Kitsap Caucus

Our own editorial board took issue with how the Legislature is operating, but a reader called me and directed me to how The Olympian gets serious on title-only bills and leads with one offered by state Sen. Phil Rockefeller, D-Bainbridge Island. From the editorial:

How transparent was it when Sen. Phil Rockefeller, D-Kitsap County, introduced a “title only” Senate bill on Feb. 9 and majority Democrats on the Senate Ways and Means Committee sent it to the Rules Committee to be scheduled for a floor vote?

That’s right, a title only bill has absolutely no details. In this case the title read: “This act shall be known and cited as the legislative review of tax preferences act of 2010.”

That’s it. That’s the sum total of the entire Senate bill, co-sponsored by Sens. Jim Kastama, D-Puyallup; Rodney Tom, D-Medina; Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma; Randy Gordon, D-Bellevue; Kevin Ranker, D-Bellingham; Margarita Prentice, D-Renton; Eric Oemig, D-Kirkland; Karen Keiser, D-Kent; and Adam Kline, D-Seattle.

They were willing to put their name on a title only bill, having no idea what the legislation would eventually say or do.

I’ll post a visual of the bill that made it through to the floor, then was reintroduced in the special session. It looks like it could include anything.

Based on the amendments that were made, then removed, earlier, it appears the bill is designed to be a placeholder for legislation that would establish new review standards for what the state calls “tax preferences,” and what the rest of us call “tax loopholes.” On its own, the bill would probably have loud support and opposition.

The problem here is the legislation does many things that resemble actions, let’s say, “a duck” would do. When legislation is pushed through in this manner, it earns the barbs of the suspicious, little matter how much it might be warranted. Check out the Washington Policy Center’s blog entry listing several editorials critical of the Legislature for operating this way.

I don’t have a solid read on how much precedence there might be for issuing bills like this. When I was covering the speedway question in Olympia it was made clear to me then that a bill is technically never dead until the final gavel. This particular method Rockefeller’s using on this bill was exactly what a supporter said could be done to keep the NASCAR in Washington dream alive. My sense at the time, though, was this kind of maneuver was risky, for exactly the reasons we’re seeing on this one.

Senate Bill 6853

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe Chairman Jeromy Sullivan hears it all the time.
“I get asked on a weekly basis,” he said.
What’s on peoples’ minds? The Point Casino. More specifically, the tribe’s plans for casino expansion.
The plan that people remember was a big one. A huge casino expansion, with a hotel, business park, retail and housing. That was in 2007, and the world – along with leadership of the Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe – has changed a lot.
“I thought it was pretty aggressive to put something like that out there,” said Sullivan, the 36-year-old chairman elected in July. Sullivan and other tribal leaders and staff members met with the Kitsap Sun Friday afternoon.
As recent as two years ago, the tribe was pursuing looking at 100,000 square feet of gaming, retail, restaurants, meeting space and bars, with 400 additional slots and adding 200 more employees. A hotel was seen as a second phase.
But in recent years, there’s been some movement in top leadership positions at the tribe, and the economy is much different now.
“The ideas have changed,” Sullivan said. “The thought processes have changed.”
Given today’s economic reality, the tribe is now looking at more modest changes to The Point Casino, starting with a remodel.
The tribe’s Chief Executive Officer, Marjorie Zarate, said they’re currently doing marketing studies to see how their casino, which provides the bulk of the revenue the tribe uses to fund its programs, can differentiate itself.
A face lift for the current casino, built in the mid-90s as a bingo hall, new signs and upgraded dining and beverage areas are in the cards.
“It’s going to be aggressive,” she said of the project timing. But it’s a far cry from the previous plans. Exact plans and timing aren’t yet determined.
While the casino plans are likely what most of the public is interested in, Sullivan took some time to explain the tribe’s position on a critically important issue for itself – Port Gamble Bay.
There wasn’t much new, but Sullivan stressed that he hopes the tribe is included early as their across-the-bay neighbors, Olympic Property Group and its town site at Port Gamble, begin planning for more development.
“Even if we don’t agree on things, it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about them,” he said.
As issue is the status of the tribe’s generations-long practice, and treaty rights, to harvest fish and shellfish from the bay. There’s also a cleanup effort underway, with OPG and the Department of Natural Resources on the hook, so to speak. For 142 years a sawmill occupied land across the bay that was the original home for the Port Gamble S’Klallam. The mill closed in 1995.
As OPG works on plans for more development, the tribe worries that it could threaten the ability of its members to harvest seafood from the bay.
The dispute already strained relations between the entities when the tribe opposed an OPG plan for a dock in Port Gamble Bay, worrying that the boats and their effluent would result in shellfish bed closures.
From Sullivan’s perspective, there needs to be conversation, and he has to work to protect his tribal member’s rights to shellfishing, and the health of the bay.
“Something that could directly affect the tribe, we’ve got to discuss it,” he said.

- Derek Sheppard

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Brynn Grimley writes:

Well the “For Lease” sign is back up on the vacant firehall building owned by the Port of Brownsville. And if Wednesday’s meeting is any indication, no one is chomping at the bit to move in.

Port of Brownsville commissioners discussed the building yet again this week, after learning last month the two people who proposed building a restaurant/brewery there had backed out. Karen Pierce, the restaurateur in the partnership, blamed port commissioner Jack Bailey as a primary reason for not wanting to move in. (Bailey opposed the restaurant, but said he would have left the pair alone once they were up and running).

The past is the past and some port taxpayers are ready to stop pointing fingers and move forward. But with all the history is that possible?

At least one commissioner questions whether the board will ever be able to reach a consensus on the building.

“It’s pretty apparent to me that we’re right back where we were two years ago,” Commissioner Bob Kalmbach said. “We’re in a stalemate on what we’re going to do with that building.”

Commissioner Allen Miller reiterated his desire to “get a tenant in there that gets some return on the port’s money,” while Bailey said he wasn’t sure a restaurant was the best business to be moving in. (Miller and Kalmbach voted to support the restaurant, Bailey opposed.)

Resident Frank Reed, who has followed the discussion over the last year, suggested maybe it’s time for the board to look to outside help to get them on common ground.

“They are at an impasse and they need to break it,” he said. “I don’t think they’re going to do it on their own.”

Reed believes the commissioners should be commended for the good they’ve done in the district. He doesn’t think it’s fair for people to beat the commissioners up for their disagreements over the firehall.

Kalmbach called me Thursday to explain why it’s so important to him that a tenant is found for the firehouse (it comes down to finances folks). He plans to ask Port Manager Jerry Rowland to call Miller and Bailey about the possibility of hiring a third party to help move things along like Reed suggested. One option is to contract with someone who would assess the building and identify appropriate uses for the neighborhood. Kalmbach wants this discussed in a special meeting before the next regular board meeting in April.

“It’s to the point where I’m tired of wasting time,” he said. “I’d agree to anything if it means we can move forward and start building something.”

But he added if the board can agree to bring in a third party, then it also needs to agree to support whatever that party suggests, even if it’s something individual commissioners previously opposed.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

There were a few other things I learned/observed while preparing the Tim Sheldon profile, things that ended up on the cutting room floor.

There was an entire section dealing with the strained relationship Sheldon has with fellow Mason County commissioner Lynda Ring Erickson.

On the commission itself a testy relationship, fueled in large part by an elimination of a county job, between Sheldon and fellow commissioner Lynda Ring Erickson almost influenced Erickson to quit.

Their ongoing spat has become so expected that their agreement in the Feb. 22 briefing surprised Hirschi. “A scary thing happened in this meeting. Tim and Lynda were agreeing with each other,” Hirschi wrote on her blog.

Many within the 35th District also wondered if Erickson might challenge Sheldon for his Senate seat, but a party newsletter published in January included a dismissal of the idea written by district chairwoman Nancy Frank of Bremerton.

“According to her campaign treasurer for the last two commissioner campaigns, ‘A main logical argument is financial — winning the senate seat would negatively impact her state retirement pension. She already took a significant pay cut to go from City of Olympia Public Works to Mason County Commissioner in 2004,’” Frank wrote.

During the half-day I spent with Sheldon, I watched lobbyists and others approach the senator to discuss Olympia issues. With all of them he seemed to be up on what they were discussing. He asked questions.

In one situation Sheldon was speaking to someone who is not a frequent witness at the capitol, and didn’t really know Sheldon’s opinions on matters. She spoke in favor of something I knew Sheldon was opposed to, and expressed wonder that anyone could believe any other way.

This is a moment that calls for extra attention. Sheldon gently weaved in a counterpoint, a maneuver not at all similar to the one he used in warning that criminals in Mason County might be subject to a “hot lead enema.” Different audience.

In almost every conversation of any length, Sheldon will work in a conversation about state-run liquor stores. The noticeable difference this year is he’s not alone. The idea looked to be dead again, but with a special session coming who knows if it might not come up again. Sheldon’s biggest hurdle in this issue is the governor. While I think it’s realistic to think a majority of legislators might approve of liquor privatization, I don’t know that they could get enough to overcome a governor’s veto.

The story mentioned his support for Barack Obama. It came up in a conversation about how the news media goes to lengths to point out Sheldon’s votes against the majority of his party, but doesn’t do much when he’s in line with the others on his side of the aisle. He praised Patty Murray. We mentioned that he supported Obama, but I left out the fact that Sheldon said he still likes Obama.

Now for behind-the-scenes tidbits. I called Sheldon about the story a few weeks ago and he called back fully on board and suggested Feb. 22 as a date. I had earlier planned that as one of three vacation days, but decided to start that break on Tuesday instead of Monday.

Sheldon was the one who suggested I ride with him to Olympia, a great idea and a great way to provide a visual for the video. Derek Sheppard wrote about that on the Kitsap Frames blog.

Things went well, but the battery on the camera didn’t have as much power left as I thought. I had originally planned to ride back to Shelton with the senator, then drive myself to Olympia, stopping at different points to grab shots of signs to Olympia. The battery had already died in Olympia, though. It wasn’t important enough to come back to Bremerton and then return through Shelton to Olympia. No road signs for the video. Angela Dice went to Olympia herself one day and got shots of the senator on the floor and talking to folks.

Fun fact: There is a glitch on the video. Normally when we have that Kitsap Sun logo that fades out the story the player shows you that it’s pretty much over. In this case, however, when I edited the piece I unknowingly eft a tiny sliver of material about a minute past the final frame. The video continues as a blank screen, which I’m sure for most people is a sign that it’s over, but about a minute later that is a very brief clip and then the show is over for real. I didn’t realize it until I had actually loaded the video onto our Web site. It probably would have taken me at least another hour to go back and repair it, so I opted to let the glitch remain.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

There is what I consider a fascinating argument going on within the pages of the Washington Post and beyond over nine Justice Department attorneys and who they represented before they were asked to do their current jobs.

To lay some context for my fascination with the subject, know that a certain person I know quite well was once a police officer and has an embedded hatred for defense attorneys. He really isn’t rational about it at all, but given what he’s seen it’s understandable why he might be bitter.

This also falls the week after it was pointed out in a “Meet the Press” segment that the arguments about reconciliation on health care reform are the same ones we’ve heard before, though the arguers have switched places. The conversation about these attorneys is fascinating on its own, but in that greater context it is even more interesting to me. Of course, one of the arguers in this case asks the question, “Where was the moral outrage . . . ?”

The WaPo argument didn’t start with where I’m sending you, but it’s a good place to begin for the uninitiated.

Marc A. Thiessen asked the following question in his column, published Monday:

“Would most Americans want to know if the Justice Department had hired a bunch of mob lawyers and put them in charge of mob cases? Or a group of drug cartel lawyers and put them in charge of drug cases? Would they want their elected representatives to find out who these lawyers were, which mob bosses and drug lords they had worked for, and what roles they were now playing at the Justice Department? Of course they would — and rightly so.”

He asks that question because nine Justice Department lawyers once represented people accused of terrorism. Two were known, but Attorney General Eric Holder didn’t name the other seven until Fox News told everyone.

Thiessen thinks Americans still have the right to know how these attorneys are working within Justice. He writes:

“Americans have a right to this information. One lawyer in the National Security Division of Holder’s Justice Department, Jennifer Daskal, has written that any terrorist not charged with a crime ’should be released from Guantanamo’s system of indefinite detention’ even though ‘at least some of these men may … join the battlefield to fight U.S. soldiers and our allies another day.’ Should a lawyer who advocates setting terrorists free, knowing they may go on to kill Americans, have any role in setting U.S. detention policy? My hunch is that most Americans would say no.”

What most Americans would say, however, might be unconstitutional. Eugene Robinson takes serious issue with the organization Keep America Safe, which ran the ad that appears at the bottom of this post asking to know the identity of the “Al Queda Seven.” Robinson wrote:

“A group that Liz Cheney co-chairs, called Keep America Safe, has spent the past two weeks scurrilously attacking the Justice Department officials because they ‘represented or advocated for terrorist detainees’ before joining the administration. In other words, they did what lawyers are supposed to do in this country: ensure that even the most unpopular defendants have adequate legal representation and that the government obeys the law. “

Robinson quotes conservative attorneys, including Kenneth Starr, who think what Liz Cheney and the group are doing is “maligning the patriotism” of attorneys who have taken positions on points that get arguments from both sides. Robinson argues that’s the whole idea:

“But maligning is apparently the whole point of the exercise. The smear campaign by Cheney, et al., has nothing to do with keeping America safe. It can only be an attempt to inflict political damage on the Obama administration by portraying the Justice Department as somehow ’soft’ on terrorism. Even by Washington’s low standards, this is unbelievably dishonest and dishonorable.”

Robinson hosted an online discussion of the issue Tuesday and the rhetoric on both sides was just as, if not more, fiery:

San Francisco, California: Would you feel the same way if the Bush Justice Department hired lawyers who helped defend members of the KKK? If not, you’re a hypocrite. No need to respond, I know the answer because I occasionally read your columns, plus I’ve seen your act on MSNBC. Yes, I am one of the six people who has actually watches MSNBC from time to time.

Eugene Robinson: Keep watching. No, it wouldn’t bother me if Justice hired a lawyer who represented KKK members. They deserve legal counsel too.

Someone later pointed out to “San Francisco” that it was the ACLU that defended the rights of Nazis to march in Skokie, Ill. “Yeah, that’s right. Did your head just explode?”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Daryl Daugs, Bremerton resident and three-time candidate, has taken a job in Walla Walla County as its director of the county Department of Human Services. Daugs has head for-profit and non-profit organizations, but made the most news running for state legislator in the 35th district and mayor of Bremerton, losing in the primaries in both cases. He also put his name in as a contender for county treasurer, but was left out of the final pool of three submitted to the county commissioners.

The announcement from Walla Walla County follows the jump:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

The Washington Post got a transcript of a conference call in which an AIG official was trying to convince employees to cut their retention bonuses in half. The employees were not that receptive. One was particularly irate, saying:

“To be honest with you, I really hope it blows up. I think the U.S. taxpayer deserves to lose a trillion dollars over this thing for the way they have behaved.”

The behavior in question, I believe, was taxpayer resentment about AIG employees who stayed on after the financial meltdown, swayed by retention bonuses paid as an enticement to stick around.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Norm Dicks, heir apparent for the top defense appropriations post, is featured in Politico. From the story:

Even now, approaching 70, he shows flashes of the old “Stormin’ Norman”: the barrel-chested Rose Bowl linebacker and Type-A Senate staffer who burst into the House three decades ago demanding the first seat on Appropriations and the last jump shot in the gym.

At an event last year, it might have even been the health care town hall, I had some questions for him, but I really wanted to get his thoughts on Steve Sarkisian coaching the Huskies.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

The (Tacoma) News-Tribune is reporting that a federal judge in Seattle has upheld the fines cities in Washington charge for infractions caught on video by cameras.

Eighteen cities, including Bremerton, were named in the suit.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Stopped by Costco Monday afternoon. In the lot I saw a car with a “Hillary 2008″ sticker.

The “08″ was crossed out and replaced with a handmade “12.”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Chris Henry’s story about the search for shuteye actually opens a door to talk about health care reform.

Late last year I finally decided to have the test done for sleep apnea. I’ve pretty much been sleepy since 1976, when I started high school. I attributed it then to, of all things, not getting enough sleep. Go figure. I was attending early morning seminary (Religion classes for LDS high schoolers) before school every day, but was going to bed at normal times.

Where it really became pronounced was after I quit working night crew (Midnight-8 a.m.). I went on a Mormon church mission to Chile (Concepcion, as it turns out. I’ve got dear friends I’m really worried about.) and never did seem to adjust to a regular sleep schedule. At least that’s what I thought, that those months on the night crew messed up my body’s sleep schedule. All through college and beyond I’ve battled pretty much daily with the urge to fall asleep at my desk, or at city council meetings, or in class, at church. Oddly, I’m fine when I drive, assuming I get a few hours sleep the night before.

The reasons I never suspected apnea were because I had lifestyle issues I could point to, I don’t remember anyone talking about it until the 1990s, and also because I didn’t start snoring until I became overweight. I had a friend who had it, but he always snored loud enough to frighten cats.

When I got married my wife said that once in a while when I sleep I will go silent, then make that noise when I remember to breathe. There’s also the issue of the legs kicking. Those are apnea signs.

Last year I had another friend who got a CPAP machine and said the difference was amazing. So I decided to finally talk to my doctor about it. She told me that people who get treated for sleep disorders and have them solved with something like CPAP find the change to be “transformative.” I liked the sound of that.

The problem was I was changing insurance coverage. To keep the same traditional plan I had it was going to represent a huge pay cut. So I opted for what President George W. Bush touted, the health care savings account.

The savings account system basically means instead of paying huge premiums I pay a much smaller one and set as much as I want (up to federal limits) aside to pay for medical costs. My insurance company pays nothing (save some discount on prescriptions, and physicals and other preventative things) until I reach $2,800 per event or $3,500 overall. After that it’s all free. The positive with the account is that if we spend nothing this year (Like that’s going to happen.) We keep it all. The potential negative, though, is we will avoid going to the doctor unless it’s pretty darned necessary.

Then again, maybe that’s not a negative. I decided to not do the sleep test, because it would have blown through my entire deductible. We kind of like the idea of having money in the bank next year, which would mean less need to set as much money aside for health care. Nothing might drive the health care cost down more than people opting to be cautious about spending money on it.

The downside is if this is really a serious issue. Instead of getting this checked out further, I’m risking lifestyle changes I should be making anyway will solve the problem. I’ve lost some weight and will continue doing so for quite a while. I’m doing better at getting to bed at an earlier hour. Still, it’s tough to not doze off during some meetings on the sixth floor of the Norm Dicks Government Center, or in the Port Blakely room at the county administration building. There are witnesses.

It was not an easy decision to wait on the sleep test. For a while I was getting pretty excited about the prospect of living life on sound sleep, or finding out that I didn’t have a problem that wasn’t self-inflicted.

The question, one that we’ll be asking for years, is what the cost to society is for having people avoid treatment, to have people at less than their optimum health? I’m confident that my work has been fine. Anything I’ve missed in this job hasn’t been because I was literally asleep. But I know vigor, which I’ve mostly attributed to the right dose of Diet Coke. How much more productive might I be, I wonder, if the right amount and kinds of sleep became a regular thing for me. I’d like to find out.

For now, I’m willing to wait.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

The official report clearing U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Belfair, and other members of Congress, including the late Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., is available via PDF file. It’s a 305-page report with sections dedicated to each House member. I’ve yet to read the report, but here’s a key paragraph:

There is not substantial reason to believe that Representative Dicks solicited or accepted contributions or other items of value in exchange for or because of an official act, or solicited or accepted contributions or other items of value in a manner which gave the appearance that the contributions were linked to an official act.

You can download the PDF by clicking here. Later I may have time to read the section on Dicks and will pull more information for here.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

I spent the morning hanging out with Tim Sheldon in Shelton and Olympia and back to Shelton. I’ll have a story later on the man with two elected offices.

The blogging will be light this week. By “light” I probably mean “there will be none until Friday.” I’m planning to attend a council meeting Wednesday night, but besides that will be away from my desk until Friday. See you then.

In the meantime, how about those chickens?

Ed Friedrich wrote this weekend about the number of jobs locally created by the economic stimulus. Some commenters were critical of the story, because he reported that people got hired. So, if we report that the Twins beat the Mariners, does that make us Twins fans? If you believe that, then here’s more fodder for you. Earlier in the “Kitsap Reader” section above I posted a link to this column, which reports economic analysts saying the stimulus worked.

Also of note was Chris Dunagan’s piece on the potential environmental implications of Norm Dicks becoming chair of Defense appropriations. It is possible he’ll have more environmental clout for this district by giving up the chairmanship of Interior.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, considered a front-runner in 2008 to be John McCain’s VP nomination and a contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, will be the keynote speaker at the state Republican Party’s convention a state Republican Party event in April.

The party’s press release follows.

Chairman Luke Esser of the Washington State Republican Party announced today that Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) will deliver the keynote address at the 28th Annual WSRP Gala Dinner & Auction to be held Saturday, April 24 at the Bellevue Hilton.

Governor Pawlenty is currently serving his second term as the 39th governor of Minnesota, a term that concludes in 2011. Pawlenty’s career of public service includes experience as a city councilman, ten-year member of the Minnesota House of Representatives, four years of which he spent as House Majority Leader.

Pawlenty also served as Chairman of the National Governors Association. During the 2008 Presidential Election, he served as a national co-chair for Sen. John McCain, and since then he has remained a national figure in Republican politics.

“Governor Pawlenty is a rising star in GOP politics for several very good reasons,” said Esser. “The Governor believes in common sense conservative principles, and has balanced his state’s budget three times without raising taxes, despite facing record budget deficits.

“It is precisely that track record of success and respect for taxpayers which has earned Governor Pawlenty a reputation as one of the most innovative, energetic, reform-minded and accomplished governors.

“We are excited that Governor Pawlenty has accepted our invitation to speak at our annual spring dinner and auction, and look forward to hearing his vision for how the GOP can win in 2010, and effectively govern after our electoral successes.”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Unlike the Senate, there was one House member whose vote didn’t match how voters in her district voted in 2007.

We had the story earlier how State Sens. Derek Kilmer and Tim Sheldon voted against the suspension of I-960, which had the requirement that tax increases get a two-thirds majority vote in the Legislature, among other things. Voters in their district supported 960 in 2007. Voters in the 23rd District did not, and their senator, Phil Rockefeller, voted for the suspension.

House members in the 23rd and 26th Districts, held to form. State Reps. Christine Rolfes and Sherry Appleton voted for the suspension. Larry Seaquist and Jan Angel voted against it.

In the 35th District the vote was split. Fred Finn voted against suspension, while Kathy Haigh voted for it.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Legislators from the 23rd and 26th Legislative Districts will host five town hall meetings on Saturday.

State Reps. Sherry Appleton and Christine Rolfes from the 23rd District will meet on Bainbridge Island and at the Fairgrounds. State Sen. Derek Kilmer and state Rep. Larry Seaquist, both from Gig Harbor, will hold meetings in Bremerton, Port Orchard and Gig Harbor.

The legislators will discuss the current session, budget issues, jobs and other questions. All the events are free and open to the public.

Appleton/Rolfes events

Bainbridge Island High School Commons
9330 NE High School Road, Bainbridge Island
9:30-11 a.m.

Eagles Nest
1195 NW Fairgrounds Rd, Bremerton
1- 2:30 p.m.

Kilmer/Seaquist events

Olympic College, Bremer Student Center
1600 Chester Ave., Bremerton
Noon-1:30 p.m.

Givens Community Center
1026 Sidney Ave., Port Orchard
2-3:30 p.m.

Peninsula High School Auditorium
14105 Purdy Drive NW, Gig Harbor
4-5:30 p.m.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

State Rep. Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard, saw her bill to require local governments to notify affected property owners when a rezone is possible pass the House on Monday. From her press release:

The House of Representatives today gave unanimous approval to a measure prime sponsored by Rep. Jan Angel that would require local governments considering modifications of zoning requirements to notify affected real property owners.

“It is not right when a property owner discovers, after the fact, that there’s been a zoning change which could affect the ability to use that land, as well as the value and taxes of that property. Property owners need to know in advance about these proposed changes, so they have input and can be involved,” said Angel, R-Port Orchard. “Considering the impact a rezone could have, I think it is only fair when a local jurisdiction is considering changing the zoning classification, that the property owner is notified.”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Today we had a story about Joe Azevedo’s flag atop the Fir tree. I suspected some might quibble with the proper etiquette being displayed, because the flag does not come down until Joe goes up and puts up a new one. According to the VFW’s primer on flag protocol, it should have a light.

This is really important to some of our readers, including a man who called me this morning to say that he appreciates what Azevedo is doing, but there are many like him who break protocol without knowing it.

My question is if Jack Hamilton can get away with wearing this shirt, shouldn’t we cut Joe a little slack?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

In today’s story about the proposed 1 percentage point increase in state sales taxes, I referenced the Senate’s vote to suspend Initiative 960, which required a legislative two-thirds majority for tax increases. Set the merits of the question aside for a moment, because I believe there were some unintended consequences of 960 that voters might have understood tweaking. Some who voted for 960 might be OK with a candy tax. I know someone who would be. And what about loophole-closing that gets classified as an increase. Again, I know people.

Look at the vote itself. From the story:

Kitsap County’s three senators, all Democrats, voted the way their constituents did in 2007. Voters in the 35th and 26th districts voted for 960, and Sens. Tim Sheldon (35th District) and Derek Kilmer (26th District) voted against undoing the initiative.

Bainbridge Island Democrat Phil Rockefeller voted with the majority this week, reflecting the 23rd District’s rejection of 960 in 2007.

I’m working on a story for the weekend about 960. I asked Tim Sheldon why he voted against it undoing. The first of his many reasons were that his district voted for 960 in 2007. In fact, 55 percent of voters in his district voted for it. State Rep. Sherry Appleton, D-Poulsbo, hasn’t yet voted on the issue, but correctly pointed out that voters in her district voted against 960, as did their senator this week.

In the 26th and 35th districts it’s easy to speculate that legislators would pay a political price for voting for something that suspends 960. My question is whether Appleton or state Rep. Christine Rolfes, D-Bainbridge Island would pay the same price in November, even though voters in their district didn’t like the initiative in the first place.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

There is a bill in the house to raise sales taxes by a percentage point, until unemployment drops to 6.5 percent for four months, at which point the increase would be a half percentage point. When unemployment goes to 5 percent for four months, the increase goes away.

I spoke with state Rep. Sherry Appleton, D-Poulsbo, who was one of 15 Democrats whose names appear on the bill. She said she doesn’t know if this bill has much of a shot, but the Legislature has to do something to save programs.

I also spoke with Jason Mercier at the Washington Policy Center, which argues that tax hikes cost jobs.

The story is on the main site, with links to the bill.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post