Annexation

We had an interesting discussion about annexation tonight at Council. We don’t take votes at work sessions, and this was meant to be informational. I’m not sure where all the council members are at on this—I guess we will find out in the coming weeks. It does seem like there may still be four votes to move the issue forward.
The staff has prepared a timeline that would take us to the Boundary Review Board (BRB) either in September this year, or February 3, 2011. It’s available here.
We expect the result, assuming it’s affirmative, would be appealed again by Fire District One. They appealed the last decision of the BRB, which brought us to this point of re-set. With that timeline and contingencies, it would take us into 2012 for the annexation to be in effect. With that timeline, we will also turn to our current residents in Mukilteo to discuss, or possibly to vote on, the issue. There are a variety of election dates after the potential BRB decision and before any vote inside the annexation area. Once the BRB decision is rendered, and any appeals are settled, it makes sense to ask Mukilteo voters: that’s when we’ll have a full picture of what we’re asking, both inside and outside the current city limits.
The discussion about annexation is happening in the framework of another process, our adoption of a long-range financial plan. That plan is taking the shape of a variety of policies governing the city’s finances. We also have a workshop to discuss a vision for the future of Mukilteo scheduled for June 10th. I’m excited for that opportunity to talk about a host of issues facing Mukilteo, and to envision what shape the future may take.

One other topic that came up was the zoning for the manufactured home communities inside the annexation area: the biggest one is Carriage Club Estates. Most of the councilmembers present voiced an interest in adopting a manufactured home park zone, similar to what the County has in place now for those properties. This is great news for the residents of Carriage Club, and I'm glad more of the council now shares my interest in taking this action.

Conference: Opportunities!

Next week, I will join more than 200 other young, progressive elected officials in Washington, DC next week at the fifth annual convening of the national Young Elected Officials Network.
This photo is from a few years ago... on this trip, we will also be attending a White House briefing! I'm not sure that I'll be able to visit the West Wing, though, as I did with Mayor Marine a few years ago.

The participants at the conference next week, progressive elected officials from across the country, are all under the age of 35. The young leaders will meet with a number of national leaders in Washington and share with each other their policy ideas, leadership strategies, and best practices.

I’m excited about learning from other young elected officials. Some of the sessions I’m attending include economic sustainability (economic development and job creation), sustainable green policies and e-Democracy (outreach and involvement). I hope to bring back some good ideas to work on in Mukilteo.

The Young Elected Officials (YEO) Network, organized by the People For the American Way foundation, consists of over 550 young, progressive city, county, state and federal officials from all 50 states. Most are at the start of their political careers; 89 percent are interested in running for higher office in the future.

“These young elected officials play a critical role in our local, state, and national governments,” said Andrew Gillum, Tallahassee City Commissioner and executive director of the YEO Network. “They are leaders in policy debates around the country, and manage billions of dollars in public funds. They are passionate, innovative, and committed to helping their communities be places of freedom, fairness, and opportunity. The YEO Network National Convening is a great way for them to work together to share ideas and empower each other as they continue their careers in public service.”

One great thing about this conference is that the costs are pretty minimal—my council travel budget will pay just for the airfare. The conference covers lodging, workshop costs and most meals. Another great thing-- our State Representative, Marko Liias, is attending as well!

EMS Levy

Just an update-- last week's open houses weren't adequately noticed, which is unfortunate, but some good news-- you get another chance to participate!
Next Tuesday the 11th, come to Fire Station 24 in Old Town, from 6-8pm, and on Wednesday the 12th, come to Fire Station 25 in Harbour Pointe from 6-8pm, to share your views and learn more about the potential EMS Levy reauthorization.

Countywide Vision

Last week, I attended a discussion about countywide planning policies at Snohomish County Tomorrow’s Steering Committee (SCT). SCT is a body of elected officials in the county who advise on vision and frameworks for the future of Snohomish County. Often, that results in sending direction or advisory motions to the County Council for their consideration. It might also result in advocacy for certain policy ideas.
The Countywide Planning Policies are an important piece of growth management policies in the region. All the different comprehensive plans and planning policy documents link together, from the city level up to the state level. This review of these countywide policies is a ten-year update to the policies. The image attached shows how these policies are linked and supportive of other regional planning policies.
As you might imagine, I love this stuff. It’s exciting to see the opportunities to shape the vision of the county’s future, to consider new ideas.
At this particular meeting, we discussed proposed policies for Development Pattern Policies. The materials on the topic are available here.
Some of the more controversial policies (the ones with minority and majority views from the technical advisory committee that is working on drafting the policies) relate to expanding urban growth areas. This doesn’t relate to Mukilteo directly because our urban growth area (areas outside the city that could and probably will be annexed someday) are all contiguous with other such areas. In cities like Snohomish, Lake Stevens, Marysville, and other cities in the north, their urban growth areas abut rural lands. So, at certain times, these cities or landowners might ask the county to expand the urban growth area, which allows more development in these rural areas.
There are some divided opinions on when this should be allowed. Snohomish County has been challenged by the regional goals of keeping future growth in urban areas, and keeping rural areas rural. The County has improved over the last few years. I think it makes sense to keep pushing that line and not provide many exceptions for expanding the urban growth areas.
This is an issue that will come back to Snohomish County Tomorrow in May and later in the year, as well, with the Steering Committee likely voting in late fall. Eventually, these policies will be adopted by the County Council.

Consider the Context

Today I learned more about a Washington State Department of Transportation (WDOT) strategy that has been in place for several years. This is a tool for transportation project development that helps involve communities and moves beyond just considering transportation mobility. An executive order from the Governor requires that every WDOT project consider context sensitive solutions. This strategy should be applied to any consideration of SR 525 in the future. The last time SR 525 north of 76th was studied by WDOT it was in 2001, before the requirement to consider Context Sensitive Solutions.
Context Sensitive Solutions have been pushed by the U.S. Department of Transportation since 2002. This process requires that transportation projects consider “effects on the aesthetic, social, economic and environmental values, needs, constraints and opportunities.”
Context Sensitive Solutions have allowed for city gateway creation, sensitivity to existing uses, and safety improvements. Examples include improvements along SR 527 in Mill Creek, improvements along SR 99 in Des Moines, and improvements to Route 395 in Colville.
These new strategies consider local needs, and local priorities for corridors. Proponents of an alternate access route through Japanese Gulch have often made the case that the other option is to widen the Speedway beyond what seems acceptable to Mukilteo. This is based on the last study of the 525 in 2001. Perhaps it’s time to ask DOT to apply context sensitive solutions to the future of the Mukilteo Speedway?

EMS Levy

Last week, the council’s Public Safety Committee met. We discussed the proposed Emergency Medical Services levy and two upcoming open houses. Next week, residents are invited to attend either meeting: Tuesday the 27th, 6-8p at Fire Station 24 (in Old Town on 5th St) or Wednesday the 28th, 6-8pm at Fire Station 25 (in Harbour Pointe: 10400 47th Pl W). These open houses are opportunities to learn about the EMS levy that voters passed in 2004, and what has happened with the department since then. That levy expires at the end of this year, and the City Council is deciding what to do. The revenues from the EMS levy are needed in the future—the type of levy as well as the amount is being debated.
The City Council will make a decision about the levy at the May 3rd council meeting next week.
At the Public Safety Committee, we discussed a variety of things, including the fire department’s future. When the first levy was passed, there was discussion about future regional partnerships. There have been great strides towards this goal. Today, the City has working automatic aid agreements, so that the closest unit throughout the area can respond. This functions well for areas in the south like the Possession Bay neighborhood and Beverly Park Road. It also works well for areas of Everett along Mukilteo Boulevard. The City also has a strong partnership with the City of Lynnwood: Lynnwood has a Medical Services Officer who also supports Mukilteo.
The committee, at our meeting last week, recommended that the City pursue regional options further. At the May 3rd meeting, the Council will receive a recommendation from the Public Safety Committee that the Mayor and Public Safety Committee should pursue discussions with the City of Lynnwood about long term fire service options, such as expanding our existing partnership or consolidating service, and discuss with any other potential partners the possibility of a future Regional Fire Authority. This should be an ongoing conversation, and it makes sense to look at ways to provide good service for a good value for the taxpayers.
The committee also looked at other improvements in the Fire Department that have happened in the last six years. We have a fully functioning paramedic unit, and Fire Station 24 in Old Town is now fully staffed 24 hours a day by career firefighters.
I look forward to the open houses this week and hearing from residents. The future of the Fire Department and its funding structure is an important discussion.

Attention History Buffs

The Council discussed Mukilteo’s Historic Preservation Commission tonight—it doesn’t exist now, but it could in the future (it's in the city code, but has no members right now). We discussed some things that are already being done in the city, as well as what commissions can do. The Historical Society already gathers historical information, but primarily about Old Town. They also work very hard as caretakers of the lighthouse. Other groups have done historical work as well: for instance, the Mayor is working with a volunteer group to identify historical photographs to help decorate Council Chambers.
Some of the topics identified at our meeting that a commission could address include providing information and education about historic register requirements, inventorying historic or nearly historic properties, and assisting in developing design guidelines for the downtown business district in the future. There aren’t specific plans to pursue these, but they fit within the scope of a historic preservation commission.
As a result of our discussion, I, Councilmember Vanderwielen, Councilmember Tinsley (or Councilmember Stoltz, if Councilmember Tinsley is not available), and the Mayor will pursue meeting with the Historical Society to assess their perspectives on a commission. We’ll report back to the Council and potentially discuss it again. I'm also hoping that work group can inventory what’s already being done, and what a Historic Preservation Commission could do. The other part of our discussion was to have an open house or workshop for other interested Mukilteans. Keep an eye out for that opportunity—or just email me and let me know if you value the city investing in historic preservation activities. Let me know if you have ideas about what those activities could be!