October 08, 2007
Easy Ballot Choices

On down the ballot in Snohomish County, two races offer an easy decision. In the races for Treasurer and Clerk there is a choice between two long-time elected officials trying to play a too-cute-by-half trick of musical offices.

In the former race, Jerry Lindsey is running for Treasurer as a skilled subordinate while County Councilman Kirke Sievers is trying to jump from offices since he's term-limited out of his current position. Same story in the latter contest, where able Deputy Clerk Sonya Kraski is running against term-limited County Treasurer Bob Dantini.

The Everett Herald makes a similar such argument in their endorsements for these two races, that Lindsey and Kraski are the easy choices. But let's be more direct about the term-limit issue. Whether Sievers or Dantini like it or not, voters approved a county charter that includes term limits. Their actions to toy with the will of the voters speaks ill of them.

Because of a number of variables, including that all county-wide offices and two Council seats appear on the ballot the same year there are a host of seats term-limited this year. County Clerk Pam Daniels is retiring. County Councilman Gary Nelson has the class to retire from his office as well after a long, distinguished career in public service. County Auditor Bob Terwilliger would have been term-limited out but parachuted into the position of Superior Court Administrator, leaving the Auditor's position open this year.

Sievers and Dantini could have shown the respect for the citizens of Snohomish County by respecting the charter's term limits. Instead, they're seeking new offices for which they are unqualified, for the transparent reason of personal job security. If voters are left remarkably unimpressed by this self-serving gambit, they should be.

Posted by Eric Earling at October 08, 2007 05:11 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Eric,

Sievers IS respecting our county charter. The county charter limits service to three CONSECUTIVE terms.

Sievers is clearly the most qualified for this position. I'd say running the Treasurer's office for three terms previously, plus his knowledge of county gov from three terms on the council make Kirke Sievers the most qualified. Kirke Sievers still has a lot to offer this county and I'm glad to see him still willing to serve. My vote is with Sievers and Kraski.

Posted by: Mike on October 8, 2007 09:47 PM
2. Kraski is not qualified to hold the position of clerk. Why in the hell Koster endorsed her I will never know. Yes, she is a manager in the office, but she is not qualified to lead the other people in the department.

Dantini is not qualified either, but at least he will hire subordinates who know how to run the show. It would be better if he were elected and kept his current deputy (who Sonya will most likely fire--she seems to have a personality conflict with her).

Sievers is sensible and moderate, and superiorly qualified to serve as the Treasurer. You can teach an old dog new tricks, and he has proven to be a quick and intelligent voice on the council.

And this is coming from a stalwart Republican.

I am voting for DANTINI AND SIEVERS.

Posted by: GCA on October 8, 2007 10:09 PM
3. GCA: did you vote for Ron Ledford, then? I did, as I agree with you, the other two are not very qualified. Especially compared to Ledford, who was eminently qualified.

I wish Ledford had won, but since he didn't, I'll vote for the only candidate remaining who actually knows something about the office they are running for.

I don't know much about Sievers or Lindsey. Like Eric, I am not pleased about career electeds hopping from one post to the next, but I don't find that it disrespects the charter: it does not limit a person endlessly jumping from one position to the next, and I see nothing that makes me think that the people wanted that, or that this is exploitation of any loophole. So while I don't particularly like it, I don't see any problem with it in terms of the charter.

In the end, I just want the best person for the job. I am undecided on Treasurer, and I have been leaning strongly toward Kraski for Clerk.

Posted by: pudge on October 9, 2007 12:45 AM
4. Sievers is one of the only Democrats I will gladly vote for. On a 3-2 Democratic council, he has often been the vote for reason- that is, a vote for the Rs.

But, my word, Eric, not qualified? The guy was treasurer before. He is taking over for a guy someone says hardly ever showed up.

And this guy has dedicated his life for government service. After the last election, he said his council position was going to be his last because he wanted to retire. But, now he wants to keep working and helping. You just gotta give this old soldier a vote; he is a throwback to the Jackson Democrats.

Posted by: swatter on October 9, 2007 06:47 AM
5. As for the Couty Clerk position. I agree with the comments about Kraski. She is not qualified to run anything, Ron ledford was the logical choice but did not get out of the gate. Dantini should back off and fade away!

Here is my two cents over the issue of treaurer. Sievers needs to back off and go into the private sector and see what its like in the real world.

Posted by: Gary on October 9, 2007 02:50 PM
6. Gary, isn't the guy, like 60 or older? 8 years ago- fine, but now? Let him continue in public service.

As for County Clerk, my vote for Ledford was based entirely on the discussion here. But here, there were some strong proponents for Kraski and almost none for Dantini. Do I take your thoughts Gary or should I vote Dantini?

Posted by: swatter on October 9, 2007 03:01 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?