David Bloom
David Bloom is running for Seattle City Council Position 4:
- official campaign website
- campaign-finance disclosure reports with the Seattle Ethics & Elections Commission.
Table of Contents
- Discussion forum on the candidates for Seattle City Council Pos. 4
- Analysis by Friends of Seattle
- David Bloom's Interview Videos
- David Bloom's Questionnaire Responses
Analysis
David Bloom, longtime affordable housing advocate and a former program director for the Church Council of Greater Seattle, offers a very clear vision for Seattle’s future: create more affordable housing. A critic of expensive capital projects such as investments in South Lake Union, Mercer Street, and the proposed multi-billion dollar tunnel, Mr. Bloom has a robust plan to protect existing housing capacity by committing resources to a one-for-one replacement of each low cost housing unit that is lost and build at least 5,000 more units to more adequately address homelessness. We admire Mr. Bloom’s commitment to ensure housing capacity meets the needs of everyone in our city.
We agree with Mr. Bloom that the deep-bore tunnel diverts too much money from other priorities, and we were heartened by his enthusiasm for the I-5+surface+transit plan---the most fiscally and environmentally responsible alternative to the Viaduct. But we are uneasy with Mr. Bloom's lingering affection (as stated in his interview) for a Viaduct retrofit and his admiration for state House Speaker Frank Chopp's plan to build an enclosed elevated Viaduct that's topped by a park. If the plan for a deep-bore tunnel implodes, Seattle leaders need to present a united front against any Olympia ploys to build a new elevated structure.
Further, we are concerned about Mr. Bloom’s views in other policy areas that will affect how livable, urban, and green Seattle is in the future. In 2008, Mr. Bloom squarely opposed the Parks Levy and Sound Transit’s light rail expansion (as stated in his interview), and he has little taste for an improved streetcar network. We too want expanded bus service, but all options should be on the table for diversifying our city’s transportation network. In some neighborhoods, in-city rail could be the best option for improving mobility, and so it should not be dismissed out of hand.
Mr. Bloom's eye always looks to social justice---a viewpoint that could benefit the Council during this period of growth and change---but we are not yet ready to overlook his thinking on the Viaduct or his opposition to last year’s ballot measures for light rail and the parks levy.
Interview
Part 1 of 4:
Part 2 of 4:
Part 3 of 4:
Part 4 of 4:
Questionnaire Responses
Table of Contents:
General Questions
Friends of Seattle's Mission
- How does your candidacy support Friends of Seattle's values, goals, and mission?
Seattle City government needs to refocus on it's urban vision. Unfortunately, we have focused so many resources on downtown projects (Mercer, Viaduct, etc....) that it is nearly impossible to focus our attention on urban design, sustainable growth and other important aspects of urban planning. We need to reprioritize our resources so that downtown doesn't soak up so much discretionary spending. If we can get our spending on downtown projects under control, we can work together to build a progressive urban vision for all of Seattle.
Qualifications
- Please describe any professional accomplishments that demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you are an incumbent) or would demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you have not yet held office).
I have been active in Seattle issues for over 30 years. I led the urban programs for the Church Council of Greater Seattle, co-founded the Downtown Emergency Service Center and Common Ground, chaired the Convention Center Coalition (working to save affordable housing), founded the Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness, and currently sit on the Boards of Real Change and the Seattle Displacement Coalition. I was also one of the organizers that convinced the City to place the first housing levy on the ballot.
Representing Seattle
Background: Seattle is the most populous city in Washington and is the state's economic engine. At the same time, Seattle cannot address many of its problems without working with King County, regional entities (Sound Transit and the PSRC), and the state government. Yet many observers believe that Seattle's interests are represented inadequately at those levels. For example, the Muni League has criticized the 40-20-40 rule for allocating new Metro transit funding. Further, transit advocates note that the state's current tax system disadvantages transit. And the Legislature refused to allocate federal stimulus dollars for road projects in Seattle.
- As an elected official representing Seattle, how would you work with King County, regional governmental entities, the state legislature, and the governor to ensure their budgets and policies address Seattle's needs?
I will work with regional leaders toward the creation of a truly regional transportation plan and system to implement it. I would begin by merging Metro and Sound Transit. Also, we should be able to use part of the gas tax for transit. And I would like to work with regional leaders in changing the inequitable tax system on the state level by taking my organizing skills and put them to work for a statewide income tax. I believe we can put together a coalition of local elected officials, religious leaders, labor, and community groups to pass a more equitable tax system.
City Council Committees
- If you are elected, which issues would you like included in your portfolio as a committee chair?
Affordable housing, economic development, living wages, environmental protection, and transit.
Issues
Waste Reduction
Background: Rather than build an expensive new transfer in Georgetown to handle the growing volume of trash generated in Seattle, the City of Seattle adopted a "Zero Waste Strategy" centered on reducing waste. As part of that strategy, the City Council adopted a 20-cent "green fee" for disposable shopping bags.
- Do you support the green fee? Why or why not?
Yes. Plastic bags are fouling our environment and creating a serious disposal problem. Their production also creates enormous amounts of greenhouse gas. The experience in Ireland in reducing plastic bag use by 90% is impressive. We need to make significant changes in our behavior if we are serious about environmental sustainability. I am concerned about the impact on low income people and want to make sure that the change does not create a negative financial impact on them. That's why I favor a generous distribution of permanent bags to low-income households.
Alaskan Way Viaduct
Background: Governor Gregoire signed a legislative bill ordering the Washington State Department of Transportation to design a bored tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This bill contains language allocating cost overruns to Seattle citizens, although some question whether the language has legal significance. Notwithstanding that provision, the City of Seattle committed $930 million and the Port of Seattle $300 million to finance the tunnel. Although the exact tax consequences of these commitments are not totally clear, it is safe to assume that the Port's contribution would result in higher property taxes for Seattle property owners, and the City's pledge would be funded with increases in property taxes, City Light utility rates, and possibly other taxes and fees.
- Do you support the plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a bored tunnel? Why or why not?
- If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?
- If you oppose the tunnel, what would you do to prevent its implementation?
No, I would've rather seen surface transit or a rebuild. I believe we had the opportunity to show progressive leadership by tearing down the viaduct and reworking our city grid system so we don't have a freeway running through the heart of our city. If we weren't going to do that, I would've supported a less costly option like a rebuild so we can focus more of our city resources on other transportation options and a more progressive urban vision for our city.
I don't support the tunnel.
Truthfully, I believe it's going to be tough to stop. However, I think the city made such a bad deal with the state (in terms of cost overruns) that if we change leadership in the city we could revisit the tunnel and look at other options. I would consider supporting either a legal challenge or a citizens' initiative to stop the tunnel.
Transit
Background: The City of Seattle already contributes to local transit. The City put together the financing package to construct the South Lake Union streetcar line, and the City and King County Metro share the ongoing operating costs for that line. Further, the Bridging the Gap tax package finances some Metro bus service within Seattle, and Bridging the Gap also pays for street improvements designed to expedite bus travel.
- If elected, how do you intend to improve the in-city transit system?
We have a great opportunity to rework our transit system. Light rail becomes a natural transit spine through our city. We need to rework metro and city buses so they are better aligned with our light rail system. The city council also has to work with the County to lower the overhead for King County Metro. We have the most expensive transit agency in the country. That needs to stop.
Bicycle Infrastructure
Background: The City of Seattle has adopted a Bicycle Master Plan, which provides a vision for improving bicycling facilities in Seattle.
- Do you support the Bicycle Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]
- If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?
- If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
YES.
I believe we are not putting enough resources into our bicycle plan and many other urban challenges. I would stop prioritizing helping downtown developers and their projects and start funding projects like improving bicycle programs in our city.
For starters, I would not do the Cadillac option for fixing the Mercer Mess. There was a much less expensive alternative. This would free up resources to fund the Bicycle Master Plan.
Pedestrian Infrastructure
The City Council is considering whether to adopt a draft Pedestrian Master Plan.
- Do you support the Pedestrian Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]
- If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?
- If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
Yes.
I always believe these plans get put in place with the best of intentions and after a lot of good public input. However in the last thirty years, I have seen the city ignore these kind of plans to focus resources and staff time elsewhere. I believe the best thing I can do for the Pedestrian Master Plan would be to ensure we actually follow the plan.
We just built a neighborhood out of whole cloth in South Lake Union complete with a streetcar, parks, sidewalks and other amenities. It makes it very hard to fund things like a pedestrian master plan when we are building neighborhoods from scratch. We need to stop investing so much in downtown to get plans like this funded.
Land Use and Multifamily Housing
Background: According to U.S. Census data cited in the Seattle Comprehensive Plan, about half of Seattle's households live in multifamily housing. Further, according to the Plan, approximately 40% of Seattle's total land area is set aside for residential use-35% for single-family residences but only 5% for multifamily dwellings. That 5% dedicated to multifamily housing tends to be concentrated in "urban villages" or along arterial streets, which are noisy and dirty. However, "backyard cottages" (also known as "detached accessory dwelling units) are also allowed in singe-family zones in Southeast Seattle.
- Would you support legislation to allow backyard cottages to be built in all single-family zones? [Yes/No only please]
- Would you ever support a contract rezone or a broader rezone allowing for more housing to be built on a site? [Yes/No only please]
- If you support the basic concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding on specific locations where more housing should be built?
- If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?
NO.
YES.
Decisions to allow more housing in any neighborhood should involve the residents of those neighborhoods, especially through the neighborhood planning process. Secondly, any increase in density must consider the environmental impact. Finally, and for me the most important criterion, is affordability. We have lost more than 3,000 units of affordable housing since 2005 that has not been replaced. We need to have strong one-for-one replacement requirements when lower cost housing is lost due to increased development.
Affordability, areas that have not met their growth goals, and impact on the environment.
Many newly built townhouses in Seattle are architectural atrocities, and site plans tend to be car-dominated. Most townhouse developments are exempt from the City of Seattle's Design Review Program. It is also difficult to find attractive new condos and apartment buildings. To address some of these problems, the City Council is considering a package of revisions to the zoning code.
- Do you support the proposed revisions to the multifamily housing zoning code? [Yes/No only please]
- If you support the revisions, do you have ideas for improving the proposed revisions?
YES.
Again, I believe these revisions could focus much more on affordability.
City Governance
- Do you support the "Vote Clean Seattle" plan, which is supported in principle by the City Council, to create a system for publicly funded campaigns in Seattle? [Yes/No only please]
Yes
Creative Response
- If you have additional thoughts on how to improve Seattle's city government or to make Seattle a more livable and sustainable city, please note them here.
I have a goal of building an additional 5,000 units of affordable housing above and beyond the housing levy and the ten year plan to end homelessness. I also am supporting a living wage ordinance. We are pricing working people out of our city. I believe any plan to make Seattle more sustainable and livable needs to include an ambitious plan to increase the stock of affordable housing and the availability of living wage jobs.