Pierce County Executive, Bruce Dammeier announcement.
I did something this week that I rarely do – I vetoed a piece of legislation that came to me from the Council.
In the nearly 7 years I’ve held this office I have only used my veto on 7 occasions, including this week’s veto.
So, why did I do it?
Context is important, so remember that housing affordability and chronic homelessness are two significant challenges facing our community. We need more than 50,000 affordable homes for our low- and lower-income neighbors. Additionally, hundreds of people are dying on our streets trapped in addiction and untreated mental illness.
Last fall, the Council adopted a wide range of updates for our residential development regulations and created several new types of uses and housing types including shared housing. (I recently visited a “shared housing” home in Lakewood with our Director of Human Services, Heather Moss).
This past Spring, the Council further expanded the “shared housing” use in the Residential Resource (RR) zone within the Parkland-Spanaway-Midland communities.
While RR zones have some sensitive areas, any project on any property would have to ensure the environment is appropriately protected and all regulations were met. Additionally, this revision allowed our Pierce County Village to move forward on the preferred site. I have blogged about the Village previously, but it is an innovative community-focused model for chronically homeless. It has proven very effective in Austin, Texas in helping people get well and take back control of their lives – both by working and paying rent. Our Village proposal includes a public-private partnership with the Tacoma Rescue Mission (TRM).
Not surprisingly, but disappointingly, Futurewise appealed this expansion to the Growth Hearings Management Board (GMHB). Our attorneys believe we appropriately followed the process in adopting these changes and are not overly concerned about the appeal.
The Council, however, felt they needed to take action. First, they delayed the effective date of the development regulations amendments they adopted this spring to December 2023. This ordinance precluded any further applications before the GMHB ruled on the appeal and I signed it. So far, so good!
Then last month Council voted to repeal both that ordinance as well as the underlying ordinance entirely, also with an effective date in December. I believe these actions and the repeal are bad for our community, so I vetoed it. Furthermore, I had significant concerns about a skipped step when the Council passed this repeal.
At a time when we desperately need more low-cost housing options, going backwards is a problem. Furthermore, while the Village is technically a vested project the repeal would make it much harder for our partner TRM – both before the Hearing Examiner and in their private fundraising. My concerns were echoed by testimony from both Michael Yoder and Michael Mirra – two long-time local leaders on homelessness and affordable housing.
Lastly, I’m disappointed that the Council did not comply with their own requirement for an Equity Note for all proposed legislation. I believe a thorough assessment of the repeal’s impact on marginalized communities would have given the Council reason to reconsider.
In case you are interested in seeing the full letter I sent to Council, I’ve pasted it below for you.
The Pierce County Charter (section 2.45) speaks to what can happen next. The Council can take no action and let the veto stand, or they can schedule a vote to override the veto within 30 days. I’m hopeful they will take the time to pause and wait and see what the Growth Management Hearings Board has to say before they act again. Then we can address any real concerns.
So, there you have it.
Thanks for reading.
Bruce, unfortunately your action of advocating the placement of an asphalt paved heat sink urban village in the middle of a critical area designated Spanaway Marsh makes no sense at all other than your apparent desire to represent the interests of the Tacoma Rescue Mission Director’s misinformed and misguided property acquisition actions and the developers who will benefit from your veto action.
The Spanaway Marsh site is an environmentally sensitive and critical area that is subject to periodic and extensive epochal groundwater flooding that will increase in frequency and intensity in the years to come as a result of the climate changes that will occur as a result of global warming. The Village site that you advocate will be underwater.
I have warned you of the consequences of a Captain who runs his ship aground. This will be your fate if you persist in your irresponsible quest to nullify to the will of the people as expressed to you by by the actions of the majority of the Pierce County Council.
Ahh thou doth protest to much Bruce! It is clear you don’t have the good of the people in mind but yourself.
I applaud the Council for having the courage to make right a decision that will have disastrous effects…. I just wish it would have stopped the village also! Spanaway lake doesn’t need this environmental challenge at a critical time for improving water quality.
I must also clarify for you some facts stated by Duke in regards to the village. It is only helping a small number of chronically homeless ( those beyond the age of rehabilitation or working) . Yes they will “ pay” rent, most likely from a voucher funded by taxpayers or by “ working on site”. And since they “pay “ rent they can do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home….. such as drugs!
There as been strong public outcry against building on this site and you have forced people to take legal action so that you will be forced to do the right thing! Listen to the taxpayers and the Council!
I strongly encourage the Council to support a vote against your veto!
I have friends who live in Austin and they said the tiny home village there is a disaster! Comparing Austin to Spanaway is like comparing apples and oranges.
Every time the idle and their enablers cry for something they want and get it, they immediately cry for more.
Could it be that is how they became who they are?
As government accommodates that while stripping responsible citizens of fundamental rights, we are evermore the worse for it .
A Bolshevik doesn’t care where their free stuff comes from as long as it keeps coming.
As long as others are paying for the poor decisions of a minority cult of failure, why would they ever change?
You are still not speaking to our water concerns, Mr. Dammeier. Water is also a significant challenge facing our community. There are plenty of parcels of land that you could use for the big tiny homes village for the homeless that are not over an aquifer that provides drinking water to much of the county.
Right on Claudia. Thanks for the succinct clarity.
i am still curious about that person’s property on the creek being “ACQUIRED” for about half of it’s appraised value! He has been paying taxes on the counties appraised value and now he is being taken advantage of. Something smells fishy, explain the “Art of this “deal”! It smells like profiteering. WHO is watching out for THAT person? Without FULL VALUE being paid, how soon will he be “homeless”?
Wow….. Definitely not feeling the unity or a community trying to work together for the greater good of mankind in this room… Whether it be the government that carries the the less fortunate & the cry babies with the taxpayers money…Or the cry babies that sit in the dark corner (or tent somewhere. .) that hold, & have endured & keep some of the governments most explicit & unspeakable secrets for them selves for the damaging…It may have been ur tax dollars deducted from all these years of your hard work..(you seem to feel) wasted carrying the undeserving proverty raised side & end of the community full of cry babies. But it may have been the corruption of the government, council members, & going down on the line from there in which many have been in high positions of power/authority & have been exposed of stealing, withholding of finances within its institution to even acts of violence on & even leading to death on regular or cry baby community members leaving their family members (who are also community members) broken & with emotional burdue due to the governments, etc. actions…So at the end of every damn day just know….Which ever side u (may or may not…)choose to stand on .. Or (for whatever reasons) which side of the line YOU land on.. Some one is always going to have to bite a bullet….TO KEEP THE WAY BEING PAVED…WE ALL HAVE A POSITION TO PLAY!..
Bruce, you say you are disappointed in the council’s unanimous vote to repeal their hasty and what now seems pressured decision to permit high-density, low-income housing in environmentally sensitive areas. With the effects of climate change peppering mainstream media, I applaud the council’s decision to put the community’s natural resources and long-term health before that of its lobbyists. Unfortunately, based on your words and actions, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Pro-Development Dammeier is the disappointment.
You stated in the Tacoma News Tribune article that you “rarely” veto council decisions. “In my six-and-a-half years, this is my seventh veto.” Even a five-year-old knows that this equates to more than one per year, which hardly seems rare. Not to mention your complete undermining of the democratic process. Sadly, we too are very disappointed.
Finally, you have failed to address the concerns raised by the community, your constituents, who voted you into office. Instead, you have resorted to gaslighting, emotional manipulation, and even name-calling. Perhaps if you strived to address concerns raised by the community, you would avoid painting yourself and your supporters in such a negative light. As stated in a previously written Suburban Times article you fail to address, preserve, or improve our county’s dwindling natural resources. Instead, you choose to pave over them. Your actions clearly demonstrate that any protection granted by previous, more adept, administrations can be easily overruled with the stroke of a pen. Should you choose to further your political career, in the same way, you have failed to serve your community and protect its natural resources, you will also fail to gain the community’s support and vote. Your decision-making process has been disappointing, to say the least. I support the council’s decision to repeal Ordinance No. 2023-5s as well as Ordinance No. 2023-14.
Mr. Dammeier’s veto clearly demonstrates, in the face of such intense public outcry in response to what is clearly a horrific project, that he is not interested in what is best for the people of Pierce County, or its environment, but in what is best for those who are pushing this and similar future projects.
His veto also shows unequivocally that he is unfit to hold office and should step down.
Protection of the environment needs to be prioritized in Pierce County, like everywhere, more today than ever before.
This is NOT the place to place an urban style village – no matter how small the houses are. This is an environmentally important Critical Area and needs to be left alone. Place this urban style community where there are transit services and other community amenities that can support it – as required by the Growth Management Act. This project is a blatant disregard of state, federal and Pierce County’s own environmental regulations. Build it in an area that could use revitalization and can be repurposed. A recent example of this is the old K-Mart site in Tacoma. Plan better than this Pierce County!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnqR1Fekcoo
It’s clear you have more underlying motives than you will provide the public. You currently are supposed to work for the people not special interest or groups. Nothing is government funded it is tax payer funded. You have moved many stones to get to this point. It’s alway a mistake when officials ignore their constituents while providing privileges for certain communities. One thing that is clear is you are all in an echo chamber and think you have the answer for a community you are so far disconnected from. It is the classic savior complex scenario. It is not a mistake to admit when wrong and walk away instead of digging in deeper.
Mr. Damemier,
Vetoing a 7-0 vote to eliminate protections on “rural resource” zoning of wetland areas and the like sort of clarifies your pro building stance no matter what. I hope the council has the guts to override your veto. Brandi Kruse said it well about homeless housing currently underused.
Your veto just shows the selfish ways of some short sighted politicians. Why is this not a vote of the people of pierce county since you clearly won’t listen to the council.