Kitsap Caucus

Jan Angel is in. She will run against Democrat Nathan Schlicher, D-Gig Harbor, for the Senate seat he has held since was appointed in January. The race of the year is set. It’s Republican vs. Democrat, perhaps the only one in the state. And of course that presumes no one else signs up to run and manages to spoil the prediction.

The Bremerton City Council District 7 race will feature two incumbents, thanks to the reduction from nine to seven council members. Eric Younger filed and will be running against fellow councilman Nick Wofford.In Poulsbo David Musgrove signed up to run for the Council District 6 spot. Alyson Rotter signed up to run for the Bremerton School Board Seat 4 position.

Noon update: State Sen. Nathan Schlicher, D-Gig Harbor, filed Wednesday in hopes he will be elected to the seat he was appointed to in January. Unless there are wild card candidates who we’ve not heard of, this puts us halfway to officially beginning what Schlicher’s presumed opponent — state Rep. Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard — said in Sunday’s piece was the race of the year.

On Bainbridge Island Robert Bosserman filed to run for a council seat in District Three, the seat held by Kirsten Hytopoulos.

The West Sound Utility District, not something I would necessarily draw attention to here, has an interesting development. Two current commissioners will be running against each other. That is because when the Annapolis and Karcher Creek water districts merged following a November 2007 vote, they kept the commissioners from the agencies until their terms expired. The commissioner positions last six years. Jeannie Screws is the incumbent in District One. Jim Hart’s position is going away, so he will also run in Screws’ district. Kevin Long, who has worked for the district, will also run for the seat.

Afternoon update: Roger Townsend joined the Bainbridge Island City Council race in District 3 and Steve C. Hancock entered his name in the race for North Kitsap School District for Position 1. Both have opponents.

In January it became clear that the November general election would almost certainly be a race between Nathan Schlicher, the appointed Democratic incumbent, against Republican Jan Angel, a member of the House. As I write this neither of them have filed to run, so we are still operating on assumptions.

There have been cases in our recent political past where the gift of an appointment might payed dividends. Would Steve Bauer have had as easy a path to his election to the county commission, and then Rob Gelder had they not been appointed earlier? I doubt it. In those cases incumbency gave them a record and some kind of reputation.

Schlicher certainly benefits from incumbency as opposed to trying to challenge Angel with no official legislative experience. The questions I wanted to pose were how well appointed incumbents have done in the past, and in cases where appointed incumbents failed to be selected, what happened? Sunday’s piece answered those questions. We scheduled the piece for the Sunday before filing began and “Happy Mothers’ Day, everyone!” I looked at legislative historical records available on the Legislature’s website, as well as news archives, to get some context.

Some side issues, interesting on their own but not contributing to the questions asked Sunday, arose in conversations with candidates and others, as well as in the research.

Issue One: Because Schlicher was not elected, can he call himself the “incumbent?” Angel said she doesn’t think so, but the dictionary does not distinguish between whether someone was elected or appointed. In fact, for many people getting the approval of the local party would be harder than getting approved by voters. It is worthwhile to note the distinction, because for many the word “incumbent” implies a past election. President Gerald Ford was the incumbent president in 1976, even though he was elected with a 1-0 vote. That’s an old joke that ignores the fact that Ford was confirmed vice president 92-3 in the U.S. Senate and 387-35 in the House.

Issue Two: If the race is close, which there is sound reason to suspect it could be, so many factors could make the final difference. In fact, in close races it is nearly impossible to credit a win or blame a loss on any one thing. So many unseen things can effect the outcome. “When you lose by 191 votes the flap of a butterfly’s wings can make a difference,” said Randy Gordon, who was the Democrats’ appointed incumbent in the 41st District Senate seat. He lost by 194 votes, according to the state, but let’s not quibble. If he were to pick one ingredient it would be the national anti-incumbent, especially anti-Democratic incumbent, mood across the country. But it could have been any one of his votes in the Legislature, or a particular ad run against him and financed by national PACs, or the money dumped into his opponent’s campaign, or the Democratic Party not putting enough money into his campaign. He said state party officials admitted to him they goofed by not spending more on his race, but how much more would have created a victory? This could be one of those races where in every moment of being awake the candidate and their supporters will not have a moment they can afford to relax.

Issue Three: Both candidates said they will win by telling their stories to win the campaign. Angel added that she will raise money. Since the story ran Angel is reporting more in her campaign chest. On a separate blog a few of you took U.S. Rep. Derek Kilmer, D-Gig Harbor, to task for planning to host a Star Wars-themed fundraiser. I’ll be honest, I was surprised at that reaction. I assumed everyone knew that a big part of a member of Congress’ life is raising money to win the job again in two years. If you haven’t listened to the “This American Life” piece “Take the Money and Run for Office,” I suggest you set aside about an hour to get yourself schooled. That Kilmer is raising funds should not surprise anyone. I’m not saying it’s right, so don’t take me to task for cheerleading the fundraising. I’m not. But I have a difficult time faulting someone who knows he needs to raise funds to win a public office for doing just that. Until finance laws change, that is how it works. Even if finance laws do change, there is no guarantee this kind of election begging would go away. If your problem is that it was a Star Wars theme, maybe it’s worth asking what the harm is in having fun with an otherwise ugly task. If I was hosting fundraisers, you can bet one would be a Batman theme. And not the newer cool Batman, but the Adam West version. Then, every time more money came in I could flash signs that said, “Kapow!” or “Zowie!”

Remember how we had to elect a member of Congress to serve in the First Congressional District for one month following Jay Inslee’s resignation? Same goes in Bremerton, it seems.

Despite the fact that the Bremerton City Council named an interim council member, Wendy Priest, following the resignation of Roy Runyon, county elections officials say there has to be someone elected to fill the remainder of the term. That election will be in November and the new person would serve from the day the election is certified, late November, until the day a new council is sworn in, early January.

Again, what makes this necessary is redistricting. The council boundaries will change beginning in January. In fact, they’ll go from nine council seats to seven.

Filing for races across the state and in the county has begun. To the right appears to be the first filing in the state, an 8 a.m. entry by Republican Bill Brunson of Legislative Distirct 7. As we pointed out in the story about the legislative race in the 26th District, odd-year elections are typically reserved for local races, such as city councils and port and utility commissioners.

This year, though, voters in the 26th Legislative District will get to participate in a high profile race. I plan to add more to the blog later about the nature of that race and why it’s high profile, as well as diving further into some side issues.

The county will update county filings beginning at noon. Candidates can file online now, but Dolores Gilmore, county elections manager, said there is still a need to verify a candidate’s eligibility before the filing is posted online.

10 a.m. update: Bremerton Mayor Patty Lent and Bremerton City Councilmen Adam Brockus and Greg Wheeler were among the first to file for re-election this week. Also running for Bremerton City Council, the first to file in District 5, is Dino Davis. In Port Orchard incumbent Jerry Childs filed, and Bek Ashby filed to run for Position 2. In Poulsbo Ed Stern is running for re-election. Ken Ames will run to retain his North Kitsap School Board seat, and in Central Kitsap Victoria Crescenzi filed to run for the seat she sought appointment to. In the South Kitsap School District Rebecca Diehl will run for the District 4 seat held by Kathryn Simpson. Larry Stokes is running to hold on to his Port of Bremerton seat. Fire districts and other port districts also have candidates.

Noon update: Becky Erickson is running for re-election as mayor in Poulsbo. Faye Flemister and Nick Wofford have filed to run to hold onto Bremerton City Council seats. Val Tollefson wants Bob Scales’ Bainbridge Island council seat. Jeanie Schulze will be running to keep the seat she was just appointed to, facing off against at least Victoria Crescenzi.

2 p.m. update: John Green is running for Debbi Lester’s seat on the Bainbridge Island City Council. In Bremerton Cynthia Triplett Galloway wants the First District seat. Robert B. Putaansuu seeks re-election to his Port Orchard City Council seat. So does Christopher J. Lemke for his South Kitsap School Board seat. In Manchester Steve Pedersen and James E. Strode both have seats on the Port of Manchester and the Manchester Water District seats. Pedersen, so far, has only signed up for the port board and Strode has only signed to run for the water district. I believe the next update will be the last one of the day.

5:30 p.m. Jerry McDonald joined the race for the Bremerton City Council seat Adam Brockus wants. Jerry Childs seeks re-election to the Port Orchard City Council. So does Jim Henry in Poulsbo. In the North Kitsap School District Cindy Webster-Martinson will run for the seat currently held by Tom Anderson. Bruce Richards is running for re-election for his Central Kitsap School Board seat.

More tomorrow.

I remember seeing “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” signs in businesses, particularly restaurants. That sign might still be in place in some places, but I don’t see how it can be considered categorically true.

If you follow the news, and if you stumbled upon this site I’m pretty sure you do, you know about Arlene’s Flowers of Richland being sued by the Washington Attorney General and the ACLU for refusing to provide flowers for a wedding involving a gay couple.

What follows is selected language from a bill introduced by legislators wanting to codify the business owner’s right to refuse service for religious reasons. After that is the press release announcing the bill and the responses that followed. If you are torn on the question, see if anything you read here pushes you one way or the other.

(more…)

Tom Huff, former state legislator in the 26th District, died Sunday. He was 80.

The Gig Harbor Republican ran for the Legislature in 1994 to fill the seat left vacant by Wes Pruitt, a Democrat. “People deserve quality services from government at a reasonable tax rate, but what we’ve gotten is unreasonable taxes with poor service. That’s a disaster,” Huff said at the time.

Huff helped found the Washington Retail Association and was an executive with Sears for 35 years before retiring in 1992. He was known for being direct. “If a private business like Sears were as wasteful as state government, Weatherbeater Paint would be a hundred dollars a gallon and Diehard batteries would cost more per ounce than gold,” Huff said.

Huff beat fellow Gig Harbor Republican Dennis Johnson in the primary and in the general election netted 61 percent of the vote in defeating Democrat Mary Ann Huntington, who later became a Port of Bremerton commissioner of some renown.

The three-term representative was a fiscal conservative who rose to the chairmanship of the House Appropriations Committee in his first term.

In 1999 he had surgery for prostate cancer, which he said had a sobering effect on him. “I think it’s just another indication your life is valuable … and life doesn’t last that long overall,” he said. “There’s only so many years to do things I want to do.”

In 2011 Huff was part of the state’s redistricting committee, accepting a request from House Minority Leader Richard DeBolt.

He and his wife, Mary Ann, had four children and nine grandchildren.

The Olympian has more on Huff’s life.

Jordan Schrader at the (Tacoma) News Tribune gives both sides of the story in the gamesmanship question about the 26th District.

“There are games being played. I can’t say there isn’t,” Port Orchard Republican Angel said. Her rival, Gig Harbor Democrat Schlicher, similarly decried “stupid games” and concluded in frustration: “This is why people hate government.”

Recall that this is the district in which the appointed incumbent state Sen. Nathan Schlicher, D-Gig Harbor, is likely to face off against state Rep. Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard, to finish the last year of the term former state Sen. Derek Kilmer was elected to.

We addressed both sides of the issue when it comes to state Schlicher when we posted The Politics of Diabetes, because we did ask why he was the sponsor of the diabetes bill in the first place when it was sponsored by another legislator a year ago.

But then we posted about Schlicher’s Narrows Bridge toll bill getting killed by a floor vote to not have a floor vote. (Confusing. It just means they voted to not vote on the bill.) The bill had overwhelming support out of committee, but the majority coalition blocked it from the floor. What we didn’t know at the time was that Democrats got the question to the floor while Republican Sen. Janea Holmquist Newbry was off floor feeding her baby. She came back to the floor to cast the coalition’s 25th vote against the bill.

After that incident I emailed Port Orchard state Rep. Jan Angel’s press rep the following:

We’ve paid some attention to how bills sponsored by state Sen. Nathan Schlicher have seemed to meet political reality. In one case he sponsored a bill that had Republican cosponsors, including from the committee. But at the last minute was pulled from committee executive session schedule. When another senator essentially forced a vote it went down on party lines. Yesterday another bill he sponsored was refused a floor vote by the Senate Majority Coalition after it had sailed through committee.

A cynic would suspect politics are at play.

A cynic would also assume that the same kind of politickacracy has been dumped on Jan Angel. I was hoping you might suggest some examples that come easily to mind.

Angel returned the request and left a voicemail message.

Angel said in her first session she had four good bills introduced, but only one passed. In the second session she introduced six bills and only one passed. She’s had three pass this year.

“This isn’t at all unusual for a freshman in their first session and for me in my second session and the fact that when you’re in the minority party, it’s difficult,” she said.

Angel said she got a bill out of committee unanimously, but it got killed on the floor, similar to what happened with Schlicher’s bridge toll bill.

“Have I had those things happen this session? You bet I have,” she said.

Angel has had three bills pass this session.

As Schrader writes in his story, proof that politics are at play is elusive. Leaders from both majorities deny it.

In an earlier story by John Stang of Crosscut about the bridge toll vote, there was a comment from Rodney Tom, a Democrat who leads the majority coalition, about Schlicher getting his one vote. “It is a Senate tradition that every senator — even those in the minority — gets one bill passed,” Stang wrote.

Schrader wrote that six senators, including Schlicher, have had just one bill pass. Not on that list are Republicans Sharon Brown or John Smith. Like Schlicher, they are appointed incumbents. Unlike Schlicher, both of them have five bills passed this session.

While the sequestration drama has again revealed partisan gamesmanship, legislators in Olympia have every bit the skill of operating with suspected “politics first” motives.

One case involves an issue that doesn’t pack the punch of a 20 percent pay cut. It could potentially touch 11.6 million, the number (PDF) of Americans the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates has diabetes.

State Sen. Nathan Schlicher, D-Gig Harbor, was the chief sponsor of a bill, SB 5423, that would have three state agencies dealing with diabetes coordinate their efforts to report every two years to the governor how much diabetes is costing state agencies, the effectiveness of existing diabetes programs, a report of agency cooperation and ideas for legislative action to help with costs.

The bill had bipartisan support and was cosponsored by three other members of the Senate Health Care Committee, including Republican Chairwoman Randi Becker, R-Eatonville, and Sen. Barbara Bailey, R-Oak Harbor.

On Feb. 19 the bill had a hearing in front of the committee. Steward Perry, a Kentuckian volunteer with the American Diabetes Association, was there to discuss the impact of a similar bill in his state. He didn’t point to tangible changes, saying the first report had just been given to Kentucky’s Legislature.

The night before the Feb. 21 executive session, where members would have voted whether to send the bill to the Rules Committee, the bill was still on the agenda. By the time the meeting started it was gone. John Stang, writing for Crosscut, said Becker told him the agenda was crowded and some bill had to be removed. Schlicher noted later that the committee ended a half hour early.

And in the committee there was more than a crowded agenda as reasons given to kill the bill. The diabetes legislation got a full conversation, thanks to the bill’s sponsor a year ago, state Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent. Keiser made a rapid motion to send the bill to Rules with a “do pass” recommendation and was quickly seconded. That’s when the fun began.

RANDI BECKER
We will go to recess
KAREN KEISER
Madame Chair?
RANDI BECKER
We will go to recess.
KAREN KEISER
I do not, I do not, I object. We cannot go to recess when a motion is on the table.
RANDI BECKER
We’re going to recess. (pause) We’re going to recess.

The committee was away for awhile, then the TVW recording returns in the middle of a dispute over whether they were voting or going to have a roll call vote. Becker asked for those in favor and those not and the “Nays” were a committed bunch, much louder than the “Ayes.”

Becker then said the committee was adjourned, to which Keiser said adjourning is not appropriate. Becker said it was and then adjourned the committee for 26 seconds, coming back saying there is a disagreement over procedure.

Keiser and Schlicher both urged passage of the bill.

Bruce Dammeier, R-Puyallup, said he appreciated the sentiment around the bills’ impact on patients, but that at its heart it was a bill about state agency cooperation. “I believe that we owe our new governor a chance to have his agencies act on this,” he said. “The governor has talked a lot about lean management and about breaking down silos, I think that’s exactly what this bill purports to do, but I don’t think it is necessary to do it statutorily.”

Becker then said the bill was discussed a lot the night before “when we broke for caucus.”

For those not familiar with the Legislature, breaking for caucus means each party steps away from the floor to meet among themselves and discuss legislation and strategy. Typically that means Democrats meet among Democrats and Republicans meet among Republicans. In the state Senate it’s Democrats and the Majority Coalition, made up of Republicans and Democrats Tim Sheldon and Rodney Tom. Becker reiterated Dammeier’s point about agency silos and said passing legislation might actually put unnecessary restraints on the agencies.

Going to caucus, though, gets to Stang’s suspicions.

“Schlicher — who was appointed to his seat — faces his first election in November against Rep Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard. The rookie Schlicher has a sparse record of passed bills compared to the veteran Angel. Becker denied that the bill was killed for reasons related to the upcoming Schlicher-Angel race.“

That Schlicher was the sponsor of the bill could be interpreted as politics, too. Keiser sponsored it last year. Her bill would have established a public-private partnership to do much the same as Schlicher’s bill, and it would have expired in 2014. The bill made it out of the Senate Committee on Health & Long-Term Care and died in Ways & Means. Keiser said this year in committee that the problems that stalled last year’s bill were worked out.

Schlicher said the thought behind having him be the sponsor this year was to have a physician run some of the hurdles for what had been a non-controversial health care bill until Feb. 21. He cited his support for a Becker bill, ESB 5305, which requires hospitals to report when a patient is being treated for a stab or gunshot wound, whether the patient is conscious or not. Existing law only required the reporting when patients were unconscious. Schlicher said Democrats traditionally did not favor that requirement, but his status as a doctor helped persuade his caucus otherwise. The bill passed the Senate 49-0.

There is no proof or testimony yet that the diabetes bill was killed for political reasons. A House version of the bill, HB 1795, passed out of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health & Human Services in an 8-1 vote the day after it died in the Senate. The House bill is in Rules on that side of the capitol, but it would need to go through the Senate again.

And Schlicher said the governor’s office has expressed support for the idea, so it may get the treatment Republicans in the state Senate are calling for.

Brynn writes:

In January I wrote about Mary Jones, the Central Kitsap woman who has cared for some of the state’s most medically fragile babies while they were placed in state custody. (Read that story here).

Jones started fostering 31 years ago, but in December she terminated her foster care license with the state because she’d finally had enough with the state’s Department of Social and Health Services.

It takes a lot to get Jones that upset — this is a woman who has the patience of a saint — but after an infant in her care was not tested for HIV, even though the child’s mother gave permission, Jones had had enough. She was told by DSHS officials that a court order was needed to test the child, but it took close to six months for that order to be issued. Testing the infant as soon as possible would have been in the baby’s best interest, because if the infant tested positive it would have been given necessary antiviral medication to potentially keep the disease away.

It wasn’t until Jones terminated her license and the baby was moved to a different foster family that Jones received a call from the baby’s caseworker saying the court order had been issued. But even then if the infant tested positive for HIV, the state wouldn’t tell Jones the results because she longer was caring for the child — even though she’d cared for the baby for three months, potentially exposing herself to the disease.

This isn’t the first time Jones has run up against DSHS about its lack of policy on whether to test infants at birth for HIV. She has tried since 2004 to get legislation passed that would test infants for HIV if the status of the mother is unknown, and if the mother is at high risk for the disease (i.e. an intravenous drug user). Many pregnant women whose children enter state custody after birth receive prenatal care, so the percentage of women whose HIV status is unknown at the time of delivery is low. But it’s the babies born to women who are intravenous drug users, or who don’t receive any medical attention during pregnancy, and who don’t know if they’re HIV positive, that the bill aims to reach.

Working with Sen. Christine Rolfes, D-Bainbridge Island, Jones hopes to see legislation passed this year that would update state law to require the test in infants whose status is unknown.

The bill, SB 5454, made it out of the Senate Human Services and Corrections Committee and after a detour through the Senate Ways and Means committee (an inaccurate fiscal note was attached to the bill, which is how it ended up there) the bill is now waiting on the rules committee to be brought to the floor for a vote.

This is the first time this legislation has made it out of committee. Rolfes is optimistic the bill will pass once on the floor, but she’s also pragmatic and knows it faces an uphill battle.

“The challenge is right now we have hundreds of bills waiting to get to the floor for a vote,” Rolfes said Wednesday. “We have another week or so to get the bills out and the Senate moves very slowly. Whether I can get it to the floor is the big ‘if.’”

Jones has been holding her breath, waiting to see if the bill finally passes. Seeing this legislation approved might help heal Jones’ wounds — the 63-year-old planned to retire this spring when her license ran out; terminating her license early was an act of desperation. While she knows she did the right thing, there’s still a part of her that is upset she didn’t get to retire the way she wanted.

Even though she’s no longer caring for the medically fragile babies, she’s still fighting for them in Olympia.

“When I go down there to testify I am always just focused on who I am there for, which is always my babies,” she said earlier this month.

If the bill doesn’t make it to the floor this session, Rolfes isn’t discouraged, in fact she’s optimistic that it will be even easier to get it passed during the next session.

“A lot times when the bills get this far you can get them out the next year,” she said. “Where we are right now is strategically a good spot. We’ll know in another couple of weeks if it’s still alive. It’s certainly my priority.”

Here’s some excerpts from SB 5454, which updates RCW 13.34.315:

When an infant under one year of age is placed in out-of-home care under this chapter, the department or other supervising agency shall request that the infant’s treating physician test the infant for human immunodeficiency virus, if the human immunodeficiency virus status of the mother of the infant:

(i) Is known to be positive; or

(ii) Is unknown and the department has specific information indicating that the mother is at increased risk of human immunodeficiency virus infection, including, but not limited to, a history of drug abuse.

The bill goes on to indicate the supervising agency must then follow a treating physician’s recommendation for follow-up testing and care for infants that test positive. It also says the child’s parent must be asked for consent. If they object for any reason, including conflicts with religious beliefs, a court order is required to perform the test.

Click here to see the TVW footage of the Feb. 12 Senate Human Services and Corrections Committee hearing on SB 5454.

Click here for a history of SB 5454, which includes links to a pdf of the original bill.

It’s a bad year all around for the state’s guaranteed tuition savings program, as Thursday’s story points out. But state Rep. Larry Seaquist, D-Gig Harbor, thinks he has the votes on moves that would save the program for the long term.

The first piece of bad news is high college tuition has elevated the price for college units parents can buy now to save for their children’s future college education cost. The second is that some with a philosophical problem with the Guaranteed Education Tuition program generally have greater power this legislative session and would love o see the program killed.

Seaquist, speaking by phone from Olympia following a committee hearing that spent 75 minutes discussing the program, thinks the philosophical challenges come for two reasons. Some are questioning whether the program pencils. The second reason comes because there are “some people who question, ‘Is this something the government ought to be doing?’”

On the first question Seaquist said he thinks what he heard Thursday should quiet any notion that program is financially troubled. As an earlier story pointed out, the program has liabilities $631 million greater than assets. The Legislature would have to come up with that money only if every person enrolled in GET decided to go to college now. That means everyone from high schoolers on down to babies.

Jim McIntire, state treasurer, said actuarial models reveal a well funded program. It’s not 100 percent, where the state would like to be. But being at 100 percent is rare, he said.

The state actuary estimates there is only a 0.6 percent chance the state would have to pay out of the general fund to cover liabilities in the GET program. This brings up an important point. The state administers the program, but it’s funded by people participating.

McIntire said the fixes needed for the program have already been put in place. The threats, other than a Legislature and governor agreeing that the program should be discontinued, are ongoing tuition hikes and implementation of a differential tuition program.

Seaquist has a proposal to get higher education funding back to a 50/50 split between tuition and state contribution. He also wants to kill off differential tuition, which would allow colleges to charge more for classes that cost more. For example, a chemistry class might cost more than a journalism class. GET investment rates are based on the cost to attend the most expensive state university in the state, either UW or WSU. If the universities started charging more for different classes, the effect would be “catastrophic” to GET, McIntire said.

So Seaquist has a bill to kill off differential tuition. Instead, he favors financial incentives outside of tuition rates for students taking classes in fields the state would like to see filled. He said Thursday he thinks he has the votes. He’s not promising, but he is optimistic.

“If we do the basic job of no tuition increase and we cancel the differential tuition feature, we’ve got a solid program,” Seaquist said. “So to me the GET controversy is over.”

When I covered the city of Bremerton and watched the council ask for public comment before consent agenda items, I thought it was a good-will gesture. Turns out I was wrong, not that it wasn’t something councils did not have to do, but in thinking councils had to do that any time. They don’t. They can make whatever decision they want and don’t have to bother with the two or three minutes time they give you to testify.

The only exceptions are items dubbed “public hearings,” which happen mostly for land use issues, according to Roger Lubovich, Bremerton city attorney.

House Bill 1197 would change that by adding the following language:

Before taking final action on any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, a governing body of a public agency must allow for public comment regarding that ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive. The public comment may be taken at the beginning of a meeting at which final action is scheduled, or at a prior meeting for which notice of the comment period on proposed action has been provided.

The bill in the Washington State Legislature, sponsored by state Rep. Gerry Pollet, D-Seattle, would require local governments to allow for public comment before making any decision.

The legislation would also require that documents related to the agenda item be made available at least by the time the meeting begins. It was sent to the Government Operations & Elections Committee. No one from the Kitsap Caucus has signed on as a co-sponsor yet.

That local governments do offer time for public comment falls under the categories of smart political moves and good customer service. And more than once I have seen a governing body swayed by something said by a constituent.

UPDATE: I had placed a call to Tim Ford, the state’s Open Government Ombudsman in the Attorney General’s office. He told me, and provided the link to the state law, that council-manager city governments are required to provide public comment opportunities. No other local government is. Again, HB 1197 would change that.

Commissioners from Kitsap County and Pierce County council members meet Thursday morning to choose a replacement for Derek Kilmer in the state Legislature.

Kilmer resigned the 26th Legislative District state Senate seat after being elected to Congress.

Following the rules set by the state constitution, 26th District Democratic precinct committee officers picked a ranked list of three nominees from which the county leaders will choose a senator.

In the most recent cases in Kitsap the commissioners have gone with the party’s top pick. On Dec. 27 that was Nathan Schlicher, an emergency room doctor in Gig Harbor. Schlicher also has a law degree. He came in first, but it was close. He had a plurality of votes on the first ballot and the second ballot was a tie with Todd Iverson, a longshoreman and member of the PenMet Parks board in Gig Harbor. Schlicher won on the third ballot with a 12-11 vote. Iverson was ranked second. Gerry Baldwin, former district party chairman and airline analyst, was ranked third.

Each county gets 50 percent of the vote on Thursday, according to Kitsap County Clerk Dave Peterson. Kitsap has three commissioners and Pierce has seven council members.

The selection is scheduled for 10:30 a.m. Thursday at Gig Harbor City Hall, 3510 Grandview St.

We’ll have a full story on this. Senate Democrats are seeking a more cooperative chamber with Republicans this year. The party announced its leadership today. Republicans can object, and they’re scheduled to pick their leadership on Wednesday.

Locally the new Democratic leadership in the Senate means more work for state Sen. Tim Sheldon, D-Potlatch. Sheldon said a couple years ago he was removed from an energy committee by former Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown. With Ed Murray in charge, Sheldon is back on that committee and is also the party’s pick for President Pro Tempore, which means he holds the gavel when Lieutenant Governor Brad Owen can’t.

Sheldon said Brown and Murray just have different styles.

State Sen. Christine Rolfes will chair the Environment & Growth Management Committee following state Sen. Sharon Nelson’s placement as Vice-Chairwoman on the Senate Ways & Means Committee.

The party’s press release follows:

(more…)

This week Washingtonvotes.org issued its “Missed Votes” report. In the past we’ve had legislators miss votes for health reasons. A few years back one legislator — state Rep. William Eickmeyer, D-Belfair — had back pain so bad he’d lie on his back in his office and wait to hear from House Speaker Frank Chopp if he needed a vote.

Most votes are not close, as illustrated here. When this report comes out each year we all look at the sheer numbers, but it’s also good to look at the margins on each vote. That’s why on the chart below you’ll see the closest vote each legislator missed.

Those with double-digit misses on the list of the 10 Kitsap legislators during the most recent session were because of multiple votes on single days the legislators missed. Many of Sherry Appleton’s misses were at a time when her mother died or she was attending her mother’s memorial services. Jan Angel only missed votes during a special session in May 2011. Kathy Haigh’s misses were in April 2011.

Not one missed vote would have changed the ultimate outcome. In some parts that’s because legislative leaders know better than to allow a vote when the outcome is in doubt.

Here is the graphic of Kitsap Legislators during the 2011-12 legislative session.

Stephen Greer, an attorney who formerly worked in the Kitsap County Prosecutor’s office, announced Wednesday he will run for state representative for the seat currently held by Republican Jan Angel. Greer, who lives in Gig Harbor, is a Democrat.

Greer joins Karin Ashabraner, a Gig Harbor Democrat, on the list of those challenging Angel.

Greer’s press release follows.

(more…)

In March we had a story about the state Department of Corrections program that would be part of a number of changes affecting Kitsap County jail. The program passed the state Senate today. I’ll post the Senate Democrats press release after this little comment.

Kitsap Sun commenters caught the quote from Chad Lewis, state Department of Corrections spokesman, who said Corrections considered the program because it would cost less to implement how it handles parole violators now. What commenters apparently missed was the second part.

Lewis said the new, less expensive, program works better.

Hence the reference to the Pew Center on the States study that reported the same program in Hawaii meant violators were “less likely to be arrested for a new crime, to use drugs and to have their probation revoked.”

Because commenters missed or ignored that part of the story, the ongoing argument was over taxes, budgets and liberal and conservative spending values. That argument was not completely inappropriate, because the state did go into this looking for cost savings, which means the corrections budget is being cut. And it does translate to bad news for the county, because there is less money for the budget.

Still, did the point “It costs less and works better” pass by everyone? Did I write the story that badly? Be honest.

In some ways I thought this was a good news story, though clearly it’s tough for the county jail to be counting on less money. The positive, though, was in someone’s ability to take advantage of a crisis, to find a solution perhaps no one would have sought had there not been a problem.

Apparently the state Senate thought it was a good idea. The bill allowing for the program passed 43-2.

(more…)

Chris Dunagan’s story about the Legislature’s help with cutting the cost of the purchase of 7,000 acres in North Kitsap has behind it a tremendous lobbying effort taken on by legislators and citizens just to get the bill heard in the state Senate.

Those involved shared e-mails. Someone shared with us the exchanges of e-mails and I’ve done the work to pretty much show them to you in the order they happened. I took out the names of the 67 people who were CC’d on the e-mails, in large part because we would love to continue receiving e-mails like this in the future if someone finds a string that illustrates a story like this. I found out a couple of years ago that legislator e-mails are not public record. There are local officials in the mix here, so all these e-mails would be public record, if you’re interested in doing a record request through the county or city of Poulsbo.

We’re including the e-mails to tell a story of what was happening behind the scenes, the events illustrated in the following part of Dunagan’s story:

Sen. Christine Rolfes, D-Bainbridge Island, said the bill got hung up because it appeared to affect only a small group. But, with the clock winding down, lobbyists from timber companies, environmental groups and local governments joined together, along with many local supporters. They pushed Senate leaders to move the bill to a vote, which was unanimous in the Senate after only one dissenting vote in the House.

“It took teamwork,” Rolfes said, “but it was very easy to say that everyone wants this.”

Jon Rose, who is spearheading the land deal for Pope Resources, said the legislation shows how people can make things happen when they need to.

“This was one of the best examples of a diverse group of Kitsap County residents coming together for a positive result,” he said, “and I would like to see more of it.”

The evidence follows.

(more…)

A Gig Harbor teacher announced she is running for the Legislature in the 26th District and will challenge Jan Angel for her seat. Karin Ashabraner, a Democrat who teaches U.S. History to 8th graders, made the announcement Wednesday.

The Position Two race is expected to be a rematch between Larry Seaquist, the Democratic incumbent, and Doug Richards, a South Kitsap fire captain.

Ashabraner’s press release follows.

(more…)

Brynn writes:

When news broke that Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, would support a Senate bill legalizing same-sex marriage, I was asked by my editors to call our local supporters and opponents of the measure to get a reaction. Haugen’s announcement gives the Senate the votes it needs to pass the measure, which has become the most high-profile issue before the Legislature during this short session.

I was able to reach Marcie Mathis, co-chair of the Kitsap Pride Network, but I had no luck getting in touch with the three members of the Kitsap Marriage Alliance’s leadership team. I left phone messages and emails, but I had already left for the day before one of them got back to me.

Because I want to fairly represent both sides of the issue, I am posting leadership member Chris Moore’s response via email that he sent me on the issue. Moore was in Olympia yesterday for the hearings. He estimated there were around 50 people from the 23rd Legislative District that he knew at the hearing.

Here’s Moore’s email to me:

 

“On behalf of Kitsap Marriage Alliance, I would say that we are disappointed but not surprised. We anticipate that there will be a referendum drive and we will be actively engaged in collecting signatures.”

While in Olympia Moore’s group met with Sen. Christine Rolfes, D-Bainbridge Island, and Rep. Sherry Appleton, D-Poulsbo, to discuss the legislation. Moore said they talked about setting up a meeting with Rolfes and Appleton similar to the one the alliance held Jan. 9 at the Gateway Fellowship church where Rep. Matt Shea, R-Spokane Valley, and other anti-gay marriage advocates spoke about the need to voice opposition against the proposed bills.

During the meeting the legislators would make themselves available to discuss their views and would make themselves available to questions from constituents. Moore said his group will “actively seek to schedule such a meeting for some time after the current session closes.”

When a date has been set, I’ll let you know about it.

Democrats Tim Ceis and Dean Foster issued their redistricting plans as a team. Republicans Slade Gorton and Tom Huff submitted separate proposals. Here are images of all three legislative proposals as far as they affect our three districts.