Rusty Williams

Friends of Seattle's picture

Rusty Williams is running for Seattle City Council Position 8.

See his official campaign website and his campaign-finance disclosure reports with the Seattle Ethics & Elections Commission.

Table of Contents

 

Analysis

We appreciated that Mr. Williams completed our endorsement questionnaire. He rightly points out that Seattle’s transportation budget allocates too little to sidewalks and bicycle infrastructure, and we agree with his support for the green bag fee. Mr. Williams, however, not only wants a tunnel to replace the Viaduct, but a tunnel with three lanes in each direction---and who knows how much that would cost. Further, Mr. Williams does not have much of a track record in Seattle’s civic life, as far as we can tell. We recommend not voting for Mr. Williams.

 

Interview

Friends of Seattle chose not to interview Mr. Williams.

 

Questionnaire Responses

Table of Contents:

General Questions

 

Friends of Seattle's Mission

I consider myself a political Progressive. I fully support the 2008 Democratic Platform. I might even enhance it.

Qualifications

  • Please describe any professional accomplishments that demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you are an incumbent) or would demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you have not yet held office).

I am both a business and community leader in this city. As a businessman I have worked within budgetary and time constraints to accomplish my goals. As a community organizer with the Friends of Magnuson Park Liaison Committee, I have worked with the Seattle Parks Department and our neighborhoods to see that Magnuson Park sees its highest and best use.

Representing Seattle

Background: Seattle is the most populous city in Washington and is the state's economic engine. At the same time, Seattle cannot address many of its problems without working with King County, regional entities (Sound Transit and the PSRC), and the state government. Yet many observers believe that Seattle's interests are represented inadequately at those levels. For example, the Muni League has criticized the 40-20-40 rule for allocating new Metro transit funding. Further, transit advocates note that the state's current tax system disadvantages transit. And the Legislature refused to allocate federal stimulus dollars for road projects in Seattle.

  • As an elected official representing Seattle, how would you work with King County, regional governmental entities, the state legislature, and the governor to ensure their budgets and policies address Seattle's needs?

Many of these issues are plain logic and/or common sense. For example, the 40-20-40 Rule's inequities can be explained mathematically. The most effective course of action is to clearly communicate the facts so that a complete understanding is made.

City Council Committees

  • If you are elected, which issues would you like included in your portfolio as a committee chair?

I am a natural fit for two committees. One is the Technology Committee. My degree is in IT. I have spent the last 12 years a computer and Internet developer and executive. I have several technology ideas but we must see what the budget can handle first of all.

The other committee is Land Use. My work as a commercial real estate broker has provided me with an intimate knowledge of the City zoning codes as well as urban development in general. Another great fit.

Issues

 

Waste Reduction

Background: Rather than build an expensive new transfer in Georgetown to handle the growing volume of trash generated in Seattle, the City of Seattle adopted a "Zero Waste Strategy" centered on reducing waste. As part of that strategy, the City Council adopted a 20-cent "green fee" for disposable shopping bags.

  • Do you support the green fee? Why or why not?

I support the fee. Everyone pretty much agrees that we must work to be more "green and sustainable". But much of it is just talk. This bill provides the financial incentive for people to walk the talk. I would have preferred a positive incentive (rebate for bringing a reusable bag) but this bill will have to do for now.

Alaskan Way Viaduct

Background: Governor Gregoire signed a legislative bill ordering the Washington State Department of Transportation to design a bored tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This bill contains language allocating cost overruns to Seattle citizens, although some question whether the language has legal significance. Notwithstanding that provision, the City of Seattle committed $930 million and the Port of Seattle $300 million to finance the tunnel. Although the exact tax consequences of these commitments are not totally clear, it is safe to assume that the Port's contribution would result in higher property taxes for Seattle property owners, and the City's pledge would be funded with increases in property taxes, City Light utility rates, and possibly other taxes and fees.

  • Do you support the plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a bored tunnel? Why or why not?

    • The deep bore tunnel is the least/worst solution to the viaduct replacement. Creating another monstrosity would not only create havoc downtown for years and years, it eliminates the opportunity to create a truly fabulous waterfront area. But if we think in the long term, a deep bore tunnel makes sense.

    But the tunnel plan is flawed. It effectively cuts of the northwest quadrant of Seattle from smooth access to US 99. SDOT's solution is laizes faire at best. More creative work is needed to see that Market, Nickerson, Mercer and the waterfront are able to take up the slack. The tunnel will also have less capacity than the current viaduct.

    A third lane in the tunnel would solve a lot of these problems. Did anyone even look into that?

  • If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?

    • Before we can even address that, we need to determine the legality of the cost-overruns verbiage.

  • If you oppose the tunnel, what would you do to prevent its implementation?

    • N/A

Transit

Background: The City of Seattle already contributes to local transit. The City put together the financing package to construct the South Lake Union streetcar line, and the City and King County Metro share the ongoing operating costs for that line. Further, the Bridging the Gap tax package finances some Metro bus service within Seattle, and Bridging the Gap also pays for street improvements designed to expedite bus travel.

  • If elected, how do you intend to improve the in-city transit system?

Specifically, we need to increase off-hour transit for retirees. This should also be done with smaller more gas-efficient vehicles. Bear in mind that this part of the population will continue to grow as the baby boom ages. Route restructure is an ongoing situation.

Bicycle Infrastructure

Background: The City of Seattle has adopted a Bicycle Master Plan, which provides a vision for improving bicycling facilities in Seattle.

  • Do you support the Bicycle Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • There is entirely too much controversy and ambiguity surrounding bicycling in Seattle and its rules of the road. I propose that we gather a panel of various interests - a “Bicycle Summit” including the Cascade Bicycle Club, Bicycle Alliance of Washington, Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board, .83, Critical Mass (that's right) SDOT, SPD, DMV, AAA and others to create a comprehensive bicycle code for Seattle. The code would provide the necessary guidelines to provide much needed bicycle safety. It would be go a long way in clearly defining the relationship between bicyclists, drivers and pedestrians. The goal is to ensure the safety of everybody. It would be as much for drivers as it would for riders.

    a bike-sharing program

    The best way to increase ridership is to increase bicycle safety. Bicycle lanes are nice but they are not very reassuring. The City should consider creating more of a boundary than just paint. One idea would be to install "road turtles" to help define the left edge of a bicycle lane.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

Take a look at the SDOT budget. Notice that

 

Pedestrian Infrastructure

The City Council is considering whether to adopt a draft Pedestrian Master Plan.

  • Do you support the Pedestrian Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • It needs a greater focus on safety.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

I generally look to associated uses for funding. In this case any revenues derived from the transportation sector.

Land Use and Multifamily Housing

Background: According to U.S. Census data cited in the Seattle Comprehensive Plan, about half of Seattle's households live in multifamily housing. Further, according to the Plan, approximately 40% of Seattle's total land area is set aside for residential use-35% for single-family residences but only 5% for multifamily dwellings. That 5% dedicated to multifamily housing tends to be concentrated in "urban villages" or along arterial streets, which are noisy and dirty. However, "backyard cottages" (also known as "detached accessory dwelling units) are also allowed in singe-family zones in Southeast Seattle.

I reject the premise of this question that housing in urban villages is undesirable ("noisy and dirty") and I think it is irresponsible on a number of levels to suggest we should depart from the urban village strategy we agreed upon as a city in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

  • Would you support legislation to allow backyard cottages to be built in all single-family zones? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • Would you ever support a contract rezone or a broader rezone allowing for more housing to be built on a site? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?

The criteria should be based upon neighborhood character, identity, scale and density.

Many newly built townhouses in Seattle are architectural atrocities, and site plans tend to be car-dominated. Most townhouse developments are exempt from the City of Seattle's Design Review Program. It is also difficult to find attractive new condos and apartment buildings. To address some of these problems, the City Council is considering a package of revisions to the zoning code.

  • Do you support the proposed revisions to the multifamily housing zoning code? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the revisions, do you have ideas for improving the proposed revisions?

    • Underground parking (increases open space)
    Shed roofs (better sight lines and interior lighting

City Governance

Yes.

Creative Response

  • If you have additional thoughts on how to improve Seattle's city government or to make Seattle a more livable and sustainable city, please note them here.

Vote Clean Seattle combined with the proposal to create geographic districts for City Council seats are both an improvement over the existing system.

I suggest we increase Seattle's tree canopy by identifying government owned land where trees can be planted. Acres and acres of such land exists. I further suggest that we contact Weyerhaueser and Plum Creek Timber to provide these trees as an effort to improve their tattered public image. Just one idea.