Thoughts of Adrian Cortes

CRC light rail sales tax vote: Russian Roulette for Battle Ground?

2012-01-20T10:38:00.000-08:00

Before I dive into the thesis of my argument, I must first state that this is the second opinion piece that I have put forth in regards to the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project. My last editorial, which was published by the Columbian newspaper, (and posted to this blog) was back on March 11th, 2009 (you can read it by viewing my past posts on this blog). With that said, we have a very busy election year (2012) ahead and Clark County's public transit agency, C-Tran, will be faced with a critical choice in regards to a public vote on light rail maintenance dollars. Each C-Tran board member must carry the voice of their duly elected city council jurisdictions and therefore a voice of the people who elected those officials. For example, Battle Ground council member, Bill Ganley, not only represents the voice of Battle Ground city council but he also represents the town of Yacolt and their duly elected officials. Other jurisdictions in Clark County have similar representation (see http://www.c-tran.com/meet_the_board.html to view their board composition).
      The decision before them is very clear; should the county as a whole vote on raising sales taxes to pay for light rail maintenance located in downtown Vancouver?  Or should the vote encompass the area in which light rail will operate; the city of Vancouver. A clear decision, perhaps. An easy and uncontroversial choice for the C-Tran board to make? Regardless of which side individuals take, elected officials should consider the effects (positive or negative) that such a vote will have on their constituents and the jurisdictions they represent; not their own political interests. As an elected official in the city of Battle Ground Washington, my focus is on my constituents and protecting their interest first; plain and simple. If a county wide vote on light rail is instituted this November and it passes, Battle Ground citizens (including myself) will be forced to pay for light rail located in Vancouver whether we like it or not. However, if a "Vancouver city only" vote is carried out and Vancouver residents pass it, they will pay for the tax (not Battle Ground residents) on light rail located in their own city. It is quite clear to me which direction I will be advocating for.
      I must now address a few of the arguments that I have heard in regards to this line of thinking. There are those who say that my constituents will eventually pay the sales tax even if a "Vancouver city only" vote is adopted because anyone who shops or dines in Vancouver will ultimately pay; this argument is flawed due to several points. First, my constituents are very smart and savvy; if they do not want to support light rail in Vancouver they can and will make intelligent choices on how and where they spend their dollars. Secondly, Battle Ground has a growing portfolio of shopping and dining opportunities. Thirdly, (and perhaps least important) anyone who travels around the country or in our own state understands that they may pay a fee or tax to a jurisdiction that they visit in which they never had a vote on.
     In conclusion, it is my opinion that it would be irresponsible to play "Russian Roulette" with my constituents hard-earned money. Given the outcome of the last C-Tran vote for normal bus operations (Proposition 1, last November 2011), Battle Ground and Yacolt were the only two jurisdictions in Clark County which citizens voted to not increase the sales tax.  However, since every other jurisdiction in Clark County voted in favor of the increase, it passed and Battle Ground voters will pay (as a full disclosure note, I supported this particular vote due to the potential cuts to the elderly and developmental disabled population who depend on C-Tran). Therefore, it is very conceivable that this could and will happen again should a county wide vote occur. In my mind, it is easy to say that we should let the people of the county vote however, if it passes what will these same voices tell my constituents when they have to pay for light rail in downtown Vancouver?   How will they ease their financial pain?  If Vancouver wants light rail, then they should vote on it and pay for it on their own accord. As for my constituents in Battle Ground, they neither want light rail nor wish to directly pay for it. Therefore, a "Vancouver only" vote is the personal opinion of Adrian E. Cortes*.

*Councilman w/ the City of Battle Ground, Wa, opinions expressed are Adrian's they do not reflect the City Council of Battle Ground.

A message to Battle Ground voters from Adrian Cortes, Battle Ground city councilmember-elect

2011-11-09T17:03:00.000-08:00

Thank you; Let me restate that with enthusiasm; thank you! It has been a long road filled with challenges and successes however, in the end the voters of the city of Battle Ground Washington spoke loudly and voted for me to be elected to the Battle Ground city council; I am truly grateful. Now it is time to place the campaign season behind us and move forward to provide strong and intelligent governance to our city. The challenges that face our community have not changed and neither has my commitment to tackle them head on; jobs/economic development, transportation infrastructure maintenance/improvement and protecting our public safety departments. I ask everyone who voted for me to not turn your heads now that the election is over, I will call on you for your wisdom on how to proceed with issues that will affect our city. For those of you who did not vote for me, I welcome your input as well and I extend my hand to you as we move Battle Ground forward in a fiscally responsible manner. The challenges before us are great but together, as a community, we will do great things! God Bless our city, state and God bless the United States of America!

Adrian Cortes for BG City council: running against the status quo and here's why.

2011-09-07T20:43:00.000-07:00

When we elect our leaders we expect them to say what they mean and mean what they say. Leaders who take the position of "voting for it before voting against it" represent the type of status quo politicians that the public is weary of. As election day quickly approaches, I would like to highlight a few very important statements by my opponent that voters in Battle Ground should pay particular attention to.

In his candidate statement, my opponent states, "I procured capital to enhance South Parkway, Grace and 20th Avenue. I negotiated investment for a community pool, youth soccer fields, and Old-Town business center."

Anyone who lives in Battle Ground and travels down South Parkway, and 20th Ave holds a deep understanding of the much needed transportation improvements that our roads need. However, what we also realize is the fact that none of these roads has experienced the necessary capital to enhance their needs. As Chairman of the Battle Ground Planning Commission I have a deep understanding of these projects given that we are consistently updated on these and many more projects that are on our 6 year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Again, none of these roads has any capital allocated or construction planned as of the date of this letter.

Secondly, I would like to ask my fellow Battle Ground citizens if they have ever been to a city community pool, youth soccer field, or Old-Town business center? If you answered "no" you would not be alone; none of these locations exists in the city of Battle Ground. There are no plans in place or money identified for any of these facilities, yet my opponent claims to take credit for their fictitious existence. What my opponent is claiming is not a stretch of facts, or exaggeration of truths; it is a pure and simple fraudulent claim in an effort to deceive the voters and retain his seat.

My opponent even tries to weigh in on other jurisdictional issues in an attempt to draw attention away from his less than stellar record. Examples of this include appearing to be a vocal crusader against the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project, light rail and tolls. Even though on July 21st, 2008 my opponent voted to support the locally preferred alternative of the CRC project and stated, "light rail works well during the day and it is more economical for Washington residents commuting to Oregon for work"; one has to question any position my opponent claims to take.

In conclusion, my platform has not changed since I announced earlier this year my intention to run for Battle Ground city council. (1) Promote individuals and groups that encompass pro-business, pro-economic development philosophies-grow our tax base rather that increase taxing our existing base. (2) Maintain a fiscally conservative budget but resist increasing taxes to solve structural budget issues; no new admission taxes(cinema taxes) and utility taxes. (3) We have great parks and trails but we must resist new user fees on these assets. (4) Resist outsourcing our Battle Ground Police Department which will make our families less safe.

My opponent is on record of taking the opposite position on each one of these items and I believe they are not in the best interests of Battle Ground. I ask for your support and vote this election. I look forward to being your voice, the voice of the community!

-Adrian Cortes
http://www.adriancortes.com/

It's official, I am running for Battle Ground city council.

2011-02-23T09:22:00.000-08:00

In 1994 the population of Battle Ground Washington was just over 4,700 and we are now on the verge of breaking a population of 18,000. So what makes the community of Battle Ground Washington such a special place to live? Is it having an active Chamber of Commerce that strives to promote a vigorous business and economic development climate? Is it the dedicated public safety personnel of our fire and police departments? Perhaps it is our diverse schools, non-profits and service clubs?

The answer to what makes Battle Ground such a great place is-all of the above. It is the people who care about their community and look to place service before self; this is the true definition of a great community. It is in that framework that I consistently strive to serve our community; by chairing the Battle Ground Planning Commission, being a Board member for the Battle Ground Chamber of Commerce, being a Board member for the Arc of Clark County, a Commissioner for the Vancouver-Clark Parks & Rec. Commission, and a Charter member for the Rotary club of Battle Ground just to name a few.

In the last few years more citizens are stepping forward to become involved in the changes and activities of our city-wanting to play an intricate role. They want and feel the need to have their voices heard and truly represented in times that are ever-so changing; citizens are seeing the need for high community involvement.
As we look ahead to 2011, I believe Battle Ground’s best days are yet to come. It is in that spirit that I look to announce my candidacy for Battle Ground city council. My platform is simple yet significant:

1. We must promote individuals and groups that encompass pro-business and pro-economic development philosophies. We must ensure our existing businesses grow and encourage new small business owners, entrepreneurs, and individual investors to come to Battle Ground; they will bring jobs to our community. We must look to expand our tax base rather than increasing taxes on our existing base.

2. We must manage our city’s budget responsibly however, levying new, non-voter approved taxes to solve structural budget issues is not the solution. Whether we are talking about new Cinema taxes, or increased utility taxes; I do not support these solutions period.

3. I do not support levying new user fees or user tolls on our existing Battle Ground parks assets. An entrenched, incumbent, city council member may think this a good idea but doing so with chronically high unemployment and a fragile economy is tantamount to financing our parks on the backs of the unemployed and others living in the reality of a weak economy. We must look to partner with our county and other north county partners to restructure the way we deliver parks, trails, open spaces, and recreational activities on a regional level. People do not want to hear their leaders say “how can we increase revenues?” They want leaders to say “how can we efficiently, collaborate more and seismically change the way we provide these services.”

4. We have invested millions of dollars in physical assets, training, and salaries with our public safety agencies; our fire & police departments. I do not support radically extreme ideas such as reorganizing and outsourcing our police and fire departments.

If you agree with my platform, I ask you to partner with me and allow me to be your voice; the voice of the community! God bless our city, our state, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Adrian Cortes

A leadership perspective in Battle Ground, Wa; can we do better? A personal perspective

2011-01-02T12:06:00.000-08:00

As we close the page on 2010 and open a new chapter on 2011, I would like to comment on some issues facing our city, Battle Ground, Washington.

Let me first provide a thesis to my personal views by stating the obvious; as a city, state, and nation, we continue to face deep fiscal challenges that must be addressed by action, not just words. What are some solutions to our challenges?

First, we must continue to petition that our elected officials use fiscal restraint on expenditures. Second, we must voice our opposition when our elected officials look for new, non-voter approved, tax revenues to solve budgetary issues; they dampen economic activity, burden an already high unemployed population, and once they are established, chances are they will never go away. Lastly, we must promote individuals and groups that encompass pro-business and pro-economic development agendas. One of my philosophies is we must grow our tax base, rather than increasing taxes on our base.

With those broad views, I must now respectfully comment on specific leadership dissentions I have. Over the past several months there have been two authors who have submitted letters to The Reflector newspaper who have voiced support for Councilman Paul Zandemela however, I must ask them and every Battle Ground citizen for that matter a few important questions. Can you support someone who has lobbied hard for a NEW Cinema tax to solve budgetary issues? Would you support someone who lobbies hard for new user fees or TOLLS to utilize our parks system in Battle Ground? Should you support someone who originally ran for office on “reorganizing our police department” and who currently supports “outsourcing” our Battle Ground Police? Is having the worst attendance to council meetings in the citizen’s best interest?

Mr. Zandemela will undoubtedly spin my letter in a context to fit his own needs. He has consistently stated that the Mayor or all of the Battle Ground city council is out to get him. When Mr. Zandemela was recently charged with “ethics violations” of lying to fellow councilmembers, he lashed out and utilized slick legal tactics to defer being found guilty of devious acts; although in my personal opinion he was clearly guilty. A question to ask Mr. Zandemela is what has he done for our city in the term he has served? What businesses, jobs, or economic development has he brought into our city? Has he reduced our tax burden? According to public records the only resolution Mr. Zandemala has introduced and approved while in office is placing his picture (and all other councilmembers) prominently at the entrance of Battle Ground City Hall; actions speak louder than words.

-Adrian Cortes

Battle Ground citizen advocate;

A voice of the community.

What is the future of Parks, Recreation, Natural Lands and Trails in Clark County?

2010-09-20T14:33:00.000-07:00

In May 2010, elected officials from Clark County and cities of Battle Ground, Camas, Ridgefield, Vancouver and Washougal established a blue ribbon commission to look at the future of parks and recreation funding and operations in Clark County. Each of the six local jurisdictions participating in the effort appointed two representatives to serve on the commission, which began meeting in July 2010. The commission will meet monthly through February 2011.

The commission's objective is to review the current operational and funding challenges and opportunities in each jurisdiction make specific recommendations to the participating local elected officials concerning:

Opportunities for greater collaboration in providing local and regional parks, trails, open space and recreation programs.
How to better pay for, manage, operate and govern local and regional parks, trails, open space and recreation programs.

How to establish stable, and fiscally responsible funding for these programs.

Each participating jurisdiction appointed two people to serve on the commission. La Center and Yacolt did not respond to the invitation to participate in the commission.

Clark County
Florence Wager
Vern Veysey

City of Battle Ground
Adrian Cortes
Debbi Hanson

City of Camas
Melissa Smith
Jerry Acheson

City of Ridgefield
Sean Kearns
Darrin Class
Alternate: Marie Bouvier

City of Vancouver
Roy Heikkala
Jeff Gordon

City of Washougal
David Scott
Suzanne Bachelder

Public Outreach

Take a short online survey and get involved!

The commission’s recommendations will reflect the interests, values and needs of the citizens of each participating jurisdiction. To assess the values and needs of the citizens, the commission plans to conduct two significant public outreach efforts:

Fall 2010: Learn about citizens' values and priorities when it comes to parks and recreation services and facilities in each jurisdiction.
Winter 2010-11: Gauge public support for the package of recommendations developed by the commission for consideration by elected officials in each jurisdiction.

Citizens from all six jurisdictions will be invited to participate in these comment periods in several different ways, potentially including electronic and paper comment forms, telephone surveys and/or focus groups. More detailed information will be available in advance of each outreach effort.

The commission also will host seven summit meetings with key stakeholder groups, including non-profit providers, charitable foundations, user groups, education providers, businesses, neighbors and others.

In addition, all commission meetings are open to the public, and include a public comment period. Starting in September, the meetings will be taped and aired on CVTV, Channels 21 and 23 and through their website: www.cityofvancouver.us/cvtv/cvtvindex.asp

Every other meeting will be held in the evening to encourage attendance, and the meeting locations will include each of the participating cities.

New Chairman of the Battle Ground Planning Commission

2010-05-13T09:06:00.000-07:00

During the May 12th, 2010 Battle Ground Planning Commission meeting the board elected new officers to lead the Battle Ground Planning Commission. The Commissioners unanimously voted for Adrian Cortes to lead the Commission as their newest Chairman and Michael Dalesandro as their newest Vice-Chair effective immediately

"I would like to thank my fellow Commissioners who unanimously voted for me to be the newest Chairman of the Battle Ground Planning Commission. I look forward to increasing the level of collaboration & communication with BG City Council and increasing our profile within our defined mandate"
-Adrian Cortes

About the Battle Ground Planning Commission:

The Battle Ground Planning Commission is a seven member board that is charged with advising the City Council on all legislative land use matters referred to them by the Council, including comprehensive planning, capital facility planning, transportation planning, and development codes. They meet at least one Wednesday a month at Battle Ground City Hall Chambers at 7p. For meeting dates please visit www.cityofbg.org/boards/planning_commission.php

Approaching 75yrs of serving our communities, The Arc of Clark County

2010-02-24T09:35:00.000-08:00

For more than 74 years The Arc of Clark County has been the premier advocate agency for persons with developmental disabilities, promoting inclusion and providing opportunities for independence. I currently serve on The Arc of Clark County Board of Directors along with 11 other highly respectable members of our county that encompass a will to put service before self.

As a Board member we are charged with ten basic responsibilities. These include a periodical review of the mission of the Arc of Clark County, Establishing policies that ensure the Arc of Clark County’s mission is accomplished, determine and monitor the Arc of Clark County’s programs and services, engage in effective strategic organizational planning, selecting the Executive Director when needed, supporting the Executive Director and review his/her performance, provide fiscal oversight including ensuring adequate financial resources and practices, enhancing the Arc of Clark County’s voice to the general public, develop and abide by the Arc of Clark County’s code of ethic and finally evaluate the Board in whole on a periodical basis. These responsibilities are key in ensuring the Arc of Clark County runs seamlessly and continues to provide the services to our communities.

What are the services we provide? The Arc of Clark County really meets a moral obligation of providing aid to those who cannot. I’d like to highlight a few programs the Arc of Clark County facilitates for our most vulnerable citizens.

1. SUPPORTED LIVING-Supported Living is specifically designed to assist people to "live in the least restrictive environment possible." The participants in this program are successfully living independently in their communities. The Arc supports them in this endeavor according to each individual's specific needs. For one it might be with grocery shopping, for another be budgeting and spending wisely. Almost all participants receive substantial assistance with safety, wellness, and medical concerns

2. PRIDE FOR KIDS-This program serves children from birth to three years who exhibit developmental delays. Services offered include physical, occupational and speech therapies as well as special education. There is an emphasis on parents participating in the process in order to reinforce the developmental process at home. Primary funding for this program comes from School Districts, County contracts and medical insurance.

3. REPRESENTATIVE PAYEE-This program assists individuals to manage their finances. In most cases social security has determined that an individual cannot manage their benefits without assistance. As Representative Payee, we are required to ensure that basic needs for shelter and food are met and that remaining funds are used in ways that best serve the clients' interests. The Arc strives to insure that each individual is as involved as possible within the confines of our appointed obligations. This program is funded through clients fees and donations

4. GUARDIANSHIP-This program offers court-ordered protections for some of our community's most vulnerable members. We strive to support the fullest expression of a person's interests and goals while guiding them toward choices for a safe, healthy and secure life. This program is currently funded entirely through donations.

In ending I urge each and everyone of you to take time out of your day and take a free tour of the Arc of Clark County facilities.(4th Friday of the Month Free Lunch & Tour at The Arc Family Center 6511 NE 18th St. Vancouver, Wa 98661 call 360-823-1561 to sign up) Learn about us and hopefully partner with us anyway you can. Having a sister who has developmental disabilities I have an intimate understanding of the needs of people with developmental disabilities and see the immense value of the work the Arc of Clark County provides our communities.

-Adrian Cortes

Battle Ground School District celebrates 100 years.

2010-01-08T16:00:00.000-08:00

Happy Birthday Battle Ground School District, 100 years is quite an accomplishment! Being that I am a product/graduate of the Battle Ground School district, I look forward to seeing many more years of focusing on our future....our children. www.bgsd.k12.wa.us

Our BG Police Chief firing.

2009-12-23T14:33:00.000-08:00

As 200-300 people packed the December 21st 2009 Battle Ground City Council meeting and displayed their feelings in regards to the unexpected firing of police chief James McDaniel, one thing that struck me was that it is unfortunate that it takes a controversial issue like this one to get citizen involvement and awareness of their leaders. As someone who lost an election for Battle Ground City Council by only 56 votes I fully appreciate this. Now to the crux of the issue, James McDaniel’s was a fine Chief; perhaps the best Battle Ground has had up to this point in our city’s history. He definitely was in the leadership role as our Battle Ground Police department went through profound changes that transformed it to the leading law enforcement agency in North Clark County and perhaps Clark County itself. I did not have the pleasure to work with the Chief on a day-by-day schedule so there is no way I could see the interaction and issues that may have been present; we are all human and being so makes us subject to failure, lapses in judgment and error. With that said, I have no substantial data or logic to develop an opinion on whether the firing was just.(the City Manager is not required to release such data for public scrutiny due to potential legal ramifications)

Was it legal to do so by the City Manager? I think the resounding answer is yes. We all live in an at-will employment state and unless you are apart of a Union or self-employed, being fired at anytime without cause in part of reality. After the firing occurred the City Manager stated that “He wanted to take the Police department in a new direction” and to many this would imply a “policy shift” or “policy change” not a simple administrative action. With a policy shift there are seven individuals that must be called upon for direction, our City Council. Perhaps the City Manager misspoke or perhaps he was truly trying to do a “good” thing for Mr. McDaniel’s by not placing a black mark on his resume thus hurting his future reputation, one can only guess. However one thing is for certain, regardless if you agree with the firing or not, regardless if it was the correct thing to do or not and regardless if mistakes were made or not, the firing is legally irreversible. I applaud our City Council for taking a step in the right direction by directing the initiation of an audit of the City Manager and an investigation of illegal executive session leaks. I urge in the name of transparency that they both be done with a sense of urgency. In the end, if warranted faults are found the City Council needs to take corrective action against the City Manger. If certain council members are found to have breached their fiduciary duty they need to be disciplined fully and their resignation should be demanded. If there is one positive thing that comes out of this unwanted event it is hopefully more citizens will be involved and aware of their city government and keep their leaders accountable regardless of how major or minor the issues may be. We have many important issues facing our city; from mandated storm water issues that could affect jobs and our future growth to ongoing budgetary concerns. Our local government needs active citizen involvement, collaboration and constructive criticism to work properly. We can bounce back from any setback and we can do many great things for our future.

Bridge partnership forged for the long haul?

2009-03-11T08:04:00.000-07:00

Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard and Portland Mayor Sam Adams wrote a joint opinion piece that appeared in the Columbian and Oregonian endorsing a new bridge that could accommodate up to six lanes in each direction, with a new bistate partnership managing the project through tolling, high-occupancy vehicle and toll lanes, and other mechanisms.

As a citizen from North County(Battle Ground) the I-5 bridge replacement with light rail is considered an issue that will not directly affect North County. (except those who commute to jobs in Portland using I-5) Regardless of what side you have in your veiws on this massive project one issue is raising concern for me. In the joint article that the Mayors wrote, they state:

"Because our partnership recognizes these decisions affect more than just the limited I-5 Bridge Influence Area, we propose to assess and manage other impacted areas, including the I-205 river crossing and Rose Quarter"

To me this says that we will try to impose Tolls on I-205(Regardless of the current rules in place that prohibit this) and get anyone who lives in Clark County who wishes to commute into Oregon for any reason to pay. The people of North Clark County including the cities of La Center, Ridgefield, Battle Ground & Yacolt need to speak up before we get stuck with a tax imposed by another Jurisdiction including one that does not even have Sovereign authority over us. The CRC Project Sponsors Council needs to have an accute awareness that if they wish to impose taxes & fees on their constiuents, they will have to answer to them for that however they must remember that there are other people in the same room that may not express the same thoughts.

Commissioners name Cortes to Parks Advisory Commission

2008-08-05T09:18:00.000-07:00

Just an FYI: I am proud that I was recently entrusted by the Clark County Commissioners to serve as a Vancouver-Clark Parks & Recreation Advisory Commissioner. I look forward to making a positive contribution towards the continued success of this valuable agency. Here's an excerpt from the county web site:

Vancouver, WA – The Board of Clark County Commissioners today selected Adrian E. Cortes to serve a three-year term on the Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission.Cortes background reflects a wide range of experience and achievements in executive/management development, project management and productivity improvement. Since 2000, he has been the principle broker for Cortes Financial, a full-service commercial and mortgage brokerage firm licensed in Washington, Oregon and California. Cortes was one of two final candidates for the 12-member Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. “We had two unusually outstanding candidates,” said Chair Betty Sue Morris. “Both were from smaller cities and eager to participate. What tipped the scale to Cortes was his compelling discussion about his childhood. He had very little money and parks gave him a way to became part of the social life of his community. He has an appreciation of the importance of parks in peoples’ lives and also showed interest in the environmental aspects.”Commissioner Marc Boldt was impressed that Cortes had read both the growth management and parks plans, while Commissioner Steve Stuart said Cortes is a young man with a young family from a small city with a willingness to get involved.“He has a love of trails, is a trails advocate and a bicyclist,” Stuart added. “These interests were lost with a couple of past members and he’s replacing those interests on the advisory commission.”