The King County Council is contemplating various reforms in the wake of the recent meltdown in the elections office, today's Seattle Times reports. Some of the Republican members have proposed creating a new position for an elected auditor and moving the elections office from the County Executive's domain to the auditor's control. King County is currently the only county in the state that doesn't have an elected auditor.
Democrats on the Council are happy keeping the elections office under the control of Democrat County Executive Ron Sims.
I think politicizing the auditor's office is exactly the wrong direction to go in," Councilman Dwight Pelz, D-SeattleAs if it's not politicized already. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 27, 2005 10:43 AM | Email This
great job keep it up. Listen just thought you
and everyone else would want to know that tommorrow
night at 7:30 pm at the embassy suites there
will be a debate among those running for state
GOP chair.
Oh by the way there has been story circulating
put out by chris vance that mark hulst was asked
by the rossi campaign to drop out of the race.
the rossi campaign made no such request.
If you dont want to believe me ask mary lane.
I am not making this up.Why I am telling you
this now? Because character should still matter.
Oh, I guess that's why Dwight Pelz doesn't want that.....
Seriously, folks, does Dwight "Castro is cool" Pelz think that because HE'S elected, that somehow his being directly accountable to his constituents is a bad thing?? Would it be so bad if the auditor finally felt he REALLY had to do his job?
"politicizing" something = Democrats won't have control over it
If Pelz is against it, that must mean it's a really good idea. Full speed ahead!
Posted by: Michele S on January 27, 2005 11:10 AMIt at least gives the voters some say.
How much more political or incompetent could it get?
Posted by: Norm on January 27, 2005 11:36 AMPelz is a hack, pure and simple.
Posted by: scott158 on January 27, 2005 11:43 AMEven making the office a "nonpartisan" office makes no difference, since there are few people in politics who don't have a preference for one party or another.
Letting them get on the ballot without declaring their party preference simply gives people a fig leaf for them to hide their true allegiance behind.
Posted by: Micajah on January 27, 2005 12:13 PMIf any of the elections you manage are contested in court, you lose your job and your pension.
Posted by: Al on January 27, 2005 12:17 PMHis eyes lit up, and he raved about being able to set his own budget and operational priorities. He said that as an appointed Sheriff he was required to follow the priorities and policies of Ron Sims.
It's scary to consider that Pelz may think appointing the Elections Director insulates the department from politics. Has he even met Ron Sims? Is Pelz naive, or cynical?
If someone were to ask Dave about this, I assume he would repeat what he said before.
Posted by: South County on January 27, 2005 03:26 PMHmmm....After ALL that's been uncovered with the King County elections over the years....how do we really know that it IS a Democrat Party stronghold?
Sheesh! At his point - I'm wondering if the Dems have been stuffing the absentee ballots for the past 10 years!
All you need is a liberal Dem in the KC Executive
position - a few vital election laws diluted and an incredibly suspicious increase in absentee voting over a couple of years.... and voila! In no time - you too can have a Democratic Party stronghold!