||| FROM MARKETPLACE.ORG ||| AT REQUEST OF OCASONIAN READER
From the driver’s seat of a yellow school bus with Orcas Island School District on the side, Matthew Steward is training for his newest side hustle: substitute bus driver in the San Juans, a series of lush, forested islands in Washington state that are popular with vacationers.
As Steward stops the bus in a neighborhood, an instructor reminds him what to do.
“Open your door … say ‘Quiet —’” the instructor said.
“Quiet on the bus,” Steward said. He already drives a bus for another part-time position at the YMCA, but neither of those are Steward’s main job. He’s a full-time maintenance worker for the San Juan County government.
Part of the reason he’s training for yet another side job: This month, the county government is switching most of its employees to 32 hours a week and keeping compensation the same.
Does this mean that, in addition to paying all SJ County employees the same amount for a 32 hour work week as they would be making working a 40 hour work week, our county is also paying part time people to cover that 5th day for jobs that require 5 day a week service, e.g. school bus drivers?
If I understand this correctly, the main reason for this change is to recruit and retain County employees, but at considerably greater expense. I would like to know what that cost will be, and where the additional funding will come from.
From the article (if one reads it in its entirety)
“Steward is not the only person with three jobs here. The San Juans are a haven for the wealthy; almost 40% of homes here are vacation or second homes. For everyone else, the cost of living is very high. There’s a saying on the islands: Everyone either has three homes or three jobs. ”
Income disparity – the elephant in a room of blindfolded people. Almost 40% of homes as VR or second (or third) homes. THIS is the culprit of why people need three jobs. The glut of unlimited, virtually unregulated growth – too little enforcement. No to way too low fines – I suppose the county is too afraid of being sued (again!)
If the county doesn’t face, and fix, the VR and land use issues soon, people will need 4 jobs… or I suppose they can simply be bussed and barged over from their barracks housing near the Monroe State Prison.
The pandemic did not help – vaccine mandates, firings, and the biggest wealth transfer in history.
Jean and Sadie–thank you. “Elephant in a room of blindfolded people…biggest wealth transfer in history.” Yes–the County and its residents are the tail being wagged by this national (international) seismic economic shift…and we haven’t figured out what to do about it yet.
Thank you for returning WE ARE BEING TOLD TODAY IS
21 October 2023, 11:33 AM. Have missed it. Carol Dickey
In support of the idea that trying new things is the only way to see what actually works, I think this experiment is worth trying.
(from the Aug 22nd article in the Seattle Times)
The San Juan County Council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve the change, which officials negotiated with a labor union that represents 142 nurses, environmental stewards, road-crew workers, park workers, clerks and other county employees. They account for about 70% of the county’s labor force. Sheriff’s Office employees and managers won’t be affected.
We cannot solve the global problem of wealth disparity from San Juan County, but we can try novel approaches to mitigation here (that may or may not work at different scales). Maybe this giving county employees a 20% raise and giving them Fridays off will work! Or maybe not! But whether it works or not, it should not be the last novel idea that is tried.
What about re-zoning some Rural Residential (5 acre minimum) zoning to allow for small clusters of county owned – employee rental housing? Especially for newly hired county employees coming from off island, finding acceptable, affordable rental housing has always been difficult and it is a big commitment to buy a house in SJC when you are just starting in a new job and maybe even in a probationary period to start.
Clearly San Juan County needs to face the reality that essential work requires essential workers and those workers need to live somewhere. Housing that is tied to employment has historically been problematic when it is owned and managed by for-profit corporations, but surely those problems can be reduced or eliminated when the “company” is the county.
There are a number of 3 story apartment buildings going up in Anacortes and Burlington recently and I wonder if that idea shouldn’t be explored here as well. There are significant energy efficiencies associated with modest apartment buildings and they don’t have to be architecturally hideous, concrete “projects” like the 1960’s urban renewal failures. Europe has literally millions of modest scale apartment buildings with long-term rentals that have been and are beautiful, welcoming homes for generations of people. We have some obsession with having a bit of land (to mow) and a free-standing house to live in (and maintain), here in America. Renting is also a valid way to provide shelter for oneself! The condominium model of ownership also has much to recommend it for many people.
I would like to see a focus on generating and discussing ideas that might help instead of just complaining on this forum.
The 32 hour work week for county employees is a good thing for giving people, especially families with children, more options. However,
at the end of the month income is the same and housing is unaffordable. That is the issue. I agree with Ken Wood we need to find a way
to provide more affordable housing such as OPAL is doing on Orcas. OPAL’s recent projects are energy efficient duplex/townhouse models.
Perhaps the county can find other ways to seed more non-profit housing options. More housing within walking distance to shopping/libraries/
entertainment builds community and is energy efficient/low carbon. That’s the way we used to do it – pre-automobile!
I know i’ll get pushback from this, but why not some apartment housing in hamlets? why should a wetland watershed be taking the brunt of this, only to see much of what is built here turn into luxury condos for people who don’t even live here or turn what they build into VRBOs in the Urban Growth Area. Not cool. Not ok. Not the original intent of UGA. ALSO – why should only working class low income and poor pay all the utilities and people outside the UGA not have to pay for water, sewer, etc? How about a UGA use tax for all those who use, but don’t live in the UGA? I can just hear the outrage over that idea. It could be sliding scale according to income, of course. When anyone mentions the income disparity and over-tourism fomented by greed and nothing more, people get all up in arms. But don’t these two truths dictate what is happening here?
Since covid we’ve seen the biggest land grab in history and increase in air travel for those who can avoid using ferries. It’s all there if people dare to look and admit these truths are the problem – as well as our seeming inability to do much about them, as concerns government since we have given up our power TO govern by not being involved or using our voices – and I know some of you are sick of my using mine but it’s the only dignity left so i’m going to keep using it. “All for One and One for All” – NO not mandated socialism – we have got to collectively do some serious individual self-examination if we are ever going to collectively do the right things. That is not encouraged in our me me mememe culture.
btw, those were ideas, Ken. Fees according to income. Not flat tax/one size doesn’t fit all ideas. I like your idea of defunding some things like the visitors bureau. Not sure what you mean in the first idea – and, mandates seem to suck no matter who orders them. I would like to see us come up with this as free people who can think and have compassion for all situations. Longer, more arduous process but we have to wrest back government from a few officials and be involved. Don’t know how to encourage that.