Alright, I can’t resist, since I’m working on this now, to share with you.
So far, all the speculation I’ve heard about potential candidates to replace Whatcom County Councilman Bob Kelly has actually come true.
Here are a few of the people I’ve spoken with so far as well as those that may be considering.
Former County Councilman Dan McShane, who recently lost very narrowly to political newcomer Kathy Kershner is considering applying for the position and will take the Thanksgiving-weekend to make a decision.
Former County Planning Commissioner Dave Pros is going to apply for the spot. He’s taking off on vacation on Saturday and so he’s got a tight window to get his application in, basically, today perhaps.
Other potentials that I’ve yet to get ahold of: Former Bellingham Planning Commissioner Doug Starcher was in attendance at the meeting last night, which I’m told is a rare occurrence for him. Of course, it was also the UGA redrawing meeting last night and he could have been there just for that.
*UPDATE* - Starcher says that he found out about Kelly’s announcement from this blog last night.
“Honestly, until it came up last night it wasn’t even on my radar,” Starcher said. “At this point, I’m certainly considering it but I haven’t made any decision.”
*UPDATE* - Two more that I won’t be able to get in touch with today but live in District 1 and are potentials: Conservatives Gary Lysne and Chris Hatch.
Hatch was Kelly’s opponent in 2007 and considered a run in 2009 but decided against it. Lysne lives in the District 1 but sought the At-Large position versus Seth Fleetwood in 2005. He also considered a run in 2009.
And outgoing County Councilman Ward Nelson is also in District 1 and he was being asked last night.
I’m calling him now.
*UPDATE* - Nelson says that he won’t apply for the position because he’s still a current council member and doesn’t think he’d be allowed to apply. I thought there might be potential for him to be appointment and then his seat would be vacant … but Kathy Kershner is coming into that seat in January.
Still, Nelson said no, though he acknowledged people have been speaking to him about it.
It appears, also, that whoever is appointed will have only be in office until the November 2010 election certification.
According to section 4.5 of the Whatcom County Charter, a vacant seat will be filled at the next November election and will fulfill the remainder of any term. Since Kelly’s term isn’t up for two years, whoever is select will have just one year in office, potentially, before someone else may have the chance to get in there:
Section 4.5, paragraph II:
Vacancies in elective office shall be filled at the next November general election, unless the vacancy occurs after the day for filing declarations of candidacy, in which case the vacancy shall be filled at the next succeeding November general election. The person elected shall take office upon certification of the results of the election and shall serve the unexpired term of the vacated office. Until a successor has been elected and certified, a majority of the Council shall fill the vacancy by appointment. All persons appointed to fill vacancies shall meet the qualifications of Section 4.20.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Aargh! Not Dan McShane! No Pros. Lysne!?? No way! The electorate is probably going to get hosed by this deal. Everyone not good enough to have been elected in the last few elections is now up for nomination. Round up the usual political suspects and let’s have a “runway off” with talent and swimming suit competitions. On second thought talent and long, covering formal wear. And I really do not want to see Barbara Brenner installing a “pole” in council chambers for the talent comp.
Yes to Ward. I’d call him now if I were you too Sam. At least he has some integrity and common sense and we need serious people on there now–even though some may argue we’ve missed that mark already. Disgruntled Jurgen.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I hope one of the criteria is that the person appointed not run for election when the seat comes up in November - I think that is only fair really.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Why would you ask them not to run for election next November?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:31 PM
People can run or not. That shouldn’t be one of the criteria for appointment. It’s a free country.
I think one of the criteria is that it be someone similar to Bob, someone who District 1 would support.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:46 PM
What a surprise - “elisabeth” and “Suzie Q”…. well, there is that incumbency thing; in my opinion, that would give the person an advantage - but that is just my opinion now; don’t take it personally…..
November 25th, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Incumbency didn’t work out so well for Laurie or Dan and barely for Carl. It is lots of developer money and fear mongering that apparently works with the voters.
It is pathetic to have a couple of new and un-qualified council people who rode in to office on developer and probably Japanese cash in hopes of pushing extremely costly (to the taxpayer) land use zoning through like Caitac’s project.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:24 PM
Yeah we sure don’t want any jobs around here. That would be pro growth. We like our Luddite ways.
November 26th, 2009 at 12:01 AM
We certainly do. I’m glad I’m not the only one with a wood-burning computer.
Mine’s pot-bellied, like Ben Franklin would have used.
November 26th, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Well, “Tom Pratum”, if you are going to hide behind such an obviously fictitious screen name then how seriously am I supposed to take your opinion?
Sincerely,
Apexnerd
November 27th, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Do you have to live in the district that you represent?
Wow, I thought they waved that rule.
Current status quo is, if you believe yourself to be a genius, whose talents Bellingham just can’t live without, you can run in any district you like regardless of your true residency.
November 28th, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Somehow, this looks like the possibility of a shoe -in for any/all of the has beens. To avoid this appointment smacking heavily of the old boys club, my vote would be for some new blood - letting him/her be tested, then take their chances to run for election next time around.
November 29th, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Madbee: You are overlooking the complexities of the County Council position, made even more difficult by the LAMIRD issues that Council will start tackling in January. This is not the position, and certainly not the time, for “on-the-job” training. The planning decisions made in the next months will impact the County for many years and require fluency with complex state and local laws and land use planning policies. If your health was dependent on some difficult surgery, would you choose an experienced surgeon or some new blood?
November 29th, 2009 at 8:33 PM
I will miss Bob Kelly! He was actually…nice. I like Jurgen’s comments- although I have to disagree- I don’t want a swim suit competition! In all honesty, this doesn’t truly surprise me. Bob Kelly was elected by Lisa McShane’s “machine.” He didn’t always vote the way he was supposed to, so support was withdrawn from him, and eventually he “had” to go. That is the same thing that happened to Seth, and actually to Carl, too, in a way, but Carl had enough supporters to be strong on his own. Just part of Whatcom County’s politics. I think that Dan McShane should take some time off and go do something else for a while. Doug Starcher would be a very interesting candidate, especially because he served so long on the City Planning Commission, and is in-tuned with District One (most of which is from the City of Bellingham). There might be some brand new blood who applies, who knows! December 8th is going to be one interesting meeting! I appreciate all of the above comments- I think everyone is right who posted, because all of the above comments are factors into this final Council decision.
November 29th, 2009 at 8:56 PM
“Mary” - what on earth are you talking about? Goodness the imagination you’ve developed over on the crazy men’s club blog.
And “Tom Pratum”: “Apexnerd” is right, stop hiding behind that anon label, just like “elisabeth” and “Sam Taylor”. As if.
I suggest, in the absence of APY!!’s exclamation points, we follow “Tom Pratum”’s ever brilliant lead with the fun quotation marks.
November 29th, 2009 at 9:58 PM
I thought this was the crazy men’s club blog, with a few cross dressers. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Given some of the comments given in people’s own names, I preferred their public personas before they opened their mouths here and removed my doubt.
November 29th, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Here’s an assignment for Ciz or any of our other resident facts and figures wonks. How much time/money is Kelly’s resignation going to cost the county for new elections, administrative expenses, keys to the washroom, time spent on the change by the entire council, etc? I don’t think you can just blow off his quitting as just a normal bit of business as Suzie Q wants to do. If it were a health reason or something understandable like that, well then sure. Bottom line is we have not gotten our money’s worth. We don’t vote for someone with the idea that they may only decide to stick around for a shorter term than the one they campaigned for and we elected them to. Does the tribal position pay better? Not that there isn’t a precedent here I would like to see more of. Carl, Ken, Sam, Barbara, feel free to bail.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:24 AM
“Bob Kelly was elected by Lisa McShane’s “machine.”" - Mary
I have got to stop reading comments will drinking coffee. Needing to clean my keyboard now. Lisa McShane, while being a very talented and intelligent women, does not have a machine. Except maybe a computer. Or maybe one of those fancy boxes that shows the Daily Show in the evenings.
As for politicians resigning mid-term, it is pretty common. That’s why when you elect someone, you want to make sure that they are someone who will stick around. A true public servant. Now some people have very legitimate reasons for resigning; Health Concerns, needing to provide for their family (working in local politics is rarely good pay), unable to give the job the time and focus it needs. Some times there are less scrupulous reasons for resigning, for instance, resigning the governor’s seat to go promote your book (Sarah Palin).
November 30th, 2009 at 2:36 AM
Lisa McShane may not have a machine but is obviously part of one. One that needs a respit, as does Dan. Futurewise is pulling our strings through them. Futurewise is not a local group. Time for new blood.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:18 AM
Whatever his reasons for resigning, it’s just painful to see it done just as an election for county council is wrapping up. Could he have done it a month ago so his replacement could be voted on in the regular election? Ugh.
At least he didn’t give a farewell speech like Palin’s.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/07/palin-speech-edit-200907
November 30th, 2009 at 8:16 AM
New blood would be a refreshing addition to the County Council. It is up to that fresh blood to place their name into the pool and then it is up to the Council (?) to realize that fresh, qualified blood will be good for them, too.
It’s time for the Council to be all about the people and their rights, working for the economy of Whatcom County. It’s still legal to dream, isn’t it?
November 30th, 2009 at 8:48 AM
How many times has a Whatcom pol resigned mid term just to seek another office? Not unheard of, but common? Whether it’s to promote a book or just seek a higher position or one with more clout, it is still rightfully called quitting.
Also, calling it Lisa McShane’s machine is a misnomer, but machine it is.
The Luddite, enviro extremists rule the day on the city and county councils and have for nearly a decade. Futurewise is just a permutation, but whether it’s Washington Conservation Voters, Futurewise, Wagroma or any of the plethora of allied groups that make up this local, vast left wing conspiracy—it is as surely a machine as any we’ve seen in this state. I’m sure some might chafe at the comparison, but those who do are just practicing obfuscation. Would you prefer, camp, faction, covey, band, outfit, pack, tribe, squad, posse, phalanx, legion, mob, Klavern? That’s why it’s amusing to see a board member of Futurewise (Bricklin) who has been involved directly with every organized effort in this county trying to limit growth and control land use claiming that he can play both sides of the street, or “bench” without a conflict. Now that’s laughable, even though he is a fine attorney and a good hearted person.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Everyone I’s hope y’all had a happy Tday! I’s sure did!
BTW, the Nutcracker down in Seattle is worth the trip! Went with a 4, 5, & 6 yr old and they all gave it 5 stars!
I’s sure do hope Ward can be convinced to reconsider, he would be a very good person to hold the position until a real election can be had!
Ward, you have given a lot to this county, can you give one more year, please?
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 30th, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Machine, whatever. For “Mary” to suggest that there’s anyone who asked Bob Kelly to step down, Seth to step over, and Carl to …well, she should lay off the cheap wine.
And now we have the pleasure of seeing the return of the good old boys/developers to run the county council.
Most of us on the left want to see a thriving economy but would like one that looked beyond bulldozing land to building an actual economy independent of putting up houses. We live in a beautiful place but sadly our economic think tank, the Chamber, is an arm of the Buildling Industry. There is simply no thoughtful, comprehensive approach to how we might have a viable sustainable economy. None. And the assumption of the right - that if you think a community should plan for growth it means you’re opposed to a good economy - may be a useful wedge issue for the Bonnerites of the world, but isn’t true.
November 30th, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Jurgen says, “The Luddite, enviro extremists rule the day on the city and county councils and have for nearly a decade. Futurewise is just a permutation, but whether it’s Washington Conservation Voters, Futurewise, Wagroma or any of the plethora of allied groups that make up this local, vast left wing conspiracy—it is as surely a machine as any we’ve seen in this state. I’m sure some might chafe at the comparison, but those who do are just practicing obfuscation. Would you prefer, camp, faction, covey, band, outfit, pack, tribe, squad, posse, phalanx, legion, mob, Klavern?”
I don’t know Jurgen, how about using a term that might be considered a bit old fashioned, like “Democrats”?
Of course, that isn’t nearly as much fun as calling people “environmental extremists. Or, referring to politics as usual as some sort of a vast, left wing conspiracy.”
Last time I checked, political parties, (for example, Democrats or Republicans) are political organizations that seek to attain and maintain political power within government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns.
Parties often assert a political ideology or vision supported by a written platform, forming a coalition among disparate interests.
Disparate interests — you know, like the Republicans have Tea Partiers, CAPR folks, Eagle Forum and Chet Dow’s Rural Neighbors?
And the Democrats have Whatcom Conservation Voters, etc.?
November 30th, 2009 at 3:44 PM
The democratics are good & the republicans are bad or how bout the republicans are good and the democratics are bad, both are the same ole BS put out by sides, each has its good and its bad!
If we are ever going to start solving problems in this county, city or country we must first be AMERICANS and democratics or republicans 2nd!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 30th, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Sorry Elisabeth, I was being flip and attempting a little tongue in cheek humor. As usual, I missed the mark with you. But you do have to admit that there has been a pretty strong push against growth and that a lot of the folks who have lived here for a while and wanted to see more environmental considerations have had pretty much the rule of the roost lately. You also can’t just blow off the assault on property at a time when children are having to return to the nest or elderly parents are needing special care. I don’t buy the overall premise of the Tea bagger Party, but in some arenas of government some sense of integrity, and history has to reside somewhere, and attacking property owners with moratoriums or painting those who own property and suddenly find themselves at odds with popular opinion is not the answer, IMHO.
AFY, I would like to sing Jingle Bells in barks to you old dawg. ” Woof Woof Woof, woof woof woof, woof woof woof woof woof, woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof woof oh woof woof woof…
November 30th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Yous making me howl, Sir Jurgen!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 30th, 2009 at 4:42 PM
I’s just got this email on the difference between liberal and conservatives, so this is for you Madam E:
For those that don’t know about history … Here is a condensed version:
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1 . Liberals, and
2. Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That’s how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to BBQ at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement..
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly BBQ’s and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. Those became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers inHollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn’t fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud or Miller. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, engineers, corporate executives, athletes, members of the military, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans.. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
Here ends today’s lesson in world history:
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 30th, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Enjoy your woof woofs, AFY.
So, Jurgen, lets say that there are approximately 3,310 parcels (5 acres and under) in unincorporated (rural) Whatcom County. Of those 3,310 — 2,401 are built out (approximately 72.5%). That leaves around 909 parcels that are undeveloped.
All total, (all parcel sizes - including large tracts of acreage) let’s say, there are approximately 3,898 undeveloped parcels in the county. Of those 3,898, approximately 3,113 are unbuilt or “substandard” parcels.
So, what do you propose to do with the substandard parcels? Just, “let um divide and build” regardless of the circumstances?
November 30th, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Case by case, but from a standpoint of assisting in compliance rather than banning. There are lots of innovative ways around problems.
AFY, if you didn’t get that history off a place mat a a tavern like the Waterfront, you should put it on one and start selling them. Also I think the subgroups were fun loving people and tight gluted church goers before they got to Conservatives or Liberals.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:43 AM
I feel confident that you will disagree, but that’s exactly what the planning department is doing.
Reviewing applications on a case by case basis. Applications are amended or rejected based on criteria and suitability. (Title 15, 16, 20, 21, 23).
http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/compliance/enforced.jsp
If a property owner disagrees with a decision, the county provides them with an appeals process. Applications for appeals and permits can be found here:
http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/forms/index.jsp
Believe it or not, citizens rights are even included in the County Charter.
Section 1.11 Citizens’ Rights.
The rights of the individual citizen shall be guaranteed under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Washington. No regulation or ordinance shall be drafted and adopted without consideration of and provisions for compensation to those unduly burdened. (Added by referendum 1995; added by referendum 2005, amended by referendum 2005).
And, believe it or not, the Growth Management Act also lists protecting property rights as one if its primary goals.
To make sure that local governments don’t step over the line, Attorney General McKenna has posted detailed guidelines on his website to assist local government’s with determining what is and what isn’t a taking when they are considering zoning changes.
I respect your opinion when it’s presented politely, Jurgen, but I do not consider you an authority on property rights or zoning. If I have questions, I will go to David Bricklin or Richard Stephens.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Maybe it’s the criteria and suitability that needs a hard look. Some pretty reasonable solutions often get tossed while some really outlandish exceptions get granted to others. Sure one can lawyer up, but that in itself is a pretty strong deterrent and so ….. I was a close follower of the GMA debate at a local and state level and I can tell you that property rights for homeowners was hardly addressed in a spirit of cooperation. It was more a spirit of eminent domain and bite me. Property rights groups, and they’re not all lunatic fringe, have had to fight to retain basic rights that were part of the promise of property ownership in this great land. There has been a growing tendency towards despotism on such issues in the left wing of the Democratic party. That’s not all bad in and of itself, but some are always ready to take it to the next extreme. IMNSHO
December 1st, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Fisher Ames, framer of the Bill of Rights and Massachusetts Representative to the first four Congresses, said: `The chief duty and care of all governments is to protect the rights of property.’
It seems to me that in the zeal of some to stop sprawl this chief duty kinda gets overlooks sometimes! Then there is that care thing too!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 1st, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Oh please do not consider me an authority on anything but my own opinion. If I were going to hire a land use lawyer to represent the environmentalist’s side of an issue I’d go Bricklin too and have, or I’d go for Ellingson. Doesn’t mean I like it just because it’s all codified. That’s just grist for a revolution. Bottom line is there are those of us who feel that some of the GMA guidelines and such are a lot of Bull Pucky and just more big government where it shouldn’t be sticking it’s nose. Now I have often ragged on those who spurn all forms of government under the get rid of big government chant, but this is one case where they are right. Only in my non bought and paid for opinion. But since we are a far left coast state not that surprising. Just because the issue is left doesn’t always mean it’s right.
December 1st, 2009 at 8:55 PM
How is it that all the Constitutional scholars in the County seem unaware of the police powers conferred upon states and delegated to municipalities under the 10th Amendment? The chief duty of the government is to protect public health, safety and welfare, NOT to promote private property interests.
Zoning laws that protect our community and our natural resources are a legitimate exercise of the police powers. Down-zoning generally does not entitle a property owner to compensation unless the zoning regulation is not related to the protection of public health and safety and either results in a physical invasion of private property, or deprives private property owners of any reasonable use of land.
And one more thing…… “it just doesn’t seem fair” is not a valid legal argument, except, apparently, in Whatcom County.