State Supreme Court

Judicial candidates, State Supreme Court

The State Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the law in Washington. As such, it is terribly important to have good people on the bench. There are 3 positions up for election this year, and because they are non-partisan and there are only 2 candidates for 2 of the 3 positions, this will be your only chance to vote for those 2 positions. I find it interesting that people with fairly specific (right wing) agendas complain that the court has become too political and they intend to correct that. Right.

The candidates:

Justice, position 1

Well, this one is an easy no-brainer. Mr DeWolfe writes books about “Intelligent Design.” I don’t think he will be particularly neutral on the court. The incumbent is supported by just about all of her co-justices and Washington Conservation Voters. I’ll be voting for Mary Yu.

Mary Yu, incumbent                        ndmary@comcast.net

http://justicemaryyu.com/

Appointed 5-1-14, previously a King County trial court judge. She is a 1^st in many ways: 1^st in her family to attend college, 1^st Asian Supreme Court justice; 1^st woman of color on Supreme Court; 1^st member of LGBT community on court.

rated ‘exceptionally well qualified’ by a number of bar associations. “Reads everything.” “She has a passion for justice. Is able to communicate with people at all levels.”, “conscientious, hard working, views her job with missionary zeal.” “able to motivate others around her to do their best.”

Endorsed by Washington Conservation Voters.

David DeWolf                                    david@dewolfforjustice.org

https://www.dewolfforjustice.org/

“Professor DeWolf is one of our state’s most respected constitutional scholars, and is Washington’s leading authority in both contract and tort (liability) law. His books on tort and contract law have been cited over 100 times in Washington appellate cases as an authority on Washington law.

David realized that he had a unique opportunity to combine several things he loved – immersing himself more deeply in the law of our state, writing accurately and clearly about it, and serving the people of this State.”

Senior fellow at the conservative Discovery Institute. Author of a Creation Science book on “Intelligent Design.”

Justice, position 5

So, we’ve got a highly competent, well respected incumbent being challenged by a great looking (I like long-haired hippies) single issue perennial candidate and your classic right-wing prosecutor. That classic phrase about needing ‘diversity’ on the court translates to: no one is pushing his agenda. I will happily vote for Barbara Madsen.

Barbara Madsen, incumbent           justicebarbaramadsen@gmail.com

Statement: Chief Justice Barbara Madsen has the experience, leadership, and courage necessary to protect the liberties guaranteed all citizens. Whether it's school funding or a neighborhood dispute, Barbara believes everyone is equal under the law.

Balanced Experience: A 1977 Gonzaga Law School graduate, Barbara has practiced in Eastern and Western Washington and has served as both a defense attorney and prosecutor. To help protect our most vulnerable, as Special Prosecutor she developed Seattle's Family Violence Project child abuse unit. A working mother and proud grandmother, Barbara has a balanced, common sense perspective on issues profoundly affecting people's lives.

Proven Leadership: After joining the Supreme Court, Barbara helped establish the Access to Justice Board and Commissions on Minority and Justice, Gender and Justice, Interpreter Services, and Children in Foster Care. Her endorsements include Democrats, Republicans, business, labor, and community groups--proof of her commitment to individual rights and holding the judicial system accountable to all.

Courage: We need the strong, honest, and compassionate voice of Chief Justice Madsen requiring the state meet its paramount duty to educate our children, leading access to justice initiatives, and breaking down barriers to re-entry after incarceration. She will protect our most precious liberties.

---

Greg Zempel                         greg.zempel@zempelforjustice.org

From his website: Greg Zempel is a leader in law enforcement and local government – experience the people of Washington need on our state Supreme Court. For more than twenty years, Zempel has kept the people of Kittitas County safe as their County Prosecutor. He has the support of Judges, Prosecutors, state legislators and both Democrats and Republicans to become our next Supreme Court Justice.
We all know our state Supreme Court has become too political. Law enforcement knows that the court is also too unpredictable, often changing the rules that prosecutors rely on to fairly and effectively fight crime. Zempel promises a court that is “less political, more predictable.”
The court has no one with major criminal prosecution experience – a serious omission because criminal law makes up a majority of the court’s cases. Adding a prosecutor to the court will make our state safer. The court has only one member from eastern Washington, and no one with county government experience. Electing Greg Zempel to the court will add much needed diversity to a court that simply doesn’t reflect our state.
He is a Republican Kittitas County prosecutor.

John (Zamboni) Scannell    zamboni_john@hotmail.com

I have been one of the few attorneys in the state that has actively been supporting the American Bar Association's criticism of the Washington attorney disciplinary system. The Washington State Supreme Court is in charge of the system, but the court has come under sharp criticism for 40 years for its practice of delegating its responsibility to the Washington State Bar Association. The ABA rightly likens this to the practice of putting the fox in charge of the henhouse, with Washington being one of the few states that continue the practice. The practice of putting a politically elected bar leadership in charge of attorney discipline is a direct conflict of interest that has resulted in low charging rates, undeserved discipline against attorneys who represent unpopular clients, as well as increased discipline directed to minority attorneys.
I will base my campaign on the issue that I will protect the rights of Washington citizens with decisions that are intelligent, just and ethical.

Justice, position 6

I went to the trouble of reading some Justice Wiggins’ decisions (the things I do for this blog) and the man writes exceedingly well and clearly. While I may not have agreed with all of his decisions, I see how he came to the conclusions he did. I’m happy to continue on this positive path and will be voting for Charlie Wiggins.

Charlie Wiggins, incumbent          info@justicecharliewiggins.com

Quoting from his website:

• Wrote 110 opinions from 2011 through 2015
• Heard argument and participated in deciding over 500 cases
• Considered and voted to grant or deny review in 5000-6000 Cases
• In recognition of careful and scholarly analysis, invited to join the prestigious American Law Institute, which is responsible for developing the oft-cited Restatements of the Law, as well as Principles of Law and model codes
• Received the Herbert Harley Award from the American Judicature Society for promoting the effective administration of justice
• Speaker at 30 seminars and conferences since becoming a justice
• Speaker to numerous community groups, service clubs, and student groups
• Chair of Task Force to Update the Civil Legal Needs Study, resulting in a comprehensive study of the unmet legal needs of limited income residents throughout the state
• Chair of the Committee to Celebrate the Centennial of the Temple of Justice, which organized commemorative events and launched a project to complete the vision of the original architects of the final details of the Temple
• Chair of the Discipline Attorney Round Table, which studies improvements needed in the administration of the lawyer discipline system
• Member of the Supreme Court Rules Committee, which recommends rule adoptions and changes to the full Supreme Court
• Member of the Supreme Court Budget Committee, which develops the Court’s budget
• Member of the Appellate Education Committee, which plans the annual appellate court conference

            He is supported by people I respect, such as the publisher of Yes! magazine, and several retired Supreme Court judges.

Endorsed by Washington Conservation Voters.

Dave Larson                          judgelarson@larsonforjustice.org

https://www.larsonforjustice.org/

“Our state Supreme Court should be the most respected institution in our state government, unfortunately it’s become far too political and needs to return to being a neutral and respected defender of the law and constitution. This will be my first priority as your Justice.”

Judging from his campaign donors, he’s rather conservative politically. In fact, he’s endorsed by the state Republican party.

Island County Superior Court

Island County Superior Court

Both Judge Alan Hancock and Judge Vickie Churchill are running unopposed. As a general rule I see no reason to vote for someone running unopposed. I happen to think rather highly of Judge Hancock, and vote for him as a sort of endorsement. In general I dislike voting when it won’t make any difference.

State Senate

State Senate

This is one hot race. The incumbent, Barbara Bailey, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the health care and health insurance industry. She also gets significant contributions from the fossil fuel industry and a thoughtful donation from the NRA. She’s a member of ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council) which brings together legislators and corporate honchos. Together they write legislation which is subsequently introduced in as many states as possible. Remember the “stand your ground” law in Florida? Abortion restrictions all over the country? Those are ALEC products. Bailey regularly introduces ALEC written legislation. You may get the impression that I am less than fond of Barbara Bailey. This is in part because I have personal experience with her and it has not been positive. She actually hijacked a hearing before the Growth Management Hearings Board a few years ago. During the break, in the bathroom, I heard the presiding officer say to another board member that she was just getting ready to shut Bailey down for overstepping the legal bounds when she finally quit talking.

I supported Nick Petrish when he ran 4 years ago. I was aware of his love of guns, but thought he was the best option. This time, I am appalled at his position on guns, which has expanded, and even more by his embrace of nuclear power. Been there, done that, got 100,000 years of toxic nuclear garbage to show for it, don’t want to do that again.

And then, of course, there’s my friend Angie Homola. In years past I have described her as a hummingbird. She zooms at top speed, but then drills down to get at the smallest detail. She would make an incredibly good state senator. She’ll be completely overworked because she has a lot of trouble saying no when asked to take on another project or issue. I watched her go through her Masters’ degree program. She could have skated any number of times and gotten by. Not Angie. Instead of skating she dug deeply into each assignment and did far more than was expected of her. That’s what I want to see in the State Senate. I will vote proudly for Angie Homola and I hope you do too.

Angie Homola                       D         angieforpeople@gmail.com

www.angieforpeople.com

education: architect, University of Vermont MA in environmental law & policy.

Full disclosure: Angie is a personal friend. I know her to be intensely bright, a complete workaholic who can’t let an issue go until she has learned all about it. She is very detail oriented – which made her a great architect and plans checker. Also a great County Commissioner.

Priorities: fully funding public education. Genuine land use planning and resource preservation. Public safety – including dealing with racial disparities in enforcement, dealing with mental illness. Transportation – maintaining a fair share of transportation funding for the 10^th district.  Jobs – “buy Washington”, tax reform to shift burden off small businesses, vocational training. Equitable pay – raising the wages of women to parity with men’s pay. Military – respect those who serve while working with military reps to assure that they do not adversely impact the communities where they are based.

There is much that her website does not say, including her ardent support for environmental protection and renewable energy, among others.

She’s endorsed by a whole lot of elected officials and a lot of organizations, for good reason. Endorsed by Washington Conservation Voters.

Endorsed by FUSE Progressive Voters.

Nick Petrish              D         nick@nickpetrish.org

http://www.nickpetrish.org/

education: BA in political science

He’s worked mostly in blue collar jobs. He does not like bullies. Most of his positions are ones with which I wholeheartedly agree – and then he goes off the deep end. 

Issues: Veterans – house, educate, and employ. Jobs – protect & increase rural transit funding, infrastructure repair, & new construction. Education – fully fund public schools and land grant universities. Privacy – protect women’s reproductive rights. But then he goes on to: Freedom – protect gun rights, responsible ownership, safety education & training. Energy – develop geothermal and publicly owned thorium nuclear power plants.

I appreciate his support for a state bank as one solution to how to fund education. Where I get off is his insistence on unlimited access to guns and the very idea of yet another generation of nuclear power.

Barbara Bailey, incumbent             R         barbbailey10@gmail.com

https://bbailey.net/

Washington Conservation Voters lifetime score: 20%

I attended a League of Women Voters (bless them) candidate’s night with these 3. Here are some of their answers to the questions (with my comments).

Q - What are your personal priorities and how do you intend to accomplish them?

Nick Petrish – support veterans; improve transportation infrastructure; reform banking; protect internet privacy; protect women’s health care; protect 2^nd amendment rights and responsibilities by teaching gun safety in schools; protect our quality of life.

Barbara Bailey – affordable college by lowering tuition; jobs, by protecting the economy; funding k-12 education; balance the budget; no new taxes.

Angie Homola – funding education; expanded education; infrastructure; environment, by supporting alternative energy; accountability, via campaign finance reform; fair wages; help the vulnerable, especially veterans.

Q - How do you propose to fund meeting the McCleary case mandate to fully fund education, and how will this affect local school levies?

Barbara Bailey – we’ve already made giant steps. Education will be fully funded by 2018. The majority coalition has finally put money into education. Revenues are currently exceeding forecasts. Schools are too dependent on levies. Our committee is looking for solutions. The claim that there are not sufficient funds to meet the McCleary mandate and that we need a tax increase is untrue. She claims that the budget shortfalls Angie mentions have already been restored, and offers to send Angie the information later. She says they are careful not to harm people. She responds to Nick Petrish by saying they don’t have to raise taxes, they’ll be increasing teacher salaries without doing so. Its better to protect the economy to keep people working. Taxes depress the economy.

Angie Homola – There is no choice but to meet the mandate. Start by closing the tax loopholes which are depriving the state of necessary funds. Institute tax reform to balance the burden away from the middle class and poor back onto the wealthy and corporations. She disagrees that we are ‘doing well.’ The state had to cut the budget by $2 billion in 2008. The only way to repair that is with serious tax reform. The levy situation is critical. The 2013-2015 budget cut $596 million from the school fund and borrowed $296 million. That caused a whole lot of cuts in services. She asks how Bailey intends to bring those back.

Nick Petrish – Institute a public banking system. End corporate welfare and punish the corporations which have been taking advantage of the system and paying no taxes. Institute an income tax to fix the state’s regressive property tax. Teachers are underpaid and we need to increase taxes to pay them fairly. He challenges Bailey.

Q - Would you favor or oppose a ban on assault weapons?

Angie Homola – We need to reinstitute the ban. We need universal background checks. No criminals or mentally ill people should be allowed to own guns.

Nick Petrish – Does not support a ban on any weapons. The solution is education, training in how to use weapons responsibly. Require training with purchase of a weapon.

Barbara Bailey – You can’t buy assault weapons in Washington anyway. We already have tight laws. Better to enforce existing laws than to enact new ones. We don’t need any more laws.

Q - Would you support background checks for gun purchasers?

Nick Petrish – Yes, I support background checks. With rights come responsibilities. The mentally ill have access to guns because Ronald Reagan shut down mental health support. Those people are now out in the population. We need to protect society from those who cannot handle the responsibility of owning a gun.

Barbara Bailey – No, I do not support background checks. We already have a background check system. Most crimes are committed with stolen guns. Adding more process will not change that and will result in less safety. Instead, look for opportunities to put bad people in prison. She says she never opposed background checks, but she had just said that she did not support them.

Angie Homola – I support background checks. An initiative to require them passed overwhelmingly in 2014. Barbara Bailey takes campaign contributions from the NRA, which might color her attitude. People are dying out there because criminals and the mentally ill have ready access to guns. She clarifies that it was not Bailey herself who opposed background checks, but the NRA whose money she accepts.

Q - How would you change the tax structure?

Barbara Bailey – A lot of people have looked at that question. We have sales tax, B&O tax, and others. As long as the economy is good and people have jobs, we’re fine. A lot of people want a state income tax, but that would oppress the economy. The economy is doing well now. We have what we need. There is no reason to change.

Angie Homola – No, the economy is not working. Washington has one of the most regressive tax systems in the country. Eyman’s I-601 limited overall revenue increases to 1% /year, which is much less than inflation. The result is that jurisdictions are struggling with less and less each year. This is not working. People are going to jail when they need to be in the hospital because they can’t afford basic care.

Nick Petrish – People die for lack of health care. We need an income tax to support education, personal support, health care, and public infrastructure. People are thinking too small. I want FDR type thinking. We need a public banking system.

Q - Could you be more specific about a system of more equitable and secure taxes?

Angie – We need to institute a capital gains tax. We need all taxes to be able to increase consistent with inflation. We need to inform the public of how the tax structure works and how we can fix it.

Nick Petrish – We need a proportional tax, based on a percentage of income rather than a flat figure. Everybody needs to pay their fair share, always.

Barbara Bailey – I would not change the tax structure but would help people be more productive. Capital gains are very volatile and a tax on them would not work for small businesses.

Q - Nick Petrish challenges Bailey – Is anyone in the Senate willing to commit to universal health care?

Barbara Bailey – responds that it is wrong to assign motive. Everyone is willing to help. We have a health care system which is in flux. We need to look at the local, state, and federal level. I can’t address all these issues in so short a time.

Q - Angie Homola  challenges Bailey – You claim the tax situation is improving in relation to the current spending Ponzi scheme. In fact the economy is terribly volatile. What do you intend to do when this next bubble bursts?

Barbara Bailey -  disagrees. The sales tax always applies. Even poor people go to the grocery store (she appears to be under the impression that food is taxed). She hasn’t heard of anyone offering to dissolve other taxes in favor of an income tax. The current system is working and she does not understand the objections to it.

Q - How do you propose to address homelessness and a broken criminal justice system?

Nick Petrish – start by ending the drug war. Legalize all drugs and treat people as patients rather than as criminals. Fund the program via the public bank, an income tax, and a single payer medical system. Yes, we have the resources. We just need to do it.

Barbara Bailey – agrees that we have the resources. The problem is that those who need help are not asking for it. There is a mental illness crisis. She’s looking for ways to end homelessness. The money is already there.

Angie Homola – this is an enormous problem. At the county level she created a fee to support homeless veterans. Barbara Bailey voted against a tax exemption for the poor. She voted to exclude mental health services from funding.

Q - Is climate change real and how do you propose to deal with it?

Barbara Bailey – yes, its happening. We don’t really know the cause. We just don’t have the science on that yet. (at this point the crowd emitted a burst of snickers). We’re not ignoring it. We’re working on carbon emissions, and regulations for clean energy and water.

Angie Homola – absolutely. No question. We have problems everywhere and we have to act. We need to get off fossil fuels. We need to increase multi-modal transportation to get people out of cars. We need to encourage and support alternative energy.

Nick Petrish – back in the 1980s Exxon ran a series of “chicken little” ads about climate change and problems with fossil fuels. Now the connection has been proven. Its real. I’m an industrial electrician and I trust my instruments. I accept climate change as a fact.

Q - And what steps will you take if elected?

Angie Homola – dump the I-601 1% tax limit so we can meet the inflation rate; institute a fair tax structure; provide incentives to get off fossil fuels.

Nick Petrish – begin construction on a publicly owned thorium power generation plant and on geothermal power; institute a public bank to support necessary infrastructure work; start huge projects to revitalize the economy.

Barbara Bailey – work for more mass transit, clean high-speed rail. We’re running out of pavement. We’re already taking steps to get off fossil fuels. This needs to be a much bigger conversation. We don’t want to shift the burden for our clean ways to other countries by dumping our fossil fuel castoffs on them.

closing statements:

Nick Petrish – he’s a Bernie delegate, wants to get big $ out of politics; wants universal education; public transit systems; public banks; privacy; guns; reproductive rights; universal health care; support for veterans; build a robust sustainable economy; money is not the only resource.

Barbara Bailey – will continue to advocate for the 10^th district; water issues; class size issues; no tax increases; transportation; jobs; building another ferry; grow the economy; transparency in government; timely, efficient government services.

Angie Homola – will work for accountability; close tax loopholes; fund education; a strong community creates a strong economy; deal with transportation issues; protect the environment.

State Representatives

State Representatives

There are 2 state representatives, and they are both up for (re)election this year. We’re in the interesting position that each has only a single challenger, which means that no matter how you vote, both names on the primary ballot will also be on the November ballot. Think of this as a trial run.

State representative, position 1

Norma Smith, the incumbent, is a pleasant and likable person. She has some good ideas. And then she votes the party line every time. My conversations with her have had an Alice in Wonderland quality. I thought I was talking about one thing, but she was talking about something altogether different. She has her pet projects, and no matter what you want to talk about, she’ll steer the conversation to those projects.

Her opponent is a classic Libertarian – fiscally conservative and socially liberal. If I thought I could trust the words, I could subscribe to his statements. I’ve just seen that those words rarely mean what they say.

So – the devil or the deep blue sea? I think I’ll sit this one out.

Norma Smith, incumbent   R                                 office@votenormasmith.com

rated 100% by American Conservative Union; 90% by the Association of WA Business; 40% by Washington Conservation Voters; 18% by AFL-CIO, 100% by NRA; 96% by Associated General Contractors of WA; 100% by the WA Farm Bureau.

positions: voted in favor of charter schools; against automatic voter registration; did not vote on a bill to prohibit “conversion therapy” on minors; voted against requiring maternal health plans to cover abortion; voted against increasing the minimum wage; voted against requiring employers to provide paid sick leave;

I would have included her website, but it is from 2014 so not particularly relevant today.

Michael Scott                        Libertarian                michaelscottelect@gmail.com

http://www.michaelscottforoffice.com/

He ran against Norma in 2014 as well.

Elected Experience: none

Other Professional Experience: Dir/Producer "On the Record" TV show; Dir/Producer "The Rising Sun"; CIO Hollywood Choppers/Chopper House; SCUBA Instructor/Special Effects; Disability Advocate-CSUN.

Education: MS computer science studies, MBA studies; BA in Film, BA of TV production; AA College of Redwoods; ROP radio broadcast, TV production, audio engineering.

Community Service: Having been a member of many fine charitable organizations; American Legion, Eagles, Moose Lodge, Habitat for Humanity, Disability Advocate-CSUN, and several others! I believe in giving where we can throughout the year, be it, St. Jude Children's Hospital, Relay for Life, or giving food to our local food bank and providing meals to those in need.

Issues: making positive changes to our political system by ending the monopoly of special interest groups over government. Socially liberal and fiscally responsible.

Will abide by the McCleary decision; will protect property owners from corporations attempting to acquire their water rights.

Other priorities are so nebulous I can’t summarize them.

Found this statement on Go Fund Me. He had reached $500.00 of his $5000.00 goal:

Two years ago today(May 16th, 2014) myself and 11 other Libertarian candidates ran for office in Washington state. We were quite successful that year and our party has grown substantially. Folks want another choice and we are here because we care and want to help!

Over the last few years I have been active at our state capitol. Learning the ropes, attending meetings, hearings, involved in our community, getting a better understanding of the issues we face! It's time we all standup and be heard! I ask everyone that I meet to please also run for office, to please help us with positive change. I understand this is not for everyone, and it is tough. If you cannot run please help those of us that are willing to do so! ;-) Many have asked that I do run again... well, It's that time. I can't do this alone. I do not take corporate or special interest funds. I only accept funds from supporter's like you. Please help with whatever you can, every bit is greatly appreciated!

Now let's work together towards "Positive Change"!

Statement: My motivation to get involved is my love for our country, state and district. I had always thought those elected to serve "We the People" did just that, serve the People. However, after hearing our community concerns I came to the realization that we are not being heard. Libertarian party believes strongly in preserving our rights and listening to the People. A big part of this is “Not” to accept corporate funding in order to gain special interests. With your support, I will serve our district, make unbiased decisions and use logic for the betterment of our community.

State Representative, position 2

Another race in which the primary is just a preliminary for the November election. I have not been fond of Dave Hayes since he took office because his focus is far from mine. As far as I can tell he has no opinion on land use, climate change, or the environment in general. His focus is on “public safety” (= law enforcement).

So it’s a wonderful breath of fresh air to see the candidacy of Doris Brevoort, who echoes my sentiments rather closely. You can read the details below. I’ll be voting for Doris Brevoort.

Dave Hayes, incumbent       R         electdavehayes@gmail.com

http://www.electdavehayes.com

He’s a Snohomish County sheriff’s deputy.

Washington Conservation Voters score: 18%

issues:

Economy – reducing excessive regulatory burdens on business will create good jobs. Education – fund it without raising taxes; lower public college tuition rates while opposing unfunded mandates.

Public safety – strengthened the firearm offender registration law; passed legislation to add a 3^rd Skagit County District Court judge; Stands up for first responders. Transportation – worked to improve transportation planning and expedite permits for bridge replacement. Wants to expand and speed completion of cost-effective transportation projects. Wants to reform DOT.

He is silent on such issues as climate change, fossil fuels, or the impact of our environment on such industries as tourism.

Doris Brevoort                      D         votedorisrep@gmail.com

http://dorisbrevoort.com/

education: Saybrook University         PhD in integrative health, UW Masters in education

issues: believes in a democracy where all voices are heard; will defend Washington’s environment. Clean air and water are critical to health, ag production, and eco-tourism; protecting forests, farmland, Puget Sound, and the Skagit watershed; create an equitable income stream for the state to fully fund education, mental health, human services, updated infrastructure, public transportation, safe communities, and disaster preparedness; supports strong unions.

Q - How would your district and the citizens of Washington state, in general, benefit from having you in office?

I will collaborate with other legislators proactively, with patience and resolve. I will be responsive to my constituents, holding Town Hall Meetings on a regular basis, rotating venues so people from every geographic region of LD-10 have opportunities to be heard. I will vote "YES" on numerous issues including:

a. Creation of an equitable, sustainable, revenue stream for WA State that can: fully fund education; provide mental health services and affordable housing for people with mental illness; update State infrastructure (bridges, roads, parks); and expand public transportation.

b. Preserve the water quality of Puget Sound and the watersheds that flow into it.

c. Transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, while generating jobs in new modes of energy production and conservation.

Q - The next session of the legislature has the difficult job of fully funding basic education for our students. How would you plan to do this, regardless of the ongoing committee reports?

I will work with House colleagues to review existing proposals and present them transparently for public consideration. Some of the tools for increasing revenue are: close tax loopholes for corporations which have large preferential taxes; assess incremental taxes on capital gains and financial transactions; consider a state income tax, with a threshold well above the combined incomes of working families. Besides increasing the funding stream, I will work to make education more cost effective by strengthening early childhood education programs and working with OSPI to integrate recent research in brain function and neuroscience into our schools, including special education best practices. [I have a PhD in Human Science from Saybrook University, San Francisco, 2012. My dissertation is about applications of neuroscience to education, and mitigation of brain-related learning and behavioral difficulties through brain training including music, rhythm, and neurofeedback.]

Q - Do you think the legislature could/should assist in finding solutions to the homeless problem? If so, what form might it take? If not, why not?

The legislature can fund and enable regulations for State agencies to collaborate with public/private partnerships, faith-based and nonprofit groups to provide temporary and transitional housing. The State then can provide access to health care, addiction recovery, training, and sustainable jobs. When families have access to these and additional school/community connections, their children can do better in school. With reduced stress, families are more able to attain and retain permanent housing. The State can help people from becoming homeless by funding mixed-income (green) development, and renovation of existing housing into affordable homes for individuals/families on fixed incomes, including seniors. Programs that involve people in service related to attaining their housing-- that they have a stake in-- also create success. Supporting affordable housing for young adults (e.g uniquely designed for cooperative/group living) offers an essential start for health and employment.

Q - Several efforts to pass a bill authorizing automatic voter registration for 16-year-olds who receive a driver’s license have failed to pass the legislature. Would you favor such a bill?:

I favor a bill that initiates automatic voter registration for youth before they turn 18. Youth may then feel that they have a firmer stake in the democratic process and, if registered, are more likely to vote.

Q - According to Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations: “Climate change is the most emblematic challenge in this age of globalization. For the sake of our grandchildren, we cannot refuse that challenge.” (The Case For True Leadership on Climate Change – Kofi Annan Foundation, 30 Nov 2015) What is your opinion of this quotation?

I agree! If we "refuse" this challenge, the planet will become unlivable for future generations! The temperature on Earth is rising. Human activities (mining, pollution, wasteful energy consumption) are predominantly responsible. The Legislature must respond vigorously to lower the overall carbon footprint of Washington State. We need to decrease emissions from fuel-generating facilities and vehicles SOONER than planned. We must aggressively educate the public, including children, regarding the critical need for both energy and resource conservation, keeping trees/ flora robust for our environment. The state can develop broader incentives for homeowners and businesses to monitor and decrease energy consumption, and retain tax credits for home-based renewable energy installations. Naomi Klein's book 'This Changes Everything” offers many details to inform readers of how people around the world are responding to the challenge. Indeed, this is what catalyzed me to run for office.

Q - If you believe your area is affected by unusual weather patterns, what actions would you support to mitigate these effects?

In Anacortes, Skagit County, the group "Transition Fidalgo" advocates locally for conservation and renewable energy. The Legislature can fund community-based 'proactivation' like this in counties throughout the State, involving nonprofit and public/private partnerships in changing our consumption habits. The Northwest is experiencing more intense rainfall, drier summers, and decreased winter snow pack. We can reach out with economic and social incentives for people to take public transport, eat locally grown food, etc. We can expand public transportation, including rail availability in the Western WA corridor: The State can fund regional transportation planning, including with railroads to add an additional track, or research proposals that revise the balance between freight and commuter transit capacity. Promoting and funding tourism can help the public experience the effects of changing weather, e.g. shifts in wildlife migration, so they become partners in future mitigation.

. . . and VOTE

Endorsed by FUSE Progressive Voters.

Island County Commissioners

Island County Commissioners

Island County Commissioner, district 1

There being only two candidates, this is another race which is mostly a preview for the fall main event. And you can only vote in this race if you live in District 1.

Helen Price-Johnson and I do not see eye to eye (and that’s putting it mildly) on many important issues. In fact, I think I can say that she hates me and wishes I would leave Island County forever. Sadly, at the moment she’s the best county commissioner we have. She is not evil. She just has a very narrow focus, that focus being small business. She cannot see that by protecting Island County’s environment we are protecting the jobs that come from tourism, among other things.

Her challenger, Gary Wray, is a rather loose cannon who appears occasionally at county hearings where he ‘testifies’ irrelevantly and clearly does not understand what is on the agenda or what the issues are. I do not judge him as capable of carrying out the duties of a county commissioner. We have the recent experience of Kelly Emerson to show us how that turns out.

Helen is plenty popular, so I may sit this one out. If I do vote, it will be for Helen Price-Johnson.

Helen Price-Johnson, incumbent   D         helen@helenpricejohnson.o

http://helenpricejohnson.org/

Priorities

Small Business:  Helen understands that to preserve our rural character, Island County needs a balanced economic strategy.  

Doing business with local companies is vital to the stability of our local economic future.  The sales taxes generated locally help support local government services such as transit, mental health  and criminal justice programs. 

Helen supports the efforts of our local farms, restaurants, and markets in creating a sustainable Farm to Table infrastructure and Farm to Market programs.  We can enhance tourism, sustain local families and protect our quality of life by investing in those things which we treasure, such as farmland, open space, and small businesses.

Transportation:  Island County is dependent upon regional connections for our transportation needs. Helen has provided strong advocacy at the regional and state level for small counties served by ferries, so as to preserve service levels for the two routes serving Whidbey Island. Further she has been a leader in promoting non-motorized trails on both Camano and Whidbey Islands for both bicyclists and marine access.

Environment and Growth:  Helen believes we must accommodate the growth coming to our islands while preserving the quality of life which makes Island County such a wonderful place to live.  Her balanced approach and visionary leadership has been essential in sustaining our economy and protecting our environment.

Helen has spent much of her second term as Commissioner working to preserve Conservation Futures funding and updating the Island County Comprehensive Plan and Shorelines Master Plan.  Her participation with the Coastal Caucus of the Washington Association of Counties and the Salmon Recovery Council of the Puget Sound Partnership has heightened her ability to advocate for Island County and its natural environment.

Law and Justice: Keeping our island communities safe is a high priority for Helen.  With the improving economy, and with her support and advocacy, the Commissioners have restored the majority of the pre-2009 funding to Island County's law and justice programs without a tax increase.  

Helen helped to bring attention to the rise of property crime related to addiction in her district. Helen has recently supported immediate investments in the Island County Jail related to safety and security of inmates and jail personnel.  She believes, however, that significant changes in the delivery of mental health services are necessary on a statewide basis in order to effect real change. Local jails have become the primary mental health facilities for the state. This has created a crisis in Washington.

Gary Wray                 R         laster.construction.com

https://www.facebook.com/Gary-Wray-for-Island-County-Commissioner-241887996188167/

GARY WRAY - A MAN OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE!
A message from Gary -
For many years, I have been involved in several community organizations, on both the local and state levels. At this time, given the urging from numerous Island County citizens, I have decided that it is necessary for me to run for this position in order to effect change—smart change!
I believe the County Commissioner’s paramount duty is to create a balanced budget that sets priorities in spending for essential government services, such as law, justice, human health and safety. I will be a watchdog of the taxpayer’s dollar.
My experience working on a number of Boards and non-profit organizations has given me strong skills in collaboration and conflict resolution.
As a facilitator, I welcome in put from all citizens of the county, even if we don’t initially see eye-to-eye. It is my intention to balance citizens advisory boards to reflect our island’s diverse backgrounds. I will not represent any special interest group and pledge to keep the best interests of the county in mind.
Government transparency and open public meetings are critically important to me. I welcome citizen involvement and participation at all levels.

Island County Commissioner, district 2

And here’s the second great race of this election. I do not believe Jill Johnson is competent in the position she now holds, as evidenced by the many points I raise below. I very briefly met Dustin Amundsen. I disagree with him on some fundamental points, namely his belief in the primacy of the navy and law enforcement. I believe in that ounce of prevention. Perhaps if a young couple can get out into the woods they won’t feel so uptight that they start beating on each other. There are studies and statistics which bear this out.

And then I met John Fowkes. We ended up talking for an hour after the end of the meeting. We agree on nearly everything. I like his spunk. Anyone who can grow up in Oak Harbor and not lose his soul carries a lot of points with me. He is obviously a political novice, but then most people who run for county commissioner are. He is also obviously a quick study, which is something I value in a public official.

I live in District 1, and one has to vote only within the district in the primaries, so I will not be able to vote for John Fowkes in the primary. Assuming he survives the primary, I will be voting for John Fowkes in the general election.

Jill Johnson, incumbent                  R         voteforjill@gmail.com

found no website for her. The Facebook page was mostly personal.

I found a favorable write-up in Island Politics, the far-right toxic blog, dating back to 2012.

My personal experiences with Jill have been uniformly negative. She clearly does not understand the basics of how government works or how one deals with multiple points of view on a particular issue. She has specifically asked me (and partner Steve) to please retire so she won’t have to deal with us anymore. Sorry Jill. Ain’t happening. She chose to go behind the backs of the public and Island Beach Access to negotiate a deal with the man who built the wall across the road at Greenbank. She really did not understand that she was giving away the store. She has said on the record that she sees no reason to abide by the rulings of the Growth Management Hearings Board, since she intends to appeal them anyway. And she has led the charge to defy the Hearings Board. And then she wonders why we feel constrained to haul her into court. It is Jill Johnson who has killed the Conservation Futures Fund which Helen Price-Johnson has been working so hard to keep alive. Jill really can’t see the value of protecting land in public ownership for the good of the entire community.

She also happens to be massively petty. Hearings devolve into something out of 4^th grade. It becomes embarrassing. I don’t know if she reads the actual language on which she is expected to rule, but she clearly does not understand it. Which loops back around to major arguments and eventually having to appeal yet again to the Growth Management Hearings Board. It does become a vicious cycle.

Dustin Amundson    R         voteamundson@gmail.com

http://www.voteamundson.com/

I didn’t think there were Republicans in unions, but Mr Amudson is the VP of AFSCME local 18451.

Issues:

Planning and Development

Island County is facing growth. It is my belief our current planning and development department is behind, overwhelmed and not handling the issuing of permits in a timely manner. This is delaying responsible development and at the same time preventing it. We need stronger leadership at the commissioner level to improve trust and operational ability. 


Law and Justice

I support without reservation our law and justice community. I also recognize that we can only do so much with the resources we have. In order to improve, we must save in other areas to provide appropriate funding. I do not believe in hiring non-elected outside counsel which is currently taking place is responsible leadership.


Financial Transparency

The citizens of Island County deserve transparent leadership especially in financial matters. There will always be competing priorities. Residents need to know where their tax dollars are going and how it is being spent. I intend to make the motive behind financial affairs transparent.


Naval Air Station Whidbey Island

I support the Naval Air Station and all of its operations. The men and women who fly the Growler need the outlying fields for training purposes. I worked at the solid waste facility for 10 + years with jets flying daily and have suffered no ill effects from it. 

---

STATEMENT

Island County needs strong leadership now more than ever. I have a lifetime of faithful public service with Navy, Fire and County. Island County is facing considerable growth which will require cooperation at all levels of government. My experience with the county as a negotiator showed a great need to improve communications and transparency.
I will ensure that Island County citizens, management and employees have the clearest understanding of what their County is doing. I have the leadership skills of communication, credibility, capability and confidence.
I am the leader our Island's need. "Leadership Matters"




John Fowkes D         fowkes4folks@gmail.com
http://fowkes4folks.weebly.com/

Q - What will be your top three priorities, if elected?

The next board of commissioners will face the growth coming to our islands as the military expands at NASWI and that growth needs to be balanced to preserve the quality of life and the environment. Through this process we also need to remember our owner operated businesses, especially small retail shops, restaurants, and places to stay as these places add that friendly character that are loved by locals and tourists.

I would like to see solutions that take the fear out of business start-ups and recognise those who build businesses through their own sweat-equity. We need to support our local artisans and create an atmosphere where cottage industry and local farming thrives. In this way we can  work on local jobs and climate change.

Island County Residents are seeing their share of struggles. Struggles for employment, Struggles with mental health, hopelessness, Drug addiction, Crime, Incarceration and we are right back to struggles for employment.   If we can stop this cycle we can save resources. Island County needs to review their mental health policies.  Housing First!

Q - What measures do you favor to keep your county economically viable?

I believe that supporting locally owned, owner controlled and operated businesses are better both economically and culturally. Small firms create 60% to 80% of new jobs in the US and rarely leave a hole too big to be filled by small competing local businesses. Local owners tend to work with other locals first keeping the money in the local economy longer. Locally owned firms tend to support local cultural events, youth sports teams, and non-profits more readily. I believe that ecotourism is good for Island County and small unique retail shops and restaurants add to the charm for locals and visitors alike.

Q - How do you view balancing development with protecting our natural resources?

We need to balance development with protecting our natural resources. When deciding on the balance it should be for the welfare of the people at large, not just the few.  Access to public beaches must be protected for the sake of tourism and quality of life and residents must be heard, and represented in their concerns for policies that may impact their lives.

Q - What is your stand on global warming?

Regardless of whether global warming is a natural phenomenon or a man made catastrophe this should be one point that is agreed upon by all citizens.  Island County will feel the effects of global warming and it will be a challenge especially as sea levels rise and sandy bluffs are undermined by erosion.  Higher tides, (up to 4 feet above current high tides now, predicted by 2030) with roads and buildings very close to sea level could prove a real challenge in the future of Island County.

Q - If you believe your area is affected by unusual weather patterns, what actions would you support to mitigate these effects?

Bringing a group of local experts together to form a "Climate change preparedness team" (if we do not have team covering this already) would be a great start.  #actonclimate.

Port District/Fairgrounds

Port District of South Whidbey Island

The Board of Commissioners of the Port District of South Whidbey Island, Island County, Washington, adopted Resolution No 16-03 concerning Fairground property and a property tax increase to support it. If approved, this proposition would authorize the District to accept the transfer of the Fairground property from Island County, and increase its regular property tax levy to support Fairgrounds expenses by five cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation, from its current rate of $0.133 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, to $0.183 per $1000 of assessed valuation for collection in 2017. Thereafter, such new levy amount would be used to compute limitations for subsequent years as allowed by chapter 84.55 RCW.

Should this proposition be approved? 

Ok, you got that on the first read, right? For starters, this applies only to people who live within the Port of South Whidbey district, roughly the same as the South Whidbey School District. So the rest of you readers can ignore it entirely – unless you’re interested.

Ok, I’ll save you reading all my reasons below. I’ll be voting NO.

Now, I went to a lot of trouble to research and write this, so read it already.

Everybody and their grandmother’s second cousin has by now received at least 2 or 3 pieces of mail concerning this, and the Whidbey Record touts it as the best thing since peanut butter.

One of the things about being a legal beagle is that I read the fine print, go back to the references, figure out which goes where and what applies when. From what I can see, while this purports to be a property tax increase to support buying and upgrading the fairgrounds, there is nothing binding in the various resolutions and statements. So if the Port District concluded that this is all just more work than they want to do, or it is not paying for itself, or  . . . fill in the blank, they could dispose of the fairgrounds, or the fair. In fact, they could simply divert the funds to some other project, like maybe another upgrade of the Langley marina.

I am told that there is a clause in the sale agreement which says that the Port District will not be able to sell the fairgrounds without a vote of the people. Ok, even if that is true, isn’t that what they’re doing right now? They’re asking us to vote on the sale of the fairgrounds by the county to the Port District. And they could just as easily ask us to vote on selling the fairgrounds to  . . . who knows? One of the rules of political dealing is that if you keep a door firmly shut you never have to worry about whatever is on the other side. Once you open that door, you have to spend all sorts of time and energy fighting off whatever crazy proposals someone or other comes up with, because the door is now open to it. I prefer to keep that door shut. There is also the question: if the county can’t afford to maintain the fairgrounds, with its taxing ability county-wide, how is the Port District going to do it with its much more limited tax base?

The Port District has absolutely no experience in operating or overseeing a fair, or in managing such a piece of land. I’m reminded of various fiascos involving purchase of the ferry parking lot. It might be interesting to ask how that is working out financially.

The concern of many people involved with producing the fair and dealing with the grounds is that the Port District has in the not so distant past come up with completely untenable proposals, which then had to be beaten down. The person who prepared that report is the chair of the “buy the fairgrounds” committee. This does not engender confidence. The Port District says it will raise funds by leasing space to small businesses. And then someone asks what those businesses will do in August, during the run up to the fair. Haven’t heard much of an answer thus far. And has anyone looked into what businesses are interested in leasing space there?

Bottom line fact: Island County is intended to serve the best interests of all the people in the county. The Port District’s mandate, by contrast, is “economic development.” They don’t need to worry about the people, just whether they can make money on the place. And that leaves me with a serious case of heartburn.

I will be voting a resounding NO.