"a bi-monthly journal of environmental news and commentary..."

Olympia City Council Candidates Respond to Questions on Water... and What's on Their Nightstand

SPEECH questioned candidates for the City of Olympia City Council positions 2 and 3.

Amy L. Tousley, Matthew Green, Toren "Starwing" Valimir, and Craig L. Ottavelli are running for Position 2. Toren "Starwing" Valimir was unable to respond to our survey by the press deadline. Any responses past the may be available on our website at www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Prophet Atlantis, Jeanne Marie Thomas, and Rhenda Iris Strub are running for Position 3.

Both city council positions are nonpartisan. Please contact your city offices for information on candidates in your area.

1. Given concerns regarding sea-level rise in downtown Olympia, what is your opinion about the proposed location of the new city hall building site?

Amy Tousley, Position 2
First and foremost, I do believe in sea-level rise. I have for over 25 years.

The proposed site for the City Hall and other redevelopment projects along the shorelines should be prepared and designed according to their location, such as elevating structures to accommodate potential impacts. This is not currently required by the City's codes, but should be considered as a prudent strategy for future developments. I am in favor of the current proposal if such specific design strategies are implemented. I believe this to also be true for all future publicly funded structures, such as the Hands On Children's Museum.

The City is required to update its Shoreline Master Program by 2011. This update should comprehensively address the potential implications of sea level rise upon all shoreline areas. Additionally, I believe there must also be a strategy to incorporate concerns with stormwater surge and the capacity of the City's downtown stormwater infrastructure system including impacts upon LOTT.

I am in support of a comprehensive approach to address all development activities in the shoreline area, including the redevelopment along West Bay. In my profession, I have had direct experience with land use and regulation to address the protection of both the natural and built environments along shoreline and riparian areas. It is important that the City work with the County and Port of Olympia on all current and future shoreline related issues.

Matthew Green, Position 2
Sea-level rise is real, and the plans for a new city hall must deal with it. In fact, we must start planning right now, with extensive public input, for how to respond to sea-level rise for all of downtown Olympia.

The new city hall also faces increased costs and potential delays in the port's environmental cleanup at the site. For all these reasons, the city council must be willing to reconsider the location of the new city hall.

Meanwhile, city government should set a good example on climate issues, as I voted to do as a councilmember. It should continue to reduce its own energy use and greenhouse gas emissions whenever possible, including purchasing clean energy and/or emission offsets. It should share information with the public (for example, through utility bill inserts) on how to save energy and reduce emissions. In particular, with a majority of our energy and global warming problems coming from dependence on fossil fuels, we have to change our approach to mobility to get people out of their cars and onto buses, sidewalks, and bikes.

Toren "Starwing" Valimir, Position 2
Please see our website for more responses submitted after deadline: www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Craig L. Ottavelli, Position 2
Though I believe other possible sites may have brought greater benefits to our downtown, I support the city council's final decision and the proposed location for the new city hall. Global warming and sea-level rise are real problems that demand immediate action by our entire region. Olympia should act as a leader in bringing together stakeholders to protect the port peninsula and the downtown core for everyone. The combined population of our tri-city area is in excess of 148,000 people, 84,000 of which receive sewerage service from the Lacey, Olympia, Tumwater, Thurston County (LOTT) wastewater treatment facility. With an estimated cost of $1.3 billion to move the downtown LOTT facility, we cannot afford to abandon the peninsula or our downtown; therefore, we must partner with LOTT, local jurisdictions, the Port, the County, the State, and the federal government to implement a response plan.

Prophet Atlantis, Position 3
As I have said for many years on my TV shows: the downtown area is a flood plain and earthquake liquefaction plain. The new city hall should not be there at all. If there is to be a new city hall put it on top (not sides) of a the few hills we have.

We should just combine the tri-cities and Thurston County as one government unit and use one hall and save the citizens a lot of tax money.

Jeanne Marie Thomas, Position 3
I have a number of hesitations about the proposed location of the city hall on Port property. I am concerned about the earthquake vulnerability due the area being built on fill. Plans for parking remain vague and where and how parking is provided is critical to the success of city hall. Also, I would prefer that the city hall be located closer to the center of downtown. Combined with potential problems from sea-level rise, I would be open to finding a different location for this important investment.

With regard to sea-level rise, we already have costly buildings on Port property, including the LOTT wastewater treatment facility. Estimates for sea-level rise in this area vary from several inches to 4.5 feet by the end of the century. There is not yet a predictable level that will guide our planning. Uncertainties include how much the land will sink in South Puget Sound, at what rate the ice sheets will melt in Greenland and Antarctica, and possible increases or decreases in greenhouse gas emissions. We need more concrete projections from researchers based on a model that will account for human-influenced changes such as land use and water management, as well as how the melting of glaciers and ice caps may influence the future. Once we have more precise information, we can implement a plan that will protect the downtown region, regardless of the location of city hall.

Rhenda Iris Strub, Position 3
I support the proposed location for the new city hall. Sea-level rise is a problem we must address as a region with other governments. By pooling our resources we can protect the peninsula for everybody. The taxpayers of Olympia have a substantial investment in the wastewater treatment facility owned by LOTT and it must be protected. Moving it, at an estimated cost of $1.3 billion, is not an option. Since we must take measures to protect that plant, it makes sense to team with LOTT, the Port of Olympia, the state and the federal government to protect the entire peninsula.

2. Do you envision any potential long-term benefits of a restored Deschutes Estuary to citizens, businesses, and the environment?

Amy Tousley, Position 2
Yes. If the preferred alternative is to proceed with the restoration of an estuary there are certainly benefits. I believe that the greatest benefit will be to the environment, especially if full restoration of the Deschutes River is implemented. There are also many educational benefits for the community, such as those that already exist in the Mud Bay flats.

It is important to convey to the public the timeline associated with the implementation of an estuary alternative. The long-term benefits may not be realized for well over 20 years, while some impacts may be felt earlier (e.g., dredging and drainage).

The Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan has been probably one of the longest processes I have seen since moving to Olympia in 1991. There have been and will continue to be valuable experts working on this issue, however it is now time to make a decision. I look forward to the completion of the Deschutes Estuary Feasbility Study in 2008. It will be helpful to obtain greater information about the costs of implementing the alternatives associated with restoring the estuary. As a planner working with these types of issues I know that there are fiscal and physical impacts to both alternatives for Capitol Lake and the Deschutes River. I am concerned with the funding mechanisms for the estuary alternatives. It is also important to me that the publicly funded investments made at the Port of Olympia be maintained effectively.

Matthew Green, Position 2
Capitol Lake should be made healthier, cleaner, and as close as we feasibly can bring it to the original natural estuary. This will create a healthier ecosystem throughout the river, estuary, and inlet. It would save taxpayer money needed to dredge the lake, and help fight invasive species naturally. It could create a unique scenic attraction that brings as many visitors as Capitol Lake (after all, Heritage Park and Marathon Park would still be there, and few other cities can claim to host a functioning estuary). It could better educate people about natural systems and better express Olympia's desired relationship with the natural world.

When I was a councilmember, I supported greater attention to the estuary option. The city must continue to push the state's scientific work; so far, they have calculated only the costs of removing the dam, not of keeping it. Meanwhile, we must work to correct the myths about the estuary option. For example, the nasty smell before the creation of Capitol Lake came from raw sewage, not mud flats, and estuaries produce fewer mosquitoes than do stagnant lakes.

In short, our guiding principle for Capitol Lake/Deschutes Estuary must be to make it a healthier and more natural ecosystem.

Toren "Starwing" Valimir, Position 2
Please see our website for more responses submitted after deadline: www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Craig L. Ottavelli, Position 2
Potential long-term benefits of a restored Deschutes Estuary include educational opportunities, improved habitat and biodiversity, improved water quality, and possibly increased tourism.

Prophet Atlantis, Position 3
It will look pretty! I like the birds and otters and ducks and stuff the other estuaries have and this would be cool here. No reflecting pool!

Jeanne Marie Thomas, Position 3
The Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan released a Net Social and Economic Benefit analysis this spring. Their findings were uncertain with respect to the economic impacts of a restored estuary. It is unclear what the impact might be on downtown businesses and tourism. Apparently the build-up of sediment in Olympia Harbor is likely to have a negative impact on boat launches, moorings and shipping business.

An estuary would likely improve habitat and the diversity of plants and animals. It would improve water quality in the restored basin. The estuary would offer new opportunities for bird-watching and environmental education.

Individual citizens vary in the value they place on restoring the estuary. Some people have grown attached to the lake and its classic reflection of the Capitol dome. Others are enthusiastic about an estuary's potential long-term environmental benefits.

One option that has caught my attention is the one that provides for an estuary and a reflection pond side by side. I was told by a CLAMP scientist that the reflection pond side of the lake area would be suitable for swimming, and this would provide an incredible asset to our community. Just imagine kids being able to cool off in the summer in a clean, outdoor body of water. Whichever direction our community ultimately chooses, we must be respectful of divergent points of view and do everything we can to address the concerns and hesitations of those who prefer a different option.

Rhenda Iris Strub, Position 3
Yes. The benefits for managing sea-level rise alone make it an attractive option. Environmental restoration of the estuary could increase tourism and investment in the area as well.

3. The City of Olympia is selling excess water to Lacey. What is your opinion of this in view of Lacey's growth management plan?

Amy Tousley, Position 2
It is essential to make clear that Olympia has not conveyed any of its water rights to Lacey. The agreement has been established for a fixed timeframe and is not automatically renewable. A local government selling its resources to another has been conducted by many jurisdictions throughout the state. I am in support of the current agreement.

It is questionable whether or not Lacey has benefited in gaining water rights through the expedited process established at the Department of Ecology. The state must be held accountable for the timely assessment and allocation of water right certificates. This issue is pervasive throughout Washington and has impacted many local governments' ability to plan for orderly growth.

Lacey's vision has been established since 1994. It has been no secret what the City's intended plans were for areas such as Hawks Prairie. A great deal of the City's urban growth area was established to address years of unchecked county sprawl. It is also no surprise that Lacey will be larger than Olympia in both land area and population. It is my understanding that Olympia has never formally commented on Lacey's comprehensive plan as allowed under statute.

I am very much in support of reassessing the Urban Growth Area that was established in 1987, and then updated in the 1994 comprehensive plans for the county and cities. Issues surrounding the current appeals with the Thurston County comprehensive plan must be resolved prior to this type of comprehensive review.

Matthew Green, Position 2
Olympia should not enable Lacey to overdevelop. Lacey has severe water shortage problems, enough to stop development in the urban growth area around Lacey. Lacey is working to get additional water rights, but until they do (assuming they can), it is irresponsible to temporarily provide water that allows Lacey to build permanent developments. Once those new developments are built, Olympia's water is effectively committed to support sprawling overdevelopment that Lacey cannot support on its own. Olympia should not encourage and enable that behavior.

In contrast, Olympia has been very responsible with its water supplies (at least until now). When I was a councilmember, we worked to secure water rights that would meet our needs for many decades - and to promote water conservation to stretch those supplies even farther.

Some people suggest this is an issue of interjuridictional cooperation, but no, we should not be forced to cooperate with Lacey's bad decisions. If there were an emergency (for example, a broken water line or temporary drought), of course we should help each other out. But Lacey's poor growth-management planning is not Olympia's emergency.

Toren "Starwing" Valimir, Position 2
Please see our website for more responses submitted after deadline: www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Craig L. Ottavelli, Position 2
Virtually all of the water available to residents of Thurston County is underground, and this groundwater obviously does not recognize the boundaries between jurisdictions. To ensure a plentiful supply of safe water we must work together and begin thinking and planning regionally to protect our aquifers. As an Olympia city council member I will reach out to our friends in Lacey, Tumwater, the County, and the State, to create the relationships and the framework necessary to establish a regional growth management plan. I believe the citizens of Lacey are interested in managing growth and ensuring that we protect our water resources, and that they are willing to work with Olympia and other partners to learn and apply best water resource management and planning practices.

Prophet Atlantis, Position 3
If the courts have their way, the city may be forced out of humanitarian needs to provide water to Lacey and other areas. Combine the water utilities with all three cities at least and all of Thurston County. We are all in this society together and should share the resources and burdens together.

Jeanne Marie Thomas, Position 3
We need to take a long-term approach to the management of scarce water resources and create incentives for our regional neighbors to become our partners in conservation.

During a drought in early July, The Olympian cited peak water use by Lacey reaching 16 million gallons in a single day, in order to serve a population of 34,600 people. In the same day of peak use, Olympia pumped 14 million gallons to serve a community of 43,740 people. This demonstrates that Olympia is a much stronger steward of water resources. Olympia has effective water conservation practices, and our success should serve as the model for the region.

Water is a finite resource. Our sale of excess water to Lacey has several consequences. Ultimately, if Lacey does not adopt more aggressive conservation policies, our shared environment will be damaged. Also, an argument could be made that selling our excess water to Lacey enables Lacey to continue to grow without making changes to the way they manage this resource. I think it is acceptable to sell water to Lacey as a temporary measure, but we need to create incentives so that Lacey will enact conservation and recycling practices comparable to ours.

Rhenda Iris Strub, Position 3
Our children and grandchildren need a place to live. If we work together regionally we can provide them the kind of community we enjoy now. The people in Lacey care about their community as much as the people in Olympia. What we lack is a regional plan for growth management. I want us to design and implement that plan using as our model the work done by The Cascade Alliance in creating The Cascade Agenda. Please read about it at http://www.cascadeagenda.com/ Whether or not I am elected to the Olympia City Council, working on this regional plan is something I intend to pursue. I am eager to hear from others who want to be involved in a steering committee to launch it.

4. What do you see as the most critical South Sound fresh or marine water issue? If elected, how would you address this during your tenure?

Amy Tousley, Position 2
Absolutely without a doubt, clean water. I believe that this must address both freshwater and saltwater areas whether it is for wildlife habitat protection, passive and active recreation, aquacultural resources, or for those communities that rely on surface water for potable consumption.

As stated in a previous response, the jurisdictions in Thurston County will be required to update their respective Shoreline Master Programs. As part of that process, I would recommend a countywide planning policy on a strategy to be implemented for the Puget Sound Initiative in our south sound waters. This process must also include the Port of Olympia and LOTT.

Most of Thurston County's jurisdictions have or are currently updating their respective Critical Areas Ordinances. These regulations must be clear about how freshwater (riparian corridors) or saltwater (shorelines) will be protected. It is also important that studies regarding watersheds and basins be integrated into the comprehensive plans and applicable regulations. There have been numerous studies, plans and regulations created by Olympia. It is important to ensure that these are not conflicting or duplicative.

As a councilmember, I will be actively involved in the Puget Sound Initiative processes that have recently begun in the past legislative session. It is vital that elected officials be in front of these very difficult issues requiring some tough decisions. In order to be successful, I believe it to be essential that solutions be implemented on a regional scale. This means collaboration and cooperation by all parties involved.

Matthew Green, Position 2
The South Sound area is fast consuming its available water supplies, and local leaders must think through the consequences. Thinking about water supplies forces us to think about natural limits, to recognize that we cannot endlessly withdraw from the finite natural capital around us. There is only so much fresh water available. At some point, we must learn to live within what nature sustainably provides, or else we harm both nature and ourselves.

In practical terms, this means rethinking land use plans to avoid overdeveloping beyond available water supplies, improving development codes to reduce impervious surfaces and increase stormwater infiltration, and addressing unregulated water withdrawals by "small" developments. It means withdrawing only as much water from aquifers as can naturally recharge, and setting stream flows high enough to ensure healthy fish populations and aquatic ecosystems. And it requires continued water conservation efforts, reuse of treated wastewater, and building codes that reduce water consumption.

Other important water issues include reducing water pollution from roads, yards, and septic tanks, and cleaning up contaminated sites in Budd Inlet.

Toren "Starwing" Valimir, Position 2
Please see our website for more responses submitted after deadline: www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Craig L. Ottavelli, Position 2
Long-range planning for the protection and conservation of our groundwater is the most critical fresh water issue facing our region. If our groundwater becomes contaminated it is impossible to clean up, and if our aquifers are not sufficiently recharged, we may ultimately lack the water we need to provide for our growing population. The City of Olympia has a strong history of leadership in groundwater protection and water conservation. As a city council member I would work to form a regional coalition to share best practices and to integrate planning for our long term water needs; ultimately, this would represent only one element of a regional growth management planning effort. Fortunately, we have a model in the work done by The Cascade Alliance in creating The Cascade Agenda (www.cascadeagenda.com). I am grateful to Rhenda Strub for introducing me to the Alliance and I look forward to partnering with her and others in pursuit of a regional plan.

Prophet Atlantis, Position 3
Share the fresh-water resources with all the three cities and county as one government utility. Share and expand the sewer and run-off treatment and natural settling ponds as one government utility so it does not get dumped into the streams/sound and affect its salinity. Allow the lake and sound area to return to an estuary, allow some restricted initial dredging to ensure tidal washing to revitalize waterways, restrict large craft usage of most areas to keep shellfish beds and life niches to stay intact and grow.

Jeanne Marie Thomas, Position 3
Our fresh and marine water issues are intertwined. Stormwater runoff is a critical issue that we can address through our local government. Stormwater carries pollutants that result from our lifestyles and land use decisions, and deposits them into our fresh and marine water. This includes automobile oil, animal waste, and residue from roads, parking lots, and private lawns. When a high volume of water crosses surfaces like concrete it cannot absorb into the ground, which can result in flooding, damage wildlife habitat, and affect our supply of water.

I would assertively work to adopt land-use policies that create compact communities where people can walk to nearby services. To limit our area's impermeable surfaces, we need high-density housing in our downtown and our corridors, to concentrate growth and minimize stormwater runoff. I would also develop practical regional transportation options such as increased routes, and improved Park and Ride space to enable people to use public transportation on I-5. People can't take transit unless it is available to them.

I would support our current public education effort to help members of our community understand how individual habits and choices make a difference. For example, people can choose to live in a neighborhood that is centrally located so that they can walk to work, shopping and recreation. Other examples are developing healthy organic soil, finding alternatives to toxic household cleaners, eliminating the use of chemicals in lawns and gardens, picking up after pets, and using recycled building materials.

Rhenda Iris Strub, Position 3
Poorly planned growth is the single biggest threat to all of our natural resources. As a Thurston County Planning Commissioner, I have worked on this issue for two years. I co-authored the minority report on rural rezoning which presented to the County Commission the strongest plan for protecting rural lands. We are currently working on updating our Critical Areas Ordinance following a very contentious public hearing of the draft in August 2005. Our challenge now is to consider each public comment submitted and make changes as appropriate. While doing that, I always bear in mind the impact our decisions will have on water resources and I choose the path of greatest protection.

I will further address the issue of resource protection by taking a leadership role in regional growth management planning that engages the cities and the county collaboratively (see my answer to #3). We need to partner with our neighbors to create a regional plan for sustainable development. I have already assembled a team of 18 elected officials from Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater and Thurston County who have endorsed me because they believe as I do that we need to work together on this and other important regional issues. A complete list of my elected leader endorsements is at my website http://www.rhenda.com/

5. What book or governmental report would we find on your nightstand?

Amy Tousley, Position 2
Currently on my home nightstand is a book, Moscow 1812, by Adam Zamoyski. It is a historical portrayal about Napoleon and Czar Alexander and the great battle for Moscow. I thoroughly enjoy history from both fiction and non-fiction perspectives. Other items are meeting packet materials associated with Olympia's Planning Commission and Utility Advisory Committee where I currently represent the community.

Matthew Green, Position 2
A biography of Alexander the Great, a Philip K. Dick novel, and a Civil War history. (No governmental reports; my nightstand is reserved for relaxing reading.)

Toren "Starwing" Valimir, Position 2
Please see our website for more responses submitted after deadline: www.oly-wa.us/GreenPages/

Craig L. Ottavelli, Position 2
My nightstand is always piled pretty high with a range of materials. Frankly, this is the most interesting, and perhaps telling, question I have been asked as a candidate. Here is an accurate and unabridged list of what is on my nightstand:

  • Government Documents
    • The Comprehensive Plan for Olympia and the Olympia Growth Area
    • The Wetlands chapter of the Thurston County Critical Areas Regulation -}
    • Books
      • Twinkie, Deconstructed by Steve Ettlinger
      • The Assault on Reason by Al Gore
      • The End Of Faith by Sam Harris
      • Last Child in the Woods by Richard Louv -}
      • Periodicals
        • The New Yorker - (OK, actually there are quite a few back issues because I always try to read each issue in its entirety.)
        • The Atlantic -}
        • Jessica's Biscuit Catalog - (a catalog of cookbooks) -}

          Prophet Atlantis, Position 3
          I read many, many reports on-line each week. I don't keep them in my bedroom so as to avoid nightmares. The topics this past week have been "The truth about 911," Al Gore's movie, the new Harry Potter book, and a few others recommended on the local Air America 1090AM progressive radio station.

          Jeanne Marie Thomas, Position 3
          As a busy candidate, I am reading a multitude of reports and planning documents so that I can be well prepared. The most recent literature I read was The Dubliners by James Joyce.

          Rhenda Iris Strub, Position 3
          This is the most interesting question I've been asked on a candidate questionnaire. What a great way to get a snapshot of a person's intellectual curiosity. I just made an inventory of my nightstand stack:

          • Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, by J.K. Rowling
          • LOTT Alliance State of the Utility Report 2006
          • Quicksilver, by Neal Stephenson
          • Yarn Harlot, the Secret Life of a Knitter by Stephanie Pearl McPhee
          • Olympia Operating Budget, 2007 Preliminary
          • Applied Cryptography, by Bruce Schneier
          • The Truth with Jokes, by Al Franken
          • Truman, by David McCullough
          • The NIV Study Bible -}

            In this issue, candidates weigh in on the longstanding challenge of maintaining Capitol Lake or restoring the Deschutes Estuary.  


            Back to Home page.


Copyright © 2024 - All Rights Reserved
Updated 2015/01/07 21:14:22