Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 17, 2013

Interviewing Ken Bell

Ken Bell looked straight at the time keeper at the Whatcom Republicans meeting who had just given him the thirty seconds sign. “Oh, I hate you,” he growls menacingly, before lightening the comment with a natural smile. The crowd cracks up as Bell wraps up his pitch for office.

Ken Bell

Ken Bell for Port

Bell, currently a Whatcom County Planning Commissioner and president of Best Recycling, is trying to add one more job title to his name, port commissioner. My first question is pretty simple, why the port? “It’s in my wheelhouse. I know the business, I know the ramifications of their decisions because I’ve worked with ports up and down the coast as part of Best Recycling.”

He walks me through some of his history in the community: buying a plant from Pete Zuanich, crossing swords with his neighbors in the Silver Beach neighborhood, and watching the waterfront cleanup. The port first caught his interest when they bought his office building. “I thought to myself, ‘you have this expensive waterfront cleanup hanging over your heads and you are making a five million dollar building purchase? I still don’t know why they bought it.”

Bell currently serves on the Planning Commission, but he admits it has been a difficult role. “It is easy to get disillusioned on the Planning Commission.” The chair of the Commission, County Council candidate Michelle Luke, agrees. “Of all the cats I have to herd on the commission, Ken is the most un-herdable,” she laughs. “I think he enjoys it that way.”

What are his issues for the port? “Liability. I wish I had a hand in the GP purchase. We have a huge liability there. It is basically a capped landfill . . . and I have some serious questions as to the nature of the contaminants.” He said the port needs to focus on attracting “the right mix of businesses. You need a mix of public and private operations. I haven’t seen the whole plan, but when you do it in chunks, you shortchange yourself.”

I asked him what he thought of the incumbent he was trying to unseat, Mike McAuley. “I like him, he is a nice guy. I just want to have an impact on the port.”

Ken Bell at the South Pole

Ken Bell at the South Pole

Naturally, I asked him his view on the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal. “We don’t have any say. For me, it is more of a philosophical thing, I honestly believe China will find a way to get coal, whether it is from Bellingham or somewhere else, they will get it. If you got to burn coal, I’d rather see it burned here in the U.S.” I asked if he supports the facility and he gives a half-shrug. “I’m not a big fan, but they are going to get it, we’re just making it more difficult to burn here, we might as well ship it through here,” he pauses and gives me a sly grin, “. . . in a responsible manner.”

Speaking of responsible growth, I ask about the airport which continues to swell every year. “I use the airport a lot,” said Bell. “We are perfectly situated here, we have an opportunity to bring things through our doors and receive the economic impact of all that travel.” However, he was not without a few complaints. “The shuttles don’t quite make sense and we need to do something about the parking there. We are missing an opportunity.”

Technically, the race is non-partisan but with Mike McAuley asking for both parties endorsements (and so far, receiving the Whatcom Democrats) I asked him where he falls. “I’m a little more right of center than most.” Do you consider yourself a Republican? “You know, that is the hardest question you have asked me. I was a Republican for years, but now, I’m not a fan of either party. When the party matters more than the idea, I hate that. Philosophically, I’m a free market guy, all the way, but I don’t think ideas are only in one party.” However he did endorse Tea Party darling Tony Larson in 2011 and has voted with the rest of the Planning Commission to keep breaking the law.

Why should people vote for Bell? “There are people out there that try to fix problems that don’t exist, you can’t! I want to make sure that we have a port that works. My business specializes in retrieving things in hard-to-get-to places. I hope that the port is not one of those places.”

I plan to interview all candidates for local office this year and build a thorough voter’s guide. Stay tuned for more great interviews and analysis!

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 14, 2013

Friday’s Odds and Ends: Bush Years Time Warp

Hello Loyal Readers,

Usually, I jump right into my gathered news bits, however, first I want to share a little bit about why these past couple of weeks have been so difficult.

I’m having Bush flashbacks. 

That's me in the top left as part of a student panel on the Iraq War.

That’s me in the top left as part of a student panel on the Iraq War.

In 2000, I was just beginning to become aware of the political world, but it wasn’t until 2002 that I really started paying attention. For those of you doing the math, yes, I was in high school, and as our nation hurtled toward war with a country that had done nothing to us, I was outraged. Furious. How could we elect people so foolish, so terrible and bloody that they would stampede the country to war?

That is when I became involved. I went to protests, I read the newspaper every day, I learned about Senate confirmations and met my state legislators. It took me a few more years to decide I wanted to be a professional campaign manager (and four years in the job to decide I didn’t want to do it anymore,) but Bush’s invasion of Iraq was the spark to my flame.

So when I read about Obama expanding Bush’s NSA wiretapping surveillance program, while Syria is using chemical weapons and the Justice Department is following around reporters stamping out our leaks, I felt the cold icy hand of cynicism grip my heart.  I want to believe that you can work hard and elect people who will hold true to their values and make meaningful improvements in our government, but it is much harder when today looks so similar to ten years ago.

On to the Odds and Ends. 

Once again, the County lost in court, with the Growth Management Hearings Board once again ordering Whatcom County to comply with the Growth Management Act. I wish it didn’t take so much time and money from private citizens to force the county to do its job, but it looks like they are going to waste even more taxpayers money on this. We have already spent over $100,000 on a Seattle-based legal team that keeps losing in court, yet the County Council is considering paying them another $40,000 to keep fighting a law that was settled twenty years ago. If you are just tuning into this fight, check out my simple explanation of the Growth Management Act and why Whatcom is doing this here.

County Republicans

County Republicans

Last Saturday, I attended the Whatcom County Republicans meeting because a wide selection of candidates were giving speeches. Last time I attended was two years ago, when Bill Elfo was scheduled to speak about the jail. I showed up for all of ten minutes before Sam Crawford saw me and ran over to Luanne Van Werven to get her to kick me out. Van Werven informed me that Elfo would speak first and I needed to leave as soon as he was done.

This year, they let me stick around. The speeches were short and they did not allow any questions from the audience. It was largely uneventful with most candidates just rehashing the same material that is on their website or at the Dems endorsement meeting. I was mainly struck by how calm and orderly the process was compared to the raucous Democratic endorsement process.

That said, this was not an endorsement meeting. After their speeches, candidates could request a survey from the endorsement chair, Bruce Ayers. If they completed the written survey and it was to their liking, Ayers would schedule an interview where the candidates meet with a select handful of Republicans. After that, the committee will make a recommendation to the PCOs at the Republican picnic in July and the PCOs vote at the picnic. It is quite a contrast from the open air, all members can vote style endorsement process of the Dems.

Finally, I attended Renata Kowalczyk’s kickoff and was impressed by the wide spread of attendees. Her message was an interesting blend of business savvy (she is a business consultant, after all) and her ideas for the port. She made an interesting contrast to my interview with Ken Bell – which should go live this weekend.

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 13, 2013

No Public Information about Jail Planning Work Group

When I was looking into the missing needs analysis for the new jail, I was told that the decision to start drafting designs without first conducting a needs analysis was made by the “Executive Jail Planning Work Group.” He also indicated that this was the group that came up with the number of 660 beds for the first build.

Executive Jail Planning Work Group

Executive Jail Planning Work Group

This group appointed by the County Executive and prominently displayed on the New Jail page on the county website (see right) is the group that would carry forward the recommendations from the Jail Planning Task Force. You can view the roster here, but as you can see, it is almost entirely county employees. I was curious how this group came to the conclusions and decisions they did, so I did a public records request for the minutes of their meetings.

There were none. Zero. No minutes were taken at any of their meetings. I asked for memos or supplemental material. Apparently no one bothered to take notes or email a summery around either. Here is my email back and forth with Mark Burnfield, Public Records Officer for the County.

Compare this with the Jail Planning Task Force, appointed by the County Council to look into this issue. All their minutes are online and publicly available.

I find it quite disturbing that the people involved in this supposedly open process did not bother to keep any public records of their discussions or even their decisions, this does not bode well for going forward with this multi-million dollar project. The public deserves a seat at the table . . . and failing that, at least the ability to know what was discussed. 

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 11, 2013

Young Conservatives Dissatisfied with Party Stance

I’ve written quite a few times about the disconnect between older and younger conservatives. Locally, this conflict was highlighted when they were were shut out of the County Republican nominating convention in 2012. It seems as if I’m not the only person interested in this divide.

The College Republican National Committee produced some fascinating reading for political junkies this week, titled “A Grand Old Party for a Brand New Generation.”

Young Republican

Young Republican Logo

While Republican incumbents are wary of Tea Party challenges this next election, this report suggests that perhaps they should spend time addressing younger voter (under 30) interests. While older people tend to vote more, younger voters are developing voting habits and party loyalties that will linger for future elections, warns the report.

Much has already been made about the low tolerance of young people with the Republican party’s closed-minded social agenda. But what I find interesting is the revelation that young Republican voters are just like all young voters when it comes to issues. They are mired economically, saddled with debt and worried about their careers and economic future.

Not surprisingly, the Republican party’s focus on taxation and business issues has left many young voters, even Republican voters who want to start businesses, “thinking they will only reap the benefits of Republican policies if they become wealthy or rise to the top of a big business. We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer a hand to help you get there.”

I couldn’t agree more.

And while “big government” continues to be a concern for young Republicans, they don’t see government as Doctor Doom.

“Focus on fixing the debt, on tackling long-term problems, on reforming institutions that are broken, absolutely. But realize that railing against “big government” isn’t the most effective way to win the hearts and minds of this generation.”

I think that’s a message shared by most young people, regardless of party stripe. We want action; we want results. Start addressing the problems that need addressing and give us the opportunity to get on our feet and prepare for the mess you leave behind.

This is one of the reasons why the hard-line conservative stance being taken by our state Republicans is not going to win them any votes. Do young voters, no matter their political stripe, care about a five cent tax on bottled water? Not really. Do they care that the summer work program is getting slashed? Heck yes, that’s job experience and pay in your pocket. Young conservatives see the connection between, say, sound economic investment in STEM programs and “wasteful government spending.” I only hope they can persuade their older counterparts before too much damage is done.

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 8, 2013

State Republicans Evasive At End of Special Session

Kevin Ranker

Sen. Kevin Ranker’s reaction to the Republican budget proposal

Things are looking grim for our state legislature as they frantically try to come to some sort of agreement about the budget in the last three days of the special session. With the deadline fast approaching, you would think the Republican-controlled Senate would be hard at work, but apparently Sen. Kevin Ranker (D-40th) had to force them to stay on the job. Speaking via his facebook page, he described his experience Thursday night.

Last night, after returning to Olympia from the memorial for Trooper Sean O’Connell, I found that the Republicans were planning on adjourning the Senate for multiple days! This just four days before the end of Special Session! Senate Democrats have repeatedly stated that we do not feel it is appropriate to “take a day off” when we are so close to extremely serious impacts of a government shutdown if we don’t finish our work soon. Further, my seatmates Kris Lytton and Jeff Morris, together with other house Democrats were at the same time working tirelessly to pass off the House floor a genuine compromise!

As the only Senate Democrat still on the floor, I reminded them that our caucus did not support wasting another day of work, and told them I would object to their motion to adjourn for multiple days based on a lack of a quorum being present on the floor. Under our Senate rules, without a quorum the only option available is to adjourn until the next day. With only a few of their members present, and no where near a quorum of 25, they could not override my objection.

So, I sat on the Senate floor for hours while they hoped I would need a bathroom break, etc. No one else present, just me sitting at my desk, threatening an objection with staff and house members encouraging me from the wings… waiting for the Republicans to agree to continue to do our work. In the end, they did agree to adjourn to today. However, they adjourned until 4 pm — basically guaranteeing no real work could be done.

Shortly after adjourning the Republican-controlled Senate, led by former Democrat Sen. Rodney Tom, gave perhaps one of the weirdest press conferences I have seen in a long while. Sen. Tom seemed completely unaware of the details of the House Democratic budget, which is rather odd, since he should be negotiating with them over what version goes forward to Governor Inslee.

Watch the video here

Hopefully everyone will negotiate in good faith and we will have a workable solution soon, but judging by the general disarray of one branch of our government, I do not have high hopes.

One thing does remain very clear, I almost made it through an entire article without mentioning Sen. Doug “Love My Free Lunch” Ericksen. Well, I tried.

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 7, 2013

Friday Odds and Ends: Healthcare and the Herald

Hello Loyal Readers,

Our theme for today’s Odds and Ends is ignoring reality (except for the first item), but before I get into it, I just want to thank everyone who has made a donation to the Political Junkie in the last couple of weeks. Your financial support means a great deal to me and allows me to expand my capabilities here on this blog. Thank you.

First, I want to highlight our new tab, here on the Political Junkie. I’ve created an index for all my reporting on the proposed jail, so when you are looking for information on this subject, you can access it quickly and easily.

Meanwhile, a new study confirms that the Obamacare birth control mandate will have a drastic effect on reducing the number of abortions in America. Apparently, if you provide people with affordable or free birth control, it reduces the number of unwanted pregnancies which reduces the number of abortions. I know this is a shocking fact for some people, but it is true. The Obama administration is on track to become more effective at reducing abortions than eight years of the supposedly pro-life Bush administration.

Julie Shirley, Exec Editor with the Bellingham Herald

Next, comes a story of our local media.  Bev Smith, a retired teacher out of Ferndale, sent in a letter to the editor discussing Sen. Doug Ericksen’s comments at his town hall in March. The Bellingham Herald refused to print them because they had no record of the event occurring because they did not send a reporter to it. I spoke with Julie Shirley, Executive Editor at the Bellingham Herald, and she confirmed their policy. They will not print letters that discuss events they did not cover in the paper.

At a time with dwindling newsroom resources (seriously, John Stark and Ralph Schwartz produce fantastic work for the time they are given), it seems rather short-sighted to take the “we didn’t see it, it didn’t happen” approach. Community insight to events should expand people’s perspective on events, and I hope the Bellingham Herald reconsiders its policy.

Finally, rumor has it that Dan Robbins requested a job description for port commissioner two weeks after filing week. Not terribly inspiring considering  you should probably know what you are signing up for before you jump in, however, I will be setting up an interview with him soon and getting more details.

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 6, 2013

Jail Planners Face a Skeptical Council

Update: Jack Louws has emailed me to clarify a statement by Wendy Jones and note that the County is currently considering the  ”initial build to house from about 540 to 580 depending on configuration”

If the jail planning firm, the DLR Group, was expecting an easy reception from the County Council last Tuesday, they were sorely disappointed. When they brought forward the work they had done, the Council was well-prepared to exercise their oversight responsibilities, asking about everything from size to missing needs analysis to poor stakeholder communication.

County Exec Louws speaking with DLR before the meeting

County Exec Louws speaking with DLR before the meeting

Tyler Schroeder, planning manager for the County, spoke first about the SEIS process. He said that they received 40 comments on the scope of the EIS process. “There were some comments submitted that were outside the scope of SEPA but I hope they will be addressed as we go forward on the process.”

Next, the team from DLR spoke about the location. They repeatedly referred to it as the selected site and none of their presented material made any reference to any other location than the LaBounty road site. Bill Valdez, DLR project lead, said definitively, “This is the site that has been selected. We examined it.”

As they walked through the various challenges with the property, they declared that they met with “all stakeholder groups”. Barbara Brenner’s ears perked up. “Have you met with the neighbors who live near the property?” The planners quickly backtracked. “We only met with people in the County.” “The neighbors live in the county!” Brenner responded but Kathy Kershner quickly came to the planners rescue. “I think she means all the departmental stakeholders within the County government.”

Moving along, DLR presented their projections for how many beds our county required. They started with this graph, showing historical trends on Whatcom County incarceration.

Historic Projections according to DLR

Historic Projections according to DLR

You can click the image to enlarge it but right away two things stood out. First of all, the average occupancy of the jail is currently pegged at 400 inmates, yet I recently spoke with Wendy Jones, the jail administrator for the County, and she said that on any given day there are an average of 265 inmates in our jail facilities. UPDATE: Jack Louws emailed me and clarified that Wendy Jones was speaking just about the downtown facility and that our average occupancy of the Whatcom County jails is around 400 inmates. 

It makes me wonder if they are counting people who are under house arrest or otherwise not in the facilities.

Since we still do not have a needs analysis, the jail planners instead relied on historical averages to create a graph. Here is the graph they presented showing the needs of Whatcom County going forward.

Whatcom County Jail projections

DLR Future Projections

Their projections show that we don’t cross the 500 bed threshold until 2025. But they admitted that this is conjecture, “We really have no idea what is going to happen,” said Valdez.

Right off the bat, Ken Mann dug in with questions. “Where  is the needs analysis? What about changing drug laws, diversion techniques, investing in mental health services? If you are just extending a line into the future and running it through a few variables, that is nowhere near the rigor we need.”

"Where is the needs analysis? I expect more than just continuing a line from a graph . . ."

“Where is the needs analysis? I expect more than just continuing a line from a graph . . .”

DLR responded that they had looked at Whatcom County’s population growth and extrapolated from there, saying they ran eight different models to come up with these numbers.

Pete Kremen pointed out at that the nation-wide correlation between population growth and the need for more prison beds has declined and asked if they took that into consideration? They reiterated that they ran eight models and considered national trends.

Capacity of Whatcom County jails

Capacity of Whatcom County jails

The planners made a good point that as you increase the number of jail beds available, the number of people incarcerated tends to jump up. They showed this graph (see left) which highlights how many more people were locked up after we opened the interim jail facility.

As they went into the possible design details of the facility (where the giant Sheriff’s office and warehouse is to be located), Sam Crawford brought up a very good point. “If we are building this jail with modular pods, couldn’t we just build a 500 bed facility and expand it when we needed more? The square footage would be the same, we just upgrade the facilities to add more beds when they are needed?” The planners agreed but reiterated that they were currently planning for a facility with 600 beds to accommodate, “special events, like a football game, when you need that extra capacity.”

All and all, I was impressed with the thorough and articulate questions the Council asked. Carl Weimer asked about where the mental health facilities would fit into this plan (they don’t, right now) and even Bill Knutzen got into it, asking about LEED certification and planning for heavy rains.

I am pleased that the council is greeting these plans with skepticism, we need their vigorous oversight to ensure that we don’t get a facility that is too large and too expensive for our needs.

Speaking of cost, on June 20th they will be holding workshops to review layouts and build some projections about how much the taxpayers will have to pay for this facility.

On June 17th, the Ferndale City Council will be considering an advisory vote relating to the proposed jail. The notice for this vote includes perhaps my favorite sentence I’ve seen in a public document so far, “The City Council will consider an advisory vote related to the potential siting of a jail facility/ sheriff offices in Ferndale.  The public is invited to attend.  This is not a public hearing.” Yes, enjoy that contradiction for a moment.

Stay tuned next week for a selection of comments that were submitted to scoping process and the case of the invisible executive work group.

Posted by: sweeneyblog | June 4, 2013

Kathy Kershner’s Thoughts on Breaking the Law

For many years, Whatcom County has been violating the state law governing planning for our community. Failing to comply with this law, called the Growth Management Act (GMA), has cost us thousands of dollars in legal fees and made us ineligible for hundreds of thousands of state dollars. You can read my simple explanation of all this here.

At the Whatcom Democrats endorsement meeting, council president and GMA opponent, Kathy Kershner, was asked about this issue and it was the only time that someone’s answer was boo-ed.

That’s right, she referred to Futurewise as a special interest group that doesn’t care about Whatcom County. Aside from that statement being incorrect, the fact is that there were several Futurewise board members in the audience who did not take kindly to her statement. I would like to add that the few boos, you can hear them at the end, were quickly ssshh-ed.

The video was provided by Center for New Media, who filmed the entire event. I will be sharing some small clips from the endorsement meeting over the next couple of weeks, so stay tuned.

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 181 other followers