You Dub Everett

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about an article by Lynn Thompson at the Seattle Times suggesting that there might be a division amongst our Snohomish County delegation over the nature of higher education in Snohomish County. At that time, the indication was that there was a House/Senate split with Senator Berkey having moved a bill through the Senate Higher Education Committee that would pave the way for locating and securing the land for a four year college somewhere between Everett and Marysville while Reps Dunshee and Sells were quoted as being somewhat skeptical about a “four year” versus the probability of a new UW extension branch in Everett. After I posted the entry, I received comments from each of the legislators.

Dunshee (D-44thLD) offered this:

”…Perhaps some day Snohomish County will have an independent university.
That would be fine with me. Communities with branches debate this option but so far none have seen it as desirable.
I do think the reality of Olympia is that a four year independent is not possible. This is just handicapping the probability of success. Since
Evergreen was created in the 1970s the legislature has not created a stand alone but has used branch campuses to meet need. These have been very successful and well received in their communities. I think it will be very hard to convince legislators from across the state to return to an option turned away from for some very good reasons. We are moving to a unified system in higher education like California and many other states. It is best for students and taxpayers…”

From Mike Sells (D-38thLD):

”…Finally, I don't know of too many 4 year stand alone institutions which are opened up in this day and age without some previous affiliation. Generally, they are grown starting from different permutations of 2 year programs that go beyond community college type AA degrees. In talking with Jerry Cornfield of the Herald last week, he noted his bias for a 4 year stand alone. I asked him where he went to school to get his degree. It was UC Santa Barbara. "How did it start?" I asked him. He said it started as a two year type community college. I suppose that begs the question of why not turn a community college into a 4 year baccalaureate delivery institution, and we do have some pilot programs going on in the state to deliver those degrees within community colleges. (Senator Kilmer, Kitsap County, also introduced a bill this week for a study of 4 year institution in his area.) My concern would be the loss in the process of the mission of those community colleges, particularly with regards to workforce education in skilled trades areas. In the beginning, however, they can be a great feeder into a new baccalaureate degree institution, especially in the area of liberal arts…”

And this from Senator Berkey (D-38thLD):

”…Our community is strongly behind this project and I believe the opposition to this proposal is overstated. The existing research universities, regional institutions, and community colleges will all have different missions and a different student mix than a new regional polytechnic institution. The most serious opposition is coming from the UW-Bothell (as we expected)…””… I do not want to spend a lot of time and space here rehashing the arguments for the four year university option or the community college/upper division option. A thorough analysis is contained in the report to the Higher Education Coordinating Board by NBBJ and MGT of America, Inc. You can find this report at the HECB Research website at http://www.hecb.wa.gov/research/issues/NSIS-RFPpage.asp then click on Final Report-Assessment of Higher Education Needs of Snohomish, Island, and Skagit Counties (SIS), which I would encourage you to download and read. Our Local Advisory Committee voted 9 to 1 to recommend the four year university option (Alternative 1) and the branch campus option was ranked 5 out of the 8 alternatives studied…”

I strongly encourage you to read the comments from each of these legislators in the original post here.

At the time, I was a bit curious that I hadn’t seen anything from Jerry Cornfield, political columnist for The Everett Herald about this; especially since Rep. Sells had mentioned him in his comments. Then, in his February 18th column, came this:

How to institute our own institute By Jerry Cornfield – Herald Columnist.

Cornfield opens up with a quick, three-step plan to achieve the goal of a new State College in Everett:

"1. Close the University of Washington's Bothell campus.

2. Move everything not bolted down to a site in Snohomish County.

3. Give the campus a new name, say Washington Institute of Technology, and then market it madly.

It's simple and not so theoretical…”

He goes on to say that he has ”… learned the idea of shuttering UW-Bothell is coming up in conversations among those most deeply engaged in this university debate.” He suggests that proponents of the above mentioned proposal take a page from Sonics team owner Clay Bennett who wants the state to help him move the basketball team from Seattle to Renton. He writes:

”…Bennett argues it's all about protecting a valued community treasure. The bottom line is he wants the state to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in an underperforming asset.
Washington Institute of Technology backers should be able to do better than the cellar-scraping Sonics.
UW-Bothell, through the actions and inaction of others, at this point is likewise an underperforming asset of the state higher education system.
Moving it from anonymity in a suburb to prominence in a city such as Everett will give it the visibility needed for success.
Slapping on a new name and giving it a new mission will create a buzz, and you can leave the University of Washington in charge…”

Cornfield lays out a pretty interesting chess board. He has obviously given this some serious thought (or has listened intently to some very interested people). He ends with this:

”The University of Washington would seem stronger with a campus devoted to technology under its wing. Political victory can be shared equally by those pushing a four-year university and those pushing the UW franchise.

I see the board set and pieces in place. Time to make a move.”

It seems the game is in play. Cornfield writes today:

”University of Washington President Mark Emmert set me straight this week:
No one is talking about shutting down the Bothell campus and moving it north as a new four-year university.
There are plenty of people - Emmert is one of them - talking about the UW opening a branch campus in the Everett area with a curriculum bent toward polytechnic instruction. A formal announcement may be made soon...”

According to Cornfield, Emmert was in town last week to meet with Everett Mayor, Ray Stephanson as well as a contingent from the House – Dunshee, Sells, and Rep. Bill Fromhold (D-49thLD), Chair of the Capital Budget Committee (Dunshee and Sells are on the committee as well). From what Cornfield writes, it would appear that the folks who are pushing for the “UW-Everett” route are working quickly to ensure that that plan doesn’t somehow get de-railed by some competing vision.

”Fromhold's presence was pivotal. He is writing the House of Representatives capital budget and will propose a sum of money for a new higher education option in north Snohomish, Island and Skagit counties.
Previously, Gov. Chris Gregoire placed $2 million in her proposed budget for developing a plan on where to put a regional university and how it should be run.
State Sen. Jean Berkey, D-Everett, responded with legislation steering those dollars toward one outcome: a four-year university run independently of the UW.
Fromhold is not of that mindset. Neither are Sells, Dunshee and Stephanson. They're fans of branch campuses as a faster means of increasing college instruction in a community.
When Fromhold rolls out his proposed budget next month, look for at least $2 million plus a directive that it be spent pouring the foundation of a branch campus.”

From what I am reading, it would appear that Everett is destined to become a college town. The only question that remains is will your sweater say “UW-Everett” or “W.I.T.”

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

The Problem With Evil

Friends

I have just posted the following over at Washblog

According to a story by Melissa Slager in the Everett Herald, "Bible essay stirs trouble for teacher", it is fine to teach about the nature of God in a high school American Literature class if you are perceived to be a person of faith but, when your atheism becomes known, what was before considered an academic exercise is now criticized as `denigrating Christianity.'

If you would like to read more of this post and/or offer your comments or opinions, please check it out at Washblog

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

DFSC Community Movie Night, Volume III

Democracy for Snohomish County will be having our next Movie Night on Sunday March 18. We have not yet decided what movie we will show (“Who Killed the Electric Car” is one suggestion), and are anxious to hear from you what films you would be interested in viewing. Please send us your ideas and suggestions. Thank you.


All My Best,

Jeff Sutro
Democracy for Snohomish County, Chair



P.S. We are currently planning to show “Fast Food Nation” in April.

DFSC Community Movie Night Vol. II

Democracy for Snohomish County is pleased to host our 2nd monthly Community Movie Night on Sunday, February 18th from 4 to 6 PM at Zippy’s Java Lounge at 1804 Hewitt Ave. in Everett. Join us as we watch the award winning documentary film “End of Suburbia” about the depletion of cheap oil and its likely effects on the American lifestyle. Enjoy the fare of soups and sandwiches along with a wide variety of beverages offered at Zippy’s before, during or immediately after the movie. The event is free (although donations are gladly accepted) and open to the public. For more information, contact Democracy for Snohomish County at:dfsc@comcast.net

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

Exciting New Tool

Over the past couple of days, I have been pleased to be among the first people in the area to be made aware of an exciting new tool for communicating with our legislators in Olympia. The ever resourceful Chad Lupkes (DFW, Vice-Chair State Progressive Caucus) has now written about his newest creation over at Washblog:

"You know how you can use MoveOn or Working Assets to write letters to congress, and the reply from staff comes back to you? They've spent a lot of time building tools for us to use at the grassroots level that does most of the work for us." He continues, "Have you ever wanted to write a letter to all members of the Government Operations & Elections committee in the Olympia Senate, but all you could find is one email at a time that you had to laboriously add to the To: line in an email? Annyoing, isn't it?" Well Chad has created a tool for us to patch that hole in the communiations loop.

Currently hosted at the 46th LD, PDWC, and DFW websites is a form that will allow you to select any State Senate Committee, identify the members, and create and send your own message to any one or combination of senators on that committee. And now, if you look to the links on the sidebar of this Blog you will find that same tool listed as "State Senate Committee Contact Form". Simply "right click" on the link, select "open in new window" and you are ready to send off a letter to a committee of your choosing. So let's begin...

It happens that there is a need to contact the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee to request they bring the senate version of the "comprehensive" bill (on Public Financing of Campaigns) up for a hearing. In this case, we want to send an email to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the committee (Sen. Fairley and Sen. Oemig) and ask them to bring SB5510 before the committee for a public hearing. For more information on the bill, please refer to this post.

After you have sent you emails to the Chair and Vice-Chair, you might want to send an email to the other members of the committee to let them know that you are a supporter of this bill and hope to see it pass during this session of the legislature. Even though most of these members will not be in your district, because they are sitting on a committee they realize that they will be hearing from a statewide audience.

Whether you use this tool today or not, I appreciate the efforts of Chad Lupkes to bring us something like this for our use. Thanks Chad!

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

Delegation Divided on University?

Entering into this legislative session, many in Snohomish County were anticipating a bold move forward in achieving the goal of establishing a four year university in our neighborhood. Much of that anticipation was based on the assumption that, with a near super majority in Olympia, our Democratic delegation would be working together to develop a plan and work to secure the funding to help the plan succeed. So I’m sure you can imagine my interest in this article “Delegation divided over university plan” by Lynn Thompson at the Seattle Times. According to Thompson, the delegation is ”… divided over whether to push for a new state polytechnic college or to pursue cheaper and quicker options for baccalaureate degrees, possibly in partnership with the University of Washington, Bothell” Gee, you would think they might have discussed this amongst themselves or at least polled their constituents BEFORE the session.

It is pretty much a foregone conclusion that this state is not graduating enough folks with engineering degrees. Thompson writes: ”A $500,000 study last year concluded that 15,000-18,000 students in the three-county area (Snohomish, Skagit, and Island) will be unable to get four-year degrees by 2025 even if the state's existing universities and community colleges expand to capacity.” She continues: ”Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon said (in testimony before the committee) the state is No. 1 in the nation in engineering jobs, sixth in jobs for computer specialists and ninth in physical- and life-science jobs, but 38th in producing graduates in those fields.”

So, why the division? Even though State Senator Jean Berkey (D-38) was able to move legislation that she co-sponsored with State Senator Paull Shin (D-21) through the Higher Education Committee that would begin the process of securing land in Everett or Marysville for a new four year college, ”… House members Mike Sells, D-Everett (38), and Hans Dunshee, D-Snohomish (44), said given the opposition of existing state institutions, the Berkey bill could be defeated in the Senate, jeopardizing $2 million in the governor's budget to develop a plan to meet the region's higher-education needs.” She quotes Sells, "It's a risky strategy." "If we get stuck on a stand-alone university, we could lose it."

I am not sure on what Senator Berkey bases her optimism in securing a stand alone university in Snohomish County. According to Thompson, ”Sells said that other underserved regions in the state lobbied for years for new colleges but had to settle for less-expensive branch campuses of existing state schools. Those communities are unlikely to support a new, comprehensive college in Snohomish County. "They couldn't do it in Vancouver. They couldn't do it in the Tri-Cities. Do you think they'll stand for us getting our own college? I don't think so," Sells said.”

I made an effort to contact Sen. Berkey to get a comment for this but, so far, she has not responded to my request for a statement. As a Snohomish County resident I would certainly enjoy the prestige of housing “our own” university. I also appreciate pursuing the option of reaching for the highest goal rather than “settling” for what is offered. However I understand the argument that Representatives Dunshee and Sells make when it comes to the potential for entrenched forces of opposition to completely derail this course of action; which brings us back to the beginning.

Why haven’t our legislators (County and State) come together before now to nail down a unified course of action for this important legislative session? In my opinion, the County Executive should have invited the entire delegation (ok, maybe just the Ds) to a “family get-together” prior to the beginning of the session and worked out the strategy for moving forward. All arguments should have been laid upon the table and debated until consensus was reached. As I stated before, the goal of establishing a four year college here is not new and most of the players are the same.

Finally, where do you stand on this and are you willing to join the discussion and the fight to achieve this goal? The folks in Olympia need to hear from all of us. Start with your own legislators and then start working on the rest. Reach out to friends and family in Skagit and Island Counties (as well as North King County) to talk to their delegations. So far, Senator Berkey’s is the only legislation I have seen. Having passed out of the Committee on Higher Education, it has now been referred to Ways and Means. Snohomish County representatives on that committee are Senator Darlene Fairley (D-32) and Senator Steve Hobbs (D-44).

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

Hearing on Public Financing on Feb. 7th

On Wednesday, February 7th, I travelled to Olympia to represent Democracy for Snohomish County at the House State Government and Tribal Affairs Committee hearing on the various public financing bills that have been referred to them.

Before the hearing, there was a rally and press conference. Bill Moyer of the Backbone Campaign was onhand with the group's well known spine puppet to set the atmosphere. In the following photo, Bill is leading the parade past the Capital Building.

The group at the rally was treated to pep talks from three Prime Sponsors of public financing legislation, Rep. Shay Schual-Berke (with megaphone in the photo below), Rep. Mark Miloscia, and Sen. Jim Kastama.

After the rally, the group headed into the Committee Hearing Room, filling it beyond capacity. Rather than give you a complete blow by blow, I will direct your attention to TVW to see the video of the entire two hour hearing. The bills discussed were 1186 and 1589 (Judicial), 1360 (Comprehensive), and 1551 (Local). There was much ground covered and, as you will see, there is considerable resistance from the Republican side of the aisle. I was pleased to be able to testify on behalf of the local bill (I come in at the one hour, 47 minute mark). Because time was severely restricted by the time I got there and I had really prepared to speak about the comprehensive bill, I wasn't at my best but it was good practice for what I hope will be many more efforts on behalf of our fine organization.

[UPDATE] For more photos and additional information on the day, Dina Johnson has posted her account at Washblog

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County

Senior Citizens Victimized Again

With reference to Chad's post below regarding an issue that troubles me deeply:

It seems mobile home parks are being bought up around the county, and the residents are simply evicted. I urge you to read Chad’s blog before continuing.

At root in this issue is a cultural imperative that declares profit to be more important than people. It is all about the right of the owner to make as much profit as possible, with the fewest possible restrictions. Such restrictions as do apply are generally intended to protect society at large, with little or no regard to how individual citizens are affected.

You see this imperative at work when thousands and thousands of jobs are outsourced to foreign job markets where labor costs are lower. This is done in the name of “remaining competitive,” and the families that are devastated by the loss of income and benefits simply don’t matter.

You see it when the huge WalMart store comes to town, especially in smaller communities, and the mom and pop stores have to close up shop because they simply can’t compete. Never mind the WalMart policy of utilizing part time employees for the majority of their positions so they can pay minimum wage and avoid paying benefits. It’s called “externalizing costs.”

In the case of Mariner Village, the prioritization of profit over people is glaring! A “group of investors” looked at the profit potential of the park in question, without regard to the human cost, which would simply be “externalized.” They purchased it at a whopping $1.3 million (if memory serves) and set about surveying and consulting with the planning department. The pesky little matter of 158 residential households was a minor inconvenience, easily disposed of under current law.

The articles I have read on this subject couch it mostly in terms of the rights of owners. That was the point of the Supreme Court ruling cited in Jerry Cornfield’s article. While the plight of the residents is vividly described, there is little or no mention of their rights. This is because, for all practical purposes, they don’t have any.

Let me go on record here and now as declaring this to be much more that an ownership issue. This is about HUMAN RIGHTS and SOCIAL JUSTICE!

Let’s take a look at the people involved. I have only spoken with two of the residents of Mariner Village, but am prepared to make a few generalizations that I would expect to hold up under close scrutiny. This being a Seniors Only park, most of the residents are retired and living on fixed incomes. There are probably more widows than widowers, and a large proportion of couples who have been together for 30, 40 and even 50 years. These people have worked all their lives and paid their dues. Some will have owned businesses. Most will have owned their own homes at one time or another. Upon retiring, they were forced by economic reality to “downscale” their lives in various ways, one of which was to buy an affordable manufactured home and park it in a clean, well-maintained park where the space rental was something their fixed incomes could support.

Now they face eviction. They are responsible for moving their homes or paying to have them demolished and carted away. The “group of investors” bears no part of this responsibility. Costs externalized. With nine other mobile home parks in Snohomish County facing the same problem, there are no spaces available. Can they buy a lot to put it on? Not likely with property values being what they are. They can put their homes up for sale, but who will buy under these circumstances? And what would they be willing to pay?

Finally, consider the previous owners of this mobile home park. With spaces renting for $500 and up, they probably had a monthly income in the neighborhood of $80K or so. Property taxes and maintenance costs were passed through to the renters, so it is safe to assume a comfortable monthly income in the $30-$50K range, if not more. And they had the pleasure of knowing they were providing a valuable service to 158 households.

Ultimately, this is about who we are as Americans, Washingtonians and citizens of Snohomish County. This is about the cultural imperative that we create. These people are us, folks. We are them. They are being downscaled right out of their homes and the communities they love, even as those same communities - you and I - are upscaling our waterfronts, riverfronts and downtown cores.

Who are we, really?

“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” – Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

The Mobile Home Park Dilema

Over the past couple of weeks, Everett Herald political columnist, Jerry Cornfield and reporter David Chircop have been writing about the precarious position many mobile home park dwellers find themselves in when the park owners decide to sell the property the homes are sitting on and the efforts of certain state legislators to come to their rescue.

In his piece from January 28th, Chircop writes about Mariner Village Mobile Home Park, a seniors-only park south of Everett that was sold to a group of investors in August of last year. Chircop writes,

"A representative with Fort Maier Homes, a Maryland homebuilder, recently approached Snohomish County planners, asking questions about traffic circulation, an early step in the development process. The representative also submitted mock-ups of a subdivision map with 363 townhouses, 38 cottages and 176 senior apartments. Tiscareno Associates, a Seattle architecture firm that has designed new townhouse developments in Everett, Bothell, Kent and Redmond, drafted the maps." Chircop adds, "Richard Beresford, of Mariner Village Mobile Home Park, LLC, says plans to develop aren't solid, and that they may choose to preserve the park."

The story points out that it is common in this state for the residents of these parks to own their mobile homes but only rent the land on which it sets. This arrangement leaves them increasingly vulnerable to the lucrative development market. When the park is slated for closure, the residents are forced to relocate. In many cases the mobile homes are too old to move, leaving the owners with no choice but to pay to have them demolished. In some cases residents could still be saddled with mortgage payments after tearing down their own homes. Chircop introduces us to Tony Carnaghi:

""I'm sick," said Carnaghi, 64, who paid $20,000 for a mobile home at Mariner Village in May. Carnaghi and his wife left Maine this summer to settle in Washington for its milder winters and to be close to his stepson and six grandchildren in Bremerton. They had just hung up the last photo on their wall when they learned of the possible development." ""Where do you go from here? You put your last dime into a place that you thought you were going to stay for the rest of your life ... "said Carnaghi, his deep voice trailing off."

The Carnaghis and other residents of the Mariner Village Mobile Home Park are far from alone in this situation. Between 2006 and 2008, 10 mobile homes in Snohomish County are slated to close, displacing 533 families, according to the state Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development. Statewide 36 parks, with 1,342 households, are scheduled to close in that time frame, according to the department; which brings us to Rep. Brian Sullivan (D-21st LD):

According to back-to-back columns from Jerry Cornfield on January 28th and January 30th state lawmakers, led by Rep. Sullivan, are looking into ways to help ease some of the potential hardship created for these mobile home park dwellers when they are faced with the eviction notice. Cornfield points out that Sullivan has introduced HB 1621 which would provide for a one year window of exclusivity for the residents of a mobile home park to secure a financing stream to purchase the park before it could be sold to outside investors. However similar legislation has been struck down in the past as unconstitutional on the grounds that it might limit the property rights of the park owners. Already the Manufactured Housing Communities of Washington, a group representing owners of 500 mobile home parks in the state, is lining up in opposition to this measure. Cornfield writes of Sullivan, "Sullivan said he "tried to craft this bill so maybe we can get around the constitutional question. I admit it's still a little fuzzy at this point." Cornfield writes about a group in Snohomish County, SOS Homes:

""We're not asking for anything but a fair chance. We'd pay the market rate," said (Kylin) Parks (president of SOS Homes, a coalition of mobile park homeowners associations in Snohomish County), who helped Sullivan model the bill on laws in New Hampshire and Minnesota." ""We don't want to take any property rights away, she said.” We just want a chance to save our homes.""

Another bill, HB 1668, co-sponsored by Sullivan, would require park owners to increase the minimum lease option to tenants from one year to five and, Cornfield points out, "Lawmakers and the governor also want to put $4 million into the fund used to help residents relocate from shuttered parks. That fund is now empty. The money, if available, can be used to move a mobile home to a new site or demolish it if there is nowhere for it to go."

As a sort of exclamation point to this post, I reprint this Letter to the Editor from today's Everett Herald:

"I live at Evergreen Estates, a mobile home community in Lynnwood. I have lived here for over 14 years. I was dumbfounded to get a notice terminating my residence because the land had been sold for commercial use.

Lynnwood Properties, LLC has given us one year to move or sell our homes or pay to have our homes demolished.

They were kind enough to list the relocation assistance address and phone number on their notice. We who live here have applied for relocation assistance funds; only to find out that there is no money remaining in the relocation assistance fund.

All of us who reside here have medical problems, are retired, low-income or have no extra money.

Most of us have tried to sell our homes. I have run ads in the paper and had my home on Craig's List. Once people find out my mobile home has to be moved, they have no interest in buying. They are closing so many communities in Snohomish County that we cannot find a place to move our home, even if we had the money. I have sent letters to several mobile home communities requesting information regarding available open spaces, along with a photograph of my home and a self-addressed, stamped, return envelope. I received a few back, stating they have no open spaces. Most did not even answer my request.

The assessor's office has been no help, as zoning has changed in Lynnwood. The value of our homes has dropped to almost nothing - great for claiming a loss on your taxes, but not for selling.

The remaining residents will ask the new owners for assistance, but there is no guarantee that they will help us.

All of us here feel left out in the cold; we are sick, old, tired, scared and nervous wrecks. We need help.

PAT HAYES
Lynnwood"

Regardless of the outcome in the state legislature, I am guessing this issue won’t stop there with Sullivan who has already announced a run for Snohomish County Council later this year. With the issues of over-development and affordable housing always at the forefront in the largely rural county, Sullivan can only enhance his standing with the Progressive community there by becoming the champion of this cause.

Peace,
Chad Shue
Vice-chair, Democracy for Snohomish County