City Council Priorities: What Changed and What Didn’t in the 2009 Election?
Comments Offby Matthew Green, 2/24/10
Each year, the Olympia City Council holds a council retreat. In January or February, away from the formal council chamber (but still, at least since 2004, in a meeting open to the public), they take time to look at the big picture. They discuss the overall state of the city, and talk about their working relationships. If some councilmembers are newly elected, they get to know each other better.
And they set their council priorities for the year.
These priorities do not address all, or even a majority, of the topics the council will actually discuss or vote on in the coming year. Weekly council meetings are filled mostly with routine, even boring, city business: reviewing a minor zoning change, approving the design of a new city building, authorizing funds to repair a sewer line.
The council priorities, by contrast, are about bigger things. What major goals does the council want to achieve? What, if any, new initiatives should the city start, or old initiatives end? What fundamental principles does it want to see expressed in city government?
The 2010 version of the council held its retreat on January 15 and 16, spending twelve hours together in a meeting room at the downtown fire station. Three councilmembers – Stephen Buxbaum, Jeannine Roe, and Karen Rogers – were new, representing the biggest turnover in decades. And they had been elected in perhaps the most heated and polarized local election in decades.
Of the four returning councilmembers, one – Joe Hyer – had just won re-election after aligning with the challengers. The remaining three – Mayor Doug Mah, Craig Ottavelli, and Rhenda Strub – had not been up for re-election themselves, but had all endorsed opponents of the winning candidates.
The big issue was, of course, the isthmus. On that, the new council didn’t even wait for the retreat. They repealed the rezone passed by the previous council, bringing building heights back down to 35 feet, in just their first two meetings – astoundingly fast for a major decision.
But, even beyond the isthmus, a very different council will, obviously, have very different priorities, right? Well, yes and no. Some things changed and some things didn’t, in ways that might surprise the new councilmembers’ critics and supporters alike.
To better understand the new city council, and where it may take Olympia, OP&L offers this review of the priorities set by the new council against the priorities set by the previous one.
(The 2008 and 2009 council priorities are grouped together because they were written by the same seven councilmembers. In 2009, the council did not complete the prioritization process; the 2009 “priorities” actually are top things suggested by individual councilmembers, and are less reflective of the council’s priorities collectively. This article emphasizes the 2008 priorities, to allow for better comparison against the 2010 priorities.)
Overall themes
Each year, the city council arranges its priorities into a handful of major themes. While the exact language varies, every council in recent memory has included themes on strengthening the local economy, protecting the local environment, supporting downtown, and providing city services effectively.
In addition, the old council listed “Focus on Olympia as the State Capital.” This theme had been included for several years prior to 2008, but was not continued in 2010.
The new council added a new theme – “Engage Citizens” – that encompassed several new priorities (discussed below).
Priorities of both the old and new councils
Downtown Housing: Both the old (2008 and 2009) and new (2010) councils named downtown housing as a priority. Both even specifically mentioned the Colpitts project, which is planned for the city parking lot at 4th and Columbia, but has been delayed due to the poor economy. Every candidate in the last election (and several elections before that) supported downtown housing, though the anti-isthmus candidates were accused by opponents of not doing so.
To achieve their housing goals, the old council discussed adding “economic development staff,” while the new council called for “good planning and zoning”. Both also mentioned streamlining the development process, though the old council emphasized this point much more strongly (discussed as one of the differences below).
Housing Density: Both the old and new councils prioritized denser housing throughout the city, not just downtown. The old council specifically called for more in-fill housing and accessory structures (“mother-in-law apartments”), while the new council settled for more general language.
Downtown Parking: Both the old and new councils prioritized the city’s new downtown parking strategy. The old council developed the strategy, including installing new parking meters in the free 90-minute zone. The new council called for implementing that strategy without change. Like downtown housing, every candidate in the last election supported the parking strategy (some with minor quibbles).
The old council had also prioritized a parking garage. However, it dropped that idea in 2009, citing financial hurdles, and the new council dropped it from the priorities.
Other: The old and new councils also broadlly agreed on priorities relating to a permanent artesian well, water quality in Budd Inlet, reclaimed water for the Capitol Campus and west Olympia, Percival Landing, making Olympia a more sustainable community.
Priorities of the old council, but not the new one
Building Permits: In 2008, the council wanted to make it faster and easier for developers to get building permits from the city. They expressed their desire through three council priorities.
One priority was to “identify and evaluate key barriers to development with stakeholders.” In this context, “stakeholders” meant the development industry: property owners, builders, realtors, and banks.
A second priority called for “improving CP&D’s [Community Planning & Development, which issues city building permits] ability to implement Council goals and policies,” by which it meant goals and policies for promoting development through faster and easier permitting. Signaling the council’s seriousness, this is the only council priority in recent memory that directly criticizes a city department’s ability to do its job.
A third council priority was to figure out why “the Latimore recommendations [are] not working in CP&D”. These were recommendations for making the building permit process faster and easier for developers, from a report written by a consulting company called [Latimore]. The report was originally commissioned by the council at the request of the development industry, and it also involved stakeholders consisting of property owners, builders, realtors, and banks.
Thus, the 2008 council made its concern for the interests of the development industry very clear. That same development industry contributed the bulk of the campaign donations for the two incumbent councilmembers running for election in 2009, just as it had for the three councilmembers who won in 2007.
However, in 2009, the candidates who did not receive large campaign contributions from the development industry won the election. Subsequently, the priorities of the 2010 council do not discuss building permits or CP&D. They mention “streamlining permits” only with regard to downtown housing and seemingly as an afterthought; the phrase was not used at the council retreat, but was added later before final council approval.
Partnership with the State: The old council emphasized partnerships with state government, to promote state buildings in Olympia (rather than in Lacey or Tumwater) and to address parking and traffic issues related to state employees. The new council does not include these priorities, though it does include support for the “capitol district,” a proposal in the Legislature that would direct some state revenues toward paying for infrastructure related to the state capitol’s impact on Olympia.
Walking and Sidewalks: Two of the old council’s priorities address sidewalks and other measures to promote walkability. The council’s strongest advocate for walkability issues was Councilmember Karen Messmer, who retired in 2009. These priorities were not included by the new council.
Parks: Besides Percival Landing, three priorities of the old council mention parks, including and extension of West Bay park toward Deschutes Parkway, a dog park, and a plaza in west Olympia (though all three were from 2009, and seem to have been priorities mainly for one or two councilmembers, rather than the council collectively). None of these appear in the new council’s priorities.
Other: The old council’s priorities also mention Artspace (an effort to create housing for artists), a Clean Clothes resolution (referring to clothes made in sweatshops), constructing a new fire station (underway after voter approval), and funding improvements on Boulevard Road (some of which are underway). These are not in the new council’s priorities.
Priorities of the new council, but not the old one
City Revenues: Since the first Eyman property tax-limiting initiatives in the 1990s, the city council has been concerned about shrinking revenues – or to be precise, revenues that are rising more slowly than inflation in the cost of providing city services. For several years in a row, the council has reduced services, including cutting 21 city staff positions in the 2009 budget and 23 more in 2010 (out of about 600). Accordingly, the old council set priorities about writing a “sustainable finance plan” and “prioritizing resources.”
However, the situation has gotten even worse with the recession, which has cut into the city’s previously robust sale tax revenues. In response, the new council went further, and included a priority to “consider revenue enhancement options” – that is, tax increases – to support general city services. Both old and new councilmembers have acknowledged the possibility of tax increases during their election campaigns, but this is the first time they were mentioned in council priorities. Other priorities of the new council specifically discuss the need for adequate funding for public safety and social services.
Further complicating the revenue picture is the new fire station, being built on Lilly Road. The old council prioritized it, and placed a levy on the ballot to build it, which voters approved. However, the levy did not include money for operations. The new council will likely need to find over $1 million per year for firefighters and equipment if it is to open.
Citizen Involvement: At the swearing-in ceremony at the first council meeting of 2010, all the new councilmembers emphasized the importance of citizen involvement in city government. At the retreat, they re-emphasized it. That idea is reflected in three priorities of the new council, relating to the comprehensive plan update, community policing, and neighborhoods. Citizen involvement was not mentioned in the priorities of the old council.
Downtown Programs: The new council’s priorities specifically mention support for two downtown programs: the Parking Benefit Improvement Area’s (PBIA) Strategic Plan, and the Olympia Downtown Association’s (ODA) Main Street Program. The old council was generally supportive of these organizations, but did not mention them among its priorities.
Based on their stated priorities, what can we expect from the new Olympia City Council? More citizen involvement. Continued work on downtown housing, parking, and Percival Landing. Much less concern about fast building permits. Possibly a tax increase – or a public vote on a tax increase – to operate the new fire station and maintain other city services.
Elections have consequences, and the recent city council election changed some – though by no means all – of the council’s priorities.
The council will have a chance to update its priorities in early 2011. And then the voters will have their next chance to update the city council itself in the 2011 elections. ◙
Matthew Green was elected to the Olympia City Council in 2001, and served with Doug Mah and Joe Hyer, through 2005. He lost an election to Craig Ottavelli in 2007. In 2009, he worked for the campaigns of Stephen Buxbaum and Karen Rogers.
Although the exact nature of how I learned who to contact and what to ask for has long since fled my memory banks, two of us went to a certain anonymous little office where a kindly older woman granted us permission to visit a special place.
The art that Jo Gallaugher has in her gallery has two prerequisites. One is that all pieces are made with predominantly recycled material, and the other criteria is that this fact is not obvious upon first inspection.
