June 03, 2005
This Isn't Entirely A Bad Idea

But I think I might choose a different location.

King County officials have a tentative agreement to buy a Rainier Valley building and turn it into a modern, $22.8 million election center intended to help avoid a repeat of the problems that plagued the November election.

The facility would allow the county to combine under one roof election offices and now-cramped absentee-ballot operations.

How would I choose the location? I would pick a city or town that had better election administration than the rest of King County. Somehow, I don't think Seattle would win that accuracy contest.

Posted by Jim Miller at June 03, 2005 09:41 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I would also place it somewhere that poll workers would not be afraid to go to. Think about it ... if you were staying up late on an election contest ... would you really want to walk 8 blocks to your car in the Rainier Valley at 2AM? I know a lot of poll volunteers that will not even drive THRU there in daylight hours, let alone park thier cars and get out.

Posted by: Itsasquak on June 3, 2005 09:47 AM
2. A better idea is to break KC up into two or more smaller counties since KCE can not handle the current election work load.

Posted by: otto on June 3, 2005 09:48 AM
3. I emailed the reporter about this article. It is disgusting that this appears the day after Judge Bridges puts a fire under Dean Logan's butt. Why does KC have to be forced into doing the right thing?

Posted by: sgmmac on June 3, 2005 09:54 AM
4. HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO BLIND?

All we need to have clean elections is a new building!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Baynative on June 3, 2005 09:55 AM
5. Yep! The dem's answer to every problem: THROW MORE MONEY AT IT!! Lord knows, it's working quite well for the educatin system. Our kids rank near the bottom of the 50 states, so LET'S BUILD MORE EXPENSIVE SCHOOLS!! Gotta make the little darlings feel good about the four walls they call "home" for the (seemingly) only 4-1/2 hours a day they're there...
:~\

Posted by: Brian C on June 3, 2005 10:00 AM
6. See, KC is doing something about the election problems. You do recall how many problems were caused by not having a new building?

You miss Ron's silver lining - he will now have "unbiased" full-time unionized county employees tallying the votes.

He can blame the new tax needed to support it on the Republican challenge of the election.

Please remember the golded rule of beaurocracy - Activity is a sign of progress.

Posted by: Thinker on June 3, 2005 10:02 AM
7. Wow - can you imagine how much all other election centers in the country are going to have to spend since this was a "model election for the rest of the nation"?

Posted by: Editor on June 3, 2005 10:05 AM
8. At least they are consistent. The solution for any problem always involves spending more millions of taxpayer dollars. How about replacing some of the people in charge instead of replacing the facilities.

Posted by: Fred Parr on June 3, 2005 10:09 AM
9. Yeah, that's it. It was the buildings' fault.

Posted by: ScottM on June 3, 2005 10:13 AM
10. ScottM

Thank you, I needed a good chuckle this AM!

Posted by: bf on June 3, 2005 10:17 AM
11. Classic Liberal Bu22$hit!!!

Have a problem -- throw money at it, and then pretend you solved it.

Dishonesty and criminality are not vitiated by different housing.

I know, let's be perfectly liberal about it (remember diversity) and make it a combination homeless center, whorehouse/gay sushi bar and an election center. Dibs on the espresso franchise.

Posted by: Amused by liberal morons on June 3, 2005 10:23 AM
12. If you have a meth lab in a small dirty apartment in and then move it to a beautiful 4,000 sq. foot house there is still a meth lab inside, but with more room to make more meth.

GET IT?

Posted by: Joe on June 3, 2005 10:33 AM
13. now, Joe.

Why do you fail to mention the improvement in team morale due to better working conditions?

Posted by: who'dathunk? on June 3, 2005 10:36 AM
14. The inmates are ruining the asylum

:)

Posted by: thecomputerguy on June 3, 2005 10:39 AM
15. How to fix King County Elections?

Two words: Firebomb.

Posted by: FedUp on June 3, 2005 10:42 AM
16. I get it and I think Joe nailed it.

We can and make it a combination homeless center, whorehouse/gay sushi bar, suede shoe shine parlor, election center, and meth lab.

That way whenever we want to vote, be entertained, or bust criminals, we can do it all in one place.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on June 3, 2005 10:43 AM
17. This is an unmitigated boondoggle.

Absolutely none of the problems in the 2004 (or 2003, or 2002) elections were caused by the lack of a giant elections building. Elections already has more than adequate facilities.

Note that:
1. This building will not replace the warehouse, the Everett plant that assembles absentee ballot packets, or the Admiistrative offices. The benefits of having all elections staff "consolidated" in one place will not be realized.

2. This new building is essentially a really, really expensive MBOS (Absentee ballot location), a facility used for about 12 weeks per year.

3. The building will be used to house ITS, which is not directly related to elections, year-round.

This is essentially a means to provide funding for a Ron Sims pet project by hiding it within a project budget allegedly designated to "help" elections.

This will not correct election problems in any way, shape, or form.

Posted by: Susan B. Anthony on June 3, 2005 10:43 AM
18. Why does this remind me of the Mariners blaming their poor performance on the KingDome?

So now we have to build a new stadium for King County Elections.

Posted by: JimFr on June 3, 2005 10:48 AM
19. Amused,
I am amused, and see that you did get it. The official policy in a new building must be to allow the homeless sleep in the vault with the ballots. Seeing as many have registered that as their home address!

But in all seriousness, my real point is that we don't change the "culture" (I'll use their PC term) by changing the scenery. Change the "culture" first. This includes following all election laws! PROVE IT HAS CHANGED IN A FUTURE ELECTION. Then and only then should we the tax payers hand them millions to change to a better facility.

Posted by: Joe on June 3, 2005 10:54 AM
20. Yes, this new facility is an entirely bad idea. I would love to get a huge sign to hang outside the County Admin Building: "It's the officers, not the offices, Stupid!". Standard distraction theory. Look over here where I want you to look, not over there where the stuff I don't want you to see is going on. Shell-Game Simms is a master of deception, and I cannot trust anything which comes from what is fundamentally an operational methodology based on the use of deception in order to prevail.

Posted by: duhh on June 3, 2005 11:02 AM
21. Joe,

Did you mean meth or mess?

Posted by: Thinker on June 3, 2005 11:03 AM
22. Ron Sims is a sick ass, he is just one of many in Ukraine County.

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 11:04 AM
23. Speaking as one living outside of Seattle/King County (Hey somehow us outsiders will end up paying for it so I can comment!).... have you noticed that just like other projects there isn't anything on paper?
Here's my bet... That in essence it'll be a rebuilt Kingdome in the Ranier Valley with both monorail and lightraid acess.
You have an excuse (all those outstanding Kingdome repair bonds need collateral) and of course you need all those bleachers for all the election observers!
I mean if we're going to have a boonedoggle let's have a good one!

One more suggestion: name it the SIMCENTER!

Posted by: Victor on June 3, 2005 11:10 AM
24. Who owns the building that is they want to buy?

Posted by: Ron A. on June 3, 2005 11:32 AM
25. Look out KC taxpayers! How much of that $23+ (once the "true" costs are factored in) is going to end up in Ron Sims campaign chest? You can bet that some of it will!

Posted by: starboardhelm on June 3, 2005 11:34 AM
26. A very good question from Ron A. given local pols track record of self serving deals it would not surprise me if there were 'connections' to City Hall or County Government.

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 11:35 AM
27. Great timing, maybe the judge isn't a Democrat after all (dean's thinking)

Of course with a whole building, just think of the places we can lose and hide ballots - the options are endless

Posted by: FEDUP on June 3, 2005 11:38 AM
28. No New Buildings!
No New Taxes!

Anyone got an idea as to how to put the brakes on this half-baked idea? Have there been any hearings? What is the public input process for this sort of boondoggle; or is it just a majority vote of one by The Sims?

Posted by: duhh on June 3, 2005 11:43 AM
29. A new building is EXACTLY what KCEO needs. Look what the new stadium did for the Mariners.

Posted by: Mark on June 3, 2005 11:44 AM
30. Being King County, you know that they've already concluded that this is the place they want, regardless of anything that could possibly be wrong with it or even if there's a better location....so why does Sims need another $677,000 to "study" the site in more detail?

Posted by: Darth Dogbert on June 3, 2005 11:48 AM
31. "so why does Sims need another $677,000 to "study" the site in more detail?"

You don't know how the consulting racket works, do you, Darth?

Posted by: Dogbert on June 3, 2005 11:54 AM
32. Buildings don't cheat and throw elections, people do.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 3, 2005 11:55 AM
33. Unfortunately I do...just frustrates the hell out of me that they spend money like this and the vast majority in this county don't pay attention. Just like the multi-million dollar "regional transportation study" voted on in November that's nonbinding and doesn't actually have to be released to the public.

Posted by: Darth Dogbert on June 3, 2005 11:59 AM
34. You know, while Sims is on a building boondoggle, why not build the new elections center underground in the new tunnel/ viaduct replacement and then he can help justify wasting even more taxpayer money on the viaduct in the name of cleaning up the elections.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 3, 2005 12:01 PM
35. How about McNeil Island? Would save commute time....

Posted by: John on June 3, 2005 12:03 PM
36. Wow, they've got some nerve, don't they?

Posted by: Bostonian on June 3, 2005 12:06 PM
37. Dan Brady testimony in a nutshell:

The observers were limited as much as possible because King County Elections is a partisan elections machine that was not interested in an honest, accurate, open and observable count.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 3, 2005 12:06 PM
38. Jeff B., You obviously haven't been paying attention. The old building produces extra ballots and needs to be replaced by one that doesn't. It would be best to have a $677,000 study by one operative of the KC machine to buy a building owned by another operative of the KC machine.

How else do we get massive campaign contributions.

Perhaps "conpaign" would be a better word.

Posted by: Ron A. on June 3, 2005 12:07 PM
39. ooo.

They've got Kim Wyman on deck?

Posted by: Andy on June 3, 2005 12:11 PM
40. Rainier Valley is a good place for it. Anything to scare off white Republicans at 2am.

Typical conservative solution=complain about something, take money away from it, then hope it fixes itself.

Posted by: The_Gent on June 3, 2005 12:11 PM
41. Ron A.

My bad. I guess the problem really was the poltergeist infested building that just kept producing ballots. In that case, I think we should spend several billion more to study the best location of the building, call in ghostbusters, etc.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 3, 2005 12:14 PM
42. The_Gent,

Is that you, Geov Parrish?

Posted by: Editor on June 3, 2005 12:15 PM
43. Gent - not too tolerant of white reps are you? how does that fit with the inclusive mantra?

Where did you pull "conservative solution=complain about something, take money away from it, then hope it fixes itself." out of? Firstly, there is no money assigned to it. Next, a solution presented does not mean it is the right solution. Reps think the solution should be discussed/voted on by the people not decreed from the almighty Simms. See the difference, or did you pull "conservative solution=complain about something, take money away from it, then hope it fixes itself." out to make more room for your head?

Posted by: Fred on June 3, 2005 12:38 PM
44. did you pull "conservative solution=complain about something, take money away from it, then hope it fixes itself." out to make more room for your head?
Fred,
ROFLMAO

Posted by: armygirl on June 3, 2005 12:48 PM
45. If a White GOP had said what Gent said about a Black democrat, they would be shouted down and banned by the good people who frequent this blog.

However, it is perfectly acceptable for a liberal democrat to be a raciest. I’m sure he is getting his complements over at horse’s ass.

Nice talk Gent.

Posted by: Doggfish on June 3, 2005 12:54 PM
46. I will go back to some comments I made earlier today. It is no harder to achieve an accurate vote count in KC than it is in the smallest WA county if the election is managed at the precinct level (i.e. the smallest unit). It is a matter of basic project management skills.
IT IS NOT buying a multi-million dollar building. The problem in KC is management not facilities.
I have seen really fine projects of massive scale run out of a 10x35 trailer.
You folks there in WA are getting some sunshine shone up your butts on this one I'm afraid.

Posted by: armygirl on June 3, 2005 12:56 PM
47. What happened to Ron Sim's new "Blue Ribbon Panel" that is supposed to be investigating the elections department and all the problems we have with this dept. in King County? At the very least, wouldn't it make sense that any plans and/or decisions are made after he's spent the thousands and thousands of dollars on this "Blue Ribbon Panel", and after the King County Council has spent their thousands of dollars on investigating the KC elections Dept. Seems like he's trying to convince Judge Bridges that King County is doing something. His timing really stinks. Poor move on his part.

Posted by: Larry in Renton on June 3, 2005 12:59 PM
48. Dogbert,
Given that the median income in this country is ~$30,000 and that the average number of working years is ~40 that would mean tat the before tax total that the average person earns in a working lifetime is

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 01:08 PM
49. Dogbert,
Given that the median income in this country is ~$30,000 and that the average number of working years is ~40 that would mean tat the before tax total that the average person earns in a working lifetime is

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 01:11 PM
50. Sims for Governor!!

Oh....sorry...that's right..he tried that already and was rejected by his own party.

Nevermind..

Posted by: duhh on June 3, 2005 01:13 PM
51.

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 01:15 PM
52. Why not locate it near their core constituency

Cemetary so they can find extra voters

Seniors center since those are supposedly the overworked workers

Alzhiemer center since that's their management team

Homeless shelter (more votes)

Kinkos (for duplicating ballots)


Posted by: righton on June 3, 2005 01:17 PM
53. Righton - you left off Sewage Treatment Plant - for the rats.

Posted by: Rick D on June 3, 2005 01:46 PM
54. I'll try once again. Given that the median income in this country is ~$30,000 and that the average number of working years is ~40 that would mean tat the before tax total that the average person earns in a working lifetime is

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 02:06 PM
55. "Righton - you left off Sewage Treatment Plant - for the rats."

Rick D - I think you're on to something. They can tack this on the the Brightwater project. It'll smell just like this election.

Posted by: Dogbert on June 3, 2005 02:27 PM
56. Rick:

Yeah, you're on to something. They can put the votes they don't want into the sewer, and nobody will know the difference.

Posted by: dad4 on June 3, 2005 02:59 PM
57. Why not the Boulevard Park area of unincorporated King County? It is an economically-underdeveloped community area with relatively inexpensive real estate, but without the blatant baggage of being within the City of Seattle.

Posted by: SpaceNeedleBoy on June 3, 2005 03:07 PM
58. Heck if they're gonna steal the elections, let offsource the work to INdia and save a buck or two. Pradeep and Nanja could count votes while taking helpdesk calls.

Posted by: righton on June 3, 2005 04:54 PM
59. I just got in off the road and had a chance to read thru the posts...Thanks y'all for your descriptions!

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 3, 2005 05:57 PM
60. Spaceneedleboy - KC has no money for parks. Better to close Boulevard Park.

Posted by: Jack on June 3, 2005 06:43 PM
61. Where I was going is that this $677,000 is > 1/2 of the median wage earner's lifetime pre tax earnings. Use this same methodology to see what Sound Transit's projects cost in 'human' terms and you get an Idea of why I get so animated over these things. In order for me to justify expendatures like this I have to see that it is worth the cost. On a transportation project that means that residents, in the agregate, save that much more time just to break even and only those projects with the highest Benefit/Cost should be funded by taxpayers. If developers want to fund projects that benefit themselves, they should pick up the tab. For this 'election' headquarters study alone to use up the equivilent of more than half of someone's entire working output is obscene. Besides the City of Tacoma did a 'study' of how they could save money and, shazam what did they find you ask? and please do ask, because what you will find is that the reccomendation was to close a certain fire station that just happens to occupy land that one of the City Council members has had his eye on for decades. Imagine that!!

Posted by: JDH on June 3, 2005 07:02 PM
62. JDH
Your dems have sold us out to the contractors for the monorail and sound transit.
They lied on the bid. They have fixed elections to keep the contracts and overrides going. They have issued bonds on the overrides to hold us hostage to the rip off.
You are just a thief and so are your illegally elected Gov and legislature.
You will win the court case.

No revote....Revlot!!!!!

Posted by: doggfish on June 3, 2005 10:08 PM
63. "Of course with a whole building, just think of the places we can lose and hide ballots - the options are endless"

I wonder if the building has a bunch of fake, drywall hidden compartments where union contractors could hide the Republican ballots for Rossi next election?

I think that would be funny but at the same time...not too funny at all *sad face*

Posted by: pete on June 3, 2005 11:36 PM
64. Maybe I should become a democrat so that I can conduct some studies about the absurd applied to the ludicrous. Good gig if you can get it.

Simms rip-off all of the way.

It will get more and more silly as we forge ahead, and they will defend it as though it is legitimate. Go figure.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on June 4, 2005 10:04 AM
65. Amused -
I have a baseball bat that I could loan you to hit yourself over the head until you either change your mind or achieve the state of "liberal-ness" ;'}

Posted by: alphabet soup on June 4, 2005 01:38 PM
66. Doggfish,
JDH is NOT a Dem, by ANY stretch.
Signed
JDH

Posted by: JDH on June 4, 2005 10:21 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?