King County Elections has determined that I-25 has submitted enough signatures to secure a place on the November ballot.
Now it's up to the County Council to determine just what goes on the ballot. Will the Council --
(a) Place the underlying Charter change question on the November 2007 ballot?
(b) Make the voters vote on this twice? (i.e. vote this November to require the Council to put the Charter change question on the November 2008 ballot?)
(c) put an alternative on the ballot which may or may not require two different votes
(more on the Council's options here)
Of course, (a) is preferred and the Councilmembers know that this is what most voters want. But certain insiders are terrified of losing their ability to manipulate elections if voters choose a fair and competent independent person to run elections. The insiders' arguments against (a) will be vigorous. They won't be logical or compelling, but they will be amusing.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 22, 2007 11:30 AM | Email ThisHmmm...did see a lot of 'Black Ops' in the city budget this year or something?
Well, there wasn't a budget item in 2004 either and anyone with a shred of honesty knows that KC manipulated that election to the point that the got to appoint their hand-selected queen!
If they put it on the ballot, when do we get to elect the elections meister?
Who's going to run?
GOP got any candidates lined up?
Dems?
Wouldn't we have to have that election nex Spring in order for that person to be in charge in the Fall of 2008?
Posted by: Seattle Democrat on August 22, 2007 05:25 PMThe initiative is posted here:
http://www.accountableelections.org/docs/cfae_initiative.pdf
If the charter change is approved by the voters (which would have to be at a November general election), the first election for director will be held at the subsequent February special election.
So yes, if the charter change is approved by the voters this November, the director would be elected in February 2008.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on August 22, 2007 05:32 PMStefan's argument that the candidates would be so well vetted here and in other places falls way short of being convincing -- since that hasn't worked for statewide offices (as Stefan has noted many times with respect to judgeships).
Let's hope this fails. Convincingly enough so it won't be in front of us again. Having a population ill-able to vote intelligently for a position will, invariably, result in folks being elected who raise a ton of money (how is THAT good for an elections director) and get lots of partisan support. It's just bad all over.
Posted by: Bill Anderson on August 22, 2007 06:54 PM"Let's hope this fails. Convincingly enough so it won't be in front of us again. Having a population ill-able to vote intelligently for a position will, invariably, result in folks being elected who raise a ton of money (how is THAT good for an elections director) and get lots of partisan support. It's just bad all over."
Why don't we just forget about the prez, gov, and any other guv election and let YOU decide Bill.....
Where's the love???? Where is the Freedom????
The fact that we elect government officials (president, etc.) is just right. They represent us. They make decisions we either like or don't like. We as voters can kick them out of office if we don't like them. BUT, we, as voters, know what it takes in a person for a president is doing a good job -- interpreting the qualifications fo the person running and evaluating. Same for governor. Or senator, representative, city council member or
The fact that this initiative calls us to elect a person to run a job -- where the ability for the public to determine if they could do a good job is the same as our ability to determine if judges do good jobs -- which is extremely low.
Clearly, this is a move backwards and feeding special interests but not the population as a whole. Vote NO.
Posted by: Bill Anderson on August 23, 2007 04:53 AMI definitely didn't want to go there, but what choice do you offer?
Posted by: swatter on August 23, 2007 07:00 AMI'm with swatter....
There is no other choice when you are dealing with a corrupt son-of-a-bitch like Sims than to totally revamp the system. Sadly, that means an ELECTED Election Director.