Saturday, October 19, 2013

November 5, 2013 election, the issues


Its that time again, an election – which means its time for Marianne’s election crib sheet. We have almost no contested positions this time, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have important questions.

I have not listed all the many positions on the ballot county-wide. Sorry, my focus is south Whidbey. But if you want information about those other positions and the people running for them, here’s a website with the names and contact information:
https://weiapplets.sos.wa.gov/elections/Candidates/WhoFiled?countyCode=IS


First, there are two initiatives, one very good and one very bad.

Then there are a whole series of “advisory votes.” This is something new, forced on us by one of Tim Eyman’s initiatives. The wording is intensely one-sided and prejudicial. The issues are beyond obscure. And yet they’re very important. They all involve closing peculiar little (and not so little) tax loopholes. Eyman’s initiative defines closing a loophole as imposing a new tax, and we now have to vote on any increase in income to the public coffers.

These are pretty heavy wading. I’ll try to be as clear as possible. The language in italics is what you will find on your ballot.    

11-5-13 General Election ballot

Initiative to the Legislature 517
Concerns initiative and referendum measures

This measure would set penalties for interfering with or retaliating against signature gatherers and petition signers; require that all measures receiving sufficient signatures appear on the ballot; and extend time for gathering initiative petition signatures.

Should this measure be enacted into low?
Yes
No

This is another Eyman special. The claim is that petition signature gatherers are being ‘interfered with.’   This initiative would make ‘interference’ a crime. There is a long list of what constitutes ‘interference’, including “maintaining an intimidating presence within 25 ft”.  It further expands the locations where signature gathering must be allowed, including “all sidewalks and walkways that carry pedestrian traffic, including those in front of entrances and exits of any store, inside and outside pubic buildings such as sport stadiums, convention/exhibition centers, and public fairs.” Turns out that includes schools, hospitals, post offices, libraries, the works. It goes on to say that law enforcement must vigorously protect signature gatherers. The crime would be disorderly conduct. 

There’s one more item, and this may be the more important part of this initiative. Many of Eyman’s initiatives are tossed out by the state Attorney General because they fail some basic legal standard. This part of the initiative says that, regardless of the Attorney General, if an initiative gets the signatures, it must be put on the ballot.

And then, just to be sure, the time for gathering signatures would be extended to 16 months.

Tim Eyman makes a lot of money running initiative campaigns for anyone willing to pay. Some are truly bizarre. Others bollix our entire government and end up costing huge sums. I’m sure you have noticed that government appears to be broke. Thank you Tim Eyman. One of his early initiatives said that property taxes may be raised no more than 1%/year. That’s a lot less than inflation and doesn’t take into account the increased cost of government from increased development. So cities and counties in Washington have been tightening and tightening their belts, with no respite in sight. Now imagine him having 16 months instead of 6 to get more of his hare-brained initiatives on the ballot – and having to put up with signature gatherers just about everywhere.

This is an Eyman job security initiative. If I could vote NO a hundred times I would do so.

I recommend in the strongest terms that we all vote NO.

http://www.no517.org/



Initiative to the Legislature 522
Concerns labeling of genetically engineered foods

This measure would require most raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, and seeds and seed stocks, if produced using genetic engineering, as defined, to be labeled as genetically engineered when offered for retail sail.

Should this measure be enacted into law?
Yes
No

In the interest of full disclosure (and no surprise to anyone who knows me) I have been actively campaigning for 522 for months now. This initiative would require the labeling of GMO (genetically modified) foods. Its that simple. Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association have thus far put up over $17 million to fight the initiative. I’ve received several mailings and seen ads on various web sites. They tend to focus on: 1. its expensive. 2. its confusing. 3. its unfair. Bullfrogs. Producers change their labels overnight and we all get used to the new label. No big deal, no big expense. As for confusing, I think we’re all grown up enough to know the difference between a label which says “contains GMO ingredients” and one which says “organic”. No confusion. Yes, there are lists of products which need to be labeled and those which don’t. If you think about that a bit, the logic becomes clear. Yes, breaded chicken needs a label because the breading is likely to contain corn or soy, both of which are mostly GMO. A plain old chicken contains no GMO because they’re not modifying chickens (yet). As for the fairness issue, unfair to whom? Everybody eats, and everybody has a right to know what’s in their food. If the industry thinks it is unfair to force them to reveal what they do to our food, maybe they shouldn’t do it. And if they think GMO food is such a great thing, then surely they would trumpet it on their labels. What do they have to hide?

I am voting an emphatic YES and hope you do too.

http://yeson522.com/about/read/
http://www.votenoon522.com/


Here come the Advisory Votes, a whole slew of them. Note the slanted language “the legislature eliminated, without a vote of the people”. And note that each issue is described as "This tax increase . . . " Note also the claim that this costs some huge amount of money. What it actually does is bring that amount into the public treasury. And finally, note that in each case the first option is to repeal, and then to maintain.

As you may have noticed, the bottom fell out of the economy in 2008. You can ascribe blame where you will. I lay it at the feet of Wall Street market manipulators. At the same time Eyman and his friends in the legislature were eliminating one tax after another. Great, you say, fewer taxes. But those taxes actually do things for all of us, and without them you start to see things like the recent I-5 bridge collapse (no money for infrastructure maintenance). So the legislature, hamstrung by the ban on new taxes, looked for ways to plug loopholes in existing taxes. There was a major fight over what constituted a new tax vs closing a loophole. All of the Advisory Vote issues are loopholes being closed, which must now be approved by us voters or they will be reopened. And I have to say, all of them are truly obscure, so hang on.

Advisory Vote No. 3 (Substitute Senate Bill 5444)
Concerns a leasehold excise tax credit for taxpayers who lease publicly-owned property.

The legislature eliminated, without a vote of the people, a leasehold excise tax credit for taxpayers who lease publicly owned property, costing approximately $2,000,000 in the first ten years, for government spending.

This tax increase should be:
Repealed
Maintained

All of us who own property pay property tax. There are people/businesses who lease public land. One of the biggest is shoreline leases from the state. Those people use the public's land as if it were their own but pay no property tax. So the state created something called the leasehold excise tax to make up the difference. The leasehold tax has been around for a long time. This bill amends the act to reduce workload for assessors, and to provide for the same exemptions which apply to property tax. It also provides a break for agriculture and marine product uses of leased land.

I’m going to presume that in this instance the legislature knew what it was doing. I will be voting MAINTAINED

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5444

Advisory Vote No 4 (Senate Bill 5627)
Concerns an aircraft excise tax on commuter air carriers in lieu of property tax.

The legislature imposed, without a vote of the people, an aircraft excise tax on commuter air carriers in lieu of property tax, costing approximately $500,000 in its first ten years, for government spending.

This tax increase should be:
Repealed
Maintained

We all pay annual tab fees on our cars, trucks, boats, etc. Airlines pay the equivalent of annual tab fees on their planes. In this case its called the state aircraft excise tax. For some reason commuter air carriers were exempt from this tax. They’ve been paying all of  $125.00/year for a turbo-jet, multi-engine, fixed-wing plane. The new schedule bases the rate on plane weight, ranging from $500.00 to $4000.00/year.

I will be voting MAINTAINED

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5627

Advisory Vote No 5 (Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1846)
Concerns the insurance premium tax to some insurance for pediatric oral services.

The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, the insurance premium tax to some insurance for pediatric oral services, costing an amount that cannot currently be estimated, for government spending.

This tax increase should be:
Repealed
Maintained

This is actually a tiny part of the Affordable Care Act. Under Obamacare, states are required to make available a menu of health care services. One of the items on that menu is pediatric oral services – being able to take your kids to the dentist. Some people go for a separate dental plan. Others have health plans which include pediatric oral services. The state charges HMOs a 2% tax on the premiums we pay. Right now pediatric oral services are exempt from that 2% tax on health care premiums. The legislature moved to close that loophole, beginning in 2015.

I will be voting MAINTAINED

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1846


Advisory Vote No 6 (Second Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1971)
Concerns a retail sales tax exemption for certain telephone and telecommunications services.

The legislature eliminated, without a vote of the people, a retail sales tax exemption for certain telephone and telecommunications services, costing approximately $397,000,000 in the first ten years, for government spending.

This tax increase should be:
Repealed
Maintained

This is actually a big one. We all know that phone communications are changing rapidly. A lot of people don’t have land lines any more.  If you look on your (land line) phone bill, you’ll see a line item called Washington E911 surcharge. On my August bill it comes to $0.25. That surcharge funds the 911 network. Cell phones have not been subject to the E911 surcharge. The legislature has moved to close that loophole, now that well over half of the population uses cell phones instead of land lines. This is all a part of a major shift in telecommunications. It seems fundamentally unfair to me that one form of phone service is subject to the surcharge but another is not. And its not exactly a killer at $0.25/month. I think 911 is a good thing and we all ought to support it.

I will be voting MAINTAINED

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1971&year=2013


Advisory Vote No 7 (Engrossed House Bill 2075)
Concerns estate tax on certain property transfers and increased rates for estates over $4,000,000)

The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, estate tax on certain property transfers and increased rates for estates over $4,000,000, costing approximately $478,000,000 in the first ten years, for government spending.

This tax increase should be:
Repealed
Maintained

Washington has a tax on the transfer of property at death, with the first $2 million exempt. Farm land, family businesses, and estates passing to spouses are also exempt. The tax ranges from 10% to 19%. This gets really complicated, but the upshot is that the tax rate needs to be indexed to inflation, and that’s what the legislature did. They provided a grid that indexes both the tax rate and the minimum taxable estate to inflation.  Its hard to call that a new tax.

I will be voting MAINTAINED

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2075&year=2013

November 5, 2013 election, candidates


Its that time again, an election – which means its time for Marianne’s election crib sheet. We have almost no contested positions this time, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have important questions.

I have not listed all the many positions on the ballot county-wide. Sorry, my focus is south Whidbey. But if you want information about those other positions and the people running for them, here’s a website with the names and contact information:
https://weiapplets.sos.wa.gov/elections/Candidates/WhoFiled?countyCode=IS

Whidbey Island Public Hospital District General Obligation Bonds

The Board of Commissioners of Whidbey Island Public Hospital District adopted Resolution No 337 concerning a proposition to improve the District’s health care facilities. This proposition would authorize the District to expand and improve Whidbey General Hospital, including constructing a new inpatient wing for critical care, obstetrics and medical/surgical patients, and make other improvements; issue up to $50,000,000 of general obligation bonds maturing within twenty-six (26) years to pay for such improvements; and levy annual excess property taxes to pay and retire the bonds, all as priced in Resolution 337.

Should this proposition be approved or rejected?
Approved
Rejected

This is one of those situations where I know I’m being had, but can’t put my finger on how its being done. Yes, the hospital is old. Yes, the new standard is for single patient rooms. Yes, there are new infections out there which require isolation. So why am I still skeptical?

One thing I want to know is how much sustainability is being designed into this new wing. Will it be solar oriented? Will it be thoroughly insulated? Will it integrate recycling into the structure? This is the stage where these questions need to be considered, and I have not heard anything about that.

All of my reservations aside, I will be voting to APPROVE the hospital levy.

https://www.whidbeygen.org/about-wgh/about-the-2013-hospital-bond




And now, finally, we get to actual human candidates – and find that for most positions there is no competition. People are running unopposed. I’m not even going to bother commenting on single-candidate races.  And in the only few contested races, well . . .


Public Hospital District

Commissioner, position 2
Non-partisan office, 2 year unexpired term
Georgia Gardner

Commissioner, position 3
Nonpartisan office, 6 year term
Ron Wallin


South Whidbey School District

Director, position 2
Non-partisan office, 4 year term
Fred O’Neal

Director, position 5
Nonpartisan office, 4 year term

Rocco J Gianni
            Mr Gianni is a long time and much loved teacher at south Whidbey. He cares fiercely about kids, and it shows. He is also a bit of a flake. I think he could do well on the school board if others on the board remind him of deadlines and issues. I think his decisions will always be based on what is best for the kids rather than what is most convenient or easiest for administration.

Betty Bond
            Ms Bond appears to be a highly qualified administrator. I have not spoken with her, and what has been written does not reveal how she feels about kids. Her short time on the island is a disadvantage. We have seen other relative newcomers make extremely unpopular decisions based on a lack of local history. Trying to shut down the middle school would fall into that category.

            I truly have not made up my mind between these two. I will try to attend some of the candidate nights to see what more I can glean. I’ll update the Politiblog if/when I have more information.


Port of South Whidbey

Commissioner, position 3
Non-partisan office, 6 year term

Curt Gordon
            Curt used to be a good guy. He did good things on the Conservation Futures Technical Advisory Group. I watched him try to minimize the damage being proposed on Glendale Road after the great washout of 1997. And then he became a Port commissioner. He traded in his white hat for a very black one. Now he’s in it for the bucks. He’s pushing the cell tower application on the Possession Point ridge – where it will trash a part of the Dorothy Cleveland Trail and endanger communities at both Possession Point and Sandy Hook. I cannot and will not vote for Curt Gordon.

Ed Jenkins
            Sadly, Curt’s only opposition is Ed Jenkins, a loose cannon who is more dangerous to his friends than to his enemies. He has serious anger management issues. He claims to have done everything and been everywhere, but when it comes to producing actual results, not so much. I cannot and will not vote for Ed Jenkins.
            That leaves an empty space. I recommend a write-in for “none of the above.”


South Whidbey Fire/EMS

Commissioner, position 2
Non-partisan office 6 year term
Kenon J Simmons


South Whidbey  Parks & Recreation

Commissioner, position 2
Non-partisan office, 4 year short and full term
Mark F Helpenstell

Commissioner, position 3
Non –partisan office, 4 year term

I don’t know either of the two candidates, other than comments I’ve seen on line from Captn Blynd and the stories in the Record. There are two issues which are very important to me at Parks & Rec. 1. I really want a community swimming pool. 2. I want the open spaces managed by Parks & Rec to remain genuine open spaces, not groomed sports fields.

Both candidates say they will work toward the goal of a community pool. Good. Bob Hezel says he wants more developed recreation, including at “Trustland Trails”, the 200 acres between Craw Road and Pioneer Park. That land was acquired from Dept of Natural Resources by Whidbey Camano Land Trust and transferred to South Whidbey Parks & Rec. There was an agreement to keep the land in its natural condition, with perhaps a few trails. That was somehow not included in the transfer documents, so the promise remains verbal only. Obviously Mr Hezel doesn’t know about that promise. I did find uTube videos about Mr Hezel downhill mountain biking on Whidbey island.

My impression is that Mr Hezel does not appreciate leaving wild places alone. As of 10-19  I have posted a query on Captn Blynd’s Facebook page. I couldn’t find any contact info for Bob Hezel.

Captn Blynd    https://www.facebook.com/captn.blynd
Bob Hezel, Jr

I think I’ll be voting for Captn Blynd.

Commissioner, position 5
Non-partisan office, 4 year term
Matthew E Simms


For central Whidbey residents, there are two important positions on the Port of Coupeville

Port of Coupeville

Commissioner, District 2

Jim Patton – according to the Whidbey Examiner, he is running to continue Benye Weber’s work and policies on the Port District. Good reason to vote against him.

Bill Larsen – 48, retired Navy, substance abuse counselor, looking to ‘get involved with the community.’ “interested in maintaining a balance of promoting the Greenbank Farm while preserving and maintaining the landscape.” Applied for Port District manager.

From what little I’ve been able to find, I would vote for Bill Larsen if I had the option.


Commissioner, District 3

Richard G Bowen – retired real estate developer, thinks there are more constructive ag ways to use the open spaces at Greenbank farm. “there’s got to be some use for that open space.” Member of WCLT. Sat on Bainbridge city council in 1980s. 

Hot news in the Whidbey Examiner of 10-24-13 to the effect that Mr Bowen was lead partner in a shady development deal in Montana (325 houses on 260 acres) which lost its permits because of unreported environmental impacts, leaving a lot of very unhappy investors. Mr Bowen has claimed that his experience as an environmental developer would help the Port in dealing with Greenbank Farm.

Mike Diamanti – appointed incumbent. Has served on various port committees.

I have heard complaints about Mike Diamanti, but I have not heard that he wants to develop the Greenbank farm. When someone says he’s looking for a ‘use’ for open space, especially someone who is a retired developer, I vote against him. If I were voting in the Coupeville district, I would vote for Mike Diamanti.