*NOTE* - This post has been updated multiple times.
I’d love to get a copy if someone can scan it and send it my way. I’ve only heard it’s negative at this point from people e-mailing me, which is interesting, considering how nice Weimer was to Luke after she froze for 40 seconds at the League of Women Voters Forum.
*UPDATE* - Wow, everyone but me clearly had it and now I do - so no need to send it my way. Working on an assessment of it right now. Thanks to those who kicked it my way.
*UPDATE 2* - Alright, I’ve got this bad boy and have taken a look. Those who have contacted me about it, to be frank, are Weimer supporters, and I actually don’t see it as being “mean” or “nasty” in terms of assessment. It is, however, critical of Weimer and the statements made on the piece or generic and don’t really address the depth of the issue.
*UPDATE 3* - Just got an e-mail from a reader who sent me Weimer’s 2005 mailer against Realtor Mike Kent, who would like to note that the tone of it is fairly critical, too. Check it out, over here.
Here is Luke’s piece, the front and here is the back.
First, the overall crux of the piece is that Michelle Luke wants to focus more on jobs and the economy. A noble pursuit that clearly anyone on the council must do during these rough economic times and, perhaps, any other time. That’s why we asked each candidate about the county’s role in economic development.
But economic development isn’t the major function of Whatcom County government. That generally falls to the Port of Bellingham. County government has tried to partner with the Port (including for the Terraquarium that Luke is against and Weimer supported, as did the city of Bellingham and other agencies and groups) as well as other agencies. With Weimer on the council they’ve given money to the Bellingham/Whatcom County Chamber of Commerce & Industry, to the Western Washington University Center for Economic Prosperity and to the Northwest Economic Council for various projects to support small businesses in the county.
*UPDATE* - Chamber President/CEO Ken Oplinger would like me to note that the council no longer contributes to their operating funds but they do contribute funding for Ski to Sea promotions each year.
Luke has argued to us here that the county must provide more stability in land-use policies.
The problem is, this is currently a time of great upheaval in Whatcom County, as the local government has been told that it must update it’s rural zoning by both the Growth Management Hearings Board and the state Court of Appeals because of lawsuits and challenges filed by Futurewise Whatcom as well as Gold Start Resorts, Inc. Not much stability, in other words, as the county must work toward drawing logical boundaries for local areas of more intensive rural development as well as coming into compliance by downzoning areas outside of those LAMIRDs. The County Council, also, doesn’t have a proposal on this in front of them yet.
Luke says that Weimer is “asleep at the wheel” and shows headlines from this very newspaper, seemingly saying that it’s his fault that people couldn’t afford their house payments (during a time when nationally people who got themselves in adjustable rate mortgages couldn’t afford that and a national economic crisis started trickling slowly into Whatcom County). I don’t know how Weimer would have saved those mortgages, so that’s an interesting criticism. Perhaps the same with bankruptcies. And if Weimer’s culpable, then apparently the entire council and County Executive Pete Kremen’s (who endorses her) administration is also at fault, too.
One thing of note that appears to be legitimate is criticism over the county budget issue. Layoffs have occurred and they’ve been trying to plug deficits. This, technically, isn’t all Weimer’s fault as he’s only one of seven people on the council, and he’s been asking tough questions of the administration and been one of the most vocal about certain spending (put him up there with Barbara Brenner, who has been very, very aggressive in wanting to slash the budget). But Weimer and the rest of the council are culpable in part for relying on revenue projections from Kremen’s administration that grossly overestimated what would be coming into county coffers. Every single local government agency overestimated in such a way and have blamed it on being caught off guard by the recession. Even in decreasing their projections (Bellingham went to, literally, 0 percent at first for increased revenue and it ended up being negative, while the county, I believe, stayed at 1 percent or 2 percent in their projections), they were wrong.
I’m no economist, and the people who did these projections are experts with years of experience who also sought the thoughts of the local business community and economics professors to try to come up with the best projections they could. However, they also relied partly on historical trends in which some people were arguing wouldn’t be sustainable. The county was seeing some awesomely-good times in terms of revenue from construction and home sales and sales taxes were great.
On the back of the card:
Luke is accurate in that Weimer was responsible for the 3 cents per $1,000 in assessed value property tax increase that amounted to $12 more on a $300,000 home. That flood fund tax was done by the Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors (the County Council acting as a completely different government agency from Whatcom County) and Weimer and the majority argued the funding was necessary to help pay for $189 million in water-related projects that were either requested by constituents or have been mandated by the state and federal governments. To local conservatives this was unacceptable for the council, with Weimer spearheading it, to increase property taxes during a time of recession.
Regarding her criticism of the Terraquarium, Luke is correct that jobs were leaving the area. According to a January 2009 story by Dave Gallagher, unemployment was at 6.2 percent with 7,000 people actively looking for work in December 2008. A year earlier, 4,440 people were actively looking for work.
But Luke’s ideas for how the Economic Development Investment funding should be used instead simply can’t happen. In her written Q&A for us, she notes that she would have spent in a better way, saying for instance Lynden spent less than $50,000 on a survey to inventory their existing businesses and services and track “leakage” from the Lynden area.
EDI funding can’t be used for that as far as I’m aware. The money is designed to build public facilities, per RCW 82.14.370:
Moneys collected under this section shall only be used to finance public facilities serving economic development purposes in rural counties and finance personnel in economic development offices.
The Terraquarium facility would have been owned by the Port of Bellingham. Clearly, however, there has been a vocal outcry about this project, and those include voters who believed it was a wrong use of the funding no matter what. Other projects that have received EDI funding include Ferndale’s Riverwalk project and Blaine’s boardwalk project.
Luke is correct about how much funding Weimer approved. The County Council approved spending $600,000, though $300,000 was county EDI funding and the city of Bellingham was contributing the other half. The county had given Bellingham $1.1 million in EDI funding for projects related to the waterfront, and the city determined that they’d spent part previously given to them to contribute to this project. The agenda packet for the very meeting Luke’s mailer cites says that.
In terms of the last quote on the back of the card, that’d be from a story of mine in which Weimer is telling the public his position on Brett Bonner’s property-tax-restricting measure requiring that the council go to voters any time they wanted to take banked capacity, or property taxing authority they decided not to use in the past but reserved the right to do so in the future.
Of note, here is that Weimer is part of a council that has repeatedly not increased the general fund property tax levy for about a decade, agreeing with Kremen on that. Weimer has however in the past few years agreed to a few tax increases, including the one-tenth of 1 percent mental health sales tax (which conservative County Councilman Sam Crawford supported as do several of the conservative County Council candidates this election) and the flood tax.
What’s odd is that Luke goes after Weimer for Lake Whatcom getting worse. First, Weimer is a part of a majority that has worked to severely restrict the ability to develop in the watershed, as experts have said that’s the leading contributor to excessive phosphorous runoff making it into the lake (i.e. ~ land clearing as well as impervious surfaces). The department of Ecology has assessed that in order to keep the lake healthy it would mean an 86 percent reduction of total existing development in 2003, or 94 percent less than total allowable buildout. That’s a pretty big figure.
However, the science also states that even if all development were removed from the watershed today, the lake would still be getting worse for a period of time.
Is it accurate that the lake’s gotten worse? Well, actually, not really. John Stark wrote in April 2009 that Dr. Robin Matthews, who does the annual assessment of the lake’s water quality, said we’re basically even.
Quote Matthews: “The good news is, we’re not getting worse at the rate we were,” saying levels of phosphorus, algae and bacteria levels were about the same or slightly lower compared to 2007.
Matthews praised Bellingham’s Park Place stormwater treatment system as doing an excellent job of removing fecal coliform bacteria but that treatment systems don’t do a good job on phosphorous removal, and that’s why planners have focused on forcing stormwater runoff directly back into the ground for filtration. The County Council, with Weimer included, approved a pilot project in the Silver Beach area designed to retrofit areas to do that as well as work on an education plan for local residents. If the project ends up being successful the city and county as partners hope to expand it.
What’s odd is that Luke is criticizing Weimer’s work on the lake when those backing her have been some of the biggest foes of requirements the county has enacted, including watershed building moratoriums, downzones to prevent more buildout, a seasonal clearing ban and also banning products like dishwashing detergent that contain phosphorous (the Building Industry Association of Whatcom County, however, in 2005 approved of a phosphorous lawn fertiziler ban the county approved. Builders and developers spent more than three hours in 2003 arguing against the council’s wet-season clearing ban). And, as far as I know, Luke hasn’t really said all that much about how she would protect Lake Whatcom.
So there’s a quick analysis. All-in-all, I don’t see the “meanness” of Luke’s statements. They’re criticisms that we’re hearing from many local conservatives, and Luke has the ear of that constituency. Those criticisms, however, don’t always mesh with the reality of situations on the ground in the county, so I hope a bit more depth will help you understand those issues. Even with this information, there are still some in this community that will disagree and will oppose Weimer and that’s clearly legitimate. For many, Weimer’s property-tax-increasing votes are enough to want to boot him. For others, his positions in working to protect Lake Whatcom and other environmentally-sensitive areas of the council make him the winner in the race.
More interesting than anything to me is if we get a different kind of majority on the council. What if conservative Councilman Sam Crawford had the majority with three freshman conservative council members? What would change and by how much? Tuesday is a big day in Whatcom County where the short- and long-term visions of this area’s future could completely change, for better or worse, depending on your viewpoints and yours alone.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:07 PM
I saw that freeze replayed on Channel 10 and I think Candidate Weimer earned his election with that gesture alone.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Carl is a considerate and thoughtful person. I’ve enjoyed working with him over the years and have always found him to be a polite listener, even when he has disagreed with me about an issue.
Michelle Luke’s hit piece is down right mean. (Which, appears to be a growing theme among the 2009 conservative women candidates for county council).
October 29th, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Kathy Kershner also mailed out a hit piece. In the mailer, she criticizes Dan McShane for accepting a modest campaign contribution from the Lummi Nation. Her quote claims, “Now he’s financially supported by the Lummi Tribe (it’s the Lummi Nation, not the Lummi Tribe, Kathy), which has shown an unwillingness to offer a cost effective solution to the County on a ferry landing lease.”
At the LWV forum, Kathy Kershner criticized local governments for infighting. Now she attacks her opponent for receiving moderate support from the Lummi Nation?
What is your goal, Kathy?
Do you want to establish solid working relationships with all of our local governments, including the Lummi Nation and Nooksack Tribe?
If so, why are you attacking your opponent for accepting a small contribution from the Lummi Nation?
Candidates who use community prejudice against the Lummi Nation or the Nooksacks to turn voters against their opponent do not belong in public office!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Well if you believe that it was considerate that the moderator didn’t ask Luke if she’d like the question repeated, if you believe it was considerate that Lisa McShane, Dan McShane and everyone sitting within their group laughed out load, snickered and rocked back and forth in glee (I was seated up in the balcony and witnessed this myself…but because Sam Taylor said it didn’t happen, the Herald refused to run my Letter to the Editor, exposing their immaturity) and if you think that constantly touting your Degrees as “The” reason you should be re-elected, not the fact that this slate of current Council members have done little to protect ‘Private Property Rights’, by all means vote for Weimer.
If you want Independent, Mature, Respectful, Representation for Private Property Rights…Vote for Michelle Luke!
Same on you Sam for trying to dredge up an Ad at this time, especially with your close friendship with Mann and the others.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:26 PM
And we’re right back to the campaign of misinformation from MissOdie. Like I said before, you could’ve heard a pin drop.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:38 PM
The truth hurst? But it is difficult to get it published in the Herald!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Mature people do not send out hit pieces like the one being circulated by Michelle Luke and Kathy Kershner.
MissOdie can view the LWV forum on BTV via the City of Bellingham site. Suzie Q is right. You could have heard a pin drop. No one laughed out loud!
Re: protecting private property rights - you can’t have it both ways!
I.E. Luke and Kershner want you to be able to use your property any way you see fit, but the Lummi Nation cannot build a Marina on it’s property?
The ferry lease is expiring. The property owner has a right to change the use of the property, if they choose to do so.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:10 PM
It didn’t happen, Miss Odie. It just didn’t. I have no idea why you think it did, but the place was dead, awkwardly silent the entire time.
The moderator didn’t ask the question again because they don’t unless they’re requested by the candidate to do it. You’re going to blame the moderator?
October 29th, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Also - what close friendship with Mann is that? I didn’t know about it. If we’re friends I’m disappointed he’s never called me for beers. Sigh. I’m so lonely.
Then again, John Servais says I’m conservative … so maybe you and I are the friends?
Or maybe everyone thinks I’m out to get them all the time?
October 29th, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Samuel, just admit it. You have no friends.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Wow Sam, that was a really good analysis of the mail piece and the history involved with it. I hope you’ll have the time to do them all.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:08 PM
1st - just because the LMV audio didn’t pick up the snickers and pan the crowd in the balcony, shouldn’t surprise anyone and proves nothing.
2nd - Sorry Sam, I assumed because I was told by Scott Ayers that You denied this happening and that you knew because You were seated next to Ken Mann at the time, that you were friends. If you want to be seen as unbiased then you probably shouldn’t be seated next to the Candidates.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:21 PM
MissOdie, if you’d been there you would know that it was packed and the candidates were mostly sitting down by the press. That happens in a packed in council room. Those of us who were there were struck by how dead silent it was.
There is simply no call to villainize people and their families just because they run for office. You’re putting a lot of energy into doing just that. If you support Michelle because she supports an issue you care about, wouldn’t discussing that be worthwhile?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:28 PM
I miss all the fun, wasn’t at the debate nor so far haven’t gotten no flyer.
However just for the record, telling the truth may be mean to some but telling the truth to me is telling the truth!
If there is something false being put out than that should be corrected but if it is factual no apology is needed, otherwise all I’s ever be doing is saying how sorry a guy I’s be!
Hey ciz, I’s left you an opening there!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 29th, 2009 at 3:50 PM
So true, DJ, so true.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:52 PM
I learned from the flyer that Carl Weimer is responsible for everything that happens in Whatcom County’s economy. I think that I will have to vote for him because he is such a powerful person.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:54 PM
MissOdie - I was sitting in the press section, where the League also placed the candidates.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:55 PM
I wish I had the time, Suzie. Frankly, I probably spent too much time on that one, too. But perhaps. These last few days before the election are very hectic for me.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Sam,
Luke has a quote from the County Assessor in 11/25/08 Herald, he claims the Flood Control District tax increase was “the biggest tax increase he’s seen and the largest in Assessor’s Office historical records”. But if that’s true, why did the property tax rate, from 2008 to 2009, go DOWN?
TOTAL tax collected (2008)$218,200,630.05 (2009)$226,889,667.11
(Divided by)
Total property value (2008)$21,624,902,725 (2009)$23,721,082,080
(Equals)
overall property tax rate (2008) 0.01009 (2009) 0.00956
In 2000 the rate was 0.0136
October 29th, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Boy, there’s a lot of people on this blog who have a problem with truth. I didn’t know that it was Lisa & Dan McShane until he was called out for his debate with
Kathy Kershner. I went with an open mind and left unimpressed with political canditates and staff or friends who showed happiness at someone else’s moment of brain freeze. It has happened to most everyone & is part of life. It does not measure ones character or ability. Change this Council needs.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:36 PM
SL are you calling the county assessor a liar?
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 29th, 2009 at 4:49 PM
MissO - Dan went first so again, you simply have it wrong. He debated Kathy Kershner and as the Cascadia Weekly put it, she was harsh and rude. The Michelle Luke debate was 2 after Dan’s so it’s not possible that you saw Luke freeze, then saw Dan when he debated. When you have something honest to say I bet folks will listen.
In the meantime, I’d love to hear why people are supporting the Republican four. All I hear and read are half-truths, misinformation, innuendo and anger about the people you oppose. What positions do your candidates have that you like? What specific ideas and proposals do they bring forward?
October 29th, 2009 at 4:50 PM
And yes, anyone powerful enough to toy with the global economy from Ferndale, that’s the guy I’m voting for! Maybe he can do something about this cold rain.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:01 PM
AFY,
I didn’t call anyone any thing… I just asked a question. The quote is from the Assessor but so are the numbers I used to calculate the overall property tax rate.
I’m just a poor country boy, so maybe I’m not sophisticated enough to understand how we can have ““the biggest tax increase he’s seen …” and a property tax bill that’s lower than last years.
.
.
Suzie Q,
Would you like the rain stopped or just warmed up a little?
October 29th, 2009 at 5:09 PM
The point is that Candidate Luke blames Candidate Weimer for home foreclosures,
job losses,
retail sales slumps,
bankruptcies and county budget shortfalls.
So if a council seat really wields that much power and influence,
I sure wouldn’t trust it to an unknown beginner.
And when Channel 10 re-ran the debate,
not a peep from anyone except Candidate Luke was heard during her freeze.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Well SQ me biggest reason is a simple one, me being a very simple minded guy and all, you see as you know I’s aginst Urban Imperialism, I say, resist them on the beach, resist them in the air and resist them when they come to your front gate!
So here is the big difference between the Urban Imperialist slate and those who oppose them, it will be very hard for some to understand, but here goes:
Your personal property belongs to you, not the government, what you earn with your labors belong to you not the government, WE THE PEOPLE, knows what is best for us and our families not the bureaurcrats who more and more are trying to tell us what is best for us, those same bureaucrats who think they knows the answers and that we are just to uneducated and stupid to know what is good for us!
There is a revolution going on in this country and the battle will be fought in our cities, our counties, our state just as it will be in our country, it will be a peaceful revolution, but SQ, IT IS ON!!!
WE HAVE JUST BEGUN TO FIGHT!!!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 29th, 2009 at 5:13 PM
SL: can we have that warm sunshine back? That would be swell!
October 29th, 2009 at 5:15 PM
SL you know me, just trying to keep the record straight!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 29th, 2009 at 5:20 PM
I think it is funny that Sam’s posts to Ken Mann’s Whatcom County Council Candidate Facebook have disappeared. An unbiased professional newsman wouldn’t want anyone to think he was playing fovorites or anything, now would he? With the love fest going on, one could almost think maybe Sam had a man crush. MissOdie, you are most likely correct about the groupies acting immature. Their typical mo is to be rude to anyone that doesn’t agree with their kind.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Maybe,
but nobody snickered during Luke’s freeze no matter which candidate you support.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Jane - I doubt my posts to his facebook page have disappeared. Why would they disappear? I don’t think I can delete them and I wouldn’t have put them up only to delete them. It is, after all, a public page. I have access to all candidate’s pages and post comments when I see fit. I believe the last post I put on Ken’s page was that there was a thunder storm warning on a day where he announced he was doorbelling.
Mann’s page is more up to date than anyone else’s. Often times, also, I’ll post sarcastic remarks. One time I grilled Ken on there about something he posted and he ignored my post. I see it as an extension of the interview process as well as coverage, simply so I can see what the candidates are doing. And it never hurts to be friendly with anyone that is a source. I try to be nice to everyone, as well as friendly.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Well SQ I beg to differ with you. Go watch that debate again & you can fast forward thru to see the order of the debates.
As far as the reason I’m for changing of tht Cnty Cncl Guard, simply tired of losing property rights, business growth & personal liberties. I will never support Progressives as I have studied their mandates & the walls they are constructing need to be smashed down by liberty lovers like me.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Steve - if you look at the specific taxing authority that is referenced, the Flood Control Zone District, the levy rate went from .13625 in 2008 to .16598 in 2009.
What overall rate are you looking at exactly?
October 29th, 2009 at 5:48 PM
Odie, now I’m wondering if you were at the event.
Here’s the video:
http://www.cob.org/services/education/btv10/videos/community-meetings/2009-09-30-primary-candidate-forum-county-council.aspx
McShane and Kershner went first. They went by district. So, since Kershner and McShane are seeking the District 1 seat, they went first.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:58 PM
My comments still appear on his page, PlainJane. This is now the second or third time you’ve made something up on the blog. Why do you do that?
Here’s a comment I made on his page on Oct. 1 after Mann linked to my round-up of the LWV forum:
I made the comment not to Mann, but to every person on his page, because I’m a page views addict and wanted people to check out the links he was providing to MY work. I’m simply a shill for the hard work I do.
On Sept. 11 people on Mann’s page were upset that the media was covering Sept. 11. My response:
I posted the comment for obvious reasons - because I enjoy being transparent as a journalist and communicating with the public about why we cover things the way we do.
So, as you can see, the comments I made on his page are all still there, and I think appropriate.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:01 PM
P.S. ~ It does indeed appear I can delete the comments, but I didn’t even realize it! Still, I haven’t and I won’t, because I stand by them.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Sam, sounds like a nerve was struck, why so defensive? Feeling a bit guilty? To say that your FB posts are an extension of your interview is laughable. I really think that this election season most of the public have clearly seen the lack of objectivity in your writings. What happened to the Sam that used to pride himsself on investigative journalism? Maybe there are promises of future rewards if the partiality falls on the correct side of the fence.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Sam,
The Flood Control Zone District levy went from 1.39% to 1.77% of the TOTAL TAXES LEVIED. That’s the increase the conservatives keep whining about.
However, if you look at the tax book and figure out the overall property tax rate (total taxes levied / total assessed values), it has gone down . The Assessor doesn’t give that number, you have to figure it out for yourself.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:38 PM
If Sam put as much effort into a news story as he did into the dissection of a political mailer, the Herald might actually get some subscribers back.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Sam, my apologies for stating that McShane got up to debate Luke & Weimer. I am not about to not have that mis-statement go uncorrected, thank you. The witnessing of the McShane group snickers & Lisa specifically with her hands in front of her mouth and rocking back and forth were not my imagination. The amazement to me was that He was a political leader and is seeking another political leadership term, that his wife is well known to manage the Progressive Candidates campaigns and after watching this display, left me cold. You were sitting up there, you were seated w/Mann according to Ayers and You know it happened.
October 29th, 2009 at 6:55 PM
Sam, my apologies for stating that McShane got up to debate after Luke & Weimer. I am not about to not have that mis-statement go uncorrected, thank you. The witnessing of the McShane group snickers & Lisa specifically with her hands in front of her mouth and rocking back and forth were not my imagination. The amazement to me was that He was a political leader and is seeking another political leadership term, that his wife is well known to manage the Progressive Candidates campaigns and after watching this display, left me cold. You were sitting up there, you were seated w/Mann according to Ayers and You know it happened.
October 29th, 2009 at 7:05 PM
MissO, I doubt that there will ever be honest admission by ST. He knows who butters his bread and is not about to become a social leper with the progressives by pointing out their faults. Why change what works for him.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:00 PM
Steve (SL),
As you can see from your first post, in the past year, total taxes increased from $218.2 mil to $226.9 mil. In other words, total taxes increased about 4%. The assessor’s office calculates total taxes and property values BEFORE calculating the various component tax RATES.
Had property values remained the same from 2008 to 2009 (assuming no new construction), then the property tax RATE would have increased 4% as well.
However, in the past year, property values increased from $21.6 bil to $23.7 bil, or roughly 10%. Some of that increase resulted from new construction and some from higher tax assessments. Since property values increased by a higher percentage than total taxes, the OVERALL tax RATE fell accordingly (from .01009 to .00956). The overall tax RATE is simply a “plug” that is calculated after total tax revenues and total property values are determined. Within the overall RATE, certain component rates increased (e.g., the Flood Control rate), and certain components decreased.
I know this seems complicated, but that’s how it works.
Regarding the Flood Control Zone District, the levy increased from .13625 to .16598, or 22%, as Sam posted earlier.
Confused?
October 29th, 2009 at 8:06 PM
What confuses me about this claim is that no one else present, including Ms. Luke, has staked a claim to witnessing any such thing.
And now, back to our regularly scheduled synaptic misfire…
October 29th, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Yes.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:11 PM
How can Sam make an honest admission to something that he didn’t witness?
Just asking.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:26 PM
PlainJane, be kind to Sam T . He has a job to do. Right, Sam?
With this blog he did it very well. Unfortunately for Wheiner, he has not gotten this piece published on the front page, yet.
Luke froze. Happens to us all. Has nothing to do with intelligence, common sense or preparedness. I have seen council member lose their train of thought. In those cases whoever running the show moves to the next council member. For Luke she had to wait until the full minute passed. That was the process as painful as it was. Luke will learn an exit strategy for those occurances and will get plenty of experience at public speaking and fielding unanticipated questions as a new council member.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:27 PM
Perhaps MissO would accept the next best thing… a dishonest admission by ST.
Just suggesting.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:34 PM
Thanks, Sam, for your excellent background piece and analysis concerning the claims in Luke’s mailer.
Needless to say, the campaign seems to have brought out the worse in at least one detractor, who has been unnecessarily rude, spiteful, and vile. While I am rather appalled at reading such acrimonious, malevolent, and sardonic comments, I surely hope you will not be similarly effected and will instead let them roll off your back like water from the proverbial duck.
October 29th, 2009 at 8:37 PM
There were some in front of me who laughed after the freeze episode but like Weimer I saw no candidates who were other than kind and reassuring to Luke. No candidate laughed. They know losing a thought can easily happen to them and at the most inopportune time and place.
I am sure had the same thing happened to one of the other slate members some would have taken great joy in their discomfort. But that really does not relate to how Luke views Weimer’s accomplishment or lack there of, which is what the mailer about. That’s politics, folks. Taken from Poker after Dark ‘That’s poker, folks.’
October 29th, 2009 at 10:33 PM
I’m still waiting for Michelle to answer Carl’s first question: “What specific pertinent experience and qualifications do you bring to his job?” (Answer: 47 seconds of silence.)
October 29th, 2009 at 10:58 PM
This election season, as with all, I’ve been told I’m a shill for the conservatives (one person called them “my” candidates) and I’ve also been accused of being bought by the progressive candidates.
Happens every political season. It doesn’t bug me really, because it’s par for the course.
But the reason why I do respond is because despite the fact that I can never, ever convince certain partisans that I’m simply trying to do a job (see: PlainJane, SM, that guy at NW Citizen), there are others who I believe are more level-headed who deserve to see a response from me and that way they can decide for themselves.
Jane, I responded multiple times because I provided an off-the-cuff response without having looked at Facebook to check your claims. Then, after I checked your claims and found that, yet again, you’ve made something up, I responded again … so that others would see it. And the third response was a P.S. because I forgot to mention previously that I can actually delete comments I make on someone else’s page. I suppose I could have edited the post, but I rarely do that in the interest of time (one more click is just too much because I have severe ADD).
October 29th, 2009 at 11:07 PM
I’m just too confused by this. Ken Mann was indeed sitting near me, I believe to my left one row up, so that’s still close. Doug Smith was sitting directly to my left. Right behind me was Kathy Kershner as well as Laurie Caskey-Schreiber and I believe Mary Beth Teigrob.
Dan McShane wasn’t sitting by us, but somehow he and Ken Mann were sitting next to each other laughing at Michelle Luke, and Miss Odie only knew Dan McShane was the one doing it after he got up to speak because she has a time machine?
It just doesn’t make sense to me. I believe what I saw was accurate, and so far Miss Odie’s claims haven’t even made chronological, or even proximal, sense.
Is it possible that someone in the room was snickering? I suppose. I couldn’t see the whole room … but I heard dead, awkward silence and Dan McShane was nowhere near me or Ken Mann (or Doug Smith, or Laurie Caskey-Schreiber or Kathy Kershner, or Stan Snapp, etc. etc.) And I’m kind of surprised this is still being debated.
If it were a Vegas casino we would have had more cameras pointed the audience and we could all replay it. But we don’t.
So, I suppose, we’ll all have to agree to disagree.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:34 PM
MissOdie, you wrote “ . . . . . if you believe it was considerate that Lisa McShane, Dan McShane and everyone sitting within their group laughed out load, snickered and rocked back and forth in glee . . . “ and “The witnessing of the McShane group snickers & Lisa specifically with her hands in front of her mouth and rocking back and forth were not my imagination.”
So which was it, laughing out loud or hands in front of her mouth? Perhaps it was that rocking back and forth that was so . . . . so . . . . silent. I was there that night and again watched the LWV video, yup could have heard a pin drop . . . for 47 seconds, silence while she failed to answer a simple question, “What specific pertinent experience and qualifications do you bring to his job?”
Carl was a true gentleman during his “rebuttal” and offered Michelle the life ring of “it happens to us all”. Oh if only the Brenners, Imhofs, Dawsons, and Crawfords were to be equally polite and considerate.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Sam, your take on the audience when luke lost her thought ,(froze), whatever is dead on- as was the silence until it was over. No candidate laughed and many talked to her when she resumed her seat after you talked to her.
October 30th, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Really well done Sam.
And thanks for posting the link to CV10.
I watched the whole thing and I’ve been racking my brain about where the contest is between the candidates ever since.
This is the kind of situation that makes me feel like I’m really a visitor from another galaxy, and I’ve been sent here to observe the peculiarities of the human race.
And as much as I would like to return to my home planet, I’m unable to do so because no one there would believe my report.
44:56
carl you’re wrong.
October 30th, 2009 at 12:52 AM
Lucky7:
I was under the impression that property taxes were levied permille (per thousand dollars) and that determines revenue; I didn’t know state/county/city governments make it up out of the blue based upon how much revenue they would like to receive. I also thought the majority of property tax levies were set in stone and voter approved to fund fire districts, school and road construction projects.
Can you point out to me on the assessor’s website and/or the 2009 Tax booklet where it shows that I have been sorely mistaken?
October 30th, 2009 at 10:03 AM
bikerbob,
As you know, there are many different taxing districts that comprise the taxes paid by Whatcom County residents, including WA state, Whatcom County, each city, school, road, fire and library districts, the Port, and the “Flood Control Zone” among others. These are listed on the 3rd page of the 2009 Tax Book at:
http://www.whatcomcounty.us/assessor/pdf/2009_taxbook.pdf
Tax revenues for certain districts are based on the actual levy / rate; however, tax revenues for the City of Bellingham’s general fund, for example, are first determined in total and then the levy / rate is calculated. If Bellingham’s general fund tax revenues increase by less than 1% (as they did in 2009), but property values increase by 14%, then the levy rate will decline. This point addresses Steve’s initial question about taxes increasing but rates falling. Each tax district / tax item stands on its own.
There is no single levy / rate that represents the total tax you pay; it is an amalgam of a variety of rates, as listed on your tax bill.
Still confused? More confused?
October 30th, 2009 at 10:06 AM
SM - thanks for the confirmation.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Yep, Bob, you are mistaken. I write articles annually on how property taxes work generally during revaluation times.
Property taxes in Washington are budget-based. That means they’re based on what each taxing jurisdiction says they need from tax payers to pay for the services they provide as government entities. Current state law only allows them to increase taxes by 1 percent each year unless they have banked capacity they didn’t previously take or they can go to voters for a higher levy.
The Flood Control Zone District tax increase is a bit different because the way it was set up. No time for history now, but the taxes collected went from $3,024,704.32 in 2008 to $4,027,475.41. That’s an increase in budget, including new construction, of 33.15 percent. That is the figure most locals upset with the tax increase point to.
To collect those new taxes, the increase in property taxes was 3 cents per $1,000 in assessed value and amounted to a $12 annual increase for someone who owns a $300,000 home.
The levy rate went from about 14 cents to 17 cents, in other words.
Nobodies taxes individually went up 33 percent, the overall budget did.
The amount is spread out over every property owner.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:16 AM
So was the Assessor right or was he right?
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Oh yes, the Assessor was correct about the increased budget overall and I wouldn’t have cited him otherwise. The problem is discussing the increase like that makes people think their taxes went up 30 percent, and they didn’t, so I try to make that clear for everyone.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Only when I read blog entries.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Apexnerd Says: “Only [confused] when I read blog entries.”
All blog entries, or just mine?
October 30th, 2009 at 10:36 AM
OK SL, I’s sure the assesor is waiting to hear yours, I’s sorry!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 10:38 AM
AFY, the Assessor was right; but who cares really? So the tax increased by about $1 per month for the average household. Really, who cares? The Assessor had a choice of comparing the % of tax increase or the amount of tax increase. If he simply said that the average home would pay $1 more, it would have been a non-issue. Instead, by claiming the increase was the largest by percentage, he exaggerated its impact. Are we not able to discern the difference? Or are we just sheep?
October 30th, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Lucky7, no I got that. My mistake was assuming that county and city taxes are set the same way school levies are. In that, I was wrong. But then does that mean that only about 1/5 of property taxes (varying depending on what city/tax districts one resides) are levied that way toward city/county coffers, since the vast majority of property taxes at all levels go directly to schools at either the state or local level? And does your 4% increase take into account levies like that that that were approved by voters?
October 30th, 2009 at 11:20 AM
There are sheep and that is why we needs a SHEEPDOG!!!
Mo taxes is never a big thing to those taking the taxes, but here is how it goes for those paying those taxes, well it only a little bit ( a cup of coffee) here, and little bit there until you gets this huge stinkin pile of little bits that turn out to be just a little bit too much!
For those of you who haven’t gottin it let (and I must say some have and more are on the way every day) the wells have gone dry, tapped out, business sucks (no matter how the media/politicians lies!), there is no more and if you want more start doing things that help business (like tax cuts!) than constantly making everything worst and then again constantly making things even more worst! constantly!, I’s knows this is the halloween season but the scariest thing I’s going see this whole week was the L & I hearings yesterday and the horror stories told there, and you wonder why Boeing is leaving, while some businesses won’t be picking up and going like them, all they will be doing is laying off more people, and closing their doors!
But we all knows a little bit mo tax never hurts anything, REALLY!!!!!!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 11:22 AM
bikerbob,
As you state, the actual percentage of taxes that are levy / rate driven varies depends on where you live. In 2009, State, County and City taxes accounted for about 46% of all tax revenues in Whatcom County. School districts take in about 33%, road districts 7%, fire districts 6%, and the Port 3%. The rest are all under 3% each.
The total 4% increase in tax revenues paid by Whatcom County residents includes all voter-approved levies. The total increase was $8.7 mil. Of that increase, the school districts accounted for $5.3 mil or ~ 60% and the Flood Control Zone accounted for $1 or ~ 12%.
Apexnerd, are you getting this?
October 30th, 2009 at 11:23 AM
ST, does Ken give you that special tingle up your leg?
October 30th, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Now PJ what goes up ST leg is his business, I must say!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Uh…
what the hell are you two babbling about?
October 30th, 2009 at 11:45 AM
I offer exhibit A (AFY) and exhibit B (PlainJane).
Not just yours, Number Seven.
October 30th, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Meselves think this line of thought has gone far enough!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
October 30th, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Apexnerd, is there any sanity left? In other words, is there a better game in town to discuss ideas sans babbling?
October 30th, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Great work, Sam! You sure you don’t have time to do more analysis of these mailers?
As for the LWV forum, the mikes in council chambers are really sensitive (trust me…blushes at comment once projected throughout the county on BTV10) so we would’ve heard Lisa’s giggle if there had been one. No one laughed.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:22 PM
mics, I mean. I can’t speak for the Mikes. They may be really insensitive jerks.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:05 PM
[...] Realtor Mike Kent, his opponent at the time. You can see the blog post on Luke’s mailer, over here, and see Weimer’s 2005 mailer, right [...]
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 AM
Tomorrow’s Obituary
It is with great sadness that we gather here election night to say farewell to the parting of the “Luckless Four”. Bill Knutzen, overwhelmed by voting in his first local election in 15 years; Mary Beth Teigrob, possessing the $10K toxic non-agenda-agenda sponsored by the GOP of WC; Kathy Kershner, succumbed to spending $19.5K from a just in time single contributor donation for charm school and Michelle Luke of old age while waiting to answer Carl’s question . . . , “What specific pertinent experience and qualifications do you bring to his job?”
I sincerely apologize in advance if you don’t see the humor and think this is over the top.
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:56 AM
Where do we send the flowers?
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:55 AM
This is just ridiculous.
People like PlainJane and MissOdie are the reason I don’t like politics. You’d think a few adults could talk politics in a civil manner and actually stick to the issues rather than arguing ridiculous points that don’t matter.
MissOdie, is it really that big of a deal where Sam was sitting? Next, you’ll be arguing he’s racisit if he happens to sit by only white people at the next event? Well golly gee, he’s sitting by Dems he MUST be a Dem! And even that, you’re going off of what some else said and not what you saw yourself….I hope you don’t run for office!
PlainJane, do you have anything useful to actually add to the discussion or do you just want to continue your childish comments on whether or not Sam has a man crush? How old are you? 10? Your argument was based on the fact that you thought Sam had deleted comments on Mann’s facebook page??? And that wasn’t even true! Then when you get called out on being WRONG you try to say he’s being too defensive! My god. I’m still waiting for your “honest admission” that your ridiculous accusations were childish and just PLAIN wrong.
I don’t even know what to say to this comment….
PlainJane Says: “ST, does Ken give you that special tingle up your leg?”
REALLY? HOW OLD ARE YOU??? REALLY?
Why don’t you both get back to actually discussing the issues? Unless you actually don’t have a good argument so you just go after the messenger because you have nothing better to do or say?