Motley Blog

I moved to Seattle in January 1986, my first civic involvement was volunteering to help start the Broadway (Seattle) BIA, second was a group called KC 2000. (The end result would be the Metro/King County Merger per the Judge Zilly decision.) These folks would be perceived as the typical regional heavy hitter crowd. FWIW though the earlier, more modest endeavor, sits sweeter in my memory.

This was the end of the Reagan, fall of 1987 when George I was making his run. At that time the economy was tanking, and I used that as a theme for a promotional editorial I wrote in the UW Student Newspaper - The Daily.

Best thing about this event was the UW Students and Faculty I met - faculty included the Geographer/Demographer Richard Morrill and Transportation Engineer Scott Rutherford.

Two student footnotes: The Op-Ed was published by Sally Clark, currently a Seattle Councilmember, and perhaps the best home grown public career resume of my generation, locally.

Asterisk
Second was Tom Nolan. At the time he was doing his Master's Thesis on a proposed Computerized Mapping system for King County. Tom currently runs the City of Seattle Department, funded by City Light. This is his Master's thesis abstract/outline relevant to the local history of this profession, a topic I should continue to write on.

The handwriting should be his.

This isn't so much a biographical item as an interesting story which I was a somewhat close spectator of.

District elections would play out as a major scandal. Though not conceived as an attack on the Seattle establishment, it was certainly an effort to make electability more accessible to the average citizen. Kerman Kermoade, the author of the following was a friend on the Vision board, doing this as a project for his later life Poly Sci degree. I was at the initial organizing meetings.

As you may recall this became a scandal when it was revealed that food executive (and active Republican) Tom Stewart was making illegal contributions as a way to seek revenge for previous battles with the City bureaucracy. I wasn't active in the campaign and know nothing about the details of Stewart's other battles. Stewart, with his company, has since left the State, one of several biggies in the last decade or so.

Tacoma, as you may know, has a mixed system of at-large and district seats - the particular mix I came to favor out of observing these debates.

As a resident of Tacoma I'd make a similar argument for Pierce County. Perhaps the most important thing to think about is how Pierce and S. King coordinate their somewhat overlapping interests.

Kimberley Marlowe Hartnett is David Brewster's and Crosscut's best hope at avoiding the stereotypical Seattle limousine liberal mindset (including symptoms of xenophobia?) in his current effort to expand his voice beyond the bounds of the 36, 37, and 43rd State Legislative Districts (okay, maybe the 48th as well).

Marlowe Hartnett is a Portland resident, a city, like Seattle, that has not seen a real estate slump (of 3 total nationally) - and perhaps for better reason.

She writes whimsically about Portland's coming year - in a style that owes a bit to Crosscut Editor Knute Berger.

I was in that City over Christmas and commented on her piece at some length - albeit wandering off topic, onto the above subject.

Viewing your city through the perspective of another is important, especially those in your region. This particular 'rambling' of mine looks at the issue of planning light rail - whether it be streetcar oriented like Tacoma's LINK or a regional system like the light rail system with a 'track record' - Portland's MAX.

Having had a favorable experience riding the Sounder this year I decided to try Amtrak - at $25 one way, cheaper than my gas driving alone. All in all it was a very enjoyable, and hopefully also, productive, 'multi-modal' trip. I urge you to become familiar with Marlowe Hartnett (linked above) as well as the details of my comments - though for different reasons.

This isn't about the Joel and Ethan Coen film still in current release, though I do recommend it.

Rather this is a comparison of the psychological profile of power presented in this piece of fiction with the power structure of King County.

Perhaps the most curious thing about this movie was that I identified with all 3 characters. I wish I was more of the Tommy Lee Jones character, but the truth is I've got a bit of all 3 inside me - thankfully enough of the Tommy Lee to keep my own 'country' looking pretty good.

In the movie the character played by Javier Bardem, Anton Chigurh, is very efficient, very rational, and very, very much a violent psychopath. Logic, law can be consuming, and Chigurh has been consumed completely and effectively. In his world he is fair and consistent but around him spins nothing but chaos and destruction.

Simply put he is a control freak.

And yes, I am saying that King County is being run by control freaks(mostly unknown). No Anton Chigurh's there, save for the occassional wannabe like a likely victim of Gregoire's projessional cohorts, Dan Evans own Ted Bundy. But the profile is similar and revealing.

Does that mean I'm comparing Microsoft to a bunch of drug runners? Go figure....

Dean Logan, controversial former elections director at problem plagued King County, is now lead of L.A. elections and continues his press presence today.

This story concerns an issue of mine - the ability of non major party members to express their preferences in the primary process. The issue here appears to be voter confusion. Though the details are not clear in the article it does appear that Logan is trying to make improvements. Although I'm a bit sceptical about his learning these lessons at his level of status he does seem to be trying.

This contrasts with Secretary of State Sam's Reeds actions on the same issue. Reed does have the ability, but he isn't trying to apply same to the problem with integrity. The forthcoming 10 million dollar primary vote on February 19 seems to be 'fair' including both Democrats and Republicans. In reality though it is slap in the face of every Washington Citizen - considering the recent history of primary election law in this State.

As you probably know the Democrats don't even use the primary at all - it is merely a straw ballot. So why can't Independents and Cross-overs express their preferences as well? In addition why aren't smaller parties, including the Greens and Libertarians allowed access to the primary ballot?

I'm not opposed to the parties restricting participation in decision making, however restricting the expression of free speech is a constitutional crime - though perhaps only currently prosecutable through harrassment law!

I won't recall the full history of primary elections here - the solution stands on its own. For both local and national primaries all parties should be allowed access and all votes tabulated and reported, whether the parties use them or not. The 'Top Two' preference of voters, invalidated by court order, should be re-invented as the top two different party winners.

Included in those eligible for top two advancement should be a special category of unafilliated independent (small i). As there is no 'party' for this group, any one should be allowed to vote a counting vote for this candidate.

Advancement wouldn't need to happen very often to have a big effect - including on lazy corrupt old Republicans like Reed and young unqualified and manipulated Democrats like Logan. As it stands now we ALL lose, whomever wins.

Use 'harrassment' law on me for that 'negative' campaigning. PLEASE, go ahead punks, MAKE MY DAY.

Perhaps the most iconic of shared memories in Western Washington is the blossoming of the Cherry Trees in the Arts and Sciences quad at the University of Washington, on a rare sunny day.

On this partly cloudy Valentine's day I'd like to direct your attention to the 'performance' of the University of Washington as a place to start healthy relationships. An occassional drunken frat boy/sorority girl fuck isn't necessarily a bad thing - if it teaches you, by example, what to avoid. Building a lifetime relationship from the continuation of such an encounter does not a healthy region make.

But I'm not here to bash Frat row, nor even the ignored domestic violence violations of starFootball players under Rick Neuheisel.

Rather, consider the case of the murdered staff member Rebecca Griego. Ms. Griego had a restraining order against her killer and those procedures have been strengthened in this year's Legislative session.

But perhaps those measures are actually making the situation worse? Certainly there have been cases where accusations of harrassment are actually the abuse. I can not speak to the Griego case, but I know in my own UW experience that the academics and some of their professional support staff can definitely abuse these politically correct 'procedures'. My case involved being accused of same in retaliation for placing complaints through established legal 'channels' and nothing more.

My rhetorical question for you therefore is whether the UW has, perhaps, continued the cycle of abuse in it's 'attempts' to protect deserving victims of abusive relationships. Is the 'due process' of UW criminally abusive itself? Is the 'authority' of this institution no better than the penis and pry bar of Ted Bundy (**perhaps** an outcast from his better bred UW Law School female cohorts - including some of those now in authority in this State?). Is the UW Police Department anything better than the violent 'tool' (dildo) of a man hating lesbian, perhaps brought into the school through title IX? Is it possible that Rebecca Griego died because of the way the UW, as a culture, addresses these matters, rather than in spite of them?

I don't know. Personally I'd rather keep my distance from such situations. Heck, they might even have accused me of harrassment if I'd bothered to testify in Olympia on those bills.

On the positive side, Fred Jarrett has a bill, 2641 that might actually help in the matter. This bill addresses measures of performance at our higher education instititutions - consistent with I-900 and Brian Sonntag's authority. This matter doesn't address domestic violence, but regardless, an accountable 'culture' will help to reduce such problems FOR EVERYONE.

Just my thoughts, take them as you will. As to my case though, that is definitely still a matter of concern.

BOOM

A discussion of the book with

Author Tom Brokaw

Moderator David Brewster (Founding Team Member of the Seattle Weekly and Crosscut)

Available for Download from TVW

David Brewster and Tom Brokaw are both big fishes in their respective ponds - Brewster in the world of local alternative weeklies and Brokaw as a long term top dog of the news team at 30 Rock. One might think Brokaw to be a big fish in a bigger pond, but Brewster is a bit more of a pioneer, and at least in Seattle may have more influence than Brokaw. As to the rest of the region their influence may be relatively equal.

Like my Parents Brewster and Brokaw are not technically 'Boomers', born before the war, but to young to have worked during it. Their leadership in that history, as well as the differing approaches towards journalism, makes for a very interesting discussion.

Alternative weeklies, including Brewster in Seattle are an experiment in journalism - dropping the pretense of inpartiality for advocacy journalism (turf the bloggers may yet win). Brokaw, in comparison follows the tradition of Cronkite and Murrow in attempting to be objective. Their discussion from those two perspectives from two top players at the top of their game is as interesting as the discussion of the baby boomer generation.

I'll leave it up to you to decide who is the more impressive. I do think though that from the perspective of politics in America (Brewster is unashamedly pro-Democrat) Brokaw wins hands down.

FWIW I haven't read either of Brokaw's two books, I do think I know the story already and don't have the time to rehash. They are both on my list though, and hopefully at some point I will - perhaps if I should ever be so fortunate to have a couple of children of my own - 21st century boomers or busters, however the case may be.

Well, it certainly looks like there are some violent wack jobs hanging on to the Earth Liberation Front movement - as evidenced by some rather spectacular fires in the SE Snohomish County community of Maltby.

The operative phrase in that sentence is 'looks like'. It is quite possible that this is just an arsonist torching unsold multi-million dollar homes (the one sold was the only one untargeted) using the ELF as scapegoat - and scoring a few political points in the process. These houses are big, that's true, but they were also showcases for environmentally friendly building processes.

The current court case regarding the accused look out for the alleged ELF bombing of the Center for Urban Horticulture, in Seattle is worthy of note. Though this particular individual is claiming innocence I do believe they have confessions, and deals, from the alleged other participants.

FWIW though I don't know the particulars of those other individuals - and targeting a bunch of Master Gardeners just seems plain weird.

Odds are definitely pointing to the ELF. Not a long shot, that. News flash to Hillary, Barack and McCain - it looks like we've got our own 'Al Qaeda' movement brewing in America, no need to import it.

The Tacoma Tribune has an editorial today regarding light rail, noting the faster than projected ridership on the Sounder Commuter train. They imply, but do not articulate, support for Sound Transit. I've submitted a letter to the editor, which I've enclosed below. (I've thought some about delaying the publishing of items I've submitted to others - this case though seems like one okay to put out immediately - it is not like my readership competes with theirs!)

The editorial is here.

Although I was, and am, opposed to Sound Transit I do agree with the editorial board's numbers regarding demand for high capacity transit.

The crucial number to understand at this point in reaching a plan of action is 20-30 years from now - the likely completion date of South Sound Light Rail. I think the case for arguing for a delay in that decision until it actually needs to be made is compelling.

Technology changes. It may well turn out that the best solution for the region's needs in 20-30 years is actually a replacement of the successful and easy to expand commuter rail - perhaps a bullet train or some sort of maglev technology?

Providing guaranteed funding to a single source agency with no real accountability for that time frame is simply idiotic. The power network behind Sound Transit is extensive and quite capable - but are they accountable to the individuals that make up this region? Or are they perhaps responsible for creating a 'hostile' working environment for everyone who choses not to be a corporate lackey(or political party hack)?

It is essential that Pierce County works together to get our fair share of transportation funding - what WE need now, not what appears to be simplest to obtain from a menu put together by a deadbeat agency with no real planning expertise or realistic local connections.

Those items include expanding Light Rail TCC and the Sounder to Lakewood. Personally I'd also like to see the Sounder go all the way to Olympia and a spur line built to Eatonville.

And this is a planning 'philosophy' that works not only in Pierce County but also for the rest of the region - perhaps nowhere more so with our close neighbors in South King County.

Instead of building that long expensive link between Sea-Tac and Tacoma how about connecting light rail to the Sounder Station in Kent? How about doing it in less than ten years instead of 30?

Instead of building light rail across I-90 with questionable engineering compatibility why not delay the building of that crossing until 520 is built, and built right for light rail? Why not, as proposed, extend commuter rail from Renton to at least Bellevue. (and perhaps using the segment north from Bellevue for the first track/technology upgrade).

Building Sounder service to the Eastside would create nearly as much demand as that service to Seattle - and Bellevue should also follow our lead by building their own starter light rail service to provide circulator service among the different areas of that medium density employment center.

The role of the Tribune in the leadership team of the South Sound is crucial. Jumping to easy to reach conclusions motivated more by a desire to grab for the easy pork rather than doing the right thing is a sure bet to create more problems than are solved. But then in 20-30 years, will you care?

Crosscut can put forth some of the worst seattle centric limousine liberal right wing conspirator friendly propoganda - but at the same time they also manage to occassionally publish stuff from some of the best.

Today I commented on three pieces, a great example of this profile.

A piece by Hugh Spitzer is an example of some of the worst:

Hugh Spitzer on the Constitution

An op-ed by former WSDOT Director Douglas MacDonald is an example of some of the best:

Douglas MacDonald on Transportation and Realistic Growth Management

What Crosscut will actually mean to the NW is perhaps best foreshadowed by a piece by Business Manager Yazmin Mehdi.

Yazmin Mehdi writing about business

Recently State Attorney General Rob McKenna announced that the proposed sale of the NW's largest private utility Puget Sound Energy to an Australian led international investment group would be challenged. PSE is the NW's largest privately owned utility - number two, curiously, was the former Enron holding, Portland General.

This AG action has State ramifications relevant to our largest public capital decisions, even the current gubernatorial contest.

A frequent complaint of anyone who takes their responsibility as a citizen seriously is the lack of decent information on judicial races. Getting a good picture of a Judge is difficult. Unless one is a regular observer of the court - a practicing lawyer, an intelligent court clerk, or above average police officer. One area where we definitely could do better is holding these individuals responsible for the consequences of their actions when the mess up - if it rise to that level, even just once. Even more important of course is removing such a dangerous individual from the practice BEFORE they ever get to consideration for a judicial seat.

I've got no smoking gun on Parisiene - however I do have a bit of information, enough to cause me not to vote for her, absent evidence to the contrary, and perhaps of some use to you.

Parisien is a 90k a year Assistant Attorney General since 1997, hired by Christine Gregoire.

My direct knowledge of her is through an email exchange - a response to an email to Ron Sims about the trickiness of dealing with abuse issues - whether they be sexual, racial, or anything. I don't think that Ms. Parisiene read my email closely enough to realize that I wasn't disagreeing with his assessment of Gregoire - and as such perhaps not as pro-Gregoire as Ms. Parisien thought. This was in the spring of the 2004 Gubernatorial year when Sims was contesting for the old style democratic nomination - I haven't checked but I would assume Ms. Parisien did go through the appropriate hoops in order to volunteer for her boss's campaign.
.
I've done a quick google on Parisien - perhaps the best info out there are the various candidate interviews done by political organizations including partisan legislative district bodies. She graduated from SU and went to Law School back east, practicing there for a time, returning here in 1997 for an AG position. She moved to Mercer Island 6 years ago. She's done a lot of domestic violence work, including with King County, and this is what concerns me.

For a supposed expert on the subject of abuse her answer strikes me as curiously lacking. Some State Departmental employess, including some in the AG's office make it a practice of 'abusing' the law on harrassment, etc, for their own benefit and, apparently, 'control' needs. I have to wonder if Ms. Parisien hasn't in fact used my particular case in order to herself take advantage of this weakness in our current judicial oversight ability.

I can't say for sure, but absent a strong condemnation of these practices on the behalf of State employees in Downtown Seattle Superior Court this is definitely a way too risky candidate.

Curiously, the King County Bar Association only rates her as 'qualified' - the third highest ranking in the race for position #1. The gay bar group ranks her as unqualified. I'm not up on current legal practice in Seattle, but I do hope that this represents a knowledge of the abuses of Gregoire and her associates as it applies to the practice. Certainly there are at least a few folks who are more than fed up with it - some of them are likely even friends of Sims!

The damage done by Gregoire and her cohorts to all aspects of authority in this State - public and private sector has yet to be determined. This is why I oppose Gregoire. That's not saying I have any legal evidence against her, it's just saying she's just too risky to hire. There are areas that do need further professional investigation - on probable cause, if you will. Most notable of those are her other 'professional' associates.

Though the King County Court's may well believe that any individual capable of making a rational, legal, argument against the behavior of a State Employee (on OR off the clock) is in fact the equivalent of a violent lawless sexual predator it may well be that it is the opposit which is the case.

I'm still open minded about Parisien, but absent her condemnation of these practices, including as they've been applied to myself, she is, at best, not fit for this office. I won't burden you with an articulation of the worst case...at least not yet.

Here's the email exchange, again, from the 2004 Gregoire Campaign: