I attended the annual State of Downtown breakfast hosted by the Downtown Seattle Association a couple of mornings ago. The room at the Convention Center was jam packed with business people sharing glum awe over the cliff the economy had driven over. Maybe that's why a page of the DSA 2009 State of Downtown Economic Report gleamed so brightly. Check out a few bright spots:

Seattle is #1

• Seattle forecasted as the best overall 2009 real estate marketplace and ranks #1 for Commercial/Multi-Family Investment (the Urban Land Institute and PriceWaterhouseCoopers, October 2008)
• Seattle continues to have the most LEED-certified buildings in the nation (U.S. Green Building Council, April 2008)
• Seattle continued to have the nation's highest number of arts-related businesses per capita in 2008 (Creative Industries 2008: the 50 City Report, January 2008)
• Seattle leads the nation in technology job creation (Trade in the Cyberstates 2008: A State-by-State Overview of High-Tech International Trade, Summer 2008)
• Seattle is the best in the country for cafes and coffee bars, farmer's markets, and intelligent people. (Travel+Leisure Magazine, October 2008)

OK, all the citations reference 2008 and 2009 may be different, but it's nice to read some good news and be reminded of what we do right sometimes.

In talking on the the Sunday editorial page about the federal stimulus package and the Obama Administration's willingness to focus on cities starved in the Bush era, Jim Vesely writes:

"At the end of the day, cities are whole and not accumulations of individual neighborhoods."

This may be the toughest concept to drive home during the neighborhood plan updates. Wallingford works as Wallingford only if all our neighborhoods make up a whole, healthy city in which people can hatch safe, affordable, sustainable lives.

One of the things I sometimes have trouble with is giving short answers. Another reason the Land Use Committee is great for me. There are no short answers when it comes to land use. People have been asking me if I support HB 1490 and I do my usual, "Well, I like many parts of the bill, but I can't support others." Not a satisfying answer to a reporter or neighborhood advocate seeking a yes or no.

HB 1490 is a piece of legislation being debated in Olympia that ties together transportation, land use and green house gas emissions. For many people, the most notable section of the bill (as it is drafted now) would require that within a half mile radius of a light rail station that cities zone for a minimum of 50 units per acre on average. The bill also requires the provision of affordable housing in station areas and replacement of affordable housing lost in new development. Much of that sits in the shadow of the minimum density figure, though. The minimum allowed density would apply to every light rail station neighborhood in Seattle and the Sounder stop cities like Kent, Auburn, Federal Way and Sumner.

While I really, really like the affordable housing requirements in the bill, it would be hard for me to support a minimum density number handed down from the state with no involvement from Seattle neighborhoods. Light rail station areas should grow more dense over time. (Some are already pretty dense, like Capitol Hill and the U-District and might not be affected by the legislation at all.) It makes a lot of sense to group apartments and condos near the stations so people have the option to use their car less or maybe even live without a car. Seattle neighborhoods have set the table for this kind of development through neighborhood and station area planning. I think that's where the hard work of planning for growth belongs.

There's a lot of rhetoric flying around about the bill, it's goals, the sponsors' intentions, the opponents' intentions, and current zoning capacity. And so I am hosting a workshop Wednesday, Feb. 18, 6 p.m., at Langston Hughes Cultural Center (17th and Yesler). We'll hear from proponents of the bill (Futurewise and the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance), opponents (Seattle Displacement Coalition), neutral land use experts (from the Urban Land Institute) and from many neighborhood advocates. The goal is to provide information and to ask questions. It's up to you then to make your voice heard in Olympia.

Deep. That's the upshot from an early estimate we received this morning in the Council's Finance & Budget Committee. When we wrapped up the budget building process for 2009-2010 in November of last year, we had closed a $19 million budget gap that had opened between the Mayor finalizing his proposed budget in September and the Council's pre-Thanksgiving adoption of a final version. We cut a few people and a few programs. We deferred a few projects.

Now it seems the sales tax and business and occupation tax numbers for the fourth quarter of 2008 will likely be worse than we thought due to the overall economy and the bad weather. We're looking at having to fill another estimated $7.5 million gap in the 2008 budget. Then, adjusting future revenue expectations further down based on the economic slide of the past couple of months, we might have more than another $16 million to cut out in order to balance the 2009 budget.

The real numbers come out in April. That's when we start trying to figure out how much we cut from General Fund services (police, fire, parks, human services, etc.) and how much we take from the Rainy Day Fund (the Revenue Stabilization Account). The Rainy Day Fund has a little over $30 million. That may sound like a lot, but it might be raining for a couple of years given the national economy. The trick will be to use the Rainy Day Fund and cuts in the right proportions. Watch this spring for the difficult discussion about priorities and how hard it's raining.