Olympia Time

History, politics, people of Oly WA

Author: Emmett O'Connell (Page 61 of 177)

Lacey election results: I don’t care who started it, you’re both in trouble!

November 4, 2009 / / 0 Comments

My coworker recently on Facebook:

My new thing is I will not pick “winners…” in “She hit me – he threw something at me” fights. “Everybody loses!” No T.V. (which they already have two days of that a week) Tuesday EITHER!!

The city of Lacey and the Lacey Fire District got into a very public fight and both got sent to their room.

All three challenged incumbents for city council positions in Lacey were shown the door last night. As Ken Balsley probably correctly asserts, the results had a lot do with the engagement of fire department union. I’d also point out that this was the first time in a lot of years that three good candidates squared off against three incumbents in Lacey.

What should also be noted is that the one fire commissioner in the Lacey 3 was also booted out in favor of a guy that said he would cooperate with the city. While as far as I can tell Gene Dobry is short on specific remedies for the stalemate between the city and the district, he sure doesn’t like fighting:

The past two levy failures for the fire district show a lack of confidence by the citizens, as well as an economic situation where taxpayers can’t afford to pay more, Dobry noted. He believes the fire district needs to work harder to live within its means while providing the best service to the people.

“Although litigation was prevented, the contract with the City of Lacey will end a year earlier than planned,” Dobry said. “Then what? Does the district rely on county tax revenues entirely? Does the city start its own fire district? These are likely to be lose-lose solutions and not worthwhile endeavors for Lacey-area citizens who need consistent protection.”

Dobry is speaking out for the people on uncontrolled spending and ineffective leadership. He is seeking the office to ensure the best interests of the people will be served. He lives in Lacey with his wife Rachel.

And…

Current leaders must accept responsibility for failed policies, overspending and the disharmony created with its city partner. I offer fresh leadership with a plan to restore confidence in the district. Introducing my “R” plan: revive the volunteer force, renegotiate with the city, and refuse to overspend. If you agree, I ask for your support and your vote.

So, while I’d say the fight between the district and the city had a lot to do with the elections results, there were no winners. Both the city and the district were punished for not being able to come to agreement.

Bullies on being bullied ( Roy and Valerie Hartwell on the west side of Olympia)

November 4, 2009 / / 0 Comments

So, were Roy and Valerie Hartwell able to get into the private, no mean people who disagree with us allowed, celebration for R-71 going down in a ball of flames?

It’s one thing to try to make a run around state disclosure laws and act extra careful to make sure no one disagrees with you to your face on election night. But its something completely different when your own campaign takes on the exact same tactics that you claim to be afraid of.

Report: anti-71 protesters bully on the westside

November 2, 2009 / / 0 Comments

We were on our way to dinner tonight, and thought it was strange that dozens of “No on R 71” folks were out in force on the westside of Olympia (a pretty liberal part of even Olympia). But, after reading this it make a lot of sense.

Via facebook:

Action Alert: We need more sign-wavers next 2 days to ensure our safety in numbers:

Olympia’s sign waving rally on Sunday the 1st (Black Lake Blvd & Cooper Point Rd) was overtaken by bullies late in the afternoon. The rally went peacefully from 12 – 4 pm. At 4 pm, Pastor Roy & his wife Valerie appeared, (local leaders of the anti-gay “Reject” campaign who are based in Dupont but lead a Church in Lacey). They had summoned 40 – 50 young men and a few young women who bullied us out of their way by jostling us and blowing painfully loud air horns close to where we were already standing. They appeared to be almost entirely Russian immigrants from one of the Tacoma churches involved in the anti-gay campaign. I asked Pastor Roy & Valerie to request their recruits to stop blaring the air horn in our ears and not to bully our sign wavers. Valerie blew me off and Pastor Roy just walked away. Ironically, last weekend when both sides were at the Lacey rally, our side made it a point to be courteous, and I even intervened in a few situations where Pastor Roy thought our people were being aggressive.

This was a pretty scary encounter. Most of our people left, including one father with a toddler. Two organizers (including myself) strongly encouraged the handful our supporters still there to leave in pairs to be safe.

Elaine’s take on the ENA city council candidate forum

October 21, 2009 / / 0 Comments

For me (I dropped off my ballot this morning) this is an interesting read, but unfortunately came too late to help me make my decision.

This is especially interesting for the candidates I didn’t vote for. Take Tony Sermonti:

Sermonti in a snazzy suit. (Note to Sermonti: I think Oly is not so much a suit kinda town.) I actually felt bad for him, because he was totally off-key on the isthmus issue, and walked right into it. I think there’s a reasonable argument to be made for developing that space (and personally I don’t give a damn about the view question), but he sure didn’t make it. He came off as classist — there’s too much subsidized housing downtown, not enough that “people like me” can buy (as an aside to the aside: what makes him think he could afford one of the proposed townhouses?) — and high-handed. That got highlighted when Mark Derricott asked him a “philosophical” question, and he responded in part by saying we don’t live in a representative democracy. I’d like to think he got that sort of backwards: we don’t live in a direct democracy, but (in theory) a representative one, in which we elect people to make decisions for us. But wow…his actual response just about set the room on fire. Thankfully, C spoke up quite loudly from off in the corner of the room, and suggested that since this was the last candidate of the evening, perhaps we should break for snacks and one-on-one conversation.

I think in a way, Sermonti is the perfect anti-Joe Hyer candidate, because if there had been a good articulation for developing the isthmus, Joe would have voted for it. But, the way it was, there was a lot of passion in the against column, a few people who really wanted it but couldn’t communicate why in a way that made sense. And, people like Elaine and I that thought it might not be a bad idea, but never heard a great argument.

Roe:

…but when she rattled off a list of issues she wanted to tackle, she mentioned making parking in downtown free again. Uh, no. After “listening in” on C’s urban studies classes, I think free parking is pretty much the last thing we need. (See the work of Donald Shoup for details, or Google for “high cost of free parking.”) I wasn’t entirely sure I heard her correctly, so I visited her site a couple of days later and yes, she does want to making parking free in downtown. So my somewhat eccentric reasoning leads me to support Joan Machlis — who wasn’t there, but it was the first night of her MPA classes, so I understand.

It surprised me that I never really considered voting for Roe. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I never really heard anything from her. At one point I was just getting the impression that she was hoping for her opposition to the isthmus development to carry to her over the line. Joan Machlis, on the other hand, always seemed to have clearly articulated positions (some of which I’ll admit I don’t agree with), but communicated to me at my level.

Its hard to say that I chose a candidate based on their website, but that’s basically what I’m saying. I could agree with Joan on a lot of issues and she communicated like it mattered.

Anyway, to get back to Elaine’s point about parking, it seems like Roe picked one more surface issue that actually has deep implications to push her over the line. No serious person who understood the city’s approach to parking downtown would suggest free parking. By even approaching it shows that she’s willing to take a cheap position to score points.

If there is no surge in shipping in Puget Sound, then what “overflow” would Olympia catch?

October 20, 2009 / / 0 Comments

One of the reason’s the Olympian supports Jeff Davis is his understanding that Olympia would catch some extra work from other ports:

Where Davis tops Peeler, in our estimation, is his optimistic vision for the Port of Olympia – from the shipping operation to the marina, and from the airport and to industrial property.

As a longshoreman, Davis understands the importance of port operations and how ports must have a tax subsidy to survive. There are a limited number of ports in this state and nation and the likelihood of creating a new port is very remote.

Davis understands that Washington is the most trade-dependent state in the nation and that one in every three jobs is tied to trade. The wheat farmer in the Palouse, the apple orchardist in Wenatchee and the Boeing engineer in Seattle all rely on port commerce for their livelihoods.

As Davis said, “Everyone benefits from an active marine terminal.”

With more and more of the products consumed in the United States being manufactured overseas, Davis understands that eventually the ports of Seattle and Tacoma and other West Coast locations will be overcrowded and marine shippers will be looking for alternative ports. With aggressive marketing, Davis thinks the marine terminal at the Port of Olympia can fill the void and be a thriving community asset that creates more jobs and commerce for the capital city and surrounding communities. He thinks there’s a real future in the shipment of windmill blades, pulp, paper and wood products.

His understanding of port growth is not so much (via Puget Sound Maritime):

The surge in import cargo to Puget Sound ports during much of the past decade was an anomaly that is unlikely to be repeated, a consultant told a joint meeting of the Seattle and Tacoma port commissioners this week.

The surge was a side effect of a port lockout and traffic congestion in California in 2002. Now that the effect is fading, rising competition from growing ports around the country — and from increasing use of “all-water” routes such as the newly enlarged Panama Canal —is likely to curtail cargo flows through Puget Sound in coming years.

The analysis, by port expert John Martin, surprised Tacoma and Seattle commissioners at a joint meeting Oct. 13. The analysis comes as the share of cargo handled by West Coast ports slipped below 50 percent for the first time in decades, according to data just released by Piers, a unit of the online Journal of Commerce.

Push poll out there against R-71

October 20, 2009 / / 0 Comments

Literally just got a push poll against R-71 on the phone a few minutes ago from an organization called “FPIW Action” (their phone number is 888-314-9416).

Here are my quickly taken notes from the poll:

The opening statement was negatively couched description of the state law, that while technically true gave was written to prompt a negative reaction. It presented the referendum as homosexual couples receiving rights without requiring responsibilities.

The first question was whether I was aware of the referendum and the second was whether I supported it. The last three were trying to place me in the political spectrum, asking if I was pro-choice, if I would vote Democratic or Republican in the next congressional election and the last if I considered myself a conservative, liberal or moderate.

And, while they said it would take 60 seconds at the beginning of the call, it took twice that long.

In the case of Veldeer v. Rogers, it comes down to attitude

October 20, 2009 / / 0 Comments

It makes total sense that most of the people who weighed in on this question did so in private. Because in the case of the two Karens up for one seat on the city council, its all about personality.

Instead of responding to the post, most people found some other way to contact me that was less public. Most likely because it isn’t very polite to say “well, that one is a jerk (Rogers) and the other doesn’t know very much (Veldeer).” While people I like and respect didn’t want to say that in public, its still worth knowing so you can decide who you’re going to vote for.

Back to the original post quickly, Thad Curtz puts up a lot of good information (some rather inside baseball), but worth reading. Darkwaterkate and Chad360 also had illustrative reasons why they support Karen Veldeer as well, which both in a way speak to my broader point below.

So, here is the collected knowledge of the larger number of people who responded in private to me:

  • The knock on Karen Veldeer is that’s she’s very nice, but not so well versed in city government. But, people say, she’ll learn on the job and make nice with other council members and citizens.
  • The knock on Karen Rogers it that she isn’t very nice at all, and while she may be better versed on the issues, may not be willing to learn on the job or get along with people.

And, on the issues, they’re about the same, so when it comes down to it, its about whether you want someone who doesn’t know how to treat people (Rogers) to someone who may be a way more humble, but will work to fill her role on the council (Veldeer).

In my final analysis, I’d rather see where the nice person ends up than see where the not so nice person fits themselves. So, I’m voting for Karen Veldeer.

The Thurston County political campaign kiss of death

October 12, 2009 / / 0 Comments

What’s the best way to lose an election in Thurston County, even if you have more resources than your opponent?

Run over a dog during a parade? No.
Yell at someone when you’re out doorbelling? I’ve actually heard about this happening, and that person didn’t win, but still no.
Have an outside group spend tons of money on your campaign in what we call “independent spending.” The candidate in this case isn’t seeking this spending, but rather, a totally independent group, with no organization with the actual campaign, puts money into the game.
And, in the past few cycles, every candidate that has had money spent in their name without their control has lost.
Independent spending in county commissioner races first started in earnest in 2006 when about 58,000 was spent for Kevin O’Sullivan and $7,000 against him. In contrast, just about $3,000 was spent in favor of his successful opponent Bob Macleod. So, despite outspending Macleod $99,000 to $63,000 in campaign money overall, the extra independent money hung around his neck like a chain and brought him down.
We see the same thing happen in 2009 when just about $20,000 was spent in the name of Democrat Jon Halvorson, $7,000 for Republican Judy Wilson and $1,403 for Robin Edmondson. Each lost, with Halvorson with the most spent, when down first in the primary.
Also, in 2008, Cathy Wolfe (Wilson’s opponent) had $6,500 spent against her in independent spending. That money ended up kicking back at Wilson.
So, with a special sort of election between Pat Beehler and Karen Valenzuela for another county commission seat this year, how will independent spending impact his race?
Well, first, it might not. The amounts of independent spending have dropped through the floor. Typically, the more conservative candidate gets more independent money spent in their name, but Beehler has only seen $1,300 go out for him.
The other part is about $260 that has been spent for Valenzuela and against Beehler and Dan Venable (who lost in the primary). I’m assuming this is the same expenditure split between its targets.
If you go by total numbers, Beehler will go down. Or, the spending will have no impact and we’ll just see who wins on their own merits.
All that said, there probably isn’t a direct connection between independent spending and victory, but rather a convenient coexistence. In short, its much more likely that independent spending will go to a candidate that some people (like builders) really want to win, but who doesn’t really have what it takes. Or, is seen as needing to be propped up.

Thurston County chamber off track (more copied forum thoughts)

October 10, 2009 / / 0 Comments

Ahem. AHHH Hem!!!

Why are candidates for the Olympia City Council, appearing at a forum in sprawling Lacey at the Worthington Center sponsored by the Thurston County Chamber of Commerce? Do they really expect Olympia residents to attend?

The Thurston County Chamber still doesn’t understand that we have three separate cities in this county – – not just one.
Those wanting to hear the Olympia City Council candidates could have attend the recent meeting of the League of Women Voters which featured all of the candidates for the Olympia City Council. It was at the Olympia Center, which happens to be in Olympia.
Additional, non-copied snark: Actually, we have five cities and two towns in Thurston County. Do we expect the residents of Yelm, Bucoda, Rainier and Tenino to drive all the way up to Lacey or Olympia in the middle of the day? Or, at night?
Seriously, I think its ok for folks from Lacey to drive a few minutes into Olympia and vice versa, but we have to stop pretending this is a Lacey/Oly fight here.
« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑