Political Desk: Primary Colors

 So, why are you taking so long to report this? 

Well, a big part of it is our mail-in ballot system. While we have strict limitations (the ballot has to postmarked or in a voting box by the 8 PM election day), it usually takes a couple days for the smoke to clear and results finalized. Plus, there are usually one or two results that a so close you have to wait to find out who wins. Older and conservative voters tend to vote early in the process, while more progressive types and young folk vote later, which can really swing results. And I think that this lack of instant gratification is a reason some folk don't care much for mail-ins, but I'm willing to wait for final results (I tend to look askance at exit polls, by the way).

In any event, there were few surprises out here. The big one is one I didn't talk about - a levy to support the Seattle Public Library system. It wasn't on my hyper-local ballot, so I didn't talk about it. The Seattle Times did talk about it, and said, "No Thanks".  Everyone else gave it an overwhelming "Yes" with 75% of the vote in favor. My only problem with all this - Why do we have to vote to raise money for overwhelmingly popular items for the greater good, while other budgetary matters (Like, oh, salaries of our elected officials) slip through without a second thought?

Anyway, here's the results from Grubb Street

US Representative District 9: Adam Smith (48%) vs Doug Basler.(29%). The more progressive candidates split the vote and the Republican talk-show host gets through for the third time. He's about topped out his final numbers from the last two runs, and there is little doubt it with tri-peat here. 

State Representative, District 11: David Hackney (43%) vs Ashley Fedan (31%). Both are Democrats. The third candidate in this race was a Republican, so it is likely those votes will swing to Hackney.

King County Assessor: Robert Foxcurran (47%) vs ....? At the time of this writing, Dominique Scarimbolo is at 19.17% and Christopher Roberts is at 18.69%. This one will continue to hang fire for a while, but it is worth noting that Scarimbolo got no endorsements, raised no funds, did little active campaigning, and was running on a platform of "Property Taxes Suck". So it is interesting to see how this one will play out. 

Washington State Supreme Court:

Position 1: Colleen Melody (53%) vs Scott Edwards (29%)

Position 3: David Stevens (35%) vs Jaime Michael Hawk (33%)

Position 5: Theo Angelis (36%) vs. Sharonda Amamilo (32%)

Position 7: Debra Stephens (54%) vs Todd Bloom (27%)

The only note I have on the above is that 50%+ for a nonpartisan position is pretty solid for the upcoming general election. 

And with that we close the rolltop on the Political Desk for a few weeks until things heat up for the general, and go back to talking about games, books, and theater. 

More later,

The Political Desk: Summing up a Summer Primary

 What, that's it?

Yep, this year's primary is kinda quiet. The biggest ticket is US Rep for us up in the Panther Lake area, and we're looking for a replacement for County Assessor, as well as a slew of State Supreme Court candidates. 

Here are my recommendations. You don't have to  pay attention to them, and I encourage you to make your own decisions. One of the great advantages of mail-in ballots is that it gives you the chance to deliberate as opposed to being in a voting booth facing a bunch of strange names and no idea what to do. 

There are whole slew of other people's endorsements and recommendations, but I recommend people start with the Voter's Guide, which allows the candidates to present themselves in their own words (or their approved words). Sometimes its a great place to see red flags, or to reveal their personal story or preferences. You want to see who is giving money to the various candidates? Check out the Public Disclosure Commission here.

The two big sets of media endorsements are:

The Stranger. which tends to be lefty loosie, swung more away from progressive candidates this time around. Their arguments can be a little loose, and they often do not get this far south of the city.

The Seattle Times goes a little more righty-tighty, but aims at centrist and pro-business. Oddly, they've currently got their recommendations behind a paywall, which is just dumb.

And I should note that here you can find a summary of the two major papers, with notes about where they agree with each other.

Other than that?

The Urbanist does a damned fine job summing up the races and covers a lot of the races that the mains don't deal with.

Washingtonsupremecourt.org does a great job summarizing the state of the state's supreme court, 

The Fuse Progressive Voters Guide weighs in, giving their choices and why other candidates may not have made the cut. Here's the link for King County, but you can search around for other locations as well. 

The Lefty Cheat Sheet does a good job gathering together all of the endorsements of the center-to-left crowd, for your viewing enjoyment.

The Sierra Club's notes are here. The state GOP talks about their chosen judges here. The King County Dems talk here. 

And with all of that out of the way, here's what I put down. You can find my rationale and rationalizations in the earlier entries.

US Representative District 9: Adam Smith 

State Representative, District 11: Ashley Fedan

King County Assessor: Robert Foxcurran

Washington State Supreme Court:

Position 1: Colleen Melody 

Position 3: Mike Diaz

Position 5: Theo Angelis

Position 7: Debra Stephens

And that's it for me. The deadline is 4 August, and I strongly advise voting early because of all the craziness at the National Level. And if you no longer trust the post office, here is a link with your friendly neighborhood voting drop-offs.

OK,  I went to all the trouble of providing all the links. Now go out there and vote!

More later,

The Political Desk: Assessing the Assessor

 A single county position is up this year, and with it comes scandal. The King County Assessor's office is responsible for setting the taxable value (valuation) of residential, personal, and commercial property for property taxes. They do not have influence on what those taxes are (though they have opinions) but are responsible for setting the base number that those taxes are based on.

Here's the current scandal, the current County Assessor, John A Wilson, has served long and well, and has on occasion ran without competition. However, of late he has been hip-deep in personal problems, including stalking and harrasing his ex, at one point being fitted with an ankle monitor to track his migratory habits. The surprise here is that he hasn't stepped down before now (because we kinda take that sort of thing serious in these parts) but he has stated he will not run for re-election. So we have four candidates that are are up for his position. 

Al Dams is the Chief Deputy Assessor under the current guy, and has been keeping the lights on over there while his boss was posting taunts from his hot tub. He points out there will be no ramp-up period for a new guy to get his bearing. He has a bunch of endorsements.

Rob Foxcurran was the Senior Appraiser of the City of Seattle, and, as such has been deeply involved in valuations of properties in the city. He also has a whole pack of endorsements.

Christopher Roberts is a former mayor of Shoreline and has managed big budgets and delivered on housing affordability. He is pushing transparency in office and regaining the trust of the electorate. He is also weighing in with a lot of endorsements.

Dominique M Scarimbalo is a wraith. She's on the ballot, has a web site, but has raised no funding according to the Public Disclosure Committee. Nor has she showed up in discussions from The Stranger or the Times of the candidates. According to her Voter's Guide entry, she's proudly not a politician (she runs a brewpub down here in Kent) and is protesting our current tax system overall. So if you want a protest vote of the entire system, have at.

Me? I'm going to go for Robert Foxcurran, who combines both experience in the field with a fresh face and outlook.

More later,

The Political Desk: The Primary Madness Begins

 All right, he says, rolling up his sleeves. Let's do this.

This time of year, I descend into madness and talk about upcoming elections, chasing off those readers who are expecting theatre reviews, book reviews, and the occasional cavalcade of new game releases. I've been doing it for twenty-five years now, so why stop now?

And, for people who have just stumbled onto this site, I have rules, because what are we as a civilization if we don't have rules?

• I comment on races that are on my personal ballot. And those are for the northern portion of Kent, Washington, that includes Panther Lake, on the East Hill. And I like it that way. I mean, who am I to tell you what to do with your vote if I don't have skin in the game? And while I will on occasion dabble in elections beyond my normal ken, I try to keep it to a minimum. 
• For the primaries, I ignore races which have only two candidates, usually. Washington State is a top two primary state, which means that top two vote-getters go ahead to the general election. That has a tendency to reduce (but not eliminate) the power of traditional political parties. Now, they have money and the ability to get their message out, but that's not always the case. Further, because it is top-two, we often see two Democrats (and rarely two Republicans, but it happens) vying for a position.
• I really want to put good people in office. You know, folks who will do the job, even if they don't agree with me on every point. I further like people who are willing to listen to opposing viewpoints, and maybe, maybe see their own viewpoints altered as a result. And for a bunch of offices, we don't even list who is the official Dem/GOP candidate, so you have to do your own digging and see who is endorsing who.
• I don't post these on Facebook, Bluesky, or the other socials, because these are frankly my opinions and I don't feel like splattering them over the joint (there are enough people already doing that sort of this - go have at!). So if you want the very-local political dirt, you have to tune in here to this station. 
• I give other references, though that number has subsided in recent years, much to my frustration (I really miss the Municipal League). The Seattle Times tends to lean towards pro-business, centrist views, though they have a new publisher, who is son of the old publisher. The Stranger also has a new publisher (and is looking for a new editor-in-chief), and usually swings to the left, though this year they don't like much of anyone because even the progressives don't tick all their boxes. There are a few others out there, like the The Urbanist, which endorses on a wide swath of offices and for the serious lefties among you, the Lefty Cheat Sheet compiles all the various endorsements (unions, blogs, newspapers) in one place. We also get a voter's guide, which should help as well, since all the entries are penned by the candidate, or at least by candidate's people, and while there is a high percentage of "I'm honored to serve you" type of statements, there are often red flags and windows into dark souls in that mess.

Now, Washington is mail-voter state, which means you get a ballot, you fill it out, and you mail it back (or drop it off in one of a number of drop-boxes).  I think that works. When I first moved here, we had more traditional voting, where you had to take time off whatever you were doing that day and get to a polling location. We were in Rush precinct, and the polling location was at the bottom of the hill at Meeker School. I would pop in before I went to work and would be voter #3. The Lovely Bride would show up in early afternoon and be voter #16. So, yeah, I like getting more people voting, even if they don't vote the way I want them to.

Now, some of our conservative brethren are not wild about this state of affairs. They love elections, mind you, but of the authoritarian breed, where there is one official candidate, selected for you in advance, and only certain people are permitted to vote. And opposition candidates tend to get arrested, exiled, or fall out of dangerously unsafe windows. They've already tried to get an initiative this year where they can go through the voting roles and get rid of folk they don't like (which failed to get enough signatures to get on the ballot this fall, so I'd say it wasn't popular). On the National Level they've been trying to convince people that Trump won in 2020 (they've lost 60 court cases so far trying to prove that) and want the Post Office to stop delivering ballots to your home, and to stop counting those ballots if the Post Office doesn't postmark them in time. So vote early folks, while you still have the chance.

And that's about it. We are on a fairly tight schedule here  - the due date is 4 August, which is right around the corner. So let's blow through the ones on my ballot and I can get back to talking about collectable quarters.

More later, 

Scams

 We are awash in scams these days. Mysterious Docusign demands. Emails claiming to be from the Geek Squad or PayPal announcing that someone purchased a iPad in your name. Other emails that claim to be from the Lovely Bride, saying "Here are the pictures you wanted!" with emojis and an unknown link (and the sender has a Bulgarian email address).

In addition to the cybercrime, we recently had some physical burglary activity in the neighborhood, in an empty house across the street. Some folk in a white truck boosted a construction trailer from a site in the valley (They have videos of the theft), stashed it there overnight while they emptied the trailer of equipment, and for good measure, broke into a shed on the property and took some other, older tools. I saw the truck at the time but did not think twice, because the previous owners had a white truck and had been emptying the house, but since finding out about the break-in I've been keeping an eye out ever since (and chatting with the original owners whenever they WERE on the property).

That's all background for the new scam we encountered. The Lovely Bride got a phone call on her phone, asking for me, under my rarely-used first name (which I only use for official documents). The caller claimed to be Sgt. Jason Cooke of the King County Sheriff's office, and would I call back. She called back and after a rather suspicious phone tree, got ahold of that officer, who wanted me to call him back as soon as possible. The Lovely Bride had some very pointed questions and he was not forthcoming as to reasons.

And there were a buncha flags here, so the Lovely Bride called a friend of ours who IS a King County Sheriff, and he determined that no, there was no one on the force by that name. And he called the number in question and they hung up on him. Twice. So, yeah, it sounded extremely some scam we had not heard about yet. 

In any event, just in case it was legit, I did call the number back, got the sketchy phone tree (which identified itself as being the King's County Sheriff), went through another secretary and got ahold of Sgt. Cooke. And he said I had a federal affidavit in my name and I should have gotten a letter. I informed him I had received no such letter and pointed out that I had a colleague who was a REAL Sergeant in the King County Sheriffs, and that he would be interested in talking to him. And Sgt. Cooke explained that they were in different divisions and shifts, which sounded just barely credible to be true.

And we chatted some more and he asked if I would come downtown to provide a signature. Again, weird but just borderline credible. He gave me an address and an office number, and the address was the King County Courthouse (I checked while I talked to him). So took a long lunch and drove downtown, trying to go over in my mind any sin, crime, or misdemeanor which would require a federal affidavit and a visit to the police (and why King County was dealing with federal affidavits was yet another red flag, but there were more red flags here than May Day during the Khrushchev era). Oh, and I could come down anytime during the day - he'd be in (Ding! another red flag).

So I went downtown, paid too much for parking, and went through the metal detectors at the courthouse, and found the office, right there on the first floor by the entrance. Couldn't miss it. And rang the bell. No one answered, but one of the people on the front desk came by with lunch. And I explained the situation, and that person explained that no, there was no Sgt. Cooke there and yes, it probably was a scam. 

So I went to Pike Place Market, bought some Earl Grey tea from Market Spice and a loaf of sourdough from Three Sisters, and some hum bao from Meesum Pastries for lunch, so the trip wasn't a total loss. 

But I have to admit that Sgt. Cooke and company really committed to the bit. The fake phone tree, the waiting music, the conversation all sounded reasonable at first blush if you didn't have any interaction with the King County Sheriff's Office. And he was extremely calm and well-mannered when confronted with the fact that no one seemed to know him. Didn't spook him for a moment, and he gave himself a good escape from the conversation. 

AND after this is all said an done, I did an internet search on Sgt. Jason Cooke. And it looks like he's a very busy officer, with reports coming on all over the country of this scam, where the bogus officer named Jason Cooke calls up and says there is an arrest warrant out for you but you can avoid it by sending him a gift card. 

The only question in this case is ... why? I mean, it was a pretty elaborate setup, and nothing was ultimately asked of me other than to come downtown for a fictitious appointment. I wondered if the thieves wanted me out of the house when they came back to the empty property across the street. That sounds really Nero Wolfe, but when I returned, the shed door was open again, which I didn't notice it at the time when I left. I called the former property owners (they're local), and they found out that the NEW property owners had stopped by and left doors open. So, nope, no prob.

But still -  I'm a little nervous about the whole thing, and keeping my eyes even further open, but frustrated that this sort of thing is ongoing.

More later, 

The Political Desk: Summing Up

 Go Vote.

Yes, I know it's not as exciting this year. And it's a short turnaround . And in my case, there are a lot of unopposed races (a dozen on my own ballot - your mileage may differ). 

Go Vote anyway.

And if you're planning to mail in your ballot (it's free), do it sooner than later. There is no guarantee that it will be postmarked in time. Otherwise, go drop it off at a hopefully nearby ballot drop box.

Go Vote early.

There are a lot of races that I don't have any say in. Mayor of Seattle (Katie Wilson). City Attorney (Erika Evans). Districts that I am not living in (Edwin Obras in the 33rd, Vandana Slatter in the 48th). That's the nature of our system. I can deal with it.

But for you? Go Vote.

I listed a bunch of the sources of recommendations and endorsements earlier in my blog here. And for those interested, here are comparable endorsements of the Stranger and the Times.  Otherwise, here's my summary from the past few days:

Proposed Constitutional Amendment: Senate Joint Resolution No. 8201: Approved

King County Proposition No. 1 Medic One - Emergency Medical Services Replacement of Existing Levy: Yes

King County Public Hospital District No. 1 Proposition No. 1 Levy Lid Lift for Health Care Services: Approved

King County Executive: Claudia Balducci

Metropolitan King County Council District No. 5: Stephanie Fain (The Times this morning launched an editorial against her opponent for claiming the Times endorsed him, which it did not.)

City of Kent Council Position No. 2: Satwinder Kaur (Her opponent sent out a late attack mailer on her. The return address for this mailer on a non-partisan position was the Washington State Republican Party).

Kent School District No. 415 Director District No. 4: Teresa Gregory

Kent School District No. 415 Director District No. 5: Laura Williams

OK, that's it. I'm going back to theatre reviews and talking about games, but I will pop back in with the results. 

Do I need to say it again? Sure. Go Vote. 

More later.

The Political Desk: County Positions and Tough Choices

 I've got two county races to decide on my ballot. One is for County Executive, the other for Position No. 5 on the Council. And these are the most frustrating items on the ballot for me, in that there is no bad choice for one, and no great choice for the other.

Both are open positions, in that their predecessors have gone on to other things. Dow Constantine was the County Executive forever, and moved on to head up Sound Transit. Dave Upthegrove was on the council for position 5, but was elected to run the Department of Natural Resources. And the thing is, either one could have just stayed - it is harder to vote an incumbent off the council than just wait for natural erosion. Reagan Dunn, the conservative counselor from district 9, has been there ever since his mom got him the posting, and they have even redrawn the borders of his district to keep him. 

Anyway,

King County Executive has two very competent and talented candidates. They are both former council members themselves, and they are both in the progressive category. They're voting records are pretty much identifcal. The good news is you're going to get someone worthwhile. The bad news is you have to choose. 

Claudia Balducci is a former mayor of Bellevue, and has been instrumental in pushing mass transit, including getting the Eastside line running, even though it not connected with the rest of Seattle. She has experience and a reputation for getting things done. Girmay Zahilay rose from incredibly humble beginnings, clerked in the Obama administration, and has leaned hard in renter protection, first responders, and increasing the minimum wage.

 Both are solid politicians: Balducci has the experience, while Zahilay has the endorsements. The Times recommended Balducci in a meek endorsement that summed up everything they hated about the council, but hopes that Balducci could fix it. The Stranger went in for Zhahily in part because Balducci has been courting the moderate/centrist wing of the party. But neither are radicals.

Me? I'll opt for Claudia Balducci, but to be honest, either one would do a fine job.

Metropolitan King County Council District No. 5 has the opposite problem, in that neither of the two candidates, Peter Kwon or Stephanie Fain, feel like particularly good fit, and brows are furrowed about what happens when either gets in. Kwon is a former council-person from SeaTac, while Fain has ben president of the Harborview Medical Center's Board of Trustees for 5 terms.

 In their attack mailers, both have accused the other of being Republicans in sheep's closing. Kwon is getting the support of the local Republicans, while Fain is married to a former GOP State Rep who stepped down over accused sexual improprieties. Kwon also said one thing to the Republicans, and another to Planned Parenthood (which pulled their support, but he hasn't admitted it yet). Fain has deep pockets supporting her. Kwon has the experience, while Fain has the endorsements, including getting the nod from both the Times and the Stranger, though it sounds like the Stranger is whistling past the graveyard on this one. 

Regardless, whomever gets the nod will likely be more in the centrist camp than a progressive force. Fain, though, is pushing healthcare, while Kwon underlines effectiveness in moving things forward without new taxes. Both sound like rational human beings and capable leaders, so that's good. I'm going to go in for hope this time, and recommend Stephanie Fain, though my opinion has changed three times as I wrote the past three paragraphs. Yeah, democracy is a challenge, sometimes. 

And that's the toughest decision for me on this ballot. Next up, we get specific with the City of Kent, my home town.

More later,

The Political Desk: Ballot Measures

 Let me whine just a bit. Our election processes allows us to vote on finances. SOME finances. Not the whopping 10% sales tax, but rather situations where we are asked to weigh in on public goods and services which most of us like. So we DON'T get to vote directly on things like, say, salaries for elected officials, putting electronic billboards on the sidewalks, or creating a AI-powered holographic Dr. Martin Luther King to talk to you about breakfast (not making that one up). But we DO get to vote on things like EMTs, Hospitals, and care for the elderly.  Which makes me roll my eyes just a tad.

Anyway ...

Proposed Constitutional Amendment: Senate Joint Resolution No. 8201 This is to change our state constitution to allow the government to play the stock market to help fund WA Cares for elderly care. Good plan, but it admittedly has risks, in that the stock market (or just the part of the stock market that you've invested in) can go down as well as up. Most of these funds are invested in bonds, since they are more stable (but lower-paying) Most recently the markets have trended upwards, but they have been highly volatile because, well, you know. On the other hand, the State Investment Board has been pretty cagey do date about investments, so they aren't exactly getting into AI and crypto. I'm going with an Approved on this one, but it becomes one more thing to keep an eye on.

King County Proposition No. 1 Medic One - Emergency Medical Services Replacement of Existing Levy This is a replacement for an expiring levy, and lowers the rate on the property taxes (but will raise more funds because your property value has likely gone up). Its for EMTs and 911 calls. No one even filed an entry against it. So, yeah, I'm good for that. Vote YES.

King County Public Hospital District No. 1 Proposition No. 1 Levy Lid Lift for Health Care Services  This is Valley Medical, which is about 2 miles from here, and the ER/OR that we use (most recently for the Lovely Bride's shoulder replacement). This will allow them to raise more money for operations and capital improvements. Yeah, I'm down with it. Go with Approved.

That's it for the funding issues - on to the candidates.

More later,

The Political Desk: Rush To Judgement

 So, the ballots have finally landed here on Grubb Street for the 4 November election. It is an off-off-year election, which means in general that things are pretty quiet. Now, we are electing a Mayor in Seattle (which I can't vote for) and a new County Executive (which I DO vote for), but there are not a lot of races this year, and many of them (local races, judges) have no listed opposition. 

One thing that is a new wrinkle, though, is the strong recommendation you get your votes in early this year, particularly if you are mailing them in. Mail-in ballots are great, because you aren't stranded in a voting booth wondering who the heck these people are. However, the Post Office has been gutted in recent years by stupid conservative policies, which consists of gutting a public service and then complaining that it can't do its job. But what this means in this case is that if you drop your ballot in the mailbox on November 4, there is no guarantee that it is going to be postmarked in time. And the postmark is the final line.

So, either vote early, or drop it off at one of the many handy drop boxes we have in King County by 8 PM on the 4th. Of course, as a result of stupid conservative policies, this one hurts areas (mostly rural) that don't have accessible ballot drop offs, and where conservatism is stronger. So it hurts themselves, so you should vote early in any event.

This year is also different in that I have received a huge number of mailers. which range from brightly colored declarations of why you should vote for me, to somber, red and black warnings about how horrible the other candidate is (often on opposite sides of the same mailer). In particular, I got a set of identical mailers for me, the Lovely Bride, and both of us from a bunch of 2nd-place candidates in Burien who have unified under the "Enough is Enough!" banner (As an aside, I don't live in Burien, and cannot even see it from my house). The fact that this organization is wasting money sending mailers to people who cannot vote for them indicates to me that no one should trust them with their communities' money. And yeah, this is another dig at stupid conservative policies. Not really stupid, but definitely incompetent as well.

I'm going to roll through my ballot in the next few days. I WON'T be covering races that have only one candidate, which this year is goodly number of positions, including the Mayor of Kent, the three Port of Seattle positions, one of the City of Kent Council Positions, some judges, and the Water/Sewer and Hospital district commissioners. So you lot can take a long lunch hour to celebrate, then get back to work.

Those voting should also have gotten Voters' Guides for King County (the thick one) and Washington State (the skinny one). They can be found here as well, which allows you to see pro and anti statements on the ballot measures as well as the candidates presenting themselves in their own words. 

Should you vote the way I indicate? Of course not! Here are a bunch of other folk's opinions. Here is the Seattle Times. Here The Stranger sounds off. Here is the Urbanist's recommendations, and here is a listing for the progressive FUSE site. For the kids, here's the UWDaily's notes. Crosscut, which has posted in the past, no longer has the manpower to muster any opinions. See earlier comments on stupid conservative policies. 

AND you don't even have to wait for me to wade through all this. Go grab you ballot by the ovals and go vote. Time is surprisingly of the essence! 

More later, 

The Political Desk: Primary Results

 Hey folks, the King County primary election has come and gone. It was a top-two primary, which means the two candidates with the most votes go on to the general election in November. It is an open primary, which means that you don't have separate Democratic and Republican ballots. And most of the positions are non-partisan, which means that anyone can run without being a member of the party (though for some positions they can self-declare as "prefers X party". That also means you can get two Democrats, or two Independents, or two Republicans squaring off against each other in the general.

It is ALSO an all-mail-in election, which means that we'll have a big drop of votes on election day, then smaller drops as the ballots mailed in at the last moment are counted. Often this does not move the results much, but there is always a race or two that in "hanging fire" - it's so close you can't make the call immediately. So I wait a couple days before posting here. Late ballots around here tend to shift the vote towards the lefter, bluer, more progressive end of the political spectrum.

Final vote total looks like 33% or so, which is a) about right for an off-year primary election, and b) still sucky. That all said, it was a good night for the progressive side of the coin. In Seattle Mayor's Race, the progressive candidate actually out-polled the moderate incumbent (50% to 42%). And for King County Executive, we see two progressives squaring off against each other. 

Anyway, here's the local results, as of Friday night. If they change further, I'll note them in this space.. 

King County Proposition No. 1 Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Levy - Everyone likes parks, This was approved with 73% of the vote. In elections where 52% is called decisive  and 54% is called a mandate,  the Seattle Times sniffed at this result with the innocuous headline "King County Property Tax Looks to be Passing."

King County Executive This is one with two progressive Democrats in the main,. Grimay Zhailay (44%) vs Claudia Balducci (30%). Both candidates are currently on the King County Council and have similar voting records. The campaign looks like it will be cordial. Good.

King County Council District 5 - Here's where it gets interesting. On election night we have three candidates of the six candidates that are running who are viable after the first day - Stephanie Fain, Peter Kwon, and Kim Khan Van. Both Fain and Kwon would fit in the moderate/centrist slot. Fain had a LOT of mailers and endorsements, and Kwon had billboards. Real, old-fashioned billboards.  As of Friday night, we're looking at 27% for Kwon, 24% for Fain, and 23% for Van, so it is likely Kwon vs. Fain in the final. This one could flip, but there are not a huge number of uncounted votes left.

City of Kent Position No. 6 -  We are looking at Sharn Shoker (34%) versus Andy Song (19%). Shoker, as expected, had a very strong campaign, but it is good to see Song in there.

Kent School District No. 415 Director District No.4 - Will be Teresa Gregory (42%) versus Carolyn Wilsie-Kendall (32%)

Kent School District No. 415 Director District No.5 - Will be Laura Williams (49%) versus Jane Smith (30%), sparing use the Laura vs Laura contest in the main..

And with that the Political Desk rolls over, hits the snooze bar, and returns to slumber until sometime in October.

More later,

The Political Desk: The Replacements

 OK, on the local ballot there are only six things, so let's try to do them in one swell foop. The bulk of these are replacements - open positions due to the office-previous holder moving on.

King County Proposition No. 1 Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Levy. I like parks. You like parks. The Stranger and the Times like parks. No one has even submitted an argument against it. This is a replacement of existing levy on property taxes to maintain parks. Sure. Go with Approved.

King County Executive Long-term King County Exec Dow Constantine has stepped down to oversee Sound Transit, so this is an open slot without an incumbent.  The two front running candidates in the run are former Bellevue Mayor Claudia Balducci and Grimay Zhailay, of the King County Council, Both are impressive, both have endorsements, and both are on the progressive side of the spectrum. The candidate that is the better centrist moderate was John Wilson, who ran into legal trouble from stalking his ex-wife and has dropped out following his arrest. The rest include Amiya Ingram, an independent who writes a damned poetic Voters' Guide, Bill Hirt, a perennial who runs to point out the flaws in Sound Transit, Rebecca Williamson who tacks down the Socialist end of the spectrum, and Don L. Rivers, who is humbled to put forward his candidacy. There is also a gosh-honest endorsed Republican, Derek Chartrand, who wants to know why King County is wasting money when it could just build more jails.

I'd love to see a face-off between Claudia Balducci, who has the experience, and Grimay Zhailay, who is the new young hotness, but for the primary, I am going for Claudia Balducci,  

King County Council District 5. King County District 5 is squarish lump of real estate that encompasses Renton, Kent, Seatac, Normandy Park, Des Moines and the southern part of Tukwilla. This is another replacement election, in that previous councilperson Dave Upthegrove left to become State Commissioner of Public Lands. And the roster is very strong with individuals with backgrounds in unions, local politics, and NGOs. That's the good stuff.

The bad stuff is ... well, there's an elephant in the room. A real political elephant. Steffanie Fain, is married to Joe Fain, a former Republican State Rep who stepped down after a rape accusation (after stepping down, they stopped the investigation, which is maddening - so we don't know what happened). The Times ignored the situation in their endorsement. The Stranger touched base on it briefly, then decided to endorse someone else. Ms. Fain packs a lot of heavy hitters in the Moderate/Liberal part of Democrat spectrum as far as endorsements. I literally don't know enough to give a firm opinion on all this. here, but I need to put it on the record.

Of the rest, I look at their Voter's Guide and what I can dig up. Angela Henderson has a strong union backing. Ryan McIrvin is a Renton Councilmember, as was Kim Khanh Van. Peter Kwon was one for SeaTac. All have a pretty respectable amount of accomplishments and endorsements. Ahmad Corner comes out the grassroots side of the equation, and stakes his claim on affordability and safety. This is a hard call, even at the primary level, but I'm going to suggest Ryan McIrvin.

City of Kent Position No. 6 OK, now we are getting into the weeds. Most of the urban blogs and magazines don't get this far south, so we're pretty much relying on what gets said in the Voters' Pamphlet and on their web sites (and yes, I am judging you on your web skills). All was to make Kent safe, happy, and affordable. I'm looking out primarily for red flags and dog whistles. But, if you tend towards the Progressive end of our spectrum, check out the Progressive Voters Guide, where you can dial down to the School District level. It's actually kinda impressive. 

Anyway, City of Kent Position No. 6.  At this level, everyone is an amateur. And that's great. Some have some experience under their belts. Some are small businessfolk as their day job. Some have been living in Kent all their lives. Some are first-generation citizens, their parents having come to one of the most diverse towns in Washington State. And that's where the goo-goo part of my civics goes out to them (Goo-goo is a Chicago term, usually used disparately, for "good-government"). Sharn Shoker is an extremely strong candidate, but for the primary I'm going to suggest you look at School Board Director Andy Song. 

Kent School District No. 415 Director District No.4 This is the trailing end of the ballot, where no one but the Lovely Bride and a few friends will be paying attention. And we actually have someone running who is an incumbent! Well, kinda. Teresa Gregory was put into the position to replace Awale Farah. for just a little while. But, so far so good, so yeah, let's keep her. 

Kent School District No 415 Director District No. 5 is a choice between two Lauras - Laura Williams and Laura Jensen. I hope both of them will be on the November ballot, just for the confusion factor. I'd go with Laura Williams, but that's just me.

OK, that's it. We can now return you to your regularly-scheduled theater, book, and game reviews. 

More later, 

The Political Desk: A Small Primary

Yard signs have sprouted. The sage editorial boards have delivered endorsements. The ballots have arrived. The Primary season is upon us. And let me rant a bit before getting to the meat of the situation.

It's short ballot this year, with only six items on the Grubb Street version, and half of those are dealing with my community of Kent. I buck the current movement of trying to shove all the elections into an even-year cadence. I do this for two reasons. The first is that if you put EVERYTHING on the ballot, there is an informational overload, which reduces the number of people who actually want to vote (I vote regardless, but I understand that people can look at a slew of names and let out an exhausted sigh). Secondly, and more importantly, I prefer to turn the boat slowly. Which is to say, if we go the wrong way, we can course-correct as opposed to lurching back and fourth between political poles. 

Also, I've described my politics as being "Politely Left of Center", which has served me well for the past 25+ years. Though I've described myself to pollsters as an Independent, I lean heavily Democrat, particularly in my time in Wisconsin and Washington State. I've supported Republicans in the past, but usually in non-partisan positions where they aren't obligated to line up with their crazier partners. I'm sure that the local leadership on the Kent City Council includes Reps, but to be honest, they've done a good job, they've stayed away from the crazy, and that's really what I care about.

Currently the Democrats are still a big-tent operation, which means it swarms with factions and arguments. That's cool - that's sort of the way Democracy is supposed to work. But I can put them into four major groups.

 Moderates, also called Centrists. They pitch themselves as the safe, sensible, responsible people. Big business should be encouraged, even pampered. Will not march, but claim to reflect the wants of most people in their districts. Are concerned that conservatives will consider them too liberal. Aware about infrastructure. 

Liberals. They want change, but are good with making it incremental. Slow change is still change. Patient. Unionist. Thoughtful, with can sometimes seem inert. Big Business should be carefully guided to do the right thing. Will march if they have to. Worry about infrastructure.

Progressives. Get things done. Movement is good, even if there are unintended consequences. Will march and protest to show that there are a lot of folk that agree with them. Corporations should be watched and kept on a short leash to keep them from screwing up. Want to rebuild infrastructure

Leftists, often called Socialists, though the term is often used by the conservatives for anyone more liberal than Barry Goldwater. Will march, will get loud, will throw things. Corporations should be burned to the ground. We need to reset everything to redress years of injustice.

I'd put myself down on this spectrum as on the Liberal/Progressive line - in favor of change, but willing to be thoughtful about it. Good with regulation, but let's playtest it. Most of the fights in our chunk of the PNW are between the Moderate and Liberal wings of the parties. Seattle itself (which I can't vote in) has been in the hands of the moderates recently, who have been doing safe, moderate things, like more money for police and cameras, shorter hours for beaches and libraries, supporting landlords, putting electronic billboards on sidewalks, and trying to reduce ethical requirements for their positions. On the other hand, cars are no longer pushing through pedestrians on the cobble-stone street at Pike Place, so ... yay?

I suppose I should address the current Republican factions as well, even though they are a rare breed in Metropolitan King County. Here's an analogy, though  Take a plate, stand over a concrete sidewalk, hold the plate at an arm's length, and let go. 

It used to be that the GOP was pretty monolithic, but now its riven with all different flavors of conservative; Neo, Theo, Paleo, Tech-Bro, Isolationist, Anarcho, Maga, and Original Flavor Conservative (though a lot of those have drifted over to become Moderate Dems). They expect the other factions to line up with them, they have a deep dislike of each other, and a hatred of Dems of any stripe trying to make things better.

OK, enough of a rant. If I go on I'd have to post this on Twitter. Lemme tag you in on the other folk reporting in.

The very-valuable official King County Voter's Guide is here. The Seattle Times, representing the Moderate Wing, and their recommendations are here. The Stranger is under new management and tends to the Liberal/Progressive side with less snide remarks and can be found here (TLDR Cheat Sheet here). The Progressive Voter's Guide is, duh, progressive, but handles a lot of areas that the Times and Stranger miss. The Urbanist's Endorsements are here. KUOW discusses the candidates without coming right out and making recommendations here. But as always, check out your sources. Don't just take my word for it.

And then we move on. More later,

The Political Desk Pops Off

OK, I'm going to be 'that guy'. The grumpy old man complaining about the responsibilities of the modern world. Blame the killer head cold that has been kicking me around since Gary Con, but I'm going to vent a little.

This past week a packet arrived from the King County Department of Elections with a ballot. And the ballot had one measure on it. One. The official title is Proposition No. 1 Regional Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) Levy. Its to fund the King County Fingerprinting unit. Yep. Fingerprinting.

It's a replacement levy for the elapsing levy. It is a property tax increase, but at a lesser percentage than the previous one. Of course, your house is worth more at this point as well. but doing the numbers, it is an extra 20 bucks on top of everything else. And AFIS has done a pretty good job for the past few decades, has been really transparent about their work, and touts their successes on their site. And checking on the web, there is not even a statement AGAINST this measure.

But,

But,

But why are you asking US at this point? Shouldn't this be part of the rest of the budget? Is this worth sending out ballots for something like this?

Well, they're asking us because thems the rules. You want the county government to boost your property taxes (even by about a Jackson) without your OK? You want a chance to be a part of the decision -making process? Well, here it is. Being a separate item also protects it from being put on the chopping block for some closed-door budget cutting (like, say, the mounted police unit for Seattle itself, which met its end last year due to budgetary constraints). 

And the ballots have a lot more on them, just not stuff where I'm living. School levies on Mercer Island and in Enumclaw. Fire Protection issues in Renton, Duvall, and Woodinville. And some of this stuff can't really wait around for a November election. 

I'm actually an opponent of the proposals to bunch everything together in one mammoth ballot, and as a result am willing to put up with this "pecked by baby ducks" approach to government. And if it is a irritant, its the same sort of irritant as getting your oil changed at regular intervals, or separating your trash and recycling, or taking those two separate bins to the curb, even when it's been raining for hours and you're really rather be inside because you already have a nasty cold. AND hauling them back up the driveway. In the RAIN.

But I digress.

Anyway, go vote when you get your ballots. Its practically frictionless at the moment, and requires only a little effort on your part. It shows you're paying attention. Despite all my whining about the process, I'd say let's keep the AFIS, and vote Approved on this. 

S'allright? S'allright.

More later,

[UPDATE:] Proposition one passed, 58 to 42%. However, only 25% of the registered voters weighed in on the matter, which as always, a little sad. By the same token, a hotly-contested school bond issue on Mercer Island also passed, with 50% of the citizens weighing in. So, good going, Mercer!

The Political Desk: Results - The Center Holds

So, long-term readers of this blog know that I wait a couple days before posting the results of the election. This is because Washington State uses mail-in ballots, and it will sometimes take a while for the dust to settle. Particularly in this season, because some knuckle-head mailed white powder to the voter-counters. Fortunately, the Elections Department actually planned for this type of A-hole move, evacuated, cleaned up, and went back to counting.

The nation story this year is that the GOP and its candidates faceplanted. More progressive candidates and issues carried the day against more conservative alternatives. But in Seattle, the big city next door, the more centrist, business-friendly wing of the Democratic Party succeeded in taking control of the City Council (and yes, the Progressive votes tend to come in late, I don't think we're going to see the amount of movement necessary to overturn many of the early results). So the centrist-business-friendly Mayor has a centrist-business-friendly council to work with. That's cool. Let's look for some results.

And lest the chattering classes tend to view this as a sudden lurch to the right (and I'm looking at you, Seattle Times columnists), the city overwhelmingly approved a near-billion dollar levy for low-income housing. Oh, the horror.

Down in our neck of the woods, the story is actually much the same. Incumbents and moderates prevailed, with one exception. That's cool, generally. Let's check out what happened. 

 King County Director of Elections - Incumbent Julie Wise smashed her opposition, a MAGA-leaning, election-denying talk show host, flat. She actually got more votes than were cast in the King County Assessor's race, where the incumbent was running unopposed. As for her opposition, who knew that denying the fairness of elections would make people less willing to vote for you in an election? 

Port of Seattle Position 5 -  Fred Felleman handily won re-election to his position as well. That's nice.

City of Kent Council, Positions 1, 3, 5, and 7. Incumbents Marli Larimer and Zandria Michaud won re-election, and retired Boeing guy John Boyd joins the team. Yeah, that works. 

Kent School District No. 415 Director District 2 and 3 - Here is where it gets interesting. At the time of this writing  Meghan Margel won her position, but and Leslie Kae Hamada has fallen behind Donald Cook by a gnat's whisker (a politically scientific term for 166 votes, which even in our small city is not a lot. Which is odd for me, since Hamada was the only candidate that had (so far as I noticed) mailers and yard signs. But it may be tied to next item.. 

Kent School District No. 415, Proposition 1 (Replacement of Expiring Educations and Operations Levy) is passing (by two gnat's whickers) while Proposition 2 (Capital Projects and Technology Levy) is failing. Disappointed in this one, but These props were a rebuild of a bond issue in the last election that didn't make 50% either, so it is not a horrible surprise. Funding issues are going to be a discussion in the near future.

Special Purpose Districts -  I know no one besides the candidates who are googling their names will find this one, so congrats to the winners. 

• Soos Creek Water and Sewer District Commissioner Position No. 1 -  Alice Marshall 
• Public Hospital District No. 1 Commissioner District No. 1 - Anthony R. Berkley 

And that wraps up this year's election. But, oh ghod, they're already talking about next year's elections.

More later. 

The Political Desk: All Together Now

 Literally, there is so little on the ballot this time, that I want to put everything down in one sitting. No Initiatives. No Advisory Votes. The EVEN numbered districts of King County are voting, but Grubb Street is in the 5th, so there is nothing there. The only state-level judicial positions are unopposed, as is the King County Assessor (which is not horrible). Now, nearby Seattle's got a LOT going on (Seven out of Nine council seats), but we're not in Seattle. But let's see what is on the rest of the ballot. 

King County Director of Elections - This is the largest King County position we have a race in. I've complained previously about this becoming an elected position, but in truth incumbent Julie Wise since that time, has done a primo job in her time in office, and has, in Amazon-speak "Earned Trust". Her opponent is a right-wing election-denier talk show hosts who runs for things, loses, and complains about the game being rigged against right-wing election-deniers. Yeah, I'm going with Julie Wise.

Port of Seattle Position 5 -  Position 2 had no competition, but we have two candidates for Position 5, and we there is even a scandal (being the Port and all). It's not much of one, but it was duly reported in the Seattle Times. Incumbent Fred Felleman used his position to try to gain admittance to a lobbying group meeting that he was not otherwise allowed to attend. Yep, that's it. Small potatoes in comparison to the Port's heyday, but perfectly fitting with this year's theme of low election expectations. I'm going to recommend Fred Felleman in any event, but we'll need to keep an eye on him.

City of Kent Council, Positions 1, 3, 5, and 7. I tend to favor incumbents and endorsements here. Not blowing things up is a major consideration, along with keeping your nose clean. I know, it feels like a lot to consider, but this year's crop is generally good at it.

• Position 1 - Marli Larimer - Ms. Larimer was appointed to the position in 2018, and hasn't made of mess of things. Her opponent didn't put anything in the voter's guide. 
• Position 3 - John Boyd - Former Navy, Former Boeing, now retired. has a fistful of endorsements. Sure, let's give that a shot.
• Position 5 - Bill Boyce versus no-one. Yeah, it is part of the trend. 
• Position 7 - Zandria Michaud. Her opponent has a Tacoma PO Box for a campaign address, and has a platform of "I dunno, what do YOU want me to do?" Politics is not about choosing a lunch place.

Kent School District No. 415 Director District 2 and 3 - Position 1 has no opposition (of course), and the one piece I've found on the candidates has them all discussing the importance of communication. And there is some frustration over the previous bond issue failing  (see below). Here's what I got.

• Director District 2 - Both candidates have a solid endorsements, but I am going with Andy Carter for this one.
• Director District 3 - I am leaning towards the incumbent Leslie Kae Hamada, but note that the WEA has endorsed Donald Cook.

Kent School District No. 415, Proposition 1 (Replacement of Expiring Educations and Operations Levy) and Proposition 2 (Capital Projects and Technology Levy). Last election, Kent voted down a bond issue for widespread capital improvements in the last election. These are more refined and targeted levies, broken into two chunks. The difference between a levy and bond is that a bond vote allows the district to raise money through taxation by guaranteeing the bonds, which are then sold of the open market, while a levy is a direct property tax. But the BIG difference as far as voters are concerned is that a bond requires a 60% approval, which a levy just has to make 50% (go figure).

In any event, the two levies are pretty much what is on the tin. Both propositions are replacement levies for funding that is going away. There is some concerned opposition in the Voter's Guide on these. The stated argument against is that we don't do enough for the schools, so we should not give them more money without more oversight. I'm a fan of oversight and transparency, but it sounds like a meta-issue (What type of oversight? Beyond the School Board itself?) as opposed to something that shows up on the proposition itself.  At the same time, a different group has lodged official complaints against the school board for promoting the levies (like announcements at high school football games). So, the district is being simultaneously too transparent and not transparent enough. OK, then.

Regardless, I am a YES on both of these. I am willing to fund education, AND I think they that more communications is always good.

Special Purpose Districts - OK, we are FAR down in the weeds on this one, and barring any breaking scandals, I have to base it on their Voters' Guide statements and endorsements.

• Soos Creek Water and Sewer District Commissioner Position No. 1 -  Alice Marshall is listed on the District's site as being a Commissioner since 2010, and I have to say the District's done a good job - we had to drop a small bundle when our septic field finally failed and hooked up to to the district sewer, but I think that's a more responsible approach than increasing rates in the face of more development. 
• Public Hospital District No. 1 Commissioner District No. 1 - And I am a little torn on this one, Erin Smith Aboudara has been fighting the good fight in the ongoing relationship with UW Med, but Anthony R. Berkley comes in the door with a fistful of political and union endorsements. I'm going to go with Anthony R. Berkley but this is a race between two good candidates.

And that wraps the ballot from Grubb Street (and it WAS longer than anticipated). I'll tune in later with the results. 

More, as I usually say, later. 

The Political Desk: News and Snooze

 So the Washington State Voters' Guide (and later, the ballot) showed up in the mailbox, which for me is the opening gun of the November election. And for my neck of the woods, it is a little bit boring. At the state level, we are voting on three positions. All judgeships. All unopposed. Seattle is a hotbed right now - seven positions out of nine on the City Council are up, but since Grubb Street is not in Seattle proper, we don't get a vote.

And this is exactly what bothers me about moving elections to all-even or all-odd years. Without a "marquee" race, there is very little draw for the average voter. Already, everyone is gunning up for next year, which in addition to the Presidential Race, we are revising the entire Executive Branch of the State (Governor is retiring, everyone else is shuffling positions around). But this year? There's not going to be an overwhelming amount of voters.

But you know what is missing this time? Those horribly-written Advisory Votes. These were toothless push-polls that at best let people vent about how Olympia is raising money. Finally, after many years, they are banished. So that means we don't know where the money is? Well, no. There's a new web site that lays out the State's spending right here. Not as urgent as grabbing one piece of legislation and shoving it in your face as outrage fuel, but a good tool. 

Mind you, the dearth of choice at the state level is mitigated slightly by the fact that the King County Voters' Guide  has also shown up, which handle the County, City, and School Board elections. Which is good, meat and potatoes stuff, but still not the attention-grabbers you see at the State and National level. 

What does that mean for the Political Desk? Mostly business as usual. I will pass through the ballot, but only make recommendations on races that are really races. So for folks who are not local, and are expecting theatre, book, and game reviews, you might want to just take the week off. The Seattle Times has their recommendations (mostly centrist-pro-business, behind a soft paywall - smooth move, guys) and the Stranger has theirs (mostly progressive, pro-renter and consumer). Fuse has a list of progressive endorsements as well, but it dovetails neatly into the Stranger's with less snark. Crosscut gets into money raised and issues here, but doesn't get outside the major metros. Talking about school board elections is pretty rare, but the Washington Educational Association has its here. 

Everyone else can take a break. For those of us in our hyper-local locality, let's turn over our ballots and begin.

More later,

The Political Desk : Summer Rush Results

 I usually wait a day or three for things to settle before posting election results. Washington State has mail-in ballots, and requires postmark by election day, so things will filter in over the next few days, final numbers change, and often there is a late surge or position that is "hanging fire" - too close to call. Usually for this end of the state, all this means that late voters who trend younger and more progressive.

Over in Seattle proper, every candidate for city council that made it into the top-two November election was endorsed either by The Stranger or The Seattle Times. In fact, the Stranger's candidates received the most votes in five of the seven positions (for those keeping score). So the general election over there will be between a progressive-ish candidate and a central-ish candidate. So there's that.

And 22.5% of registered voters in the County voted. Which is ... not horrible for an off-season election, but still kinda sucky.

So, for the stuff that I am paying attention to, here's what I have:

King County Preposition No. 1 Veterans, Seniors and Human Services Levy -   APPROVED at 70%. Not bad for a popular levy already approved a number of times already that had no opposition. Of course, that means that 30% will vote against a levy on general principles.

Port of Seattle Commissioner Position No. 5 -  Incumbent FRED FELLEMAN (55%) versus JESSE TAM (27%)

City of Kent Council Position No. 3 -  JOHN BOYD (36%) versus KELLY WIGANS-CRAWFORD (23%)

Kent School District No. 415 District No. 415, Director District No. 3 -  LESLIE KAE HAMADA (49%) versus DONALD COOK (24%). Got a late mailer from Hamada's campaign which had a big globby typo on it ("Oustanding" instead of "Outstanding"), but that the only news there.

And with that The Political Desk is retiring to the back deck with a rum & cola. Be back in October.

More later,

The Political Desk: Summer Rush Edition

 So, the King County Voters Pamphlet showed up a few days ago, but I chose to wait to post only because I tend to make my comments based on what I actually can vote on, and only rarely (though occasionally) wander out into other jurisdictions. 

The 2023 elections are already being overshadowed by the 2024 elections in this state. That's not just because of the Presidential Election is next year (though Washington State is reliably blue), but because the Governor of the past 12 years is not running for re-election. As a result, a leading contenders on the Dem side are the current state's Attorney General and Commissioner of Public Lands. And as a result of THAT other candidates are leaving THEIR jobs and running for THOSE positions. In other words, it is like entire elected state government is a big Boggle Cube and we've hit it with a hammer. But that's not what I need to talk about.

Similarly, the City of Seattle is currently having a big thing this year in that they have 7 open seats, and so we have a raft (45 candidates) of newcomers vying for their positions. But I don't vote in Seattle's city elections, so while I will point you in the direction of people who DO talk about it, I have no further advice.

And FURTHERMORE, there are a number of seats on the King County Council that are up, but they are in even-numbered districts, and Grubb Street is an odd-numbered district, so, again, there is no election for us.

And this is why I DON'T like the idea of moving major elections to even-numbered years. From a marketing side, I want people to go vote. Without big-ticket elections, everyone else gets a short shrift. The biggest matchups I'm seeing this cycle are things like Port Authority. A lot of school board stuff, and council seats at the micro-local level. These are the solid, working, effective positions - not particularly glitzy, but really important. They just don't have the glitz.

Let's make matters even worse. The day for the Primaries is 1 August. So a lot of people will not worry about it because "it's next month" and then get surprised when election day goes zipping past them at high velocity.

So the bad news is that not of lot of people are paying attention here. The good news, such as it is, is that YOUR vote, should you vote, is worth just a tiny bit more than otherwise. So, you know, go vote. It doesn't even cost you a stamp. Fill it out and mail it back, or drop it off in a plethora of election drop boxes scattered around the county. That simple.

But the smallness of this election creates one further difficulty for the small-time elections. We DON'T have a lot of info on the candidates on this level. We have their Statements in the Voters' Pamphlet, and maybe see some yard signs and MAYBE read something about them in the hyper-local media. So the chances of people running under false flags or not being entirely honest with the voters is high. A few elections back we had someone running for Hospital Board who attended the 6 Jan protests (but not, so far as we know, the riot that followed).. And we had a candidate for School Board that sounded good in the Voters' pamphlet until he chose to reveal the horrors of CRT in the local newspaper. 

So let's keep our eyes open around here. Check endorsements (though candidates can be untruthful about those as well). See who is fronting the money (The Chamber of Commerce, while not an alarm, is a red flag). Take things with a hunk of salt.

Here are some other people's recommendations. The Seattle Times trends further right that most of its readership, is much more pro-business, and just fired a new member of its editorial board for tweeting that Hitler was not THAT bad a guy. The Stranger is a little to the left of its readership, and disappointed that retiring socialist Kwana Shawant is not running for every position. Neither one gets this far south. Here is the Progressive Voters' Guide for the City of Kent. Here are endorsements from Crosscut, which again concentrates on the big urban centers. The Capitol Hill Blog asks a lot of questions to the candidates for District 3 here. Here is covereage from the West Seattle Blog.  Here are endorsements from the Seattle Transit Blog which worries about, well, Seattle transit.  Here and here a couple from the various Democrats. And from the Republicans I have ... nothing. The one I checked said they were putting up a new web site Real Soon Now. 

So what about my recommendations. Well, my own ballot arrived, and it is ... scant. Four items only. See, I told you.

COUNTY

King County Preposition No. 1 Veterans, Seniors and Human Services Levy. This is the second renewal of a levy that has already done well in previous elections and has proved effective. No one showed up to argue against it in the Voter's Pamphlet - APPROVED.

PORT OF SEATTLE

Port of Seattle Commissioner Position No. 5, There's always a good scandal at the Port, but of late its challenges have been mostly the result of their own success. The airport is too crowded. Traffic to the airport is a mess. The cruise ships dump thousands of tourists (and their vacation money) at Pike Place Market. Fred Felleman is the man on the scene, has a good environmental record, and wants to offload air freight to nearby JBLM to the south until they finally build a new airport. Yeah, re-elect FRED FELLEMAN

CITY

City of Kent Council Position No. 3. From the Voter's Guide, it seems like requirement for this position is children in the Kent Schools and at least one ancestor in Saar Pioneer Cemetery. All candidates want to make a better, safer, more unified Kent. All good things. I'm going with endorsements on this one and voting for JOHN BOYD.

SCHOOL

Kent School District No. 415 District No. 415, Director District No. 3. Again, everyone looks good on the Voters' Guide. No red flags or buzz words. Challenger Stephanie Lawson looks good, but incumbent Leslie Kae Hamada has not blown things up, which in these days is a definite plus. For this round I'm going to go with LESLIE KAE HAMADA

That is it for me. The rest of yinz are on your own.   

More later, 

Political Desk: Funding Redux

 So, how did things turn out? 

The King County Proposition No.1 Crisis Care Centers Levy passed by a handy margin from the initial vote count 55-45 (when this is written). The Approved vote had major endorsements across the board, and a lot of fliers that showed up in the mailboxes. So that's a good thing. Only like 25% of the voting population voted on this, which is not so good.

The Kent School District - Proposition No. 1 General Obligation Bonds, on the other hand, was rejected. One thing that was soft-pedaled in most of the discussions was the bond issues need a supermajority (60%) in the first place to pass, and this one did not even crest 50% (Current results 53-47 on the NO side). Possibly contributors to its failure is that there was another property tax increase on the ballot, the low voter total (about 20%) and that it was just a lot of money. This sort of thing has happened before in Bond votes, and what may happen is that the bond offering rethinks its ask, refines its message, and tries again on the general election. 

The State Legislature is wrapping up its session, and actually has been accomplishing stuff. In addition to getting the budget settled (which is their primary job), they've bounced out the push-polls on our ballots and strengthened gun safety laws (which will not totally eliminate people shooting school kids, but hopefully reduce the frequency). One thing they failed to do was come up with a unified comprehensive drug policy. The old one was bounced out of the courts a while back with this year as the deadline. A compromise bill grounded out on the last day, rejected by both progressives (who felt the bill did not do enough for treatment) and conservatives (who felt the bill did not kick drug-users hard enough). So we may see a whole slew of local measures with varying degrees of cruelty (Our conservative member of King County Council has already offered up his proposal).

And that's it until, oh, maybe August, when the primaries take hold.

More later, 

The Political Desk: Pop-Up Funding Edition

 What, another ballot in the mail? Such is the price of Democracy.

And speaking of price, there are only two items this half-year ballot locally, and both of them involve funding. This time, the voters pamphlet came in the same envelope as the ballot itself. And going through the arguments, I'd have to say the arguments AGAINST these measures gave me the best reasons to vote FOR them. 

The easy one is approving a bond issue for Kent Schools - Proposition No. 1 General Obligation Bonds. It authorizes half a billion-with-a-b worth of bonds paid off over 21 years. We sell the bonds now, get the money for improvements, and pay them off over time to the bond-holders. The school district increases the property tax rate to pay for this, but in this case, total property taxes would go down, not just because of old bonds being paid off, but because property values have gone up over the years. 

The arguments for and against are here. The arguments for are pretty much along the lines of "this is a good thing", and provides a long list of needed physical improvements. And yeah, the school behind our house still is using the "temporary classrooms" that were there 20+ years ago when we moved in. But the argument against are off-the-wall AM talk-radio nuts. No, seriously. Go read them. I'll wait. I can't properly do them justice. Government, as you know, is a left-wing scam, and this is a socialist power grab that will bankrupt you. Educating kids? That's just a pet project. Maintenance on older schools? That's dictating how your kids should be educated. Putting it to a vote? That's just intimidation.

Seriously, folks? I mean there are some good reservations here - it is half a billion dollars from a 21 year bond issue. And I am not seeing anything about hiring or maintaining teachers - it is mostly about the physical plant. But this bilious bloviating is right out of the crazy-conservative playbook. They opposition statement could make a sane, reasoned argument. It didn't.

Needless to say, I recommend voting YES on Proposition No.1 General Obligation Bond. 

But that's just the hyper-local matter. On the King County level, we have another, DIFFERENT Proposition No.1 Crisis Care Centers Levy. This one increases our property taxes for nine years county-wide to fund behavioral health services. The Seattle Times and the Stranger are both boosting this, and they never agree on anything, and the Times has been running articles on the current state of affairs and why we could use this. Right now, available beds for mental health are lower than they were 20 years ago, and there is a 41 day wait for one. That's not particularly good, and puts a strain on everything else, in policing, hospitals, and other services. So yeah, I'm good with this.

The opposing view is not as flaming as for the one for the Kent School District, but still misrepresents what is going on, and declares that once the government gets the money, they will go spend it somewhere else (no word on whether mental health is a good or bad thing, or if we are taking the right approach to it). The argument they put forward, that the government can hot-swap funding at will, is an interesting one. Pity they don't give any examples that the county government has done this in the past. 

So, yeah, I recommend voting APPROVED on Proposition No. 1 Crisis Care Centers Levy (though to be honest, I don't know why one is a YES/NO vote and the other is APPROVED/REJECTED).

And as a side note, one of the sage heads submitting the statement in opposition is Tim Eyeman, noted initiative launcher and apparent office chair thief. One of his few victories has been to tag onto the ballots useless and misleading push-polls that let people vent about taxes. The measures have no teeth, but can be used to bludgeon anyone trying to raise funds. Finally, the State Legislature is getting rid of this swollen appendix of a measure. Here's a way-too-detailed article on the situation. After this is signed off on by the Governor, you will still be able to find out about tax increases- there will be web sites and QR codes and referenced in the Voter's Guide - but you will no longer have to put up with meaningless chaff on the ballot. And that's a good thing.

And that's it for the off-off-off election cycle. It is due next Tuesday, and all you need to do is drop it off at the many ballot drop boxes or put it in the mail. You don't even need a stamp. But don't worry, primaries are right around the corner. 

More later,