Dan McShane

Qualifications:

Strengths

What makes you the best candidate to be Mayor of Bellingham?

I’m a strong leader and I’ll work with you to set a new way forward to cleaner water, good neighborhood planning and transparent, respectful government. My positions on issues and budget priorities as well as my government and private sector experience make me the best candidate for Mayor.

My record is strong: I’ve led the County Council on protecting Lake Whatcom, Lake Samish, farmland and natural resources, on working with neighborhoods throughout the county on plans that reflect their vision, and on effectively prioritizing the spending of tax dollars.

My administrative experience is solid: I’m a licensed geologist and engineering geologist and in 1997 I started an environmental and geotechnical consulting business. One of my proudest accomplishments is that I managed to expand that business substantially while serving on the County Council. I did that through smart time management, hiring and retaining good people, building tremendous trust between our clients on simple and very complex projects, and always keeping within project budgets. In my career I’ve overseen large complex projects including projects with budgets in excess of 30 million dollars.

2. Weaknesses

Many in our neighborhoods feel that the choice of Mayor this year will be between vision/leadership and administrative experience. What do you perceive as your weakest attribute of the two and how will you address this?

I am a strong and visionary leader with solid administrative experience. While you may know that you can count on me to be a strong leader on the issues you care about, you may not be aware of my strong administrative background.

I have a record of success in business and in managing projects. As a geologist I’ve managed large cleanups, including a superfund investigation and cleanup projects with multi-million dollar budgets. Since 1997 I built a company from scratch, while also serving on the County Council. My company’s revenues have quadrupled in the last 3 years alone, while I was aggressively pushing forward legislation on the County Council to protect farmland and Lake Whatcom.

In addition to revenue expansion, my company has provided deeply discounted consulting services to the Skagit Land Trust, Lummi Island Community Trust and Kulshan Community Land Trust, free consulting to Friends of Sumas Mountain and have donated to the Whatcom Peace and Justice Center, the Rainbow Center and others.

As an administrator my best skills are in hiring and retaining good people as well as paying close attention to the finances so that projects pencil out. I’ll bring that administrative experience to the job of Mayor.

Growth and Planning:

3. Consistent Development Process and Neighborhood Input

The spot rezone process that was recently used for the Squalicum Lofts proposal created an unfair situation pitting neighbors against the developer, Planning staff and policy makers in an unpredictable process. Without changes, other neighborhoods and developers will be similarly affected in the future. What are your observations of this process and what would you propose as Mayor working with Planning staff to protect the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, neighborhood plan updates, and a meaningful proactive exchange of ideas with stakeholders.

Neighborhood plans need to be adhered to. Simply put, rezones should only go forward when they are consistent the neighborhood plan unless it can be demonstrated that there is a clear mistake in the plan. That is the criteria I have followed for planning throughout my tenure on the County Council. In Bellingham, neighborhoods and developers have been placed in a difficult position: neighborhood planning has been set aside for more than a decade and in some cases our neighborhood plans are badly outdated.

Neighborhood planning will be a key priority of my administration. Numerous neighborhoods have stepped forward to begin the planning process and I will invest in neighborhood planning so that neighborhoods have the support they need to create and implement their own visions. I will use this process to determine investment priorities so that our streets become safer and our tax dollars go toward steady improvements where we live.

Bellingham’s brightest future lies in meeting our growth challenges with thoughtful strategies and visionary planning that includes our neighborhoods. We need to keep the unique character of each neighborhood while maintaining transportation and utility corridors and keeping intact our industrial land base for job centers.

4. Urban Center Infill

Do you support the Comprehensive Plan’s direction of infill housing created through Urban Centers and if so, how can this method be expedited in order to take pressure off leapfrogging in inappropriate areas?

Yes, I support redevelopment to create high quality urban centers. Done well, they have the potential to add vitality, jobs and homes, making our neighborhoods even better places to live. Planning for great urban villages will be a project that will require the full participation of the neighborhoods and these plans must meet the criteria of making the local community a better place.

Over the past number of years the city invested resources into a proposal to move the city line 2 miles to the north. At the same time they talked about urban villages yet declined to commit the needed resources to create policies for urban villages and put them in place. I believe we can provide opportunities for quality redevelopment and good investments within our city and that sprawl is not the solution to our growth pressures. A massive expansion of the city borders will not make our existing neighborhoods better places to live. Only a consistent investment of resources into our neighborhoods will get the job done.

Under my administration planning priorities will be funded, staff will work closely with the neighborhoods and the citizens and we’ll move forward together to find solutions.

Lake Whatcom Watershed:

5. Watershed Comprehensive Plan

How will you move the community to embrace an overriding vision with specific goals for stormwater management and land acquisition in the Lake Whatcom watershed that will effectively and immediately maintain and then, eventually further reduce pollution levels.

Bellingham once had one of the best sources of drinking water in America. We’ve made some mistakes. As Mayor, I’ll see that we restore Lake Whatcom so that our water is clean and affordable far into the future. I won’t pass the buck and I won’t leave this for our children to fix.

As a scientist I’ve read the studies and I’m certain of this: it’s time to act. I will prioritize Lake Whatcom by budgeting for technical, policy and financing support to provide strategies and solutions. These solutions will include:

1) financing mechanisms to buy the remaining lots or development rights in the watershed in a fair manner,

2) a firm policy of creating no new lots in the watershed,

3) fixing the broken storm water systems,

4) ensuring we keep 75% of our watershed forested, and

5) restoring the streams in the urban areas of the watershed.

A fundamental responsibility of city government is to provide safe, cost effective drinking water to its citizens. Delay is costly. Actions leading to restoration will begin on my watch. Our families and our economy depend on that.

6. Funding Choices

In last week’s Cascadia Weekly Gristle column, Tim Johnson declares Bellingham has two waterfronts demanding our community resources. As mayor, how will you prioritize and provide direction for Lake Whatcom drinking water protection versus cleanup and redevelopment of the salt waterfront?

Safe, affordable drinking water for you and your family will be among my highest priorities. Cities all over the world protect their source of drinking water because that’s the cheapest option in the long-term. It makes sense. If Lake Whatcom degrades further we face extraordinary and ongoing expenses to provide people with safe, clean drinking water. We need to immediately invest money into acquiring all the undeveloped, buildable lots in the watershed and to restoring our streams. That’s where I will commit the public’s resources.

We can’t afford everything. If you’ve juggled bills, you know that paying for your home, your food and your utilities takes precedence over remodeling your kitchen. Municipal finances may be a little more complicated but the basic principle applies: our fundamental needs for good neighborhood planning, clean, affordable drinking water and police and fire services must be paid first. Those are our basic bills, those are my priorities and it will be my job to make sure those bills get paid.

Beyond City financing of watershed restoration, I will work with the County, State and Federal government and make our watershed the priority it should be for grant funding.

Waterfront Redevelopment:

7. Harbor Cleanup

Describe, briefly, the key features of the cleanup plan favored by the Port of Bellingham for “New Whatcom,” the adjacent waterways, and the ASB.

The current cleanup plan the Port and City support involves capping the majority of contaminated marine sediments in the Whatcom Waterway and within the highly contaminated log pond next to the waterway. The Port is planning to use State cleanup money to excavate low level contaminants from the ASB and turn the ASB into a boat marina.

Cleanup plans have not been proposed for the contaminated land however; early documents by the Port’s consultant state an interest in leaving many of the toxins, including mercury contaminated groundwater and dangerous waste dump sites, capped in place with parks and buildings placed over and around these contaminated areas.

As a geologist I manage cleanup of contaminated sites. I have never had a client who wanted to leave toxins buried. They pay for cleaning up contamination because it pays - clean property is valuable, contaminated sites are not. If cleanup pencils out for private property owners why wouldn’t the same economic factors be at play for publicly owned waterfront land that was purchased for $1?

Are you satisfied with this plan/agreement?

No. This will severely limit development options and will likely be a considerable liability issue for investors in the area of these sites.

Have you read the Interlocal Agreement (and the three Supplemental Agreements) between the City and the Port and is it a “fair” agreement for both parties?

Yes, I’ve read them and no, this agreement is fundamentally unfair to the City. I do not believe it makes sense to abdicate zoning authority, environmental policy authority, or to not levy impact fees to pay for infrastructure.

The redevelopment of the waterfront will take decades and before we commit significant financial resources we need to take the time to make sure the finances make sense and are fair, that it’s cleaned up and that the redevelopment has the strong public support it will need to be successful.

8. Infrastructure

What is your back of the envelope list of Capital needs and your guess as to the cost?

My back of the envelope has the total Capital needs at $252 million. You’ll note that I added in funds for land acquisition and storm water fixes in Lake Whatcom – virtually absent from the city’s current list. My assumptions are from 2008 – 2014, the next six years. This list is partially generated by current city capital facilities plans with changes as noted. Funding sources would be varied.

Medic 1 facility and upgrades: $500,000.

Police Headquarters Phase II: $10,000,000.

Parks (acquisitions and improvements): $27,000,000.

Library (main and improvements to existing Fairhaven and north branch): $30,000,000

Public Works Streets Six Year Plan minus waterfront expenditures: $35,000,000

Public Works Water: $60,000,000 Note – This cost includes the treatment plant expansion. I will propose a broader Lake Whatcom storm water district that pulls in all property owners within the watershed boundary and all water users to create a more equitable funding mechanism for buying land and funding storm water in the Lake Whatcom watershed.

Nooksack Diversion: $10,000,000. Note – this is currently unfunded yet can b e funded by grant programs.

Public Works Wastewater: $68,000,000 Note - This includes Treatment Plant construction and expansion at $45,000,000

Public Works Stormwater: $10,000,000. Note – currently the city has just $300,000 planned for stormwater projects in the Lake Whatcom watershed for 2007 and nothing beyond. This needs to be significantly increased.

Public Works Facilities: $300,000

Public Works Operations: $2,000,000

By how much would your list exceed the borrowing capacity of the COB?

It should not be assumed that the entire list would require borrowing. I would advocate working with the community to set priorities, aggressively seeking other funds and grants and then following a pay-as-you-go system, as much as is practical. Projects that may require borrowing would be the police headquarters ($10,000,000), library ($32,000,000), waste water treatment plant ($45,000,000), water treatment plant expansion ($10,000,000).

The City debt capacity is approximately $103,000,000. Current debt is $33,000,000. Hence the capacity is approximately $70,000,000 more.

Significant portions of the above projects should be paid for via existing revenue streams and grants and in the case of the library, a bond approved by Bellingham voters.

At what point would the amount borrowed lead to higher interest rates?

I do not believe that the amount borrowed will necessarily have a bright line trigger for higher interest rates. The structure of how bonds will be paid back and with what funding source is critical. For example, the waste water treatment plant is likely a one time big expense but will be paid over a long period with waste water utility funds. There will not be a lot of competition for that fund and it’s a fairly certain pay back. However, street fund projects or park projects may be higher risk as the revenue streams for those funds have greater variability.

Obligating the city to an additional $200,000,000 to $300,000,000 for facilities on the waterfront is potentially very risky as the means of paying for high cost items come from revenue sources that have much lower certainty and may be needed for other basic capital facilities.

What would be your priorities?

Watershed land acquisition, the water treatment plant and waste water plant.

9. Redevelopment of the Waterfront

Will the economic benefit exceed the cost for the average Bellingham taxpayer and under what conditions?

For the redevelopment to make Bellingham better, the social, environmental and fiscal benefits must exceed the cost. For government, there’s more at stake than a simple question of future tax revenues. Government investments should make the community a better place to live.

I generally don’t favor more studies but for the waterfront, given the size of the investments and the assumptions that underlay the project, I think an independent economic study is called for. That study should seek to answer such questions as these: what are the best economic and social uses for this land? How should investments and profits be shared?

What will the impact of this redevelopment be on the adjacent neighborhoods and how would you go about minimizing them?

I think under the current plan, with the city agreeing to invest more than $200 million, the impacts go well beyond the simple traffic impacts to adjacent neighborhoods. If redevelopment proposals require large investments over 20 or more years, those investments and commitments will have impacts throughout the city. Clearly there will be economic benefits for some and hopefully many. A well planned waterfront may have a great positive impact on many peoples’ daily lives, but if revenue sources are severely tapped, there will be an inability to move forward on projects where people live throughout the city.

Recreation

10. Parks, Trails and Open Space

Besides the dedicated funding of the Greenways III levy, how would you suggest the City balance it’s parks, trails and open space system so that north Bellingham is better represented?

In addition to a need to distribute Greenways funds fairly throughout the city, the north end of the City would benefit from localized park impact fees so that development impacts on local parks will be addressed. In addition, developers should be allowed and encouraged to dedicate open space and public park land for a broader more localized benefit.

Is this a priority issue for you?

This is a simple issue that calls for clear leadership: fair distribution of parks will happen when I’m mayor.

Raising a family in the York neighborhood, I know what it’s like to not be able to safely walk with your children to reach a safe place to play. We’re Bellingham’s densest, most walkable neighborhood. Having safe places for kids to play as well as having quiet corners of park land nearby in urban areas is a huge plus for life quality as well as property values. As urban centers are developed, small parks and squares should be an essential part of the design.

Emergency Response

11. Utility lines

Our neighborhoods have large industrial high-pressure gas pipelines and high voltage power lines running through residential areas. There are houses connected directly to the gas lines, still at high pressure. These were installed to service industries in the area. They pose tremendous danger in case of earthquake. The Cascade Natural Gas franchise agreement will be renegotiated for a new term during your tenure as Mayor. PSE’s agreement can be reopened after January 31, 2013. What should new agreements with any utility company provide for to protect our neighborhoods?

Identifying and protecting major utility corridors should be a fundamental part of planning efforts.

There are a variety of approaches that can be pursued to ensure gas lines are safe. Initially, I believe creating a gas line utility corridor would be the preferred approach. If this is not an option (I would need to be convinced) other requirements on operation, testing and pipe types and valves should all be part of any franchise agreement. We are fortunate in that we have the Pipeline Safety Trust in Bellingham. I’ve turned to them as a County Council member and I’ll turn to them as Mayor.

How important is this issue to you?

Gas pipeline routes have been a priority for me as a County Council member. I acted as the Council’s lead in negotiating with Williams Pipeline Northern Tier proposal across the northern portion of the County and took a lead with the Orca Pipeline proposal that was proposed as a north-south line east of Bellingham. Neither of these projects moved forward.

Are you prepared to ask these companies to reopen the contracts now to provide safe service?

Yes, when we work through our neighborhood plans, utilities are an important component. If there should be changes, utility companies should be involved as early as possible.

Personnel Management

12. Finance Director Role

What is the role you see of an appointed Finance Director in decisions related to the large financial impacts of the Lake Whatcom watershed and the waterfront redevelopment?

The Finance Director will need to be able to present various financial approach alternatives in a neutral manner and be ready and willing to point out the consequences of any and all financial approaches not only for the funding of a specific project area but the impacts to various city funds and bonding capacity.

13. Advisory Committees

What skill set and geographic balance do you look for as a Mayor in the makeup of the Planning Commission and other advisory boards?

There should be a good balance of geography, gender and background on our advisory boards. Given that no women are currently running for mayor, it’s clear we need to work harder to recruit women for advisory boards. As for skill sets: Open minded, demonstrated ability to be engaged in the community, ability to ask thoughtful questions and bring new ideas forward, and civility and decorum skills even when under criticism.

Does it concern you that all current members of the Commission live south of Whatcom Creek?

Yes. It is important to have Planning Commissioners from a variety of areas around the city and from a variety of perspectives. I’d be interested in a policy that requires at least one Commissioner from each of the City’s wards.