 Expanding the TDR, Acquisition, and Easement Programs to Include an Ecosystem Marketplace
5.14 Recommended Management Options
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
7. REFERENCES
-------------------
As you can see this is not a superficial report!
It ranks phosphorus source areas in the following order of importance:
• Lawns/Landscaped Areas
• Residential Streets, Driveways & Sidewalks
• Stream Erosion
• Land Clearing & Other Disturbed Surfaces
• Animal Waste
• Stormwater Treatment Facilities
• Household Products
• Septic Systems
The main surprise in this listing is ' Stormwater Treatment Facilities.'
That means the ones in use aren't working very well to remove phosphorus - in fact some may be adding it!
That is not good news for people who believe that 'Stormwater Treatment Facilities' are the answer to everything.
If the current, worsening stuation weren't bad enough, existing zoning could allow an additional 3208 homes in this watershed which could add 16,000 more residents.
With that prospect, it would be prudent to establish, now, a target phosphorus loading that can be used to calculate what additional steps will need to be taken to achieve our watershed mangement goals.
Three options exist for establishing a target phosphorus loading rate to lake Whatcom:
1. No net increase.
2. Percent reduction over current loading estimate
3. TMDL
While we wait for the TMDL Report to get issued by DOE, time is wasting!
I believe setting an interim target loading rate ought to be done without further delay.
A value, not to exceed 20 micrograms per liter, would suffice and allow us to get on with monitoring phosphorus loading, at least by tributary.
That is one action the City -and County- need to take soon.
There are many other actions that are recommended, but they all help achieve that one.
--------------
Without going into more detail here, the report itself is available for those interested.
But, the Report's concluding remarks make a good summary:
"The City has developed a comprehensive phosphorus control program that is achieving significant success in a difficult aspect of watershed management.
In order to maximize program effectiveness, the City should work with the County to develop a focused yet holistic approach to controlling phosphorus in stormwater runoff to Lake Whatcom from both existing and future development across the entire watershed.
It is recognized that although this report suggests opportunities specific to the City for improving its stormwater phosphorus control program (i.e., its portion of the Lake Whatcom watershed), phosphorus control efforts in other portions of the watershed are equally, if not more, important.
As noted, 98 percent of developable land in the watershed is located in the County.
Therefore, all recommendations, as well as all components of the City's current program, should be reviewed for opportunities to involve the County, DNR, and other entities and/or encourage them to incorporate similar management approaches when applicable.
Overall, findings of this review and evaluation are as follows:
• Phosphorus is difficult to control as evidenced by the City of Bellingham's experience as well as similar experiences documented by othe municipalities nationwide.
• Review of the literature and other stormwater programs indicates the City of Bellingham has, and is, employing the range of available technologies and BMPs for phosphorus control.
• Review of the literature also shows that the City of Bellingham could enhance its current program with additional emphasis on programmatic policies as well as improve existing treatment BMP performance.
• Future source identification and loading analysis may necessitate a re-evaluation and re-prioritization of the City's phosphorus stormwater management system."
----------------
So there you have it.
We're doing a lot of stuff in our 2 % of the watershed, but it ain't working too well.
We need to do some more stuff, including changing human behaviors and convincing the County to do the same.
Once we get all that done, it will still likely take many years to stabilize the lake water quality.
But, it can be done.
And, it must be done, because we don't have another water source nearly as good as Lake Whatcom!
----------------
Yesterday's blog promised more on this important subject, so here it is.
My review of the 58-page DRAFT Report recently produced by the consulting firm Parametrix, confirmed what I had suspected; the job we face in reducing the phosphorus level in our Reservoir will be difficult, costly and require many years to achieve.
But it can be done.
And, the sooner we get started, the shorter will be the time required, and the lower the overall costs.
That said, here is a synopsis.
The report is divided into 7 sections, subdivided as shown below:
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Structure of this Report
1.2 The Lake and its Watershed
1.3 Lake Phosphorus
1.3.1 Phosphorous and Lake Ecosystems
1.3.2 Lake Phosphorus Water Quality Criteria
1.3.3 Phosphorus in Lake Whatcom
1.4 Phosphorus Sources
1.4.1 Typical Sources and Pathways of Phosphorus to Lakes
1.4.2 Phosphorus Sources to Lake Whatcom
1.4.3 Future Source Identification
2. CURRENT CITY STORMWATER PHOSPHORUS CONTROL PROGRAM
2.1 Stormwater Retrofit Program
2.2 Mapping and BMP [Best Management Practice] Coverage
2.3 Monitoring and Maintenance Program
2.4 Ordinances
2.5 Acquisition/Easement/Transfrable Development Rights Programs
2.6 Enactment and Enforcement of Strict Development Restrictions
2.7 Yard Debris Collection Program
2.8 Street Sweeping Program
2.9 Incentives to Discourage Personal Motor Vehicle Use
2.10 Septic System Inspection and Certification Program
2.11 Planned Future Efforts
3. AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT BMPS AND CITY BMP PERFORMANCE
3.1 Infiltration/Bioretention
3.2 Filtration
3.3 Wet/Dry Ponds
3.4 Swales
3.5 Wetlands
3.6 Review of City BMP Monitoring Data
3.7 Performance of City BMPS
4. PHOSPHORUS LOADING TO LAKE WHATCOM: PRELIMINARY APPROACH
4.1 Establishing Target Phosphorus Loading
4.2 Estimating Phosphorus Loading Rates by Land Use
4.2.1 Undeveloped Land Loading Rates (Smith Creek)
4.2.2 Developed Land Loading Rates (Silver Beach Creek)
4.3 Estimating Current and Future Phosphorus Loading Rates
4.3.1 Current Loading Estimate
4.3.2 Future Loading Estimate
4.4 Estimating Future Phosphorus Loading Rates Using Treatment BMPS
4.4.1 Future Development and Existing Development with South Campus BMP
4.4.2 Future Development with South Campus BMP, Existing Development with Current BMPS
4.4 Method Assumptions
5. OPPORTUNITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENHANCING THE CITY'S PHOSPHORUS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
5.1 Enhancing Phosphorus Treatment BMPS
5.2 Applying BMPS to Single Lots
5.3 Updating and/or Adding Phosphorus Control Policies
5.4 Homeowner Policies
5.5 Waterfowl Control Options
5.6 Phosphorus Control Incentive Programs
5.7 Education Programs
5.8 Compliance Enforcement Programs
5.9 Stormwater Retrofit Program
5.10 Discontinue Deficit Financing of Infrastructure
5.11 Develop a Stormwater Index
5.12 Inventory/Mapping of TDR, Acquisition, and Easement Programs
5.13 Expanding the TDR, Acquisition, and Easement Programs to Include an Ecosystem Marketplace
5.14 Recommended Management Options
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
7. REFERENCES
-------------------
As you can see this is not a superficial report!
It ranks phosphorus source areas in the following order of importance:
• Lawns/Landscaped Areas
• Residential Streets, Driveways & Sidewalks
• Stream Erosion
• Land Clearing & Other Disturbed Surfaces
• Animal Waste
• Stormwater Treatment Facilities
• Household Products
• Septic Systems
The main surprise in this listing is ' Stormwater Treatment Facilities.'
That means the ones in use aren't working very well to remove phosphorus - in fact some may be adding it!
That is not good news for people who believe that 'Stormwater Treatment Facilities' are the answer to everything.
If the current, worsening stuation weren't bad enough, existing zoning could allow an additional 3208 homes in this watershed which could add 16,000 more residents.
With that prospect, it would be prudent to establish, now, a target phosphorus loading that can be used to calculate what additional steps will need to be taken to achieve our watershed mangement goals.
Three options exist for establishing a target phosphorus loading rate to lake Whatcom:
1. No net increase.
2. Percent reduction over current loading estimate
3. TMDL
While we wait for the TMDL Report to get issued by DOE, time is wasting!
I believe setting an interim target loading rate ought to be done without further delay.
A value, not to exceed 20 micrograms per liter, would suffice and allow us to get on with monitoring phosphorus loading, at least by tributary.
That is one action the City -and County- need to take soon.
There are many other actions that are recommended, but they all help achieve that one.
--------------
Without going into more detail here, the report itself is available for those interested.
But, the Report's concluding remarks make a good summary:
"The City has developed a comprehensive phosphorus control program that is achieving significant success in a difficult aspect of watershed management.
In order to maximize program effectiveness, the City should work with the County to develop a focused yet holistic approach to controlling phosphorus in stormwater runoff to Lake Whatcom from both existing and future development across the entire watershed.
It is recognized that although this report suggests opportunities specific to the City for improving its stormwater phosphorus control program (i.e., its portion of the Lake Whatcom watershed), phosphorus control efforts in other portions of the watershed are equally, if not more, important.
As noted, 98 percent of developable land in the watershed is located in the County.
Therefore, all recommendations, as well as all components of the City's current program, should be reviewed for opportunities to involve the County, DNR, and other entities and/or encourage them to incorporate similar management approaches when applicable.
Overall, findings of this review and evaluation are as follows:
• Phosphorus is difficult to control as evidenced by the City of Bellingham's experience as well as similar experiences documented by othe municipalities nationwide.
• Review of the literature and other stormwater programs indicates the City of Bellingham has, and is, employing the range of available technologies and BMPs for phosphorus control.
• Review of the literature also shows that the City of Bellingham could enhance its current program with additional emphasis on programmatic policies as well as improve existing treatment BMP performance.
• Future source identification and loading analysis may necessitate a re-evaluation and re-prioritization of the City's phosphorus stormwater management system."
----------------
So there you have it.
We're doing a lot of stuff in our 2 % of the watershed, but it ain't working too well.
We need to do some more stuff, including changing human behaviors and convincing the County to do the same.
Once we get all that done, it will still likely take many years to stabilize the lake water quality.
But, it can be done.
And, it must be done, because we don't have another water source nearly as good as Lake Whatcom!
----------------
Monday, October 8, 2007
Lake Whatcom Reservoir: A Necessary Restructuring
"Management is doing things right. Leadership is doing the right thing." - Warren Bennis
------------------------
Those of us who have been working to preserve our drinking water source had reason to take heart today.
But, what happened certainly should not be viewed as a 'silver bullet' by any means.
Instead, it should be seen as another positive step in the right direction, a move to secure, strengthen and to work smarter on the substantial efforts being devoted to solving the hard problem we face.
Do not make the the easy mistake of under estimating our problem!
It will literally take our lifetimes, and maybe then some, to stabilize our reservoir and protect it in perpetuity.
But, it will be worth it!
Today, the City Council unamimously encouraged the Mayor & County Executive to bring forward a new Interlocal Agreement to reflect the proposal they presented.
Tomorrow, the County Council will have the same opportunity.
With their support, a new working agreement will happen.
It is guaranteed to be more collaborative, because it will be equally and reliably funded by both juridictions.
As the jurisdictions with zoning, enforcement and related duties, it makes sense that this structure be shared between City and County.
The cost will be about $150,000 more than the current Lake Whatcom, split between City and County.
Most of that will likely be spent on hiring a Director to focus full-time on preserving Lake Whatcom.
That is a critical hire.
But the structure itself will definitely get City & County aboard the same galley, and pulling oars together in a direction both entities can agree upon.
That is a step in the right direction!
It's called accentuating the positive.
Another benefit will be to expand the City's Watershed Advisory Board to include County members, and have the resulting group report directly to -the Director!
That gives their recommendations more visibility, coordination and clout.
All of those things are improvements over what we have now.
Both City & County can benefit from each others knowledge, experience and common goals.
Rather than continuing a system of finger-pointing, competition and excuses, the new arrangement promotes cooperation and results.
The tip-off that this was truly a good faith effort was the obvious mutual respect shown by the Mayor and the County Executive!
That has been a long time coming, and it is an important element that has been missing.
And, taking this step now, before the election, insures that the incoming Mayor and Executive will be pre-committed to support this new management structure.
------------------
On related matters, the City also received preliminary reports on its Water Source Protection Plan update and on the existing Lake Whatcom Management Plan.
The WSPP will be reported more fully later, on October 22 for the WSPP.
The LWMP Update will be presented at a joint Council Review Meeting on November 1.
The City's Comprehensive Plans for its Water, Sewer and Stormwater Systems are also undergoing periodic reviews.
Adjustments in rates are likely, but these would be phased in over time.
The twin guiding principles are these:
• Adequacy of overall revenues
• Equity in collecting revenues
Finally, a Draft Stormwater Plan for the Lake Whatcom Watershed was presented.
This will become a section of the City's overall Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, and focuses specifically on the issue of phosphorus in stormwater.
This Plan itemizes what steps the City is currently taking, what it is proposing to do, and what other activities should be considered to limit phosphorous generation.
This subject warrants its own blog, at a later time.
--------------------
------------------------
Those of us who have been working to preserve our drinking water source had reason to take heart today.
But, what happened certainly should not be viewed as a 'silver bullet' by any means.
Instead, it should be seen as another positive step in the right direction, a move to secure, strengthen and to work smarter on the substantial efforts being devoted to solving the hard problem we face.
Do not make the the easy mistake of under estimating our problem!
It will literally take our lifetimes, and maybe then some, to stabilize our reservoir and protect it in perpetuity.
But, it will be worth it!
Today, the City Council unamimously encouraged the Mayor & County Executive to bring forward a new Interlocal Agreement to reflect the proposal they presented.
Tomorrow, the County Council will have the same opportunity.
With their support, a new working agreement will happen.
It is guaranteed to be more collaborative, because it will be equally and reliably funded by both juridictions.
As the jurisdictions with zoning, enforcement and related duties, it makes sense that this structure be shared between City and County.
The cost will be about $150,000 more than the current Lake Whatcom, split between City and County.
Most of that will likely be spent on hiring a Director to focus full-time on preserving Lake Whatcom.
That is a critical hire.
But the structure itself will definitely get City & County aboard the same galley, and pulling oars together in a direction both entities can agree upon.
That is a step in the right direction!
It's called accentuating the positive.
Another benefit will be to expand the City's Watershed Advisory Board to include County members, and have the resulting group report directly to -the Director!
That gives their recommendations more visibility, coordination and clout.
All of those things are improvements over what we have now.
Both City & County can benefit from each others knowledge, experience and common goals.
Rather than continuing a system of finger-pointing, competition and excuses, the new arrangement promotes cooperation and results.
The tip-off that this was truly a good faith effort was the obvious mutual respect shown by the Mayor and the County Executive!
That has been a long time coming, and it is an important element that has been missing.
And, taking this step now, before the election, insures that the incoming Mayor and Executive will be pre-committed to support this new management structure.
------------------
On related matters, the City also received preliminary reports on its Water Source Protection Plan update and on the existing Lake Whatcom Management Plan.
The WSPP will be reported more fully later, on October 22 for the WSPP.
The LWMP Update will be presented at a joint Council Review Meeting on November 1.
The City's Comprehensive Plans for its Water, Sewer and Stormwater Systems are also undergoing periodic reviews.
Adjustments in rates are likely, but these would be phased in over time.
The twin guiding principles are these:
• Adequacy of overall revenues
• Equity in collecting revenues
Finally, a Draft Stormwater Plan for the Lake Whatcom Watershed was presented.
This will become a section of the City's overall Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, and focuses specifically on the issue of phosphorus in stormwater.
This Plan itemizes what steps the City is currently taking, what it is proposing to do, and what other activities should be considered to limit phosphorous generation.
This subject warrants its own blog, at a later time.
--------------------
Sunday, October 7, 2007
IT'S BUDGET TIME AGAIN! -A $200 Million Exercise
This subject is so boring to some folks, that I've decided to give them a choice;
Read the quips, then quit.
Or, scroll down to read the recommendations developed by our Budget Advisory Committee after they studied the City's budget process for over a year.
---------------------------
Shaw's Principle: Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it.
Peer's Law: The solution to the problem changes the problem.
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. - Bokonon-
Rule of Accuracy: When working towards the solution of a problem, it always helps if you know the answer.
Inside every small problem is a large problem struggling to get out.
Wiker's Law: Government expands to absorb revenue and then some.
Weiler's Law: Nothing is impossible for the man who does not have to do it himself.
Langsam's Law: Everything depends.
Grossman's Misquote: Complex problems have simple, easy to understand wrong answers.
The Sausage Principle: People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made.
Jacquin's Postulate on Democratic Government: No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.
Sevareid's Law: The chief cause of problems is solutions.
Democracy encourages the majority to decide things about which the majority is blissfully ignorant. --John Simon--
======================
As most folks know, the City Council's main roles are to pass legislation to set City policy, and to approve the annual budget needed to pay for the services and programs the City provides.
But, the budget is where these things come together.
After the contentious 2004 budget sessions, which seemed to demonstrate a progressively worsening 'Gator' gap between projected revenues and expenditures, the Council decided to get a diverse citizen's committee together to review its process through new eyes.
We did that, set up the BAC, spent considerable staff time in briefing them, then awaited their recommendations, which are printed below for those who wish to read them.
During this process, some predictable things happened.
There was controversy about some of the appointments.
There were more reports and meetings than most could easily tolerate.
There was discomfort among some staff about some of the questions that were asked.
There was considerable learning that took place.
There was an attempt to evaluate the 'Priorities of Government'.
There were some attitudes, grandstanding and personal prejudices displayed.
There was an ad hoc, competing group set up for political purposes.
There was more demand for staff time than was contemplated.
There was a small rebellion that demanded the BAC ask more of its own questions.
There was an eventual loss of enthusiasm experienced by BAC, staff and Council.
There was a final push to summarize findings.
There were the inevitable mixed feelings of achievement, disappointment, relief and encouragement.
Some Council members were relieved when the BAC ended.
Some wanted it to continue in some fashion.
Some had felt it wasn't necessary in the first place, if Council had just had the courage to do its job.
Some thanked the BAC members for their service.
Some may have thanked the BAC for acting as a human shields.
In the end, this was probably a worthwhile exercise that produced some good ideas -some of which were already being considered.
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
To the Bellingham City Council
Monday, June 12, 2006
==================
ECONOMIC VITALITY RECOMMENDATIONS
We were specifically requested to provide a recommendation regarding the allocation of current Economic Development funds. We provide in the list of recommendations below guidelines for the allocation of economic development funds. We also provide additional recommendations that speak directly to City Council goals regarding the development of a more diverse and sustainable economy, continuing to support a high quality of life, and increasing the number of high paying jobs in Bellingham.
Recommendation #1: Regarding the allocation of current Economic Development funds, we note that $205,640 in grants was given to 7 community organizations in 2005. Reports from these organizations are highly variable and tend to focus on the activities undertaken with the grant money but not on the economic impact of the activities. Our committee found it was not possible to do an adequate review of the return on investment from the grants made and therefore we are unable to provide a specific recommendation on current allocations of Economic Development funds. However, one grant recipient, the Small Business Development Center, stood out positively in our review. To be able to better analyze the allocation of Economic Development funds in the future we recommend the City of Bellingham adopt process improvements such as the following:
1. All entities applying for grants should provide written statements of purpose and explanations for what they believe will be accomplished with the grant. Sample work products or deliverables should be encouraged.
2. Key criteria for evaluating proposals should include the expected impact of funded work on economic vitality within the City. Specifically, funds should be used for programs that enhance business retention, expansion, attraction, and redevelopment within the city boundaries. All qualified requests should have measurable outcomes that improve the City’s economy – such as increasing sales taxes, B&O taxes, etc.
3. Grant approvals should include the approvers’ signatures and rationale for approval (see recommendation below for Economic Advisory Group.)
4. All organizations receiving grants must provide year-end reports documenting what was accomplished with the grant.
Recommendation #2: Establish a plan and create a senior level planner position within the Executive Department in city government to guide the economic vitality of the city so that the city can fund the services that support the high quality of life we wish to sustain. This person’s responsibilities would include:
1. Proactively meeting with local businesses of all types to discuss their needs
2. Convene a regular business roundtable as a means of building better city-business relations.
3. Assist business in navigating government regulatory requirements
4. Assist new business in assessing opportunities in Bellingham and work with existing businesses to maximize the retention of those businesses within the city.
5. Be the conduit for communicating business perspectives to local government and be the coordination point for economic issues with the port, the county and state.
6. Evaluating other cities’ economic development plans to determine “best practices” and incorporating these practices into Bellingham’s plans.
7. Develop an economic strategic plan for the COB including an analysis of local business/economic trends
8. Provide an annual “state of the city economy” report to the Mayor and City Council
The individual in the position should have experience in the private sector; some formal training in economics or a related field would be considered a plus, but could be offset by experience. We also envision a selection process that would include members of the business community (see next item). The position should report directly to the mayor, thereby assuring proper access and communication to the executive and legislative departments of the city government.
The on-going funding for this position would come from the increased tax revenues realized by the efforts of the individual. Attracting just one high-paying job employer, or retaining a current employer considering leaving the city, would more than cover the cost of the position. For the first year or two we recommend funding all or part of the employment costs by using funds from the current Economic Development fund.
Recommendation #3: Form an Economic Advisory Group of local business representatives to provide input to City Council on matters related to economic vitality and to assist in the selection of the City’s Economic Development Liaison.
Recommendation #4: Commission a series of studies to determine what businesses were and are currently located within the city limits, with information on the number of jobs, wages, etc. in each sector. For example, the City might request the information for the years 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005. This information will form part of the analytical foundation upon which an economic development plan can be created.
Recommendation #5: Promote the creation of new, high wage jobs by offering a B&O tax credit (see Tacoma example). This direct incentive would be a tangible statement of the city’s resolve to foster high wage jobs across all components of private sector employers. While insufficient data is available at this time to assess the costs of the program, on judgment we believe it will be self-funding due to the incremental jobs it will create.
Recommendation #6: Charge the new Economic Development Liaison and the Economic Advisory group with creating a written economic development plan for the city of Bellingham. This is an imperative. The COB must take control of economic development and plan for it, not allow it to evolve haphazardly.
Recommendation #7: In addition to the already identified downtown/waterfront development priority, identify other business “clusters”, for example health care, marine services and organic/natural products industries where Bellingham might evolve into regional centers of excellence. Task forces for each cluster should be formed to facilitate economic development and high paying job creation for that cluster.
==================
“JAWS” RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1: The City should consider raising property taxes each year by the allowable 1% (about $0.12 million a year). These additional funds should be banked in the GF reserves to protect against out year deficits and used to pre-fund LEOFF-1 obligations (Appendix B).
Recommendation #2: Any GF surpluses should be used to increase GF reserves and pre-fund the LEOFF-1 obligations (Appendix B). The City should establish a policy to assign surplus GF revenues (i.e., beyond that required to meet the 12% reserve requirement) to these pension funds.
Recommendation #3: The City should commit to fully fund its LEOFF-1 obligations by 2021. If future trends play out as expected, this implies continued annual contributions from the GF, growing from $1.3 million in 2006 to $2.1 million in 2011, $3.0 million in 2016, and $4.3 million in 2021.
Recommendation #4: Once the LEOFF-1 Fire Pension Fund is fully funded, the revenues collected from the 22.5¢ property tax and tax on fire-insurance premiums, currently allocated to the fire pension fund, should be reassigned. Initially, these revenues should be assigned to the other LEOFF-1 obligations. After 2021, these property tax revenues could become part of the City’s GF.
Recommendation #5: The City should continue, both on its own and through the Association of Washington Cities, to seek state assistance in paying these LEOFF-1 obligations. *We noted last year, in our review of the Fire Department, that a typical Bellingham firefighter enjoys an annual salary (exclusive of benefits) at least $14,000 more than highly skilled technical staff working in other departments. The City should both explain and justify this difference or work to reduce it.
Recommendation #6: The City should bargain aggressively with its unions to shift increasing amounts of benefit costs (primarily for health insurance premiums) from the City to employees.
Recommendation #7: The City should bargain aggressively with the firefighter union to, over time, bring firefighter compensation in line with that for employees in other unions/ departments.* This shift in compensation should recognize differences among groups of employees in, as examples, the requirements for prior education and training, provision of on-the-job training, on-the-job risks, and the number of qualified applicants seeking these jobs.
Recommendation #8: The City should explain the basis for growth in employee compensation below that of inflation and population growth. In particular, does City management plan for a decline in the amount and quality of services offered to City residents?
Recommendation #9: The City should explain why the budgets for the police and fire departments are expected to increase more rapidly than the overall GF. For example, are costs in these two departments expected to increase rapidly, or is the City planning to increase the level of service provided by these departments?
Recommendation #10: The City should use alternative qualitative and quantitative methods to estimate future GF revenues and expenses, including sensitivity and scenario analysis. In addition, the City should periodically review the accuracy of its past forecasts (backcasting).
Recommendation #11: The City should include in the annual budget document a discussion and explanation of expected trends in GF revenues, expenditures and reserves and how and why they differ from historical trends (Appendix A). *We do not discuss Charges for Goods and Services and Other Revenues because they are subject to definitional changes over time and because they are smaller revenue sources than the taxes.
==================
BUDGET POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1: Adopt a policy on target levels of service – including mechanisms for determining whether funds are being spent efficiently to meet the desired service levels.
Recommendations related to policy #1:
a) Divide this policy into a guiding principle (noting the difference between principal and principle) and two separate policies
b) The discussion about providing a healthy balance of services to residents and quality of life should be moved up to the list of guiding principles (section in budget immediately above budget policies)
c) There should be a budget policy – or goal statement – to say that the city strives to have revenues sufficient to provide a particular service level.
o We recommend that the City conduct a study or have one prepared to determine appropriate benchmarks and target service levels for each department and key function. This work should be done as soon as possible. Without this information it is not possible to know if expenditures to maintain or improve service levels are money well spent; what cuts might be acceptable when cuts are needed; etc.
o We recommend that the study include a statement about the frequency with which the target service levels should be reviewed, by whom, and how.
d) There should be a policy describing what the city will do when net revenues increase or decrease. See recommendation 3 for detail.
Recommendation #2: Revise existing budget policy #3 to ensure it provides a pragmatic guide with regards to employee compensation.
Recommendations related to policy #3:
Delete the second sentence of the policy. Compensation levels for city workers should exceed compensation levels for workers in the private sector only if the city is unable to fill open positions with qualified workers.
Recommendation #3: Establish a new policy on banking excess revenues
There should be a policy describing what the city will do when net revenues increase or decrease. The City of Bellingham should bank excess revenues received in any given year to minimize the impact of rising health care costs and known pension (LEOFF-1) obligations.
Recommendation:
We recommend that excess revenues be banked to minimize the future impact of known pension obligations and, possibly, health care costs for current City workers. (We note the creation of pension funds by cities such as the City of Everett for this purpose.)
Recommendation #4: Establish a new policy on public involvement
The City of Bellingham should adopt a new policy to encourage more public involvement in the budget process. The BAC notes the absence of any policy regarding public involvement. We recommend the addition of the following new policy. Rather than a separate recommendation to the City of Bellingham, (COB), our committee suggests this be included with the recommendations from the “Policies” committee.
Recommendations for wording related to this new policy:
The City of Bellingham shall provide for systematic, transparent and ongoing citizen involvement and input, through regular surveys and other feedback mechanisms, of city residents to help determine funding priorities.
Regardless of the method, the process would be transparent, systematic and ongoing. Our committee recommends a community involvement process that is:
• Inclusive and representative of all neighborhoods with an opportunity for every resident to participate.
• An ongoing, systematic process that includes both an opportunity for citizen input and process for ongoing feedback and evaluation.
• A timeline of January to June in the year preceding the upcoming budget.
Recommendation #5: Provide a link to the city’s investment policy
RE: General Operating Policy #8
The City will use the ‘Prudent Person’ policy when investing funds. Preservation and safety of assets is a higher priority than return on investment. The City’s investment policy provides greater detail on this subject.
Recommendation #6: This policy is not a budget policy, but rather an operational guideline.
RE: General Operating Policy #9
“The City will use recycled paper whenever costs are less than or similar to costs for virgin paper stocks.”
Suggestion:
The City could develop scorecards for the various departments to encourage savings or efficiencies since it already has five year forecasts by department, division and program.
Read the quips, then quit.
Or, scroll down to read the recommendations developed by our Budget Advisory Committee after they studied the City's budget process for over a year.
---------------------------
Shaw's Principle: Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it.
Peer's Law: The solution to the problem changes the problem.
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. - Bokonon-
Rule of Accuracy: When working towards the solution of a problem, it always helps if you know the answer.
Inside every small problem is a large problem struggling to get out.
Wiker's Law: Government expands to absorb revenue and then some.
Weiler's Law: Nothing is impossible for the man who does not have to do it himself.
Langsam's Law: Everything depends.
Grossman's Misquote: Complex problems have simple, easy to understand wrong answers.
The Sausage Principle: People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made.
Jacquin's Postulate on Democratic Government: No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.
Sevareid's Law: The chief cause of problems is solutions.
Democracy encourages the majority to decide things about which the majority is blissfully ignorant. --John Simon--
======================
As most folks know, the City Council's main roles are to pass legislation to set City policy, and to approve the annual budget needed to pay for the services and programs the City provides.
But, the budget is where these things come together.
After the contentious 2004 budget sessions, which seemed to demonstrate a progressively worsening 'Gator' gap between projected revenues and expenditures, the Council decided to get a diverse citizen's committee together to review its process through new eyes.
We did that, set up the BAC, spent considerable staff time in briefing them, then awaited their recommendations, which are printed below for those who wish to read them.
During this process, some predictable things happened.
There was controversy about some of the appointments.
There were more reports and meetings than most could easily tolerate.
There was discomfort among some staff about some of the questions that were asked.
There was considerable learning that took place.
There was an attempt to evaluate the 'Priorities of Government'.
There were some attitudes, grandstanding and personal prejudices displayed.
There was an ad hoc, competing group set up for political purposes.
There was more demand for staff time than was contemplated.
There was a small rebellion that demanded the BAC ask more of its own questions.
There was an eventual loss of enthusiasm experienced by BAC, staff and Council.
There was a final push to summarize findings.
There were the inevitable mixed feelings of achievement, disappointment, relief and encouragement.
Some Council members were relieved when the BAC ended.
Some wanted it to continue in some fashion.
Some had felt it wasn't necessary in the first place, if Council had just had the courage to do its job.
Some thanked the BAC members for their service.
Some may have thanked the BAC for acting as a human shields.
In the end, this was probably a worthwhile exercise that produced some good ideas -some of which were already being considered.
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
To the Bellingham City Council
Monday, June 12, 2006
==================
ECONOMIC VITALITY RECOMMENDATIONS
We were specifically requested to provide a recommendation regarding the allocation of current Economic Development funds. We provide in the list of recommendations below guidelines for the allocation of economic development funds. We also provide additional recommendations that speak directly to City Council goals regarding the development of a more diverse and sustainable economy, continuing to support a high quality of life, and increasing the number of high paying jobs in Bellingham.
Recommendation #1: Regarding the allocation of current Economic Development funds, we note that $205,640 in grants was given to 7 community organizations in 2005. Reports from these organizations are highly variable and tend to focus on the activities undertaken with the grant money but not on the economic impact of the activities. Our committee found it was not possible to do an adequate review of the return on investment from the grants made and therefore we are unable to provide a specific recommendation on current allocations of Economic Development funds. However, one grant recipient, the Small Business Development Center, stood out positively in our review. To be able to better analyze the allocation of Economic Development funds in the future we recommend the City of Bellingham adopt process improvements such as the following:
1. All entities applying for grants should provide written statements of purpose and explanations for what they believe will be accomplished with the grant. Sample work products or deliverables should be encouraged.
2. Key criteria for evaluating proposals should include the expected impact of funded work on economic vitality within the City. Specifically, funds should be used for programs that enhance business retention, expansion, attraction, and redevelopment within the city boundaries. All qualified requests should have measurable outcomes that improve the City’s economy – such as increasing sales taxes, B&O taxes, etc.
3. Grant approvals should include the approvers’ signatures and rationale for approval (see recommendation below for Economic Advisory Group.)
4. All organizations receiving grants must provide year-end reports documenting what was accomplished with the grant.
Recommendation #2: Establish a plan and create a senior level planner position within the Executive Department in city government to guide the economic vitality of the city so that the city can fund the services that support the high quality of life we wish to sustain. This person’s responsibilities would include:
1. Proactively meeting with local businesses of all types to discuss their needs
2. Convene a regular business roundtable as a means of building better city-business relations.
3. Assist business in navigating government regulatory requirements
4. Assist new business in assessing opportunities in Bellingham and work with existing businesses to maximize the retention of those businesses within the city.
5. Be the conduit for communicating business perspectives to local government and be the coordination point for economic issues with the port, the county and state.
6. Evaluating other cities’ economic development plans to determine “best practices” and incorporating these practices into Bellingham’s plans.
7. Develop an economic strategic plan for the COB including an analysis of local business/economic trends
8. Provide an annual “state of the city economy” report to the Mayor and City Council
The individual in the position should have experience in the private sector; some formal training in economics or a related field would be considered a plus, but could be offset by experience. We also envision a selection process that would include members of the business community (see next item). The position should report directly to the mayor, thereby assuring proper access and communication to the executive and legislative departments of the city government.
The on-going funding for this position would come from the increased tax revenues realized by the efforts of the individual. Attracting just one high-paying job employer, or retaining a current employer considering leaving the city, would more than cover the cost of the position. For the first year or two we recommend funding all or part of the employment costs by using funds from the current Economic Development fund.
Recommendation #3: Form an Economic Advisory Group of local business representatives to provide input to City Council on matters related to economic vitality and to assist in the selection of the City’s Economic Development Liaison.
Recommendation #4: Commission a series of studies to determine what businesses were and are currently located within the city limits, with information on the number of jobs, wages, etc. in each sector. For example, the City might request the information for the years 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005. This information will form part of the analytical foundation upon which an economic development plan can be created.
Recommendation #5: Promote the creation of new, high wage jobs by offering a B&O tax credit (see Tacoma example). This direct incentive would be a tangible statement of the city’s resolve to foster high wage jobs across all components of private sector employers. While insufficient data is available at this time to assess the costs of the program, on judgment we believe it will be self-funding due to the incremental jobs it will create.
Recommendation #6: Charge the new Economic Development Liaison and the Economic Advisory group with creating a written economic development plan for the city of Bellingham. This is an imperative. The COB must take control of economic development and plan for it, not allow it to evolve haphazardly.
Recommendation #7: In addition to the already identified downtown/waterfront development priority, identify other business “clusters”, for example health care, marine services and organic/natural products industries where Bellingham might evolve into regional centers of excellence. Task forces for each cluster should be formed to facilitate economic development and high paying job creation for that cluster.
==================
“JAWS” RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1: The City should consider raising property taxes each year by the allowable 1% (about $0.12 million a year). These additional funds should be banked in the GF reserves to protect against out year deficits and used to pre-fund LEOFF-1 obligations (Appendix B).
Recommendation #2: Any GF surpluses should be used to increase GF reserves and pre-fund the LEOFF-1 obligations (Appendix B). The City should establish a policy to assign surplus GF revenues (i.e., beyond that required to meet the 12% reserve requirement) to these pension funds.
Recommendation #3: The City should commit to fully fund its LEOFF-1 obligations by 2021. If future trends play out as expected, this implies continued annual contributions from the GF, growing from $1.3 million in 2006 to $2.1 million in 2011, $3.0 million in 2016, and $4.3 million in 2021.
Recommendation #4: Once the LEOFF-1 Fire Pension Fund is fully funded, the revenues collected from the 22.5¢ property tax and tax on fire-insurance premiums, currently allocated to the fire pension fund, should be reassigned. Initially, these revenues should be assigned to the other LEOFF-1 obligations. After 2021, these property tax revenues could become part of the City’s GF.
Recommendation #5: The City should continue, both on its own and through the Association of Washington Cities, to seek state assistance in paying these LEOFF-1 obligations. *We noted last year, in our review of the Fire Department, that a typical Bellingham firefighter enjoys an annual salary (exclusive of benefits) at least $14,000 more than highly skilled technical staff working in other departments. The City should both explain and justify this difference or work to reduce it.
Recommendation #6: The City should bargain aggressively with its unions to shift increasing amounts of benefit costs (primarily for health insurance premiums) from the City to employees.
Recommendation #7: The City should bargain aggressively with the firefighter union to, over time, bring firefighter compensation in line with that for employees in other unions/ departments.* This shift in compensation should recognize differences among groups of employees in, as examples, the requirements for prior education and training, provision of on-the-job training, on-the-job risks, and the number of qualified applicants seeking these jobs.
Recommendation #8: The City should explain the basis for growth in employee compensation below that of inflation and population growth. In particular, does City management plan for a decline in the amount and quality of services offered to City residents?
Recommendation #9: The City should explain why the budgets for the police and fire departments are expected to increase more rapidly than the overall GF. For example, are costs in these two departments expected to increase rapidly, or is the City planning to increase the level of service provided by these departments?
Recommendation #10: The City should use alternative qualitative and quantitative methods to estimate future GF revenues and expenses, including sensitivity and scenario analysis. In addition, the City should periodically review the accuracy of its past forecasts (backcasting).
Recommendation #11: The City should include in the annual budget document a discussion and explanation of expected trends in GF revenues, expenditures and reserves and how and why they differ from historical trends (Appendix A). *We do not discuss Charges for Goods and Services and Other Revenues because they are subject to definitional changes over time and because they are smaller revenue sources than the taxes.
==================
BUDGET POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1: Adopt a policy on target levels of service – including mechanisms for determining whether funds are being spent efficiently to meet the desired service levels.
Recommendations related to policy #1:
a) Divide this policy into a guiding principle (noting the difference between principal and principle) and two separate policies
b) The discussion about providing a healthy balance of services to residents and quality of life should be moved up to the list of guiding principles (section in budget immediately above budget policies)
c) There should be a budget policy – or goal statement – to say that the city strives to have revenues sufficient to provide a particular service level.
o We recommend that the City conduct a study or have one prepared to determine appropriate benchmarks and target service levels for each department and key function. This work should be done as soon as possible. Without this information it is not possible to know if expenditures to maintain or improve service levels are money well spent; what cuts might be acceptable when cuts are needed; etc.
o We recommend that the study include a statement about the frequency with which the target service levels should be reviewed, by whom, and how.
d) There should be a policy describing what the city will do when net revenues increase or decrease. See recommendation 3 for detail.
Recommendation #2: Revise existing budget policy #3 to ensure it provides a pragmatic guide with regards to employee compensation.
Recommendations related to policy #3:
Delete the second sentence of the policy. Compensation levels for city workers should exceed compensation levels for workers in the private sector only if the city is unable to fill open positions with qualified workers.
Recommendation #3: Establish a new policy on banking excess revenues
There should be a policy describing what the city will do when net revenues increase or decrease. The City of Bellingham should bank excess revenues received in any given year to minimize the impact of rising health care costs and known pension (LEOFF-1) obligations.
Recommendation:
We recommend that excess revenues be banked to minimize the future impact of known pension obligations and, possibly, health care costs for current City workers. (We note the creation of pension funds by cities such as the City of Everett for this purpose.)
Recommendation #4: Establish a new policy on public involvement
The City of Bellingham should adopt a new policy to encourage more public involvement in the budget process. The BAC notes the absence of any policy regarding public involvement. We recommend the addition of the following new policy. Rather than a separate recommendation to the City of Bellingham, (COB), our committee suggests this be included with the recommendations from the “Policies” committee.
Recommendations for wording related to this new policy:
The City of Bellingham shall provide for systematic, transparent and ongoing citizen involvement and input, through regular surveys and other feedback mechanisms, of city residents to help determine funding priorities.
Regardless of the method, the process would be transparent, systematic and ongoing. Our committee recommends a community involvement process that is:
• Inclusive and representative of all neighborhoods with an opportunity for every resident to participate.
• An ongoing, systematic process that includes both an opportunity for citizen input and process for ongoing feedback and evaluation.
• A timeline of January to June in the year preceding the upcoming budget.
Recommendation #5: Provide a link to the city’s investment policy
RE: General Operating Policy #8
The City will use the ‘Prudent Person’ policy when investing funds. Preservation and safety of assets is a higher priority than return on investment. The City’s investment policy provides greater detail on this subject.
Recommendation #6: This policy is not a budget policy, but rather an operational guideline.
RE: General Operating Policy #9
“The City will use recycled paper whenever costs are less than or similar to costs for virgin paper stocks.”
Suggestion:
The City could develop scorecards for the various departments to encourage savings or efficiencies since it already has five year forecasts by department, division and program.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Mayor: A Living Wage Job In A Fishbowl
Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
-- Winston Churchill
Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage. -- H. L. Mencken
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
If men were angels, no government would be necessary. -- James Madison
"Popular adolescents look like leaders.
But in reality they are tracking peer opinion.
They do the same thing politicians do in tracking opinion polls.
They are very much like politicians."
-- Joseph P. Allen - Psychology Professor, University of Virginia
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
-- Winston Churchill
When I look back on all these worries, I remember the story of the old man who said on his deathbed that he had had a lot of trouble in his life, most of which had never happened.
-- Winston Churchill
---------------------------------------------------------
Every Municipality requires some form of leadership.
Bellingham's Charter, adopted 35 years ago, specifies an elected Mayor to fulfill that function.
Mayor is a big job!
It entails holding much power and influence, but also much responsibility.
By definition, the job is relentlessly demanding.
It has the potential to be exhilarating, as successes are enjoyed by the community.
But, it can also be debilitating when things don't go so well.
There are diverse groups to be continuously dealt with fairly and reasonably satisfied.
There are a multiplicity of goals to be sought, even though some compete directly with others.
How to deal with and effectively resolve issues is not an exact science.
At best, a Mayor will seek to keep important things simmering, but not boiling over!
That requires a set of skills that many folks don't have, and even if they do, don't wish to go to the trouble of becoming Mayor.
It's not a job everyone wants, including me.
But, the purpose of this blog is to revisit some of our history since Mayor Mark resigned, effective November 1, 2006.
I did not always agree with Mark, but I did respect his talent, courage and vision for our City's future.
No fair-minded person can deny Mark possessed those qualities.
In addition, he had the ability to pick really good staff, many of whom still work for the City in responsible jobs.
I hope they stay around, regardless of who our new elected mayor will be.
But, Mark did reach his limit in the job of Mayor and has moved on, I hope happily.
I wish him well.
Below, I've reprinted his resignation announcement, followed by a few comments of my own.
--------------------------------
Message from the Mayor
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Dear fellow employees,
I have frequently written to you about a variety of subjects. Whether it be issues ‘in the news’, changes in policy, celebration of successes or a word of thanks, it has been my hope that you knew that I cared about your awareness of issues the city faces and to remind you that it is through your good work that we achieve our success.
Today I write to you with information that affects the city but is not about the city.
I will be resigning as Mayor of Bellingham effective Nov 1, 2006. On that date I will start in my new position as manager of the Northwest Clean Air Agency (NWCAA), a regional organization that includes Whatcom, Skagit and Island Counties.
I have had a connection with NWCAA for many, many years. The mission of the agency is one I am passionate about and when the current manager announced his intention to retire, I thought long and carefully about whether to apply for the vacant position. The new job will involve a cut in pay, nonetheless I eagerly look forward to this different chapter in life.
This is my 20th year as a local elected official. While a career in public service has been of great satisfaction and joy, it had never been my intention to spend my entire adulthood in elective office. I am pleased that I will continue in service to the citizens of our community, just in a different capacity.
The primary reason that I am able to take this step is because of the extraordinary talent and commitment to service of the City of Bellingham department heads, managers and employees. Ours is not a perfect organization, but I believe that it is in an extraordinarily strong position at this time. Together, over these last nearly eleven years, we have accomplished so very much. I am proud of my affiliation with the City of Bellingham and with you. I know you will continue to do great things.
In my years as Mayor, I have made many wonderful friends among you, my fellow employees. I look forward to maintaining these friendships, with the added benefit that I will not always be ‘talking shop’ when they are trying to relax!
In closing, let me thank you all for the energy, commitment and spirit you bring to your work. I will be forever grateful for the honor of having been your fellow public servant.
Sincerely,
Mayor Mark
PS. The vacancy created by my departure will be filled by a majority vote of the City Council. The Council can fill the vacancy from among council members or any Bellingham citizen that meets the eligibility requirements of the city charter. The voters will select the mayor at the general election in November 2007.
-------------------------
I believe Mark's reason for resigning was a good one, the prospect of a responsible job that wasn't a pressure cooker.
Unspoken, were other probable reasons:
• His health
• A reduced level of enjoyment, due to an atmosphere of growing distrust and controversy
• His family
• His accurate reading of political 'tea leaves', particualy after the contentious 2003 election
[Note, here I suspect Mark came to know that he would be challenged by one of his former strong supporters, now a candidate for Mayor]
-----------------
But, Mark's announcement still came as quite a shock to most folks, even though it was openly welcomed by some.
It also came at a time I was away, hiking in the Canadian Rockies.
That vacation was particularly enjoyable because it occured right after I had made a similar decision.
I had decided to resign myself at the end of 2006, but announce it early so that the Council would have time to appoint a replacement for 1 year.
Mark beat me to it!
Boy, I was mad at the time!
Mark's resigning made me reconsider my own plans.
Under those circumstances, I thought it would have been irresponsible for me to walk away from the challenges that were facing the City at that time.
Of course, some may not have liked me quitting before my elected term was over, either.
Others may have felt differently.
Anyway, sense prevailed and I stayed.
And now, I'm glad I did decide to finish my term.
---------------
Another time, I might extend this reflection.
But this is enough for now.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
-- Winston Churchill
Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage. -- H. L. Mencken
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
If men were angels, no government would be necessary. -- James Madison
"Popular adolescents look like leaders.
But in reality they are tracking peer opinion.
They do the same thing politicians do in tracking opinion polls.
They are very much like politicians."
-- Joseph P. Allen - Psychology Professor, University of Virginia
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
-- Winston Churchill
When I look back on all these worries, I remember the story of the old man who said on his deathbed that he had had a lot of trouble in his life, most of which had never happened.
-- Winston Churchill
---------------------------------------------------------
Every Municipality requires some form of leadership.
Bellingham's Charter, adopted 35 years ago, specifies an elected Mayor to fulfill that function.
Mayor is a big job!
It entails holding much power and influence, but also much responsibility.
By definition, the job is relentlessly demanding.
It has the potential to be exhilarating, as successes are enjoyed by the community.
But, it can also be debilitating when things don't go so well.
There are diverse groups to be continuously dealt with fairly and reasonably satisfied.
There are a multiplicity of goals to be sought, even though some compete directly with others.
How to deal with and effectively resolve issues is not an exact science.
At best, a Mayor will seek to keep important things simmering, but not boiling over!
That requires a set of skills that many folks don't have, and even if they do, don't wish to go to the trouble of becoming Mayor.
It's not a job everyone wants, including me.
But, the purpose of this blog is to revisit some of our history since Mayor Mark resigned, effective November 1, 2006.
I did not always agree with Mark, but I did respect his talent, courage and vision for our City's future.
No fair-minded person can deny Mark possessed those qualities.
In addition, he had the ability to pick really good staff, many of whom still work for the City in responsible jobs.
I hope they stay around, regardless of who our new elected mayor will be.
But, Mark did reach his limit in the job of Mayor and has moved on, I hope happily.
I wish him well.
Below, I've reprinted his resignation announcement, followed by a few comments of my own.
--------------------------------
Message from the Mayor
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Dear fellow employees,
I have frequently written to you about a variety of subjects. Whether it be issues ‘in the news’, changes in policy, celebration of successes or a word of thanks, it has been my hope that you knew that I cared about your awareness of issues the city faces and to remind you that it is through your good work that we achieve our success.
Today I write to you with information that affects the city but is not about the city.
I will be resigning as Mayor of Bellingham effective Nov 1, 2006. On that date I will start in my new position as manager of the Northwest Clean Air Agency (NWCAA), a regional organization that includes Whatcom, Skagit and Island Counties.
I have had a connection with NWCAA for many, many years. The mission of the agency is one I am passionate about and when the current manager announced his intention to retire, I thought long and carefully about whether to apply for the vacant position. The new job will involve a cut in pay, nonetheless I eagerly look forward to this different chapter in life.
This is my 20th year as a local elected official. While a career in public service has been of great satisfaction and joy, it had never been my intention to spend my entire adulthood in elective office. I am pleased that I will continue in service to the citizens of our community, just in a different capacity.
The primary reason that I am able to take this step is because of the extraordinary talent and commitment to service of the City of Bellingham department heads, managers and employees. Ours is not a perfect organization, but I believe that it is in an extraordinarily strong position at this time. Together, over these last nearly eleven years, we have accomplished so very much. I am proud of my affiliation with the City of Bellingham and with you. I know you will continue to do great things.
In my years as Mayor, I have made many wonderful friends among you, my fellow employees. I look forward to maintaining these friendships, with the added benefit that I will not always be ‘talking shop’ when they are trying to relax!
In closing, let me thank you all for the energy, commitment and spirit you bring to your work. I will be forever grateful for the honor of having been your fellow public servant.
Sincerely,
Mayor Mark
PS. The vacancy created by my departure will be filled by a majority vote of the City Council. The Council can fill the vacancy from among council members or any Bellingham citizen that meets the eligibility requirements of the city charter. The voters will select the mayor at the general election in November 2007.
-------------------------
I believe Mark's reason for resigning was a good one, the prospect of a responsible job that wasn't a pressure cooker.
Unspoken, were other probable reasons:
• His health
• A reduced level of enjoyment, due to an atmosphere of growing distrust and controversy
• His family
• His accurate reading of political 'tea leaves', particualy after the contentious 2003 election
[Note, here I suspect Mark came to know that he would be challenged by one of his former strong supporters, now a candidate for Mayor]
-----------------
But, Mark's announcement still came as quite a shock to most folks, even though it was openly welcomed by some.
It also came at a time I was away, hiking in the Canadian Rockies.
That vacation was particularly enjoyable because it occured right after I had made a similar decision.
I had decided to resign myself at the end of 2006, but announce it early so that the Council would have time to appoint a replacement for 1 year.
Mark beat me to it!
Boy, I was mad at the time!
Mark's resigning made me reconsider my own plans.
Under those circumstances, I thought it would have been irresponsible for me to walk away from the challenges that were facing the City at that time.
Of course, some may not have liked me quitting before my elected term was over, either.
Others may have felt differently.
Anyway, sense prevailed and I stayed.
And now, I'm glad I did decide to finish my term.
---------------
Another time, I might extend this reflection.
But this is enough for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
