Sally Bagshaw

Friends of Seattle's picture

Sally Bagshaw is running for Seattle City Council Position 4:

Table of Contents

 

Analysis

FoS was impressed with Sally Bagshaw, former chief of the civil division of the King County Prosecutor’s Office, a candidate who describes herself as someone who avoids the limelight by bringing others together. Her knowledge of the community and experience working with local policy issues both as a professional and a volunteer is extensive.

Ms. Baghsaw, as we are, is a progressive urbanist. She has an aggressive vision for promoting mobility in multiple modes, offering stout support for the bicycle and pedestrian master plans (to her credit, she champions physically separated bike lanes, an idea rejected by Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan, unfortunately). Mr. Bagshaw was a co-author of Allied Arts’ Waterfront for All plan (see PDF), and compared with her two opponents, she appears most interested in figuring out how to keep our local economy innovative by bringing technology and green jobs to Seattle. Additionally, she encouraged us with her support for backyard cottages in single-family zones, her favorable views towards transit-oriented development, and her insistence that government should “think sustainable first.”

But at times we are not yet clear on how specifically Ms. Bagshaw’s vision will be transferred into policy. She is supportive of transit and alternative transportation, but when it comes to funding, she says only, “As a region we must prioritize funds for transit and transportation options.” We’re not sure what this statement means in practice; we expected specific ideas and suggestions. With regard to the proposal to cut the commuter tax (or “head tax”)—a proposal that Ms. Bagshaw has publicly supported—she said in her interview with us only that “repeal is going to happen” and the tax “is probably off the table.” This was an opportunity for us to learn about Ms. Bagshaw’s values and her analytical approach to policymaking. But she offered no insights into her rationale for supporting the cut and did not tell us how she would make up for the $5 million annual loss in funds for bike and pedestrian infrastructure. In short, Ms. Bagshaw did not explain her thinking enough for us to understand how she might perform in new situations in the future.

We also have some lingering policy disagreements. For example, we want the waterfront back too, but FoS does not support her unqualified advocacy for a deep bored tunnel. To cite further examples, we do not think her idea of saddling bikers with a bike sales tax and a bike license fee is appropriate, and we also encourage Ms. Bagshaw to rethink her opposition to the bag fee.

Still, we are impressed by Ms. Bagshaw’s work ethic, exhibited in the campaign she is running and her unremitting efforts to reach out. This is important, because even where disagreements exist, Ms. Bagshaw is interested not merely in hearing from everyone, but incorporating others into the analysis (during her interview, she was quick to create a pie chart chronicling priorities in the transportation budget). This process often yields the best policy.

Friends of Seattle hopes Ms. Bagshaw will continue to reach out to community groups and will listen to multiple policy perspectives. We look forward to working with her as the campaign moves forward.

 

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

In essence, your mission is to help create a “sustainable, healthy and livable” Seattle for those who live here now and for those who will live here tomorrow. We will do this by promoting walkable neighborhoods, by having a comprehensive integrated transit system, by providing housing that is just as diverse as our population, and by being “green” in word and in deed. I not only support this mission, I live it!

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 am running for Seattle City Council because I unite people and solve problems. That’s what I’ve done as a public school mom, as a community activist, and as 33-year public service lawyer. I build trust, and as demonstrated by the wide range of campaign endorsements I have received to date, I get things done by working hard and working collaboratively. Bringing people together to solve problems – whether in the community or on the council -- is what we need, and getting things done with interested people translates to effectiveness.

I can elaborate on the “what” needs to be done --- connecting transportation, building our economy, supporting public schools protecting our environment--- but I think it is more important to talk about “how”.

I listen. I build coalitions. I find common ground. Then, I act.

When I see a problem, I find a solution. I have done that as a community activist. I have done that in my professional life. And, if elected, I will do that on City Council.

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?

Because of my career as a lawyer representing and advising the University of Washington, Metro, and King County, I have profession ties with leaders at the City of Seattle, King County, Metro, Sound Transit, the legislature and beyond. I have shown I work well with the people of our city from every neighborhood, from every walk of life. I will work closely with our elected officials in the city, county, and legislature.

Though I am running for “City” Council, I am fully aware our issues go beyond our city’s boundaries. To be effective, and truly make regional progress, we must have a functional, working relationship with all levels of government--- from Neighborhood Community Councils, to our School Board, to the Executive, County, and State. We must work together for the greater good. All stakeholders need to be at the table, and as a City Councilmember, I will make sure that happens.

City Council Committees

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

Transportation, Land Use and Neighborhood are the committees that interest me most. But, I would be honored to serve on any committee.

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?

I applaud the City’s decision in not spending hundreds of millions of dollars on building an intermodal transfer station in Georgetown.

Reducing our use of plastic bags and brown paper bags is just one step to reduce our waste. I support the essence of a ‘green fee’ and am personally committed to carrying my own canvas bags to the grocery store, every time. But I am concerned about adding one more possible fee on families right now. I know it is not a ‘tax’ but based on the countless conversations I have had with residents throughout this city, it feels like one.

For one year, I would prefer to have the City emphasize education and spend the budgeted $750,000 on an aggressive effort to get people to bring their own bags and recognize the importance of their actions. I would establish target reductions and a one year time line. If after one year’s concerted effort we don’t see the results we want and need, then I would be open to establishing a ‘green’ fee and discussing an outright ban on unnecessary plastic bags.

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?

    • Yes. I support the bored tunnel and accompanying Center City Access Strategies and additional transit hours because this transportation system plan accomplishes four objectives I support: the tunnel and connections allow freight to move successfully from the Port throughout the region; it creates new opportunities for economic growth in our maritime industry and more; it offers us a once-in –a –century opportunity to take back our waterfront and allow us to truly create our Waterfront for All. And we will leverage this project to clean up the Puget Sound by catching and cleaning stormwater runoff, enhancing salmon habitat within Elliott Bay, and reconnecting the people of our region with the Sound.

    As former chair of Allied Arts’ Waterfront for All Committee, I am passionate about this issue. I have worked with freight haulers, labor leaders, business leaders, and neighborhood activists, pedestrian and bicycle leaders to create the vision for what our waterfront could become. Our Seattle waterfront is not something to squander. We have a chance of a lifetime to create our legacy and we must do it right. Some ask “Can we afford it?” I say “We cannot afford NOT to make this choice.” It’s a hundred year investment for our region and for our kids. Our region has debated this issue and the best alternative for nearly a decade. It’s time to stop talking and start building the city we want. Please see the Allied Arts Waterfront for All report which I co-authored at http://www.alliedarts-seattle.org/images/download/AlliedArtsFull.pdf.

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

    • Cost overruns are a concern for everyone. The one fortunate thing about our current economic situation is that major capital projects around Puget Sound and the West Coast generally are coming under budget. Work is desperately needed so bids are coming in lower. Delaying this construction project will not improve our financial prospects.

    My professional experience is in drafting public works contracts and working with multi-layered municipalities and large projects. I would use that experience to oversee the complexities of the project funding and insist on accountability. I will also work with elected leaders including our Governor, our State Legislators, the County, the Port, downtown businesses, and Seattle residents who live near the waterfront as partners to fund this legacy opportunity. Our State, our region, and we who live and work here receive benefits. We must share the burden.

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

    • N/A

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?

By coordinating with Metro Transit to add transit hours and improve speed and reliability for transit; by connecting neighborhoods to transit hubs with safe sidewalks, crosswalks, and separated bicycle lanes for starters.

As a region we must reduce our reliance on single occupancy vehicles. Reducing the number of trips we take in SOV’s is economically smart and sustainable.

As a lawyer for Metro Transit between 1992 and 2007, I have a wealth of experience with our transportation system. We need coordination between the City and the County departments responsible for transportation. We need much more transit service of all kinds so people will leave their cars at home. Since we voters approved Bridging the Gap and Transit Now a few years ago, we have 24,000 more bus service hours taking us between our Seattle neighborhoods and downtown, as well as the addition of bicycle lanes and pedestrian safety features. This is a good start.

I support faster, predictable bus service across our city, increased use of vanpools, car pools, and Commute Trip Reduction efforts such employer support of bus passes, car pool privileges, flex hours, and new creative alternatives.

All of this costs money. As a region we must prioritize funds for transit and transportation options.

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?

    • Planning is one thing, implementing is another. Now that the plan is done, we need to implement it.

    The city conducted outreach and asked people all throughout the city to participate and provide input. If we are asking people for their thoughts and their time, we owe it to them to make sure this plan becomes a reality. We need to walk the talk, or “bike” the talk in this case.

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

The major funding source is already in place. Voters passed the Bridging the Gap levy in 2006, which provided dedicated funding for 9 years for bicycle lanes, trails, and safety improvements. The City approved over $6 million for 2009 budget to add new bike trails and bike paths this year.

Additional funds may be obtained through the Transportation Improvement Board grants (paid through a portion of the gas tax) can be obtained to enhance transportation safety and connections. Additionally, federal stimulus dollars can be used on major highway projects such as 520 to add safe and separated bicycle lanes.

Although no one wants to pay more taxes or fees, possible revenue options for dedicated bicycle lanes considered in other bicycle-friendly cities include:
one time $10.00 bicycle tax at the time of purchase
annual $10.00 bicycle license fee for adults

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?

    • Again, planning is one thing, implementing is another. Now that the plan is done, we need to implement it.

    Same response: The city conducted outreach and asked people all throughout the city to participate and provide input. If we are asking people for their thoughts and their time, we owe it to them to make sure this plan becomes a reality. We need to walk the talk, literally and figuratively.

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

The Bridging the Gap transportation funding levy provides approximately $60 million for pedestrian improvements over the next six years (2009-2014).

This includes $41 funding for new sidewalks, curb ramps, signals. $19 million has been budgeted for sidewalk repair, crosswalk re-striping.

This is a good start. More is needed, and private sector money will need to be leveraged as the city becomes more densely populated.

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]

    • YES!

  • 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?

    • Almost twenty years ago, Washington State adopted the Growth Management Act to protect our critical areas and nature resource lands. In order to save those open spaces, we needed to designate urban growth areas. Those areas have been designated. In Seattle, they are known as our Urban Villages and Urban Centers.

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

The GMA was adopted so we don’t have uncoordinated and unplanned growth. We want density to occur in the appropriate areas. We want housing near amenities, near transportation, near jobs. In other words, we must encourage transit-oriented development (TOD) and this can be accomplished by using a variety of tools, including land use and transportation planning.

We should grow in a smart, planned manner, and this will reduce urban sprawl.

I support upzoning near transit corridors. A range of 2-4 blocks away from the lines seems to be an appropriate distance, but each neighborhood is different and we must consider the geography and character of each neighborhood, not try to apply a one-size fits-all strategy to local development.

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?

    • Many of the newly constructed 4-packs or tall and skinny’s have a garage as the dominant feature. Tall fences are also quite prevalent. In both cases, a barrier is created between the sidewalk and the new development and are considered bad designs by many. There is virtually no interaction between the streets and the home. This often is unsightly in design terms and is not pedestrian or neighborhood friendly.

    Revisions that allow for more flexibility in design would be welcome. Guidelines that allow for easier process and design that is reflective to a neighborhood’s character is needed.

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.

Here are 10 ideas:

  1. Increase the money to fund Department of Neighborhoods grants. At one point, the Matching Fund Grant program was over $5 million. This year there is only $1.5 million for over $4 million worth of great neighborhood-based projects. DON MFG program is a win-win-win. It builds community in the very best way – over a project and many of them are parks. It is a 1:1 match so the city funds are doubled (and the private funds are doubled). And it results is a great asset for the neighborhoods.
  2. Change the tone: HELP citizens, don’t hinder them. One suggestion is to ease up SDOT’s right-of-way street use program so that it is easier for community groups to improve stairwells and rights-of-way all over the city. Neighbors complain that they are willing to do the work to transform a bunch of weeds into a beautiful green connection but they do not get positive support from SDOT.
  3. Conduct a strategic planning process for every branch of government to streamline and improve City service and reduce the cost of doing business. Require this to be done by management and employees, not by consultants. Departments should consider how every aspect of service could be provided more efficiently. Consider the current situation and how improvements could be made. Use a well-tested “Lean” or “A3” process.
  4. Remove graffiti and provide assistance for victims of graffiti. Many business leaders suggest that as part of a sentence that convicted perpetrators clean up the graffiti and do community service or compensate the victim.
  5. Buy Local and Vacation Local Campaigns. To keep our dollars at home and support our small businesses, we should support a "buy local" and "vacation at home" campaigns to energize our neighborhood businesses and get our residents to check out the Seattle neighborhoods that have so much to offer.
  6. Offer an incentive for property owners and their lessees to maintain clean, attractive buildings and appealing storefronts. An Office of Economic Development program could be offered annually and operated through the local Chambers of Commerce or other recognized organization. Participating property owners could apply to their chamber for a monetary award to partially compensate the cost of certain items -- power washing, painting, etc. Business owners could be eligible for an award that would partially fund an awning or updated/attractive signage to unify the area. All this, followed by a "thank you and buy local" campaign.
  7. The City must work more cooperatively with King County. SDOT/Metro, long term jail facilities, emergency management or response to snow storms are just a few areas where taxpayers would be better served by a coordinated response.
  8. Assist the Seattle Public Schools. In many ways, Seattle’s resources can be used to support Seattle Public Schools. Here’s one: Seattle/King County Public Health offices are close to many schools and can serve as a resource for kids who need help and counseling. Rather than expecting the school district to fund such services, coordinate with Seattle/King County Public Health.
  9. Think sustainable first. In every decision the city makes, consider how we – government and businesses and residents – can use less of the worlds precious resources. This is the only approach to reach true sustainability.
  10. Support and encourage those who are offering help to homeless people. Speed permitting processes for religious organizations offering sanctuary or temporary housing; provide a permanent location for Tent City and other transitional housing programs; support self-managed 24 hour programs like the Bunk House.