James Donaldson played center for the Sonics and had a long career playing for NBA teams and for clubs in Europe. Drawing from that experience, Mr. Donaldson's campaign themes are, "We need a big man to look out for the little guy," "You don't just want change, you want BIG change," and an emphasis on teamwork and collaboration. Mr. Donaldson is almost singularly focused on the business climate in Seattle, and this perspective has elevated the dialogue during the primary-election campaign. Mr. Donaldson also struck us as even-tempered and cool under pressure, suggesting that he would handle the demands of the mayor's office well.
Mr. Donaldson's questionnaire was supportive of transit (he even likes the idea of expanding streetcar lines into neighborhoods beyond South Lake Union), was generally in favor of bicycle infrastructure (although he opposes completion of the Burke-Gilman Trail through the Ballard industrial area), and positive towards the draft Pedestrian Master Plan. Mr. Donaldson supports the deep-bore tunnel to replace the Viaduct---a position we disagree with, but we appreciate his blunt honesty in disagreeing with us and admire his defense of his argument.
Still, too much of Mr. Donaldson's policy platform clashes with our own. Mr. Donaldson wants to cut the commuter tax ("head tax"), the small $25 per year tax on a business's employees who drive to work alone. This tax raises $5 million per year for much-needed transportation improvements, and now (an economic downturn when city borrowing costs and contractor bids for city projects are both very low) is the right time for the city government to be building new infrastructure. In his interview, Mr. Donaldson claimed that the commuter tax and Seattle's other economic policies drive businesses out of Seattle, but he could not cite an example of a business that has actually left Seattle for the suburbs or refused to hire new people because of the commuter tax. Also to our chagrin, Mr. Donaldson opposes the green bag fee (but he does support an outright ban on plastic bags while permitting paper bags to continue in use) and does not support allowing backyard cottages to be built in all single-family zones.
Most troubling for us, however, was his lack of familiarity with his own policy proposals. In his questionnaire, for example, Mr. Donaldson argues that the environment could benefit from changes to multifamily housing zoning code so that the code requires "permeable paving, tankless water heaters, and even solar power in exchange for prompt approval." But when asked about it during his interview, Mr. Donaldson did not know what we were talking about.
There are other areas of concern we could discuss in greater detail (such as his proposal to merge all Puget Sound area transit agencies), but we've made our points. Although Mr. Donaldson raises important issues as a candidate, many of his proposed policies are off base and he has not quite demonstrated that he is ready to be mayor. We recommend not voting for Mr. Donaldson.
My campaign for Mayor seeks to improve our city by improving neighborhoods, particularly those that have been neglected by the current administration. The tax policies of the City have stifled small businesses, and harmed larger businesses, forcing many to relocate outside city limits. When we lose businesses, workers are forced to commute long distance. Concurrently, we have not done enough to allow MIL units and other gentle density measures that create sustainable neighborhoods while preserving the character of a place. When the cost of housing skyrockets again, we will again see an exodus of working class families and single individuals who will then commute long distances into the city, adding to our already trouble transportation system. I will change our priorities.
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 traveled all over the United States and Europe, and lived in numerous cities the world over during my NBA career. In so doing, I became fluent in three new languages, but also gathered a tremendous respect for alternative ways of doing things. Particularly in the ancient cities of Italy and Spain, I learned how to preserve historic sites and neighborhoods while bringing in modern amenities, businesses, and transit. Every other place I've lived has had extensive transit, something we are slowly developing here, but is still not adequately addressing core population densities. My experience building and leading teams is the greatest skill I will bring to the Mayor's office, for the old "my way or the highway" will go the way of the horse-drawn wagon. The biggest reason Seattle has floundered on potentially good policies is because we have failed to lead in a team fashion. I will change our approach and get results.
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?
As mentioned above, Seattle cannot possibly lead when it acts as a petulant bully. Legislators made it clear why Seattle didn't get stimulus dollars, even though those dollars would have helped ease trade and transportation that ultimately benefits Eastern Washington agriculture trying to get to our Port. Whether we are the largest jurisdiction or the smallest, we are all in common with the State, Cascadia, and the United States, and we ought to act like a member of a team. On a team, every person, even the towel guy, has a crucial role. We need to listen more, build relationships, and ask for help. I have found tremendous mentors in leaders like former Speaker Brian Ebersole, and numerous regional mayors. I have already started the process of rebuilding trust and am ready on Day One.
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 adopteda 20-cent "green fee" for disposable shopping bags.
Do you support the green fee? Why or why not?
Seattle residents are among the most environmentally responsible citizens in the United States, and adopted recycling eagerly and early. Our residents have, over the past few years, embraced mightily their tote bags. Therefore, I strongly believe that the action undertaken by the Mayor and City Council to impose a 20-cent tax on disposable bags was not just an insult to our good behavior, but counterproductive. We are reaching a point where many folks are beginning to resent the important moves, and we cannot afford to move backward. We can do more, much more, to improve our environment than taxing people who forget their tote bags. An outright ban on plastic bags would have not met my objection, especially if we spend some resources distributing tote bags to our poorer neighbors. I propose a project that uses union apprentice plumbers to install low-flow toilets in older buildings and small businesses. The cost savings Public Utilities will reap more than offsets the one-time investment. And treating less sewage offers a far bigger impact. Similarly, I propose repaving city government parking lots with permeable pavers, so that storm water is biofiltered, rather than running into our sewer system. I will do more to clean up our environment than any tax on plastic bags can hope to accomplish.
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?
I do not agree with your suppositions. Nearly everyone connected to the DBT legislation agrees the cost overrun language is not only unenforceable, it is unconstitutional. Also, it is not safe to assume the Port's contribution will result in a larger tax burden on Seattle taxpayers. There is no majority on the Port Commission making such claim, not are the candidates for the two open seats calling for such a tax increase.
I do support the Deep Bore Tunnel. After 8 years of complex negotiations between every layer of government, corporations, trade groups, business groups, industry, manufacturing, and citizens, a decision was made. It is vitally important to have a throughway that moves people, commerce and freight through this city, rather than having 110,000 vehicles stalled for miles every single day. That said, with just 1% of the design completed, I will work aggressively to gain the "Y" option that puts a spur to the Northwest portion of our city, and address an outflow for downtown.
If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?
This is a state highway, and highways are paid for with state funds. Cost overruns can be minimized if stakeholders do not hold the project hostage with mitigation requests, as occurred with Link Light Rail, and if the project is constructed with a Project Labor Agreement. Such PLAs virtually eliminate work stoppages and protect the tax payer. Further, I will work with our federal representatives and Senators, who understand the need for efficient and linked transportation, to gain access to additional federal money.
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?
The single-greatest thing for Seattle transportation would be to merge all the transit agencies. However, there are already numerous transportation experts working to minimize the 128-separate transportation departments in Puget Sound. In the meantime, I will immediately pull together our King County Council delegation to work on changing the bus hour allocation so that our dense, transit-friendly neighborhoods gain more service. In addition, the street car system needs to be expanded. Although street cars are often lampooned by the able-bodied who claim to outwalk them, street cars are popular with the elderly, the ill, and those with burdens. I will work to ensure that our transit system is not merely more efficient, but more humane.
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?
It is dangerous through the Ballard Industrial Area and should be moved a few blocks, with greater amenities. The plan lacks tremendously in the way of bike racks, downtown bike storage, and provision of bicycles to those who cannot afford them. I propose restarting a bicycle sharing program, as well as giving out safety equipment to youngsters.
If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
When the city installed Red Light Cameras a few years ago, it discovered a Bad Driver Tax boondoggle, and responded by installing dozens more cameras throughout the city. Unfortunately, instead of using the fines for transportation safety or any other safety program, the money is directed to the General Fund. I would redirect the Bad Driver Tax to a broader transportation fund that includes bicycles and pedestrians.
Do you support the Pedestrian Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]
YES.
If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?
Our sidewalks, especially downtown and in neighborhood business districts, are virtually impassable in places due to magazine racks, sandwich boards, utility boxes and telephone poles. For those with mobility or sight issues, people pushing carts or strollers, this creates a some-times dangerous obstacle course. I would work to redesign these obstructions - perhaps mounted magazine boxes - in order to create a more pedestrian friendly environment. Further, many crosswalks have been eliminated in order to direct pedestrians to a distant but safer crosswalk. This type of behavior engineering has resulted in numerous pedestrian deaths, many of which have been the elderly and children. I will work to put common sense into the Transportation Department that places greater attention on human behavior.
If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?
See Bicycle Plan response above.
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]
Not all.
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 requires a neighborhood team building approach. While many neighborhoods automatically go NIMBY, or worse, BANANA on a zoning change, oftentimes people meet the neighbors who want to add an accessory dwelling or a MIL on top of a garage and lower their objections. These changes need to involve the neighborhoods as well as government planners and good-government organizations like this one.
If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?
Current density, the quality of housing stock, and perhaps most important, the existence of existing infrastructure such as schools, fire stations, power stations, and shopping villages.
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?
First I will say that much of the old, existing housing stock - rental or single family - is architecturally atrocious as well. It has become fashionable to complain about the sameness of townhomes, while at the same time urging more and more density. I recall reading historical references to the "ugly sameness" of the row houses in San Francisco at the turn of the 20th Century. We have to remember that tens of thousands of people have eagerly snapped up Seattle's newest townhomes, happy to finally enter homeownership, doing so on a smaller patch of land than most of us enjoy. It is important to recognize that I embrace an approach that, rather than criticize the homes and lifestyles of others, seeks to more gently modify and change designs and approaches with carrots rather than sticks. I believe the MFH zoning code has too many sticks, while not recognizing the tremendous opportunity to do more for our environment by requiring permeable paving, tankless water heaters, and even solar power in exchange for prompt approval.
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.
Elect James Donaldson and you will get a whole new style of government - because you don't just want change, you want BIG change.
Last week, The Stranger published its patented Snowball’s-Chance-in-Hell—O-Meter, which rates the likelihood of a candidate making it through the top-two primary. Mayor Greg Nickels is a shoo-in; the question is who will face off with him. Last night, the candidates went head-to-head at a forum at Spitfire sponsored by Friends of Seattle.
Friends of Seattle, a progressive group focused on the environment and urban transportation, sponsored a mayoral forum Monday night at Spitfire in Belltown. They made a video available in two parts.
Candidates Michael McGinn, James Donaldson, Jan Drago and Norman Sigler participated. But it lacked some of the fireworks without Mayor Greg Nickels and Joe Mallahan. They had good excuses. Nickels was in DC hanging out with Obama and therefore was unable to attend. On his behalf, Michael Mann of the city's Office of Sustainability and Environment gave opening and closing statements.
Incumbent Greg Nickels and T-Mobile exec Joe Mallahan weren't able to make it, but the consensus seems to be that environmentalist Michael McGinn scored the most points at Monday's Friends of Seattle mayoral forum at the Spitfire sports bar in Belltown.
There is a small group of younger political wonks that regularly attend candidate forums and at this point in the year, they've pretty much made up their minds. So they're starting to pay less and less attention to the candidates' answers. Thanks to that (and the availability of booze), nearly every answer at last night's Friends of Seattle forum at the Spitfire was greeted with a rustle of whispered asides and at one point, actual heckling.
There may have been more of that had Mayor Nickels been in attendance. He was at a meeting of mayors at the White House and represented by one of his advisors, Mike Mann (pictured far left), who wasn't allowed to speak unless he felt the mayor had been unfairly maligned in some way. Joe Mallahan also canceled citing a family emergency. Only Norman Sigler, Jan Drago, James Donaldson and Mike McGinn to faced the crowd in Belltown.
PubliCola’s own Erica C. Barnett was the obvious winner at last night’s Friends of Seattle Mayoral debate. Density, Metro, the head tax—the lady knows her shit. (It was also pretty dynamite when she shut down the guy in the audience who had a question/wanted to give a speech about Israel. Sorry lefty Seattle, but somebody’s gotta draw the line. Blaming Seattle’s transportation woes and budget crisis on AIPAC is even a little lulu for this town.)
But Erica’s not on the ballot. And she did have the unfair advantage—as moderator—of controlling the microphone in the packed (100 people) back room at Belltown’s Spitfire club.
With Erica disqualified, we have to declare the person on stage who gave the second best performance of the night the winner: Sierra Club leader Mike McGinn.
Recent comments
3 days 22 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
6 days 15 hours ago
2 weeks 15 hours ago
2 weeks 15 hours ago