Dorsol Plants

Friends of Seattle's picture

Dorsol Plants is running for Seattle City Council Position 4:

official campaign website 

Twitter

Facebook

campaign-finance disclosure reports with the Seattle Ethics & Elections Commission

Table of Contents

 

Analysis

As with David Bloom, first-time candidate Dorsol Plants’ primary concerns involve the city’s dwindling ability to address affordable housing and homelessness. We share his views on the green bag fee, and Mr. Plants is right to say that technology could ease transit riders’ navigation of the complicated Metro bus system.

While Mr. Plants brings fresh ideas and enthusiasm to the race, we had trouble understanding some of Mr. Plants’ stands on other issues. For instance, in his interview with FoS, Mr. Plants had not yet clearly determined how to resolve controversy surrounding the Viaduct and candidly admitted that his views on the head tax were continuing to evolve. Further, Mr. Plants displayed a lack of knowledge in some key areas: when it comes to funding bike and pedestrian infrastructure, for example, Mr. Plants suggests only that the money come from the transportation budget. It already does; the real issues are whether a greater proportion should be allocated and whether new taxes or fees should be levied. And we were alarmed by Mr. Plants’ land-use positions: he opposes the city’s sensible proposal to allow backyard cottages to be built on single-family plots, and he suggested in his interview that neighborhoods should have a complete veto over land-use decisions---a step too far, in our view.

We applaud Mr. Plants’ service to the United States and his local community, but we cannot yet conclude that he is the best candidate in this race.

 

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

I am someone who knows firsthand about the need for courage, especially when you are left to stand-alone. Our goals are one and the same in creating an environmentally and socially just city that will not only serve to be what we want, but also serve as an example to other cities in the country. Here in Seattle we are known for our compassion, environmentalism, and commitment to our democratic government, its time for us to live up to that reputation.

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 served 2 combat tours in Iraq, and did a total of 5 years in the US Army as a Cavalry Scout. I advocated for and helped secure the Family and Adult Service Center for the first time ever in the city budget. Working as the Chair of the Highland Park Action Committee we organized not just our neighborhood but also multiple neighborhoods that would be affected by the jail. We also organized with several social service groups and created a movement that would eventually turn into Real Change's I-100 movement.

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?

This is one of the ways in which I feel our local government is letting us down. We have effectively cut all of our communication with other government agencies and stumble to get anything done. I believe that much like anything, decisions can be reached by honest listening and a desire to figure out what works best for everyone. I have experience bringing people together be it locally as a neighborhood leader, politically as a homeless advocate, or cross-culturally as in my time in Iraq.

City Council Committees

  • If you are elected, which issues would you like included in your portfolio as a committee chair?

I would like to serve on the Public Safety, Transportation, or Neighborhood committees. I believe I would bring prior experience in a uniform, a desire to start look at our mode priorities, and knowledge of the neighborhoods and how they work to the council.

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, I support the green fee. I feel that it still presents the choice of disposable or reusable bags, but acknowledges that disposable bags effect more than just you. I also feel the city has done an excellent job in providing free reusable bags at its public outreach events which has enabled everyone to have one.

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?

    • No, I do not support the bored tunnel replacement for the viaduct. It is based on an archaic mode priority, one we talk constantly about trying to move past. It is also the most expensive plan, and removes transit and alternative transportation routes. However at this junction the plan is moving forward and we need to focus on preventing a flawed plan that will cost Seattleites millions isn't put into place.

    [EDITOR's NOTE: We were confused by Dorsol's position on the Viaduct, so we emailed him. What follows is a copy of our email conversation.]

    from Gary Manca
    to Dorsol Plants
    cc Sean Howell
    date Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 9:32 PM
    subject Your position on the bored tunnel

    Dorsol,

    Gary Manca from Friends of Seattle here. I have a question about your position on the proposed plan to replace the Viaduct with a tunnel. In your response to the Friends of Seattle questionnaire, you wrote:

    "No, I do not support the bored tunnel replacement for the viaduct. It is based on an archaic mode priority, one we talk constantly about trying to move past. It is also the most expensive plan, and removes transit and alternative transportation routes. However at this junction the plan is moving forward and we need to focus on preventing a flawed plan that will cost Seattleites millions isn't put into place."

    At a Chamber of Commerce candidate forum, you indicated that you support the tunnel. See the photo at http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30399745&id=1077202895.

    I'm confused. What is your position?

    Thanks for clarifying. Gary

    from Dorsol Plants
    to Gary Manca
    cc Sean Howell
    date Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM
    subject Re: Your position on the bored tunnel

    Hey Gary,

    I appreciate you asking for clarification. Let me start by saying that I never like yes/no questions like the one at the Chamber of Commerce. Had I been on the Council at the time it is very likely that I wouldn't have voted in support of the tunnel. To me the tunnel is representative of how we talk Green, but when it comes down to it we are still reading from the old playbook. At this point however, the plan is moving forward, and I feel it would only hurt Seattle more to be an obstructionist on the issue. I feel that way because if we built the tunnel right now as planned we will have problems. Problems such as how the North Portal isn't going to accommodate the freight traffic that this tunnel is being built for, and insuring that the newly done waterfront is a public park we can all benefit from.

    I hope that helps clarify some. The viaduct is one of those issues that I don't think anyone will be satisfied on. I've actually been out most place and as soon as someone I'm talking to takes a for or against position someone nearby goes with the opposite. If its going to be pushed our direction, we need someone to be watching to make sure we are getting our money's worth. That is why on a yes/no question I would say 'Yes' while still responding to an open question in the way I did.

    Be Safe,
    Dorsol Plants
    Candidate
    Seattle City Council Position 4
    www.dorsolplants.com

  • If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?

    • The cost overruns are to me one of the most critical aspects of the bored tunnel. We have to insure that the people of Seattle aren't stuck paying for overruns that aren't our mistake. We need to thoroughly look into the legal side of the agreement, and then prepare a completely public oversight board to oversee any potential overages.

  • If you oppose the tunnel, what would you do to prevent its implementation?

    • [EDITOR: No answer provided.]

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?

One of my primary goals would be to create a more efficient mode of east to west travel. Right now what little transit we have is all headed downtown, and we need to accommodate ways to move east-to-west. Also, we need to correct several Urban Deserts we've created that don't have access to transit or grocery stores and similar items. I believe we should look into a shuttle service or some other type of transport that would provide easy access too various Urban Oasis. Finally, I'd like to use technology to better equip Seattleites with information about their buses. We could do this with something as simple as assigning every route a twitter account that would update any accidents, delays, or route changes.

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]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • I would like to see us do something similar to Minneapolis in which we connect all of our major parks in the city via a safe and separate bike trail; similar to Burke-Gilman, this would by proxy make it so someone could get anywhere in Seattle by trail.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

This should come out of the transportation budget, as it is a safe, environmentally friendly, and potentially effective means of transportation.

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]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • We have a great plan in place, my concerns at the moment are funding and insuring the plan is actually implemented. A good example would be the 60 year-old promises to the north-end neighborhoods for walkable sidewalks that still aren't there.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

I believe very strongly that funding for the project should come from the transportation fund. We need to stop looking at that money as cars only, but instead understand that transportation is any means in which a person gets around.

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]

    • No.

  • 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]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the basic concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding on specific locations where more housing should be built?

    • This is why I couldn't say yes to the first question. Seattle has this bad habit of trying to pigeon hole every neighborhood with the same zoning laws. This doesn't work because there are a number of factors that differ with each area of the city. I believe in a reinforced neighborhood planning process that would entitle each of the individual neighborhoods to take an active part in their planning and zoning process. This will help the city to accommodate new growth without complete disregard for the present population.

  • If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?

As I mentioned above, each neighborhood has different terrain, environmental concerns, and character. The best way to go about rezoning and dealing with increased density would be to create more neighborhood specific zoning laws that fully account for the concerns in each individual neighborhood.

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]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the revisions, do you have ideas for improving the proposed revisions?

    • One idea I would like to see is something similar to what Portland does with their building design. They keep a full complement of designs for townhomes that anyone can access for free. It allows for unique and creative approach to townhomes that befits an artistic place such as Seattle.

City Governance

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 would like to use modern technology to create a virtual supply depot for all of the nonprofits in Seattle. I believe by creating an effective and easy to use means of communication, we can cut out a lot of miscommunication between agencies that could be working together. This will also enable nonprofits to save money as one agency that receives a donation they couldn't use can communicate with all and allow them to use the item.