History, politics, people of Oly WA

Category: Thurston County (Page 15 of 16)

Did Jon Halvorson scrub Judy Wilson from his website?

Before Judy Wilson decided she was going to run for Thurston County Commission again Jon Halvorson had her endorsement listed proudly on his website. Makes sense, right? Former Republican county commissioner, she brings both experience and cross-party cred to his endorsment list.

One of Halvorson’s selling points is that he’s endorsed by a lot of county level pols, including at one point (more later) Judy Wilson, a former county commissioner. The question was, now that Judy is running, would he endorse her back, pitting himself against sitting Democratic commissioner Cathy Wolfe?

Looks like that problem has cleaned itself up as Halvorson has scrubbed Wilson from his website.

Check out his new endorsement list here and check out the old list, archived here and screen shot below:

Sandra Romero nominated by Thurston County Democrats

Sandra Romero was nominated earlier tonight by a vote of 77 to 63. Its a sham and a shame, but its something we do now.

I got there late, but here are my notes from tonight. I’ll hopefully get some time tomorrow to distill my thoughts down. Ignore the typos please:

Turns out I wasn’t too late, walked in about 7:30 and John Cusick was still getting through the “why exactly we’re doing this again?”

Guy Hoyle Dobson made a valient effort. Weird, I usually disagree with anything Guy has to say, but he made the point of the weird difference between a nomination and an endorsment.

Another lady named Virginia, a PCO, made the point that the state party shouldn’t be telling us what to do. We made a resolution from the floor that we wouldn’t endorse before the primary during the convention and now it looks like we’re going the other way.

Commissioner district 1, Cathy Wolfe nominated by acclimation. I tried to vote no, but it went quicker than I expected.

A few minutes of clearing up everyone in District 2 had the right colored cards. That’s how we do credentials in Thurston County, you lift up a different colored card depending on whether you’re a PCO, member (and for tonight) where you live. Second district PCOs have blue cards, District 1, pink and PCOs, smaller green cards. So, to keep that straight, I have a pink and green card. The people seeing the real action tonight have blue (district 2) and green (PCOs).

One of the things we didn’t really talk about tonight is that someone else could have (theoretically speaking) stood up and stolen the nomination from Cathy, Sandra and John.

John Halvorson talks first. “Who’s ready to vote Democrat!?!?” Yeaaaah says everyone. Then he goes into a pretty basic schpeal:

He’s experienced, he’s been elected before, he’s lived here a long time. Almost every county official in this courthouse has endorsed me.

Sandra and I like each other today, we’ll like each other tomorrow and tomorrow we’ll still be Democrats.

Romero speaks second.

Legislative experience, working in the joint Transportation committee. We need more than roads, we need alternatives.

We need to make sure we don’t become everywhere else USA. This is why I support Sandra, she worked so hard with the livable Thurston Campaign. She isn’t just running on experience or who she knows, but rather what exactly she’s going to do.

Circle name and sign on the back. Not a secret ballot.

Ironically, Fred Finn got the real endorsement/nomination whatever of the Thurston County Democrats by getting campaign services.

Sandra wins the nomination. What was the vote?

I want to thank both candidates for putting up with this rushed and unanticipated thing we had to do tonight.

We voted not to report the vote.

Longer Sandra Romero (than the Olympian let on)

Through the cloud of email comes a summary of what county commission candidate Sandra Romero (endorsed by me) sent to the Olympian and what the Olympian actually wrote for this article.

It was a normal side box summary of the candidate’s positions, which took some input from the candidates themselves. Apparently the nuances of Romero’s positions were muddled.

My answers to The Olympian questionnaire before they edited them.

1. Land use, hitting a balance between growth and economic development.

Growth is inevitable…. surely so here in Thurston County. We must do a much better job of guiding development. Indiscriminate ‘economic development’… indiscriminate ‘growth’… make almost all of us ‘poorer’. The community, as a whole, is unquestionably ‘the loser’ when it comes to indiscriminate ‘rapid growth’. Given Thurston County’s location, at the ever-growing southern edge of Metro Puget Sound… just any kind of growth doesn’t need to be courted here… growth is going to locate itself here, regardless of whether we court it or not. To the extent we court growth, it should be quality growth.

The challenge is for us is to retain our unique character and not become “everywhere else USA”

We need to become a community that so loves and honors what’s left of our local natural treasurers that we give ourselves a local government that will assertively, consistently, act to preserve that which cannot be replaced. Thurston County must come to grips with the vulnerability and perishability of its remaining natural environment. We can’t possibly preserve an adequate portion of natural Thurston County by simply maintaining a few County Parks and purchasing a few development rights out in the rural areas. I am a charter member of the Nisqually Land Trust and on the Advisory Council of the Capitol Land Trust and know there is not enough money to purchase all that is necessary to protect our drinking water, air quality, restore Puget Sound and protect our rivers and streams. I think we can do a better job in implementing conservation market strategies, like transfer of development rights, to preserve rural lands. We must come to realize that the only viable pathway to avoiding ‘sprawl’ and the permanent loss of irreplaceable natural settings in Thurston County… is a stand-up Thurston County government that will champion that objective, stick to that principle, and not waver in the face of short-term pressure for more tax revenues and the unrelenting pressure tactics of the “build everything everywhere right now” usually from out of county special interests. When it comes to tax burdens that result from ‘new construction’, we must require ‘new construction’ to pay for its proportionate share of increased public costs.

Olympian version:

ROMERO: Thurston County must come to grips with the vulnerability and perishability of its remaining natural environment.

I am a charter member of the Nisqually Land Trust and on the Advisory Council of the Capitol Land Trust and know there is not enough money to purchase all that is necessary to protect our drinking water, air quality, restore Puget Sound and protect our rivers and streams.

I think we can do a better job in implementing conservation market strategies, like transfer of development rights, to preserve rural lands. We must require new construction to pay for its proportionate share of increased public costs.

Romero version on county budget shortfall:

Thurston County government has some extremely serious financial problems, which are not being dealt with adequately. A really major problem is a $4.5 million budget shortfall. Not ALL of Thurston County government is in extremely serious financial shape, but certain parts of it… very vital parts… are in extremely serious financial shape. 2008 is the last ‘quiet year’ before these financial troubles become no longer postponeable.

Services that are financed by the County’s ‘general taxes’…. (the general County property tax, and the ‘general’ portions of the County sales tax)… are most certainly headed towards great financial difficulty in the years just ahead. In 2008, Thurston County government will consume several million dollars in ONE-TIME, non-replaceable reserve cash… merely in order to make it through 2008 without dramatic cutbacks. It’s possible (but not advisable) that Thurston County government could do something like that again in 2009… but doing so would be very damaging, in the long-run… because the very limited one-time cash reserves of the County are just about exhausted. Meanwhile, we hear the constant drumbeats of the needs for actually increasing&nbs p;expenditures of general taxes… primarily for the County’s Law and Justice services, which consume more than 3/4ths of total general taxes now. 2009 and 2010 will be pivotal, crucial years for Thurston County government services financed by general taxes. This community needs resolve and action now from the County Commissioners.

Amidst the difficulties, there are also opportunities. We’ve got to discover and implement every possible restructuring move that can help sustain the County government through the very tough years immediately ahead. Implementing some of the strategies of the December CTED (Dept of Community, Trade and Economic Development) report, aligning department budgets with results, enhancing budget/policy analysis capabilities, integrating budget priority settings, more frequent budget updates to the County Commissioners and a strategic plan can all help in the long run. Should cuts need to be made, they should be done with knowledge and extreme care to assure top priorities are maintained.

Olympian version:

ROMERO: Thurston County has a $4.5 million budget shortfall; 2008 is the last “quiet year” before these financial troubles become no longer postponable. We’ve got to implement every possible restructuring move to help sustain county government. Aligning department budgets with results, giving more frequent budget updates to county commissioners and having a strategic plan are several steps. Any cuts should be done to maintain top priorities.

Romero’s answer on “Public safety, crime prevention, enforcement, offender treatment.”

Thurston County government devotes every available dollar… and more… to the ongoing struggle to find money to fund the ever-increasing costs and service-levels of public safety, law and justice. For example: the County’s General Fund is tasked with financing two essential categories of public services: (1) law and justice (the sheriff, the jail, the courts), and (2) the County’s several other elected public service offices (the auditor, the assessor, the treasurer, the commissioners). However, over the past 15 years (1993 to 2008)… ALL of the County’s increases to general-tax-financed public services have gone to ONE type of Count y public service: law and justice (public safety). Thurston County’s biggest financial problem is: the inability of growth in general tax revenues to keep pace with the ever-increasing costs of the ever-expanding size of County ‘law and justice services’.

One key to this is more sensible land use policies. Our county’s development patterns have resulted in neighborhoods spread all over the County, putting a massive stress on both law enforcement and street maintenance. By concentrating this development into the urban growth area, we can cut the cost of providing infrastructure dramatically.

Olympian version:

ROMERO: In the past 15 years, all of the county’s increases to general-tax-financed public services have gone to law and justice. We can keep pace with this by concentrating development in the urban growth area to cut costs to supply public-safety services in the outlying areas.

Romero on “Roads and transportation.”

The County’s road maintenance operations are primarily financed by the Road District property tax levy, which is paid by residents of unincorporated areas. Road construction, what there is of it, is primarily financed by grants from the state and federal governments. Thurston County’s Road Department does a good job with the limited financial resources that it does have. Our local State legislators do their best to assist in funding for roads projects in Thurston County. The Department needs to redouble its efforts to leverage technology… to ensure that we get the most out of the limited financ ial resources that we have for roads and transportation.

Roads are essential to our county’s livability but we must plan carefully, design our communities to minimize the number of trips needed, and invest our limited budget in key projects that help people get from home to work, to school, to shopping, and to their other community activities.

As County Commissioner, I will promote a stronger role for the county in improving regional transportation, both within the county boundaries and between Thurston County and major destinations outside of the county, particularly to the north and the south. I’ll advocate to the state for improved freeway facilities, for more park and ride facilities, and for improved regional transit and rail opportunities.

Olympian version:

ROMERO: I would promote a stronger role for the county in improving regional transportation, both within the county boundaries and between Thurston County and major destinations outside of the county. I would advocate to the state for improved freeway facilities, for more park-and-ride facilities and for improved regional transit and rail opportunities.

Romero on :The new county jail–building, staffing and operating it. “

Among the dozens of issues facing Thurston County, it’s likely that no other issue presents the levels of difficulties, dangers and risks…. as those posed by this issue. Thurston County government does not have the financial resources to ‘operate two Jails’… doesn’t have ’em now, won’t have ’em next year, or the next. Nonetheless, the laws that require the County to incarcerate criminals make no accommodation for the ‘we can’t afford it’ problem. We must jail criminals; we have more criminals than can fit in one Jail, that’s why a second jail is being built. But the County does not have the financial capacity to operate two Jails. It’s the quintessential “rock and a hard place” situation. What Thurston County needs is a Board of County Commissioners who wi ll find the courage to make the difficult choices… choices that haven’t been made yet…. choices that must be made soon.

This problem is really emblematic of the most fundamental problem facing Washington county governments today: the missions and responsibilities of County government, long ago established and persisting to this day… are not supportable by the classic tax revenues of the County government. And Tim Eyeman’s budgeting by initiative has further aggravated the problem. Thurston County needs County Commissioners who are up to the daunting challenges and fights that lie ahead… immediately ahead. It’s going to be very tough, to get done what must be done in Thurston County government, over the next four years. The time for action has come; continued postponement will really injure the fabric of Thurston County government by deterio rating the ability of the County government to deliver needed public services.

Phasing the construction of the Accountability and Restitution Center (ARC) is a good first step. But revenues will still be needed to staff and operate the structure. All possibilities for support revenues must be put on the table for consideration or we may follow some other communities that have not been able to staff and operate their brand new facilities.

Olympian version:

ROMERO: Phasing in the construction of the Accountability and Restitution Center is a good first step. But revenues still will be needed to staff and operate the structure. All possibilities for support revenues must be put on the table for consideration, or we may follow some other communities that have not been able to staff and operate their brand-new facilities.

We may not have to pay for postage on mail-in ballots

But, even more drop off boxes might be even more ideal. Maybe we can call it a “drop off” election.

Small brew-haha in Thurston County last fall when an old fellow decided not to put postage on his ballot. The ballot was delivered anyway, and the county started sending him stamps, avoiding pissing the guy off, but raising the question of why ballots don’t come with pre-paid postage in the first place.

Previous entries on the topic:
Thurston County can afford to pay for our ballots to be mailed
Why do we need to pay for stamps to vote anyway?

Well, if a bill passes this legislative session, the state will require counties to pay postage on ballots. SB 6199 (HB 1483 in the House) will have a public hearing in the Government Operations & Elections committee on Monday morning.

The house version was heard last year. Here’s the audio file.

Sam Reed, former Thurston County auditor and now secretary of state, pointed out that Thurston did at one point pay for ballot postage during special elections in the late 80s. He said that paying for postage didn’t boost participation, and that the county would pay for postage anyway if someone didn’t affix a stamp.

I think that Reed’s experiment was too inconsistent to get a real sense of whether it would increase participation.

Kim Wyman said something interesting that by expanding permanent drop off boxes open during the election cycles, they were able to somewhat solve the postage as poll tax complaint. Twenty-five percent of voters in Thurston County used a drop box during the last election, she said. Here are the drop off box locations in Thurston County.

Here is the bill analysis (pdf file).

The fiscal note (pdf file) on the bill pegged the cost at $2.5 million every two years for the state (as they would reimburse the county for the cost). The cost per ballot could go about the going rate for mail because of the size of some ballots in some counties.

Olympian the official vote reporter in Thurston County?

I know it only matters to weirdos who would sit at their computer and hit refresh on election night, but it bugs the ever-living-crap out of me that the Olympian is posting live results, while the county Auditor’s office is MIA.

9:29 p.m. and no results.

UPDATE: 10:07 p.m. and we’re the only county in the state not reporting any results (at least officially). Theoretically, since we are the state capital, you would assume we could bike our results over to the state auditor and still beat some other counties.

Update again: Last Tabulated: 11/6/2007 10:21:34 PM. Freakin’ finally, two hours?

First of a series: money and the parties

I’ve been poking around the PDC website for a couple of days, and now I’m going to post how much money is given to the both major state parties and the two parties in Thurston County.

All future posts in this topic will be categorized here.

For September:

State Republican Party (exempt): $41,471
State Republican Party (non-exempt) $0
Total: $41,471

Top giver, George Rowley of Rowely Enterprises in Sammamish who gave $25,000.

State Democratic Party (exempt): $4,543
State Democratic Party (non-exempt): $67,103
Total: $71,646

Top giver, Greg Amadon, a venture capitalist.

Thurston County Republicans: nada

Thurston County Democrats: $5,238.41

Top giver, lots of people, because over $4,000 came from a low cost fundraiser. I’m going to guess the burger booth.

Thurston County can afford to pay for our ballots to be mailed

A follow up to earlier today, I was poking around trying to find out what the savings were when Thurston County went to vote by mail back in 2005. This is as close to a definitive answer that I could find:

There are obvious advantages to make the switch.

– Cost savings. Wyman estimates the county could save $400,000 in poll-site costs by going to an all-mail election.

So, if 100,000 people voted in Thurston County during each election, it would only cost $41,000 to pay for postage. This is of course assuming the county couldn’t get some kind of bulk mail rate, which is sort of obvious that they would.

Why are we even talking about this, why don’t they just do it?

Why do we need to pay for stamps to vote anyway?

When Keri and I voted on Sunday night, she wondered why we have to pay for stamps to vote. I repeated my fantasy “If I was running”: I’d mail stamps to likely voters before their ballots arrived.

What if we all just dropped our ballots in the mail without stamps. If we all lived in Thurston County (like I do), seems like they’d get delivered anyway and the county would eventually pay for our postage.

While I’m not totally sure that paying for postage is a “poll tax” (actually going somewhere to vote probably costs something too), the political wisdom of asking people to put a stamp on a ballot is distasteful at least. So says Rep. Williams:

Democratic state Rep. Brendan Williams of Olympia agrees with DeMucha, saying the postage requirement is a poll tax. Williams, who has suggested using state money for postage, also said he thinks county auditors might cover postage using the savings from going to vote-by-mail in 36 of the state’s 39 counties.

A story in the Puyallup Herald from back in May points to the cost, especially since we’re not talking about just once a year in November:

The auditor’s office and school districts are looking at ways to make it a non-issue for voters.

“We’d like to pay return postage,” Cook said, explaining the postage would be part of the election costs.

However the expense may be too great to make it a reality, said Pat McCarthy, Pierce County auditor.

The Puyallup and Sumner School Districts paid $156,000 combined for election costs for the February bond measures.

District officials think the cost of providing postage would be out-weighed by the voter response.

People don’t want to go to the grocery store to buy a book of stamps or go to the post office for a single stamp just to send in a ballot, Cook said.

So what would the postage cost? Assuming we’re talking about full postage, if the 2006 election were held in Thurston County this year, we’re talking about around 85,000 voters. Let’s just say 100,000 for the sake of arguing that free postage would boost turn out. That’s $41,000, which doesn’t sound like very much.

Statewide, the cost would have been just about $864,000 (not assuming a boost in turnout).

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑