UPDATE: Council Candidates Answer Your Questions

Editor's Note: running against last week, after we posted the candidates answers to your questions. Patch's mission is to offer as much information as possible to people in Woodinville so we allowed Montgomery to answer your questions to the candidates. Liz Aspen declined to answer.

Patch did not alter the questions with the exception of #6 where Growth Management Act (GMA) was spelled out on the first reference. The questions were placed them in the order they were received via email. The order of candidates answers were randomized at Random.org for each question. However, Montgomery's answers were added at the end of each question.

A formatting problem in the email Patch sent out to the candidates with the questions, combined questions  9 and 10, some candiates combined their answers and that is noted below.

1. Community:  Are you for or against the protection of R-1?

Hageman: I have always supported the R-1 zoning as well as all our neighborhoods current zoning and character. That is why I supported our incorporation and took on the fight over our city’s zoning years ago that went all the way to the Supreme Court and affirmed our right as citizens of Woodinville to determine how we develop our city.

Taylor: I support 1 house per acre, 4 houses per acre and other densities of housing provided they meet current zoning codes. Neighbors have expressed concern about mixing densities within current zones and I respect their opinion because they, like my family, chose the area that we live based on the neighborhood that was codified years ago. Changing any residential zoning is a process that should respect input from the existing neighborhoods.

Rubstello: I am definitely FOR protecting the current zoning in all residential zones.

Glickman: I am unequivocally for the protection of all of our neighborhoods, including R-1. This means that our citizens have the right to the lifestyle of their choosing and neither the city nor a developer may be allowed to take that away from a citizen.  At the core of this issue is the right of the city to decide its zoning within its jurisdictional boundaries. The Supreme court decided unanimously in a 9-0 decision upholding the right of the City to decide how to manage this. I will be vigilant and protect all of our neighborhoods.

Montgomery: I am definitely a proponent for protection of R-1.

 2. Community: If you were forced to choose between spending money on parks or the police which would you choose and why?

Glickman: Police. Anyone holding public oath takes an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of the State of Washington.  These laws require the city, and thereby an elected councilmember, to provide for the safety of our citizens and businesses, but state little, if anything, about parks.  Parks are a wonderful amenity for all, but they have to come second after ensuring everyone’s safety.

Hageman: Of course we need a safe community, so we need to spend the necessary money to fund police so that our community is safe. And, we must recognize the complexity of this issue and not treat just the symptoms by thinking the only solution is continually adding more police which is very expensive. By providing our children with parks and playfields we give them access to safe recreational opportunities with appropriate role models and interactions that can capture their energy and focus it into constructive, healthful habits while instilling within them both an appreciation for and sense of ownership in our wonderful community. This will in turn help them to become law abiding and contributing members of our society.

Rubstello: I doubt this question is ever this simple. It would all depend on the situation. The key is to try and set Priorities of Government ahead of time that gives a framework for what percentage of spending should go to each crucial department when reductions are necessary.

Taylor: Washington State Law does not make this choice an either or decision. It is the council's duty to support policy that ensures safety and provision of essential public services.  

Montgomery: Legally, the City must provide protection and safety for its citizens. I would, therefore choose police over parks.

3. Where do you stand on repairing Woodinville’s infrastructure?

Taylor: By infrastructure, I suppose we are discussing roads, emergency equipment and facilities to house equipment used to maintain the city.  I support repairing roads (many neglected from budgeting since city inception), making sure that the city has adequate equipment to perform routine maintenance, and staff and facilities to maintain equipment used in keeping our city open.

Glickman: Until the past year or two the city had no idea what infrastructure it had or its condition.  For example, the city recently located and created an inventory of its storm water system. For 15 years past mayors and councils ignored the city’s infrastructure. Now we have a comprehensive inventory of our roads, bridges and storm water systems and know their condition. Because of 15 years of neglect, the infrastructure is in serious need of attention with estimated repair costs that exceed $200 million. For example, we recently found a storm water vault that has been infiltrated by tree roots. Had the vault been maintained there would negligible maintenance costs associated it, however due to neglect it now has to be replaced at a cost of more than $200,000.

Hageman: I have always felt that maintaining our infrastructure is important. That is why I have supported countless projects over the years to maintain and improve it. I have also felt that Woodinville’s citizens should not have to shoulder this financial burden alone, so I have insisted that whenever possible regional improvements include regional dollars.

Rubstello: I am a Public Works engineer during the day.  Infrastructure is critical for keeping us alive and our City livable. The major infrastructure the City is responsible for is Roads. The Woodinville Water District is responsible for water and sewer service. I feel it is very important that the City not only build new roads when necessary, but also make sure the roads we have are in good repair. Elected officials have the responsibility to realize that taking care of the billions of dollars we have already invested in our infrastructure is as important as new construction.

Montgomery: Little has been done until recently in the area of infrastructure repair. Wouldn’t it be interesting to see how much, if any, of the mitigation dollars that it received from Brightwater was spent on such repairs. If we can procure bonds, grants and of course, revenues to continue the much needed improvements I would support such work.

4. Per the City's housing permit data base, there have been zero final occupancy certificates issued for single family residences since 2007.  As we all know, this is indicative of the slumping housing market and construction industry.  As a council member, do you have a responsibility to help rectify this situation, such as by revising zoning codes so that they promote construction of single family residences? 

Taylor: The city has little to do with external market forces, but we can plan for growth and there is opportunity for the city and residents to improve processes that impede both residents and developers who seek to build in Woodinville--I'm all for improving our processes that have been neglected as previous city councils concentrated on other large capital projects. 

Rubstello: I can’t answer this question until I do more research to find out if the zoning is responsible for the lack of single family building permits. According to the City’s Comprehensive Plan currently 55% of the land in the City is zoned single-family residential. So on the surface it appears there is not a simple answer to this question.

Table A3-7 Land Use Within the City of Woodinville (in acres)1

Acreages were calculated from Geographic Information system data layers. 2 Area totals may vary from  totals in other tables due to discrepancies in Geographic Information System data sources. Source: City of Woodinville - Woodinville 2000 Land Use Survey.

Hageman: We have hundreds of lots available in our single family neighborhoods that could be developed per our current zoning. The question I have asked staff is why have these lots not seen houses being built yet? The slump in the economy comes up as the main issue here. I believe we are responsible for making the permit process as transparent, easy and accessible as possible for our development community and I continue to work with the city to improve this process.

Glickman: I believe in capitalism and the free market.  Right now the market is demanding apartments and condominiums, and not single family residences.  A substantial part of the underlying reason for this is the restructuring that has occurred in the financial sector which has made it very difficult to for people to qualify for home loans.  As long as families cannot get loans to buy a house, there will be limited demand for single family residences.  Revising zoning codes cannot change this.

Montgomery: More single family dwellings are not in as much demand as are condos and apartments. I would like to see Woodinville go that route.

5. Is Woodinville responsible on a regional level to help get this industry back on its feet, which will lead to increased city revenue, local jobs and support enrollment at our schools?

Rubstello: I am a firm believer in Economic Development, especially in these economically challenging times. We need to work locally and regionally, to create jobs in Woodinville and the region. This will not only help our local tax base it will also help our residents who find work outside the City.

Hageman: We have been working on zoning in our Downtown Master Plan to encourage residential in our downtown neighborhood while building and supporting a great number of transportation improvements that have regional significance. We also continue to participate in ARCH housing projects at a regional level.

Glickman: To the extent we can promote something that is in demand such as apartments or condominiums, yes. Remember that you are asking the city to expend tax payer’s money on this. Councilmembers have a fiduciary obligation to handle tax payer’s money responsibly.

Taylor: I believe that Woodinville is a member of the team, but it is not Woodinville's primary responsibility to lead industry back to its feet. I would encourage members of the community and businesses to prepare plans and include Woodinville in their formulations, but our small city has little resources available to fund larger projects using the tax payer monies.

Montgomery: Woodinville is not in the building business. If we want to increase our revenues building single family dwellings will not do that. It is the existing businesses and new businesses which come here that will generate revenue and more jobs. By easing our permitting and zoning codes we will not only encourage existing businesses to stay and expand, but entice new businesses to come knowing before they come what to expect in these areas.

6. Woodinville is proposing to annex rural and agricultural lands into the Urban Growth Area of the city.  Some current council members have stated that "this will help the city meet its Growth Management Act growth numbers", "that people want to be part of our city", and that "these areas are being used in a manner that is not rural or agricultural now, so let's expand the UGA". Doesn't this fly in the face of the GMA?

Taylor: Woodinville already has adequate space and plans to meet 2030 growth projections without assuming agricultural land. It has been said that the valley view is our asset similar to waterfront views in other communities and I agree with that assessment--why ruin something that ads to our uniqueness and quality of life. Per 2030 growth targets, Woodinville must be able to accept 3000 new residential units and 2,165 will be from absorbing fill-in growth at current zoning densities with about 835 new units in the mixed-use downtown area. Yes, we can even build more R1 housing in the large undeveloped lots existing in Wellington. With the addition of the new units downtown, Woodinville will be in a unique situation to offer a wide variety of housing for all categories of home buyers. 

Glickman: King County, the jurisdiction that has responsibility for these lands, has admitted that these properties are operating under non-permitted uses.  Functionally, some of these properties are already urban.  This is an example of sluggish government and paperwork catching up with reality.

Rubstello: I don’t think this is a GMA issue. GMA allows the movement of UGA lines. I also don’t think that any of us can say that the city and agriculture land boundaries that were set years ago are perfect. Any decision like this has to be open for review and reassessment. The agricultural lands in the Agricultural Production District are our most precious resource, and we need to make any decision about reducing  functioning agriculture lands very carefully. As I understand it under current law if land is taken out of the APD a like amount must be put back into it from the Valley so there will be no net loss of land in the APD.

Hageman: Growth Management is a complex issue and is a dynamic not a static document in character.  There have been many changes in our society since the Growth Management Act was adopted in the early 1990’s.  The Urban Growth Boundary that was established when we became a City almost 20 years ago should not be static either if there are compelling reasons to move it.

Montgomery: Woodinville is already ahead of the GMA’s numbers placed upon it. Bringing condos and apartments into the downtown core will assure future demands on us by the GMA.

7. If these lands are designated rural or agricultural, shouldn't they be returned to this state rather than expanding the UGA? 

Glickman: These are privately owned lands under King County’s jurisdiction that include operating churches, schools and businesses. King County has made no move to force these business closed and return these lands to rural or agricultural

Rubstello: It would all depend on the particulars of the project. I don’t know enough about the current set of properties to comment.

Hageman: I believe 21 Acres (which is not in the proposed annexation) was built on agricultural land and it is a spectacular testimony to green development. It is a showcase to sustainable development and living. The 21 Acres Facility will really help the farmers market their produce. What a shame that wonderful facility couldn’t have been built because it was in the Valley. We need to think about how we can promote agri-tourism and sustainable living. Some of the properties in the proposed annexation, such as the Alliance Church, will not be going to back to agriculture production. However, shouldn’t we make sure these already developed properties are not polluting active agriculture lands and the Sammamish River. We need to protect our valley. We could do more agri-tourism facilities, especially on the already developed land, that could highlight and showcase the agricultural lands and our wine industry.   

Taylor: Not knowing the specifics of location that is being discussed, I am assuming that there are existing structures in these areas? If there are permitted structures, they are grand-fathered and should not be required to return to agricultural use unless the owners are compensated as per recent supreme court decisions. Woodinville is not in a financial position at this time that would allow it to pay these grand-fathered owners and I personally do not believe it would be the wisest use of money if the city coffers could afford to purchase them.

Montgomery: Privately owned rural and agricultural lands should be returned as such. Annexing these properties will not solve the GMA expectations of growth in our city and would put additional strain on our budget.

8. The King County executive office does not support these annexations, do you support that Woodinville use it's precious resource dollars to pursue these annexations?

Taylor: I don't think it is prudent to annex property unless there is a compelling argument that would justify annexation.  

Glickman: The churches, schools and businesses on these properties are regularly frequented by Woodinville Citizens, are already urbanized, are directly adjacent to urban uses including two medical buildings and are located at one of the busiest intersections in the city. At this time we expend dollars dealing with issues across jurisdictional boundaries with King County. Bringing these parcels into the city will have a net savings for the city.

Hageman: We had a problem in the past in Woodinville with staff, similar to the King County executive office, trying to interpret land use policy. That is the Council’s job. It took a lot of time, effort and money to correct it. In this case, the King County Council itself, which sets the land use policy, is supportive of the annexations.

Rubstello: Currently under our County system of government we have an executive and legislative branch.  =The County Executive recommends and the County Council either agrees or disagrees.  =The Woodinville City Council has to do what it thinks is in the best interest of the residents of Woodinville in working with both the County Executive and Council.

Montgomery: No, I am not in favor of using city funds to purchase these lands.

9. The R4 (four houses per acre) and higher residentially zoned areas of the city are maxed out.  Do you support the model of future housing growth in the city to all be concentrated in the downtown? 

Hageman: EDITOR’S NOTE: Scott Hageman sent a combined answer for Questions 9 & 10, here is his answer: First, none of the residential zones are maxed out and at the current zoning there are hundreds of lots in all our neighborhoods available for more homes to be built. The impact fees paid by these developers and the increased revenue from the developments should go a long way in producing more pedestrian sidewalks and trails throughout the city. These amenities can also be funded by partnering with other agencies, such as the state from which we have received grant money in the past and we are hoping to similarly partner with on our Woodinville-Duvall Rd. project. Economic development can also be a source of funding for multi-modal transportation improvements as well as increasing residential growth in our downtown. Rezoning some of our industrial land to higher and better uses is also a way of generating more revenue for our city and citizens. 

Rubstello: EDITOR’S NOTE: Les Rubstello also sent a combined answer for Questions 9 & 10, here is his answer: I support that the City’s current 20-year plan that shows the majority of new residential development will occur downtown. In the plan there is no plan to increase density in the residential neighborhoods. There are probably many reasons why growth should occur downtown, but the two most meaningful are: 1) If in the future we need to accommodate even more growth, we don’t have enough vacant land in the neighborhoods to take that additional growth over what we have planned with the current residential zoning. We would either have to up-zone the neighborhoods, or put it downtown.  Downtown is the better option. 2) The residences downtown will have a very beneficial impact on the vitality of downtown. More people living downtown will mean more active business operating more hours of the day. It will also mean more people on the streets, living, working, and playing. More successful businesses will mean more sales tax revenue to support the City. Indirectly, the downtown residential units will bring in the revenue needed to build the amenities we all want to make Woodinville a great place to live and maintain the rural atmosphere we want to preserve.

I am a Public Works engineer during the day. Infrastructure is critical for keeping us alive and our City livable. The major infrastructure the City is responsible for is Roads. The Woodinville Water District is responsible for water and sewer service. I feel it is very important that the City not only build new roads when necessary, but also make sure the roads we have are in good repair. Elected officials have the responsibility to realize that taking care of the billions of dollars we have already invested in our infrastructure is as important as new construction.

Glickman: The city has plenty of land capacity for R-4 zoned areas and higher. We have multiple models, that are in simultaneous use in the city, that support future housing growth. This includes in-fill and short plats in the R-1, R-4 above downtown, R-8 in the Wedge, and higher densities downtown. I support the rights of each neighborhood to have its own character and identity, and I support all of these models for future housing growth.

Taylor: The R4 area is NOT 'maxed out'. I do support the addition of housing in the downtown area because that is where many next generation home buyers are buying and Woodinville does not have much to offer that buyer. These new buyers are drawn to living in an area that minimizes their dependence on expensive personal transportation in favor of walking, shopping and using mass transportation. Woodinville has many neighboring cities including Redmond, Kirkland, and Seattle who have embraced this option quite successfully.

Montgomery: Single family dwellings are not the way to go. I support a downtown plan that encourages condos and apartments, providing a safe walking environment for all who would come into our city.

10. Do you believe this is the best and only way to increase city revenues so that we can get safer pedestrian sidewalks and trails throughout the city?  Have you ever explored alternatives to this model, and what are they?

Hageman: See #9

Rubstello: See #9

Taylor: I'm not sure what this question is referring to; however, if you would like to clarify, then please send me an email (al@altaylor2011.com) and I will do my best to answer. 

Glickman: Residential densities do not increase city revenues. Generally, residential areas are a net loss for the city, and it is the sales tax from the commercial zones that subsidize the operating costs for the residential zones. The industrial zones used to help, but since streamlined sales tax went into effect, they too are a net loss for the city. Safer pedestrian sidewalks are a high priority – these are capital projects that are generally funded from grants rather than revenue. Alternative models cannot increase city revenues. To increase city revenues we need to increase the size of our commercial zones. This is very high priority issue for me.

Montgomery: Hopefully, the new downtown plan will have a design to enhance safer walkways and pathways for those living in this area. Once again I much reiterate that it is bringing businesses here and keeping those who are here to stay. The city must woe new businesses to come here because they will know the appreciate them doing so.