The Problem with Mark
Commentary by Tip Johnson
Thur, Oct 16, 03
For almost four decades, I have cultivated an interest in democratic government and municipal affairs. I've steadfastly been a social and environmental progressive. I've never voted for a candidate endorsed by the Building Industry Association. How could I possibly consider voting for Brett Bonner? The mayor's race has become quite heated, with an apparent hard line being drawn between liberal and conservative factions. For those who take an active approach to public involvement, that analysis is seriously undermined by one important factor - Mayor Mark Asmundson's record.
Mark says he supports a local economy. He makes a point of helping sustainable, buy-local programs, but buys his campaign materials in Seattle. Mark says local companies couldn't produce it in time. That's not true. The fact is that Mark buys in Seattle to get his signs printed with a union "bug"
. That's the small logo for the printer's union. It's the first condition of union campaign contributions. Why would Mark hesitate to say so?
Mark makes a big deal about his "Living Wage Requirement". The requirement sets wages for city contractors at only $10.00 to $11.50. It "adjusts" this wage annually according to the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD). The what? The municipal code doesn't say whether to use the federal Gross Domestic Product IPD, or the state IDP for Personal Consumption Expenditures. What happens to wages if it goes down? Hong Kong's has - for several years running.
How has Mark done for workers? While he's been in office, our population has grown about 50%, overall job indices by 75%, and industry earnings by nearly 90%. Over the same period, average earnings per job grew by less than 10% and our per capita personal income lost about 3% against the national average - even though Washington State's gained (USBEA). Growth in Bellingham has not been good for the average individual.
I just don't trust Mark to support worker rights. While on the council, Mark spearheaded adoption of a two-tiered wage standard. He advocated a regional scale for supervisory and exempt positions, but a local scale for the rank and file – making sure the better paid get paid even better. Under the City Charter, the mayor's pay must be at the top of regionally scaled salaries in City Hall.
Mark likes two-tiered systems. When the City's water agreement with G-P expired, he pushed through a special rate, available only to them, charging about 1/10th what other business pays. The rate was so low that when G-P closed their pulp and chemical operations, in April of 2001, it stuck the city with a loss of about a $100,000 per month against the cost of operating their dedicated supply. The rate payers will have to pick up the tab for that subsidy. Mark stymied a public vote on the issue by ignoring a referendum citizens had duly qualified for the ballot.
Mark likes subsidies. Remember Hoag's Pond? Mark's administration devised a complicated and unnecessary land trade that would have added about a million dollars of value to a property that only they knew was already scheduled to be acquired by Greenways. Mark takes credit for vetoing the measure, but did nothing to stop it for more than six months. Only the threat of a public referendum stirred his intervention. The property was then owned by a retiring Public Works administrator. Now Greenways owns it.
Mark touts the Mason Building Site as "priming the pump" for downtown development. It's another million plus dollar give-away. The property was meant to become part of a new central downtown parking facility. Bank of America gave their adjoining parking structure to the City for a dollar on that expectation. Now the beneficiaries of Mark's pump-priming subsidy get a sweetheart parking deal there.
Why obstruct downtown parking improvements? Guess who got the subsidy? The folks from Barkley Village! They've also managed to recruit 500 jobs out of downtown as parking gets worse and worse. Could the banks be next? Mark says he doesn't build parking because the public doesn't want to pay for it. He leaves out the fact that parking fees more than reimburse any public investment. Does he really believe folks would rather pay for those copious yellow tickets than for secure parking? In fact, Mark is on record supporting higher ticket penalties and meter charges downtown. Yet he supports a $10+mm parking facility proposed nearer City offices than downtown shops and residences.
Mark says he supports downtown, but expensive garbage cans and benches purposely designed to be uncomfortable have been the only public improvements during his term. Mark presided over the famous Downtown Development Workshops with hundreds of citizens "visioning" to revitalize downtown. More parking and a connection to the central waterfront were the workshop's top recommendations. Instead, Mark appointed his own steering committee and spent hundreds of thousands of parking fund dollars hiring consultants to reverse the workshop's conclusions. Under his administration, downtown parking is a dead horse, and the only two blocks of waterfront important to downtown's future have been buried in an 11.2 mile comprehensive review of Bellingham's shoreline that Mark said, "... will take years".
Mark says he supports Public Safety. Yet he is carving emergency medical services out of the general fund and, under threat of personnel or service reductions, holding it hostage to a voted tax hike. His campaign takes credit for building the first new fire station in 25 years. No one mentions the 19 low income housing units destroyed for the last fire station site. Mark promised to replace them, but didn't. His campaign applauds the project coming in under budget, but doesn't account for the tragic loss of the landmark historic fire station sold to reimburse the project. The new owner has turned the station into a political billboard for the Asmundson campaign.
Mark says the Police Department is doing a fine job downtown, but had to interrupt his breakfast at a Railroad Avenue restaurant to apprehend a criminal because the police were nowhere to be seen. Complaining that it was just too hard to deter crime downtown, police had earlier asked the City Council to condemn the perfectly sound Bellingham Inn. When police finally stepped up downtown enforcement, the tickets handed out were to J-walkers not drug dealers.
To find the police, try a political rally, one that lobbies for alternative transportation, better air, public space, open process or world peace. There you will find police arresting citizens for expressing their views, many of which have direct bearing upon the policies and actions of the City's administration - like granting special favors or plundering the public trust. The Police Chief Mark appointed - without a job search and lacking the minimum educational requirements for the job - has arrested more than fifty citizens expressing these very views. Arrestees are vigorously prosecuted in the Municipal Court that Mark established to avoid paying for services in County District Court - where it would cost half as much. It may not be cost effective, but it can be very efficient - even scary.
Mark says he puts neighborhoods first. But find one that agrees. Every neighborhood to experience his administration has chaffed at the pretense of public process that starts only after his decisions are made. Low-to-moderate income residents had to scrape up $20,000 to challenge a "Memorandum of Agreement" Mark crafted after refusing to rein in the University when they announced "sovereignty" over sixty acres of the Happy Valley neighborhood. Mark could have stood up for functional, diverse neighborhoods and benefited downtown by showing the University where to expand. He did neither.
Mark says he protects the watershed. But recent events include an unprecedented pollution closure of the Bloedel-Donovan swimming area, a building boom in Sudden Valley and continued sewage overflows into the reservoir. Mark showcases the Silver Beach Ordinance. It took months to adopt regulations that are recommended by the state for any watershed. They're not at all specially designed for reservoir protection. Since Silver Beach is downstream from our intake, the ordinance will never affect the drinking water quality.
Mark says he's for alternative transportation. Yet he's busy creating a cross-town arterial on Garden Street from downtown through campus that threatens to cut Happy Valley in two at 21st Street while loading Sehome and South Hill streets with unwanted traffic. If Mark meant what he said about alternative transportation, he would be moving the Transit Authority toward demand-driven flexible routing. He would allocate a significant portion of the street fund to build a reserve for real solutions - instead of continuing to widen roads.
Somehow, good things, like fixing downtown or the watershed, always "take years" with Mark. The new state sales tax rebate, worth $15mm toward "regional facility" improvements, was quickly earmarked for jump-starting a grand scheme of still-unfunded improvements in the government district. The public wasn't asked. They were told. Meanwhile, downtown and the central waterfront go wanting with empty warehouses that could be transformed quickly and inexpensively into premiere waterfront amenities - within the regional facilities budget. Peripheral commercial districts, like Barkley Village, benefit from inaction downtown, but all Bellingham suffers because the first prerequisite for effective regional planning is a vital urban center.
Mark's supporters haven't offered specific examples from his record that are free from this contradiction between what is claimed and what is accomplished. Instead, they cast general aspersions against Bonner's qualifications or character and convey a chilling reluctance to oppose Mark. That's not good. Our system relies on openness toward critical comparisons and competing ideas.
Mark Asmundson is an intelligent and charming guy. He is a capable city administrator, maybe too capable. There is no question that he has more qualification for the job. But Asmundsons have been leading this town for over fifty years. To what extent is that "old guard" establishment responsible for the way our growth has hurt the average citizen?
It's true that Brett is not an experienced city administrator. Neither was Mark when he first got the job. It's true that Brett's radio programming was slanted. But Brett is not that extreme, and he won't be able to advance an extreme agenda in City Hall. Brett will be very busy with administration. The Council will likely rediscover their role as policy makers. That would be a big improvement. Competing ideas would at least have a chance – a luxury not afforded them under the present administration, as many a neighborhood advocate has discovered. Mark's administrative capabilities are not at issue. The issue is whether citizens have a real say in their future. That's what self-determination is all about.
Tip Johnson was on the Bellingham City Council for 8 years as the representative from the 6th Ward. He served on the council with Mark for several of those years. Send email comments to: editor@nwcitizen.us
To Top of page | To Contents of this section | To NwCitizen home