The Seattle Times reports on yet another fiasco at King County Elections.
Sherril Huff proposed spending $345,000 on VoteHere mail ballot tracking software, but neglected to tell the Council that VoteHere has gone out of business and the product is essentially unsupported. (Kudos to Jason Osgood for reporting this in public comment at yesterday's Council hearing).
After the council vote, Councilmember Bob Ferguson, D-Seattle, dressed down Huff, saying, "As policymakers, we have to have all information in front of us. I think you misjudged badly on that."Poor judgment at King County Elections? I'm shocked. But Ferguson is to blame. When Ferguson refused to allow the voters to elect an elections director for 2008, he cited his desire to have "stability" in the elections office. Huff's poor judgment is precisely the stability that Ferguson fought for.
Anything that goes wrong now at our stabilized Elections office is ultimately Ferguson's fault.
Oh, and the Pitney-Bowes ballot tracking software the Council approved is apparently vaporware.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 18, 2007 09:12 AM | Email ThisIf Initiative 25 passes, the first ordinance I will introduce will be to amend Section 3 of I-25, which is the part that provides for the February election with no primary. If I-25 is approved, Section 1 will place the charter amendment on the ballot to create an elections director. Section 3, on the other hand, would not be placed on the ballot again, since it is merely an ordinance setting the initial election date for this position, instead of language that would go into the county charter.
The King County Charter allows initiatives to be amended by 6 council members within the first two years after their adoption. I think at least five other council members will want to do away with the February special election, and elect the office in November instead (with a primary to boot). If 6 council members vote to change this, then the initial election would be in November 2009, instead of February 2009.
Once we correct this dangerous February election provision in Section 3 of I-25, I will enthusiastically support adoption of the charter amendment itself in the November 2008 election. And the people will be able to elect an Elections Director in November 2009. This would be a partial two year initial term, which would expire on December 31, 2011, and then be elected for a regular four year term in 2011, 2015 and subsequent elections.
Posted by: Richard Pope on September 18, 2007 10:24 AMHow big is the company? How many employees? What is its financial condition? What Washington counties does it currently serve?
Did the council ask and get answers to these and similar questions before committing to this path?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on September 18, 2007 10:28 AM"Once we correct this dangerous February election provision in Section 3 of I-25.."
Yet, February special elections are fine for substantial tax increases such as school levies, hospital districts, libraries, and fire districts.
If less than 25% turnout is "dangerous", why wouldn't it be "dangerous" for any election?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on September 18, 2007 10:51 AMI actually agree with you on this one. Ideally, these tax levy elections should be in the August primary or November general election. Preferably in November.
But the law allows them in February. Since the state doesn't fund basic education so well, and local tax levies have to be approved by the voters, a school district views the tax levy as too important to have rejected. If the initial proposal rejected in February, they can present a stripped down version a couple of months later as a desperation measure.
And timing is important, especially under the state constitutional provisions. A levy vote in February 2008 will give tax revenues starting in the 2009 calendar year -- as will a levy vote in August 2008 or November 2008 for that matter.
But schools use the "school year" of course -- basically September 2008 to June 2009. If the levy isn't approved, they have to cut the planned budget drastically, since the January 2009 (actually due on April 30, 2009 and October 31, 2009) and later property tax collections will not materialize.
So they need levies approved in February 2008 (or a second choice desperation levy approved in April 2008 or so), in order to make sure they have the funds to budget. Contracts need to be signed in the late winter or early spring, for teachers and other staff to work the following school year.
Unfortunately, the state constitution does not allow a November 2007 vote on a tax levy that will start being collected in 2009. You have to vote on that tax levy sometime during the 2008 calendar year.
One important distinction between school tax levies and I-25: school tax levies require a 60% vote in order to pass. Even if the constitution is amended, they will still require 50% plus one -- unlike the plurality without runoff initial election director special election proposed by I-25.
Posted by: Richard Pope on September 18, 2007 11:33 AMI think it is a non-starter on the February 2008 election. Only a Democrat would be afraid of such a vote; therein lies the comments above.
Posted by: swatter on September 18, 2007 11:56 AMYou make an implicit assumption that having an elected elections officer in place would result in better judgment in the process.
Given your rants about the quality of performance by our elected judges, I feel that this assumption is hardly valid -- since the electorate electing elections directors is akin to electing judges (how the heck does joe and jane voter know whom to pick? they don't! they pick the best financed and polished campaigners -- hardly a recipe for quality in the job).
Posted by: Bill Anderson on September 18, 2007 12:15 PMIf that was the concern of the council, they had adequate time to do the right thing. Since the council refused to act, they have no one to blame but themselves.
A February election is FAR less dangerous than status quo.
Posted by: drw on September 18, 2007 12:35 PMPeople who make your argument are missing a key point. The elections function is much more visible to the community than most judges are. If there is incompetence or dishonesty, it will become apparent and the voters can do something about it. Under the current system, the only way voters can remove the elections director is to remove the county executive. When was the last time that happened? When the person counting the votes is only accountable to the elected politician that appointed him/her, is it any wonder that the voters can't get rid of either one? It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes. In this county, that's effectively the county executive. That's why Sims is fighting this so hard. It just might jeopardize his job-for-as-long-as-he-wants-it.
Posted by: deedub on September 18, 2007 12:51 PMAre you saying that voting for any public official will almost always come up with people not worthy of the position?
Are you saying that the other 38 elected auditors in the state are incompetent dolts, elected by the ill-informed?
Why are you so against this particular position being an elected office? If you are so afraid that the King County electorate are too stupid to make an informed choice for this position, why would you trust that same electorate to choose the Executive, the Sheriff, Port Commissioners, Council members, Governors, Senators, Congress persons, etc.? Why would you trust the same electorate to vote on tax proposals?
Why, when it comes to a vote for an elections director, would all those that vote for all of these other things be suddenly too stupid and uninformed?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on September 18, 2007 01:28 PMFerguson ought to be ashamed & do a public mea culpa on his prior support for Huff & so-called "stability". Stability my ass!
This woman's incompetence is well-documented. This is merely another chapter.
What did the other Councilor's say????
No one complained except Ferguson???
Perhaps Huff was right in thinking the Council is too stupid to understand this!!! How could anyone just sit there & listen to this without speaking up??
Ferguson ought to be ashamed & do a public mea culpa on his prior support for Huff & so-called "stability". Stability my ass!
This woman's incompetence is well-documented. This is merely another chapter.
What did the other Councilor's say????
No one complained except Ferguson???
Perhaps Huff was right in thinking the Council is too stupid to understand this!!! How could anyone just sit there & listen to this without speaking up??
Ferguson ought to be ashamed & do a public mea culpa on his prior support for Huff & so-called "stability". Stability my ass!
This woman's incompetence is well-documented. This is merely another chapter.
What did the other Councilor's say????
No one complained except Ferguson???
Perhaps Huff was right in thinking the Council is too stupid to understand this!!! How could anyone just sit there & listen to this without speaking up??
Don't mind Bill, he has made it his lifes work to disagree with almost everything here on SP. Why do you still come here Bill? If you stayed over at HA or Postman you could probably get some Government Cheese to go with your whine. That's where the majority of the Government employees hang out.
Posted by: Huh? on September 18, 2007 02:30 PM@11 - I believe in represenatitive democracy...the basis for our republic. Those positions you list are there to represent the people in their functions. The elections director is there to run an election well. That's an operational thing. I want the best people in the job..not the one with the biggest backers and slickest campaigns.
@15 -- Convenient argument, but you ignore the fact my previous three postings were all supporting Stefan's positions - and on HA, I've taken Goldy to task for his half-truth partisanthip as well. Like most partisans (on the left and the right), you ignore facts that don't conviently match your prejudiced beliefs. That's why folks need to call you out when you make such incorrect statements.
Posted by: BIll Andreson on September 18, 2007 02:40 PMI only had to go back to the September 12th posting you made at 5:02 p.m. where you said "Stefan and Goldy both of whom all too regularly create purposely false impressions using bits of data." Supportive right? Keep digging.
Posted by: Huh? on September 18, 2007 03:40 PMBill A., I would say that our ability to have free, clean, honest elections is the cornerstone of our form of government. If it doesn't function well, the rest won't matter.
Who is responsible for representing the people's interest in elections? In King County, the responsibility fell to the KC Executive and his response was lackluster, causing the affected citizens to create I-25. I see no problem with it. Seems to be just fine in the other counties.
In 38 of 39 Washington counties, an elected representative is responsible. The elected representatives of those 38 counties represent over 60% of the voters in this state. Why do you think the other 30%+ voters of King County do not deserve a direct representative in the oversight and running of the election process?
You have argued that special interests would put forward candidates that have no experience or special knowledge that qualifies them for the office. Don't we always have that potential problem with elected officials? What makes this one so different?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on September 18, 2007 04:09 PMGet rid of trashy systems based on Access databases that can be manipulated by Ron Sims.
Posted by: John Bailo on September 18, 2007 07:45 PMwhat would happen if there were NO special elections, NO tax proposals in primaries and at least some public funding for NO votes on tax propsals ??
Would our city, state and county fall apart?
I think the average citizen would be in a much better mood after an election. And I'll bet the roads and schools would survive just fine.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on September 18, 2007 08:10 PMVAPORWARE to run elections in one of the most software-dominant counties in the United States?
Where the hell is the mainstream press on this?
C'mon Jean Enersen, Dennis Bounds, Kathy Gertzen, Dan Lewis, Steve Raible, and the rest of you who are supposedly honest brokers of information, quit selling out to this state's power structure and DO YOUR DAMN JOB.
Posted by: bigdawg on September 19, 2007 08:35 AMVAPORWARE to run elections in one of the most software-dominant counties in the United States?
Where the hell is the mainstream press on this?
C'mon Jean Enersen, Dennis Bounds, Kathy Gertzen, Dan Lewis, Steve Raible, and the rest of you who are supposedly honest brokers of information, quit selling out to this state's power structure and DO YOUR DAMN JOB.
Posted by: bigdawg on September 19, 2007 08:37 AM