Category: Thurston County (Page 14 of 16)

Halvorson not in the Top Two?

August 20, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

UPDATE: From this, it looks like there are about 10,000 more ballots to count, so maybe Halvorson isn’t sunk yet. Too damn close for someone who spent that much though.

Wow. Have to say the surprise of the night so far is Jon Halvorson seemingly packing his bags early from the county commissioners race.

I think everyone sort of assume that it would be Halvorson and Romero facing off in November and the nominally funded Republican and Independent would head home. But, despite spending the most of any candidate ($39,000) and raising the most ($51,000) it just goes to show that money isn’t everything.

County Commissioner District No. 2
Vote for One 1
Sandra Romero . . . . . . . . . 3,885 31.49
Robin Edmondson . . . . . . . . 3,792 30.74
Jon W. Halvorson . . . . . . . . 3,245 26.31
Bill Pilkey. . . . . . . . . . 1,059 8.58
Lucius Daye. . . . . . . . . . 342 2.77
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 13 .11
Total . . . . . . . . . 12,336

Just a few thoughts:

1. Halvorson was running for a really long time. If memory serves, he announced in February of 2007, even before most city council candidates had gotten on the ground. Were people just tired of him?

2. He was endorsed by the local builders and well-liked by other local conservatives, but he failed to get the nomination of the local Dem party. I don’t think this had anything to do with it exactly, but…

3. Despite fears by some that Thurston County would be the prototypical “Top Two” locality with two Dems in the running in November, maybe voters really do sort themselves by party.

You have to admit that with the endorsement of the builders, Halvorson was cutting to the right of Romero. Maybe voters who wanted to vote for a more conservative candidate just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for someone who preferred Democrat?

Maybe Halvorson was just plain bad at spending his money and people just voted the labels and Romero just did a plain better job getting her name out to people who vote the Democratic label. I think that’s likely.

So called “frivolous” lawsuit upheld by State Supreme Court

August 14, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Hey, R. Scott, frivolous (and here, here) lawsuits don’t get upheld by the State Supreme Court (even partially):

We affirm the Court of Appeals in part and reverse in part. We hold a party may challenge a county’s failures to revise aspects of a comprehensive plan that are directly affected by new or recently amended GMA provisions if a petition is filed within 60 days after publication of the county’s seven year update. We hold a party may challenge a county’s failure to revise its UGA designations following a 10 year update only if there is a different OFM population projection for the county. We reverse the Court of Appeals’ holding that a county must identify and justify the use of a land market supply factor in its comprehensive plan. We remand the case to the Board to determine whether a land market supply factor was used and whether, Thurston County v. W. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., No. 80115-1 based on local circumstances, the County’s UGA designations were clearly erroneous. We reverse the Court of Appeals’ ruling that densities greater than one dwelling unit per five acres cannot be considered in determining whether a comprehensive plan provides for a variety of rural densities. We remand the case to the Board to consider whether the various densities identified by the County in the rural element and/or the use of innovative zoning techniques are sufficient to achieve a variety of rural densities.

So, the summarize:

The State Supreme Court mostly upheld the decision which seems to be the crux of the Tim Ford vs. Robin Hunt Appeals Court race (Hunt was on the appeals court that originally made the decision considered by the court).

R. Scott’s dumb argument, no matter how or how many times its copied, its still dumb.

The State Supreme Court’s email notification tool is freaking awesome.

Except they don’t explain WHY the builders are going after Robin Hunt

August 8, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

So, the Olympian points out builders money going into the Appeals Court races between Robin Hunt and Tim Ford (whose signs look a lot like John McCain’s, btw).

The three cases that the builders are trying to highlight have nothing to do with their typical common refrain of environmental protections being overboard. They’re a public disclosure case, one dealing with a sex predator and another condemnation case (well, I guess that might be close to their wheelhouse).

But, its safe to say that the builders don’t go after a judge because she ruled badly on cases involving public disclosure. They do go after a judge if she ruled on the wrong side of a case involving Thurston County’s comprehensive plan, which governs where people can build things.

From the builders’ perspective, she did (here’s the ruling).

Local conserverative blogger R. Scott has already tried to tie the case to county commision candidate Sandra Romero, who is a board member of the organization that filed the suit. He says that while defending the case that they eventually lost because of Hunt’s ruling, the county spent $1.5 million therby putting the county in deficit.

It isn’t enough for them to go after the person who filed suit against bad growth rules, they’re going after the judge who said the rules were bad.

Washington Land Use Law Blog: Thurston County v. WWGMHB
Oly Master Builders: Futurewise vs. Thurston County Ruling

Don’t waste that stamp mailing your ballot (24 locations to drop off your ballot)

August 7, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

In Thurston County, you don’t have to bother putting a stamp on your ballot, because there are 24 locations throughout the county where you can easily drop your ballot off.

Here’s my map last time I checked (some are missing because they’ve added more locations. And here’s the updated list from the county.

Chances are you will drive close to one of these locations between right now and the 19th.

R. Scott trying to change the past (it seems) to cover-up blog/LTE plagarism thing

July 28, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Things have been moving, people have been doing things since I noticed a letter to the editor which looked exactly like a blog post I had just read.

First looks like blog author, our own R. Scott, has been changing things to make everything look ok.

The post in question now carries a notice “Source: anonymous email submission,” but I’m 100 percent sure that wasn’t there the first time I read the post last week or yesterday when I noticed the similarity with the letter.

And, why would someone submit a piece anonymously to a blog and then to the Olympian as well? Newspapers don’t take anything on an anonymous basis.

And, R. Scott has changed the original post and since there are ways on the internet to see if you’ve changed something, check it out:

Click image for larger version.

This is a picture of my feed reader, Google Reader, Saturday morning. What it shows is the post in question, its original date July 25, 2008 and when it was last edited (12 hours ago on Friday night).

So, R. Scott changed his post, most likely to add the note of the anonymous submitter after all of this started Friday morning.

It is still pretty likely that the letter was plagiarized. But, if it wasn’t then R. Scott plagiarized the original anonymous version by taking credit for it.

Either way, the fun does not end there. Late on Friday night, R. Scott also published a press release on his blog, which he also quickly took down. Here’s a link to where it was and another screen shot:

Again, click the image for larger version.

Also, here’s the entire press release.

080725 romero pressrelease – Upload a Document to Scribd

So why send a press release pointing out that Sandra Romero is a board member of Futurewise? This isn’t a mystery to anyone, especially since its actually listed at her own website. And, that Futurewise sued the county for not doing its job… do you think that anyone who has been paying attention didn’t know that already?

Also, since the Olympian reported on the cost of the lawsuit back in April, what’s the point of sending a press release pointing out an already reported fact?

What’s more likely is that R. Scott wanted to point to his “anonymous email submission” in public.

There’s nothing definite there so I can’t say for certain that any of my suspicions are true, but the things that happened in the last few days do nothing to allay them.

The letter was likely copied from the blog. Either the letter writer didn’t think anyone would notice or she just didn’t care.

Anti-Romero letter copied from a blog

July 25, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Letter to the editor in the Olympian this morning:

Romero has cost taxpayers dearly

Sandra Romero is a board member of a powerful special-interest group called Futurewise. Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County’s comprehensive plan and cost the county an estimated $1.5 million defending against this frivolous claim.

The county commissioners have a duty to administer the state laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The commission doesn’t need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.

In Romero’s own words, “(The) budget is the biggest problem right now, it is the driver of all of our woes … with almost a $4.5 million shortfall it’s going to be very difficult to get out of it.”

Romero’s special-interest group is responsible for over 25 percent of the current budget crisis, and I’m not willing to send her in to try and fix it. This would be like sending the fox to the hen house.

Please join me in voting for any one of the other three candidates.

Cathy Franzmann, Lacey

Thurston Pundits (written by R. Scott) 10 days ago:

Sandra Romero is a board member of a powerful special-interest group called ‘Futurewise’. Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County’s comprehensive plan and cost the County an estimated 1.5 million dollars defending against this frivolous claim.

The County Commissioners have a duty to administrate the State laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The Commission doesn’t need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.

In Romero’s own words, “[the] budget is the biggest problem right now, it is the driver of all of our woes … with almost a 4.5 million dollar shortfall it’s going to be very difficult to get out of it.”

Romero’s special-interest group is responsible for over 25% of the current budget crisis, and I’m not willing to send her in to try and fix it. This would be like sending the fox to the hen house. Please join me in voting for any one of the other three candidates.

Wow. Nothing more I can really say about that.

One last Lakefair laugh (Republican Party as GOP)

July 24, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Forwarded by a fellow Thurston Dem:

Just a couple of thoughts.

Their sign isn’t very big, but with the wilting upper right hand corner, can you see that this is the Republican booth at Lakefair? I didn’t get down this far (only as far north on Water Street to get a Demo burger and an Elephant Ear), so I didn’t see this myself.

Maybe they didn’t have a big enough sign to be able to say “Thurston County Republicans?”

Maybe they didn’t have enough money for a second sign that said “Thurston County Republicans?” And, why don’t they sell burgers?

Maybe they’re guilty of the same distraction as Dino Rossi. Maybe no one will realize they’re Republicans?

Actually current leadership, not Sandra, cost Thurston County $1.5 million

July 16, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

R. Scott blames Sandra Romero for pointing out where Thurston County was wrong:

Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County’s comprehensive plan and cost the County an estimated 1.5 million dollars defending against this frivolous claim.

The County Commissioners have a duty to administrate the State laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The Commission doesn’t need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.

Wouldn’t a frivolous claim, that the rules in Thurston County governing growth didn’t jive with state mandates, be thrown out by the courts? It would, but R. Scott lied when he characterized the nature of the lawsuit and how it ended up. Futurewise actually won the case.

Even the local builder’s association admits this:

According to Andy Cook, BIAW Legal Counsel “the decision is a mixed bag, but mostly a loss”. The court ruled that the Growth Management Hearings Board did not err in ruling the Thurston Count’s urban growth areas were too large. Cook noted, that “the court completely dismissed our arguments and evidence showing that the Board made a clerical error in finding that the UGAs were too large.”

So is it frivolous to challenge government action that you think is wrong? Is it frivolous when two judges agree with you?

For your refernce’s here’s Washington Land Use Law blog’s post on the topic.

Filing week notes in Thurston County

June 7, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Full results here.

There’s a handful of Democratic candidates that are describing themselves at preferring the “Democrat Party,” Which no self-respecting Democrat.”ic candidate would actually do. I think the blame falls on the online form.

But, that doesn’t explain why the two non-Democratic candidates for the open house seat in the 35th LD (just north of here) couldn’t say Republican. Heck, they couldn’t even say G.O.P., which seems to be the popular alternative.

Once, Herb Baze, just said R Party. Yeah, OK.

The other one, Randy Neatherlin, described his preference as “Prefers No Gas Taxes (R) Party.” I guess, “Prefers sunshine and lollypops and everyone being happy and stay off my lawn (R) Party” wouldn’t fit.

Back in Thurston County, there are four candidates for an open PUD seat. The Thurston PUD has a very limited scope, providing utilities to an urbanized, but not incorporated area of Thurston County called Tanglewild. The PUD has had a grander vision, becoming the water supplier of Thurston County, but the cities haven’t liked that idea at all. They also run a handful of other water systems across the South Sound.

Anyway, two guys from Rochester, Lowell Deguise and John R. Blacklaw, and two guys from Olympia, Chris Stearns and Terence Artz, are running. I’m assuming the PUD also runs a water system down in Rochester, so those folks see an interest in having a say.

Yeah! Ken Balsley’s on the internet!

May 13, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Sweet.

Ken is awesome, and not because I agree with him. Actually, he’s about as opposite as I get. But, in addition to his KGY commentaries (which I never hear anymore because I’m never in the car when they’re on), he’s doing a blog.

Great stuff like this:

To really understand the answer to that question we have to go back to World War II and the Olympia Airport. During WW2 army military pilots used to train at the Olympia Airport and flew scouting missions out over the Pacific looking for Japanese sumarines and planes.

Across the street from the Olympia Airport sat the Airport Inn, a typical Northwest tavern. It was here that pilots, when off duty, would hang out and it was at the Airport Inn where local boys also found time to lift a beer or two.

One evening the two groups met, exchanged words (no one is certain over what but is was suggested a girl was involved) and a fight broke out. Nearly two dozen people were involved.

After investigating the incident, the military commander at Ft. Lewis put Thurston County off-limits. And it remained off limits for decades.

Soliders arriving at Ft. Lewis were told to look in Pierce County for housing and to stay away from Thurston County. And they did. For all of the 1950’s and most of the 1960’s it was rare, extremely rare, to see military uniforms anywhere in Thurston County.

And stupid stuff like this:

Why do we need to allow “Tent Cities” in Lacey anyway? There seem to be plenty of churches and organizations in Tumwater and Olympia which want to provide this service. I don’t think it’s necessary that Lacey join the fray. It also seems to me that the recent Lacey City Council’s 4-3 vote on requiring churches to keep homeless populations inside was just an excuse for banning homeless encampments. A good one, if you ask me.

(Answer: because freedom of religion is for everyone, everywhere).

But, he’s blogging, so: Freakin’ Yeah!