Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Health District Dinner

Tonight at the annual Snohomish County Health District dinner, I was sworn in as the Edmonds representative to the County Health Board.

The health board presented Richard Marin with a plaque for his years of service. Richard Marin had great things to say about the health board and the folks on the board had many good things to say about him. To better understand the health district, he went on restaurant inspections, septic inspections, and even watched a drug bust (where Health District employees have to deal with hazardous materials). His shoes will be tough to fill.

In a stunning act of hypocrisy, I had the Salmon for dinner. I hope my fellow members of the Salmon Recovery Council don’t find out.

Council Retreat Location


I don’t know how the decision got made for the council to have its annual retreat at Clearwater Casino Resort. (Maybe I was sleeping or something).

Because I led the effort to ban casinos in Edmonds, I am a little sensitive about gambling establishments. However, I will go participate, even though I don’t like the location. Fortunately, you don’t have to worry that I will gamble. I just gambled 6 grand of my own money on my re-election. I am done with gambling for a while.

May I put a plug in again for having the retreat at Edmonds? If the city, city officials, and staff are going to spend some money on a retreat, why not do it to the benefit of our own merchants? It’s also easier for citizens to attend the retreat if it's held in Edmonds.

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Comments Welcome!


Comments are welcome on the OrvisBlog. Please feel free to speak your mind. Some folks have tried to post comments and had difficulties, and I think the problem could be with icon confusions. Below each post, you'll see three links. One (the time), goes to the top of my page. The other "0 comments" will goto a page that allows you to post a comment. You can post an "Anonymous" comment if you don't want to fill out the info. The letter looking icon will allow you to send my post to a friend, and it will ask for your friend's e-mail.

You can also make a comment by clicking on the title of the post and then clicking on the link that says "post a comment".

Hope this helps. And thanks for reading my blog. I have had a lot of positive feedback.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Dawson on the Sound Transit Board




Council member Deanna Dawson was recently nominated to the Sound Transit Board. She will be an excellent addition and I am sure she will represent Edmonds and the region well.

Congrats Deanna!


Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Paintball

This is an interesting game called Presidential Paintball. You can choose a Presidential character and shoot paintballs at the other candidates while roaming the White House.

Just a warning, I played as Guliani and Romney and McCain always gets me on the fifth level. I tried playing as McCain, but Obama dropped me on the third level.

I wonder if we can get a version of this game for the city council?

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Thoughts on the comp plan and the waterfront.

At that last council meeting, the council debated what the comprehensive plan says about the waterfront area east of the railroad tracks. I think I should weigh in.

Here’s the paragraph in question, straight from comprehensive plan, which can be found here.:

Downtown Master Plan. The properties between SR-104 and the railroad, including Harbor Square, the Edmonds Shopping Center (former Safeway site), and extending past the Commuter Rail parking area up to Main Street. This area is appropriate for design-driven master planned development which provides for a mix of uses and takes advantage of its strategic location between the waterfront and downtown. The location of existing taller buildings on the waterfront, and the site's situation at the bottom of “the Bowl,” could enable a design that provides for higher buildings outside current view corridors. Any redevelopment in this area should be oriented to the street fronts, and provide pedestrian-friendly walking areas, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Development design should also not ignore the railroad side of the properties, since this is an area that provides a “first impression” of the city from railroad passengers and visitors to the waterfront. Art work, landscaping, and modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project.

While the language clearly recognizes that this area “could allow for higher buildings outside the view corridors”, the plan also allows for a “mix of uses” at that site. The language does not mandate taller buildings.

It also creates an enormously “high” standard for taller buildings (sorry for the pun). No view corridors can be obstructed. Considering that there are numerous corridors from adjacent residences over the site, how does a taller building not obstruct view corridors?

It is also worth noting that the language above was only approved by a one vote margin in a vote on March 8th, 2005. The Waterfront/Activity portion of the plan was VERY controversial. Council members Plunkett, Dawson and I, said no to the Waterfront/Activity portion of the plan. Peggy Olson approved it. The other three council members who approved it are no longer with us: two were removed from office by the public.

Does the language in the comprehensive plan reflect the vision of the majority of the council? Probably not. Does the language reflect the vision of the majority of Edmonds citizens? Based on what I have seen during the elections, no.

OrvisBlog makes the news!


Al Hooper had a nice review of the OrvisBlog in his column “City Lights”, which is published weekly in the Edmonds Beacon.
Thanks for the plug Al!

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Salmon Recovery Council



I attended a meeting of the Salmon Recovery Council today, a government agency whose goal is to improve the water quality in the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed.

My motto for the group: “We conservate, so fish will procreate.”

For Edmonds, the challenge of WRIA 8 is how the funding is directed. Most of the funding is a pass through from King County or directed toward river conservation. Near shore projects and Snohomish County tend to get left out, and I am hoping we can change that.

The Puget Sound Regional Council is coming on line and they may make some funding available to cities for conservation through the Salmon Recovery Council. This means Edmonds could be eligible for some grant money. However, the PSRC and the Salmon Recovery Council still need to do some talking. We’ll know more later.

On another note, the Salmon Recovery council voted to authorize Jean White (the director) to apply for a grant to develop standards for Low Impact Developments (that is, Green Building Codes). If the Salmon Recovery Council gets the grant, we will hire professionals to advise cities on how to create more watershed friendly building codes. I think this is exciting. The cities may need to help match the grant by providing some staff time, so more information is needed, and will be coming. I hope Jean White gets the grant.

Next meeting: March 20th

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Erasing Graffiti in Edmonds

Tonight, the council unanimously passed a stricter graffiti ordinance. It has tools to make enforcement easier and it strongly encourages all property owners (both public and private) to clean up graffiti once it occurs.

Last year's public safety committee, which consisted of Council Members Michael Plunkett and Deanna Dawson, worked hard on this ordinance. (see the article in the Edmond Beacon). They deserve our thanks.

Deanna Dawson also helped to organize the Graffiti Paint-Out Day to battle graffiti along the Interurban Trail.

A stop light update.

It’s time to update everyone on the dangerous intersection on 88th and 196th.

I put forward a resolution to send to our state legislature urging them to work with the Department of Transportation to get a stop light at this intersection (see council agenda, January 15th, item 9). Several members seemed very receptive to the resolution, but they wanted two council members to meet with the Department of Transportation first. I volunteered to be one of them. I will let you know how it goes.

You can learn more about this intersection by going to my previous blog entry.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Are you an Edmonds NIMBY?

Recently, Eric Earling editor of soundpolitics.com blamed mismanaged growth on city NIMBYism.

Apparently, we in Edmonds are NIMBY’s because we don’t except our share of the population growth. We in Edmonds like our single family neighborhoods and we want them to stay that way.

Forget the fact that we were arm twisted into re-zoning a whole section of our town into four lots per acre. Forget the fact that we passed a very controversial PRD ordinance that has allowed for full development of residential zones. Forget the fact that we rezoned the Unocal site for one of largest condominium projects in our history, (and that’s just the half of the project). Forget the fact that Edmonds has had a zone since before I was on the council that allows for high-rises, and forget the fact that Edmonds will soon have high rises in that zone.

Forget the fact that Edmonds meets its GMA growth targets set by the county.

Sigh!

So do you feel like a NIMBY? I don’t. Unfortunately, there will always be folks outside our city who label us NIMBY’s because we don’t say “yes” to absolutely everything some developers want (like taller buildings in downtown).

Oh well, count to ten, sticks and stones…sticks and stones…

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Dave Orvis is like Bogart?


Al Hooper, in his column "City Lights" published in the Edmonds Beacon, compared me to Humphrey Bogart. Actually, he was quoting one of his "Edmonds Oracles."
I don't see any resemblance and I don't think Mr. Bogart had a double chin, like I do.

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Let's tape executive sessions

The Seattle Times had an excellent opinion piece about the council executive sessions.

Executive sessions are not private meetings; they are public meetings where public exposure must be delayed to protect the city’s legal interest. Once the legal issue that caused the executive session is resolved, the contents of the meeting, including what is said by the elected officials, should be open the public.

Government should always be as open as possible. The city of Edmonds has always exceeded the requirements of law and kept detailed minutes of executive sessions and made them open to the public as soon as possible. We can easily tape executive sessions. I hope the legislature requires all cities to tape executive sessions.

Monday, January 7, 2008

Quasi-Judicial


When I hear land-use appeals, I must be quasi-judicial; that is, I must follow the appearance of fairness doctrine and act like a judge. How do I look?

Radach v. Gunderson

Last year, I joined my fellow council members in rejecting an ADB application for the Old Mill Town remodel. I was accused by my opponent of exposing the city to a lawsuit. I wrote this and tried unsucessfully to get it printed.

Tomorrow, we talk about the "appearance of fairness doctrine." It sort of ties in now.

I hope you like it:


Sometimes on the council, I have to hear appeals of various development applications. Re-zones, sub-division appeals, architectural design board appeals are a few of the quasi-judicial decisions I have to make on the council.

A small set of individuals always complain if I don’t always side with a developer on these appeals. They want me to “rubber stamp” the opinion of the so-called experts: that is, staff and the developers. I say look at what happened in Ocean Shores.

A couple in Ocean Shores, Mr. and Mrs. Radach, noticed that a new house was going to built ten feet closer to the ocean than the law allowed. They went to the city and complained, but the city ignored them and allowed the house to be built.

The Radach’s took their case to court.

And the courts were not amused at the city’s behavior.

In the landmark decision, Radach v. Gunderson, the state Supreme Court ordered the house moved and they ordered the city to pay for it. Normally, courts are reluctant to hold cities financially accountable for permitting SNAFU’s, but the courts make a special exception: a city that knowingly fails to enforce codes assumes the financial consequences of not doing so.

The Radach’s told the city of Ocean Shores there was a problem, but the city would not stop construction of the house. Had the city enforced the codes as soon they knew of the problem, the city would not have had to pay, but the city chose to ignore their citizens, so the courts made the city pay to fix the problem.

Radach v. Gunderson teaches council members an important lesson: we cannot waive codes or grant special favors on land-use appeals. Therefore, if I determine that an application doesn’t meet the code, I have to deny the application regardless of my feelings, or I expose the city to great financial risk.

Some developers (just like some citizens) have a tendency towards passion, characterizing any decision that doesn’t go their way as “arbitrary and capricious”; a legal term used to describe the situation where a council makes up code on the spot, something the Edmonds city council has never done. In my time on the council, no developer has ever successfully overturned a council decision, because the council does not hold developers to standards that don’t exist.

The real problem with the council is their tendency to rubber stamp. In my second term, the council was overturned twice by courts for essentially rubber stamping decisions. In each of these cases, the majority of the council followed the advice of the so-called experts and I dissented, citing valid legal points brought up by citizens.

We can’t have a “rubber stamp” mentality on the council. A “rubber stamp” mentality can cost the taxpayers serious money, just like it did in Ocean Shores; and more importantly, rubber stamping denies the citizens of the protections they deserve.

A Strong Council

Eight years ago, I was sworn in as a council member for the first time, having successfully run for an open seat.

The origin of a council member often correlates to the strength and independence of a council member. One of the strongest council members I know, Michael Plunkett, had to remove a well entrenched incumbent to get his seat. The weakest council member I know, Chris Davis, had to resign because he committed forgery, and he was appointed to fill a vacancy on the council. The harder it is to get on the council, the stronger the council member.

On my first council, only one council member (Plunkett) had attained his seat by removing an incumbent. Three other council members (Earling, Petso, and Orvis) attained their seats by winning open seat elections. One council member (White) won an uncontested open seat election (he would later plead guilty to money laundering), and two others (Miller and Davis) were appointed.

(To be fair, I need to say former Police Chief Miller is an upstanding citizen, who needed to resign to meet his work obligations. He was a dynamic and positive force for the council).

This new council is much different. Every council member is elected: no appointees, no uncontested races. Every council member attained their seat in a contested election, and a majority of council members removed incumbents to get their seat.

Council members Plunkett, Olson, Wambolt, and Bernheim removed incumbents to get their seat. Council members Orvis, Dawson, and Wilson all won open seat elections.

If my theory is correct, this will be the strongest council I have ever been on.

I am looking forward to serving on it.

Saturday, January 5, 2008

Welcome to the city council

This Tuesday, two new council members will be sworn in.

Steve Bernheim is the biggest surprise of the election. I endorsed Steve because he walks his talk. For example, he often lectures us on how to reduce carbon emissions, and then he backs up his talk up by powering his house with solar panels and driving a little yellow electric car. He says he wants protect the charm of Edmonds, so as a citizen he joined a suit to overturn a bad council ruling on height limits. He won the suit and stopped an unnecessarily tall building from being built.

D.J. Wilson also will bring strength to the council. If I were to take a college political science course, I would want to take it from D.J. He is one of the few political science majors I know who actually decided to apply his trade by running for office. He should know political science better than most of his colleagues having experienced the election process first hand. He will be an effective council member, and I am looking to forward to sitting with him on the council.

Steve and D.J., I will give you the same advice I give all new council members: Think for yourself. You’re both capable people. Don’t let interests groups, staff, or your more senior colleagues (like me) get to you. You have proven yourself in some very difficult races and so you should stand on your own two feet and approach your council term with confidence and independence.

See ya guys Tuesday, and welcome to the city council.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Let’s disagree!

A friend of mine applied for an appointment. When the city council has a vacancy, they may appoint someone to fill it until the next election, but before they do so, they usually interview the applicants.

One of the council members asked my friend a question:

“If you wanted to vote no, but the rest of the council wanted to vote yes, would you change your vote?”

The council member who asked the question wanted the council to work together, to be a team that solves issues in the community. Lone wolves in his mind distracted from the effectiveness of the team; hence, he was looking for my friend to say he would work with the council, and change his vote to put up a united front.

My friend was not appointed. His answer: “I would always listen carefully to my fellow council members, but if they cannot persuade on the merits of the argument, I would vote my conscience and say no, even if I was the only one to vote no.”

My friend and I think alike on this issue. There is no way I am going to change a vote of conscience simply to present a united front for my fellow council members.

Does this mean I am not a team player?

My answer is that I am not on a team. I am a member of a legislative body that represents the public. If the public is divided on an issue, then shouldn’t the council be divided on the issue?

My experience has also demonstrated that when someone wants people to “work together”, he or she really wants people to fall in line. No council member should ever fall in line. We are accountable only to the public, and we should not be taking orders from anyone but the public.

Healthy councils disagree. They have 4-3 votes, 5-2 votes, 6-1 votes, and an occasional unanimous vote. Councils that vote unanimously all the time are simply falling in line with the mayor, the staff, or some other group, and that’s means they're not representing the public.

I hope in the upcoming session that we council members do our jobs and disagree on issues.