Majority Rules Blog

Eight Seattle City Council Members Sign Letter Urging Seattle School Board to Look at Alternative Design for Ingraham High School

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Tue, 13 May 2008 18:10:00 +0000

Eight of the Nine Seattle City Council Members yesterday signed a letter urging the Seattle School Board to look at alternative designs to cutting down over 80 trees on the west side of Ingraham High School. Ingraham High School is currently considering adding an addition to the west side of the high school to replace a number of old portables that will be taken down.

One alternative site is on the north side of the high school and would not require that any large trees be cut down. It is currently listed as a possible site for a future addition to the high school as part of the school’s long range plans – so it is certainly a viable alternative.

Below is the e-mail sent out by the eight Seattle City Council members as well as some links to previous coverage of this issue and a link to the Seattle Public Schools website link on the Ingraham High School Construction Project. Last Friday the Seattle Public School’s issued a Revised Checklist and (another) Determination of Nonsignificance for the Project.

While the Seattle School District added some more mitigation in the form of planting more trees on the campus, they still do not do a biomass or CO2 fixation analysis that determines how many small trees are needed to compensate for even one large 50 year old, 100 foot tall Douglas fir tree.

With 50 plus years of growth the majority of the Douglas fir and western red cedar trees proposed to be cut down are well on their way to being trees of significance in Seattle. Somewhere the continued cutting down of large trees in Seattle has to stop. The tree cover in Seattle in 1972 was listed as 40%. Last year it was 18%.

From: Richard Conlin
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 3:36 PM

To: cheryl.chow@seattleschools.org
; harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
; mary.bass@seattleschools.org
; michael.debell@seattleschools.org
; peter.maier@seattleschools.org
; sherry.carr@seattleschools.org
; steve.sungquist@seattleschools.org

Subject: Ingraham H.S. Plans for Expansion

May 12, 2008

Seattle Public Schools
School Board
PO Box 34165, MS 11-010
Seattle WA 98124-1165

Dear Board Members,

As members of the City Council, we are writing to request that the School Board take a closer look at plans to expand Ingraham High School. We recognize that the authority to determine a design rests with the School District and School Board, but we have concerns about the proposed plan. We therefore want to communicate those concerns and ask that you consider them as you move forward with this important project.

Our primary uneasiness rests with the loss of most, if not all, of the sixty plus Douglas Firs and some twenty-two Madrona trees that we understand will be cut down under the proposed design. We would like to encourage you to consider alternative designs that might preserve these important assets.

It is important that we maintain and increase our tree canopy, not only to honor the esthetic that our residents know and love, but in order to carry out our responsibility to prevent global warming and to maintain a healthy environment. Stands of mature trees are the lungs of our ecosystem; they provide important benefits to our drainage systems and creeks. In 2007 the City launched an Urban Forest Management Policy to preserve and maintain our tree canopy. Unfortunately, we are rapidly running out of available green space; and, despite our commitment to maintaining the urban forest, trees like those on your property too often are cut.

The loss of mature Madrona and Douglas firs cannot adequately be compensated for by planting young trees. As a City that recognizes its responsibility to future generations, and as a city that has made urban density a goal, we must not lose the opportunities we have to keep existing natural areas.

The City Council has received a significant number of emails and calls opposing the removal of these trees. We believe that it is quite possible that an alternative exists which would give the School District what it needs without losing a valued feature of the community and a precious environmental resource to the City.
We offer any assistance that we could give to work with you to find the right answer for the School District and the community. We sincerely hope that you will take our concerns into consideration.

Sincerely,

Council President Richard Conlin
Councilmember Tim Burgess
Councilmember Sally J. Clark
Councilmember Jan Drago
Councilmember Jean Godden
Councilmember Bruce Harrell
Councilmember Nick Licata
Councilmember Tom Rasmussen

Council President Richard Conlin
Seattle City Hall
600 Fourth Avenue, Floor 2
PO Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

(206) 684-8805

Additional information by Majority Rules Blog for this post::

Ingraham High School Renovation, Demolition and New Construction Project – Seattle Public Schools

http://www.king5.com/video/index.html?nvid=234572 – King TV Video

Neighbors near Ingraham High School Fight to Save Evergreens – Seattle Times

A Growing Contradiction at Ingraham High – Seattle PI

Correcting the Public Record on Ingraham High School – Majority Rules Blog

Seattle School Board Wins Grinch Award – Majority Rules Blog

Neighbors Urge Seattle School Board to Redesign Ingraham High School Project – Majority Rules Blog

King Co Executive Ron Sims, Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen Sign Petition to Save the Trees – Majority Rules Blog

Seattle School District Says Cutting Down 62 Evergreen Trees in City is Not Significant – Majority Rules Blog

Correcting the Public Record on Ingraham High School

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:12:00 +0000

Last Friday I attended the BEX (Building Excellence) Programs Oversight Committee that is supposedly helping oversee the latest construction projects being done by the Seattle Public Schools. I went to correct errors in their meeting notes from a previous meeting. I was graciously given an opportunity to present my concern regarding the lack of public involvement in siting and designing the Ingraham High School Construction Project that is moving ahead to cut down 62 large Douglas Fir and western red cedar trees, most over 50 years old and many over 100 feet tall, as well as up to 22 madrone trees

While the committee was responsive to realizing that there was a lack of public notification and involvement on the front end, their response seemed to center on the fact that they needed to do a better job in the future addressing public involvement and environmental concerns. The present situation seems to be a classic group think process. No one seems to want to be the one to say maybe they need to look at alternative designs because that would stop the forward momentum and no one wants to be the one to say now that maybe they messed up and they should step back and site the project on an alternative site.

It doesn't matter that it is now obvious that no alternative designs or sites were seriously considered. In fact at the August 27, 2007 Ingraham High School Design Committee meeting #2, the recently published minutes have the statement that "Building Scheme A with new addition at the west end is preferred."

When I recently asked to see any blueprints or budgets or even serious sketches of alternative designs to the west addition, I was told that none were available. A formal request for alternative designs and budgets to the Legal Department of the Seattle School District brought the response that none exist.

Ironically the guy dealing with the environmental review process for the Seattle School District is Ron English who reminded me recently that he was involved in defending WPPSS's (Washington Public Power Supply System) building its 5 ill fated nuclear power plants many years ago. Back in 1981 when he was an attorney for WPPSS, I was the sponsor of Initiative 394 to require that there be a public vote before they could issue more public bonds to be paid for by ratepayers to continue building the projects. The initiative required for the first time that WPPSS do cost effectiveness studies on the projects to determine whether or not there were cheaper alternatives to generating energy than building all 5 plants. This was something WPPSS never did before starting to build its 5 nuclear power plants.

In some ways the Seattle School District, while much more benign than WPPSS, has approached building the new addition to Ingraham High School in the same secretive way WPPSS went about building its nuclear power plants. The Seattle School District did a non public design review process. It started last year with the Ingraham High School Principal selecting a few teachers and a couple of parents to meet with consultants and Seattle School Administration people to sit on a school design team that was involved in selecting a site and design for the new project. The design team did not hold public meetings or seek public input. It was only in March, 2008 long after the meetings were held that brief notes of the minutes were posted on the school's website. The meetings started back in July of 2007.

Neighbors, other community members and concerned citizens were not given a chance to give input on the project or even follow its progress until after the site was chosen and the architectural firm had drawn up the blueprints. When neighbors first heard what was happening - that the school design team, consultants and Seattle School District Administrators had made their decision - they were basically told it was too late to look at any alternative designs or question the decision of the in-house committee. The first public neighborhood meeting was on March 18, 2008 the day before comments were due on the Environmental Checklist that was used to reach a Determination of Non-significance by the School District's in house environmental Lawyer, Ron English.

The parallels with WPPSS are obvious to me- they did not seriously look at alternatives, either in terms of environmental costs or for comparison of building costs. They only seriously considered one site, the same as WPPSS only considered building nuclear plants. WPPSS treated its ratepayers the same way as the School District did in this process - WPPSS allowed them the opportunity to respond after the meeting was over and the Board had taken their votes on agenda items. It was obvious that the public's opinion did not matter.

Being given an opportunity by the Seattle School District to make comments after the site and design decision is made allows for only token public involvement. We repeatedly hear the argument that we've already spent money to come up with a design and we don't want to waste it by looking at alternatives now. WPPSS made the same kind of argument, as they continued to issue more and more bonds for what eventually became the largest municipal bond default in US history. Continuing to spend more money does not make the original decision any more right. Being unwilling to re-evaluate projects as to their feasibility and desirability as concerns arise is a sign of rigidity and a shirking of public responsibility. Saying we will do better next time does not make it right this time.

The following is the letter I submitted to the BEX committee. Originally it by some committee members was suggested to add the letter to the meeting minutes but the representative from the UW sitting on the committee thought that was going too far since I was advocating a position (they aren't?) and got the committee to agree to only amend the minutes. Heaven forbid if the public read what I had to say at a public meeting of a committee of the Seattle Public Schools. Anyway here's the letter:

Correction needed to Meeting Notes
of March 14, 2008 BEX Programs Oversight Committee

Under Project Updates for Ingraham High School it says “Numerous community meetings were held.” This is not true. No community meetings had been held to this point. The first community meeting anyone heard of was a March 18, 2008 open house and it was poorly attended because of a messed up mail program that sent a few people 29 copies each of the meeting notice and the rest of the neighbors got no notice, including those right across the street from the proposed construction site. A second and final meeting was held April 24, 2008. These were all after a design and site had already been picked without community involvement.

At the April 24th meeting four sites were noted on a map, on the north, east, south and west side of the school. This was the first time neighbors and others in the community heard any discussion of other sites besides a north site mentioned in the geophysical report and dismissal of the north site when neighbors asked why it was not being considered. Besides the site in the west grove of trees, the site on the east side was in a second grove of trees, while the south site was where the tennis courts are and the north site is actually on a grassy lawn that does not require any large trees to be cut down.. So to say that “even more trees would have to be removed if another location had been selected” is also factually wrong.

It is important to note that over 700 citizens have signed a petition asking that the school district build on an alternative site like on the North side of the school that does not require destroying 62+ fifty year old 100 foot tall Douglas fir and western red cedar trees, as well as up to 22 madrone trees. The tree cover in Seattle was listed as 40% in 1972 and last year was 18%. The Douglas fir madrone forest area on the west side of Ingraham is becoming rare in the city and destroying over half the forest would be a loss for Seattle and the school district that is not necessary.

What is strange here is that the North site is actually discussed as a building site for Ingraham in its long range plans. The community and neighbors are upset that they were excluded from the process and are still viewed as only a nuisance. Yet the public that was given no chance to be meaningfully involved in a timely fashion are the ones who will be paying off the bonds for the projects.

Groups like the Haller Lake Community Club, the Seattle Community Council Federation and the 46th District Democrats have all taken positions questioning the lack of community involvement, opposing cutting down over half the forest area and supporting an alternative design. Signers of the Save the Trees petition included King County Executive Ron Sims, Washington State Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen and State Representatives Mary Lou Dickerson and Phyllis Kenney.

Support is strong for preserving the trees and the public does not understand why the Seattle School District seems to think they can destroy so many trees and think it is not significant or that they did not feel the need to consult with neighbors and others before going ahead with a design that significantly destroys so much of a unique urban forest, significantly altering both a school campus and the neighborhood.

The Seattle School District needs to step back and give an alternative design serious consideration or it stands to lose serious credibility as a responsible member of the larger community. Building on the current proposed site will destroy many trees that have been growing for over 50 years and that given time will be exceptional trees, Just as educating students takes time, trees do not reach maturity in just a few years. And serious questions exist as to the viability of the remaining trees because of possible severe root damage and changed wind dynamics at the site.

The Seattle School District has an opportunity to step back, take a second look and act in a more environmentally responsible way. It is not easy to do that but it would set a great example for Seattle students to see the Seattle Public Schools change course and adapt to changing times, needs and circumstances and put a greater emphasis on preserving our natural habitat in which we live. It is a great lesson to impart to our future leaders – that it is possible to change course and be more environmentally conscious and responsible.

Steve Zemke
Save the Trees
2131 N 132nd St
Seattle, WA 98133
www.MajorityRules.org/blog

dated Friday, May 9, 2008

View KING 5 News Coverage of Save the Trees

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Thu, 08 May 2008 06:02:00 +0000

Efforts continue to save 62 old Douglas fir and western red cedar trees at Ingraham High School in North Seattle. The trees are in a grove of about 120 trees on the west side of the high school.

The Seattle School District decided to design a new classroom addition to replace old portables on the campus without involving neighbors or others in the community. Instead Ingraham High School Principal Martin Floe selected an in house group of administrators and teachers and other school affiliated people to come up with a design. No effort was made to reach out to neighbors or the local Haller Lake Community Club to let them know the design process was going on, to ask if anyone wanted to be involved or give input from the neighborhood.

It turns out that they never priced out or looked at any other designs besides the site the architect who designed the school in 1959 suggested in 1959. Since then a large grove of 120 some trees, including 100 foot tall Douglas fir, western red cedar and madrone trees have thrived in the area and created a unique park like setting on the west side of the school.

Back on Arbor Day last month King 5 TV did a segment on the controversy. You can view it by going to KING 5 VIDEO.

Since the session aired the Seattle School District has withdrawn their original determination of non-significance and have completed a second draft of the Environmental Checklist. They will soon issue a revised draft for comment and this will represent another opportunity for neighbors and Seattle residents to question the need to cut down some 62 large Douglas fir and western red cedar trees when an alternative site exists on the North side of the school to build the new classrooms without cutting down any trees.

You can help to stop the destruction of these trees by sending an e-mail to the Seattle School Board members telling them you oppose cutting down the trees and that they should come up with an alternative design. Our tax dollars pay for the Seattle Public Schools. We have every right to demand that they spend them in an environmentally sound way and do it in a manner than protects our urban forested habitat.

In the last 30 years we have lost some 50% of our tree canopy in the city. It is absurd to keep cutting it. And the Seattle School District and Seattle School Board have a viable alternative to cutting the trees down. The Seattle School District actually shows the North site as available for possible future expansion. What a terrible lesson the Seattle School District is giving to our students.

McCain and Clinton Pandering to Voters

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Fri, 02 May 2008 04:54:00 +0000

Give Barack Obama credit for the straight talk, not John McCain or Hillary Clinton. Obama has refused to climb aboard the crazy train of his opponents in both parties suggesting that cutting the Federal tax on gasoline this summer makes sense. It doesn't.

Gasoline usage is price sensitive. Cutting the cost for the summer by suspending the Federal tax of 18.4 cents will not lower the price because the same fixed amount will be available and oil companies will merely raise the price to take advantage of customer demand. Any decrease in prices will be very short term.

The oil companies have no qualms about raising prices. They continue to rake in record profits at the expense of American car and truck users. Republicans in Congress, and President Bush with his threatened veto power, continue to support the oil companies making record profits at the expense of the American economy and American consumers.

And the bulk of the profits raked in don't even go for producing more oil or alternative energy. For example, as Yahoo.news reports:

"Exxon posted record earnings of $40.6 billion in 2007, with revenue higher than the gross domestic profit of Turkey, the world's 17th-largest economy....
The company has been criticized by some analysts and investors for laying back on capital spending while going full bore on share buybacks.
Exxon spent $31.8 billion to buy back shares in 2007 while shelling out $20.9 billion for capital expenditures."

Exxon Mobil reported today that they raked in another $10.89 billion in first quarter profits this year.

So American consumers are shelling out their cash so that companies like Exxon can but back their stock. It's absurd. At least Hillary Clinton proposes that the oil companies be hit with an excess profits tax to pay for her proposed summer tax cut. John McCain does not even support that and says he would cut elsewhere.

Democrats tried to pass legislation to end special subsidies to oil companies but Republicans held fast and stopped legislation passing. Democrats wanted the subsidies to go for funding alternative energy programs like wind and solar, which would help to reduce global warming impacts from carbon fuels. Instead we are left with no approval of existing incentives for solar and wind energy which expire at the end of this year.

And where was John McCain when votes were taking place to pass an energy policy to reduce dependence on carbon fuels and reduce global warming. AWOL - see excellent article by Grist on McCain's missed votes in Congress, rightly pointing out McCain's professed concern about climate change action is more hot air than anything else.

see also
Dumb as we Wanna Be - New York Times
The Gas-Guzzler Gambit - New York Times editorial
Summer Fuel-ishness - Seattle Times editorial
Clinton Gas Tax Proposal Criticized - Washington Post

Seattle School Board Wins Grinch Award

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:54:00 +0000

"Hate those trees, sure do," said the Grinch. Reverting back to his old form and stance, the Grinch announced yesterday that he is expanding his franchise of celebrations that we can do away with. Earth Day is one of those.

And in the spirit of those who agree with him, the Grinch awarded an honorary franchise membership to Seattle Public Schools for their dogged efforts to clearcut trees from their school campuses.

Trees are a bad influence on kids said the Grinch. Especially large old trees noted the Grinch. So the Seattle Public School's efforts to remove 62 large old evergreen trees from the west side of the Ingraham High School campus in North Seattle got the Grinch's attention.

Brilliant strategy said the Grinch. Seek public money to replace grimy moldy old portables and promise new classrooms to renovate and upgrade the campus. The public supports that. But don't tell the public paying the bill that the plan is to build the new classrooms smack in the middle of one of the few large groves of old Douglas fir, Western Red Cedar and madrone trees left in Seattle. Some of these trees are now 50 years old and over 100 feet tall.

The Grinch praised Seattle Public Schools for excluding members of the public from participating in the design process. "Neighbors and other members of the public only ask embarassing questions and waste your time," said the Grinch.

Part of the strategy to decrease student support for Earth Day celebrations the Grinch noted was the consideration by Seattle Public Schools to also cut down another grove of trees on the east side of the campus by the Helene Madison Pool. In the tree report filed with the City of Seattle dated Oct 22, 2007, the Master Plan circled this grove of trees and wrote in large letters "POTENTIAL EAST PARKING EXPANSION" - 50 spaces.

"Brilliant!" said the Grinch. "The more we work to encourage students to drive to school by creating more parking spaces, the less environmental habitat there is for them to spend time in marveling and celebrating their natural environment."

The Grinch said that while the Seattle School District dropped the proposal in their current plan, they'll always be more chances to cut down the trees in the future. "And for now you can tell the public that you're not going to cut down these trees and look like environmental heroes while you move forward to decimate the grove on the west side," he gloated.

The Grinch noted that the trees in the east grove remain a real threat because teachers at Ingraham High School have actually used this area for environmental learning. "Preserving trees and native natural areas are a continuing threat to our efforts to do away with celebrating Earth Day," said the Grinch.

The Grinch praised the inaction of the Seattle School Board in responding to strong public concern about cutting down the trees. Obviously their continuing to move forward with building the addition as planned is encouraging noted the Grinch. To seriously listen to the taxpayers paying for the school renovation would be a mistake he said. Just stop up your ears he suggested, urging them not to give in to public demands to come up with an alternative design that would save the trees on the west side of the school.

The Grinch urged the Seattle School Board to remove their e-mail contact information from their website at www.seattleschools.org/area/board. "If members of the public get hold of this information, who knows how many might try to contact you, urging you to come up with a new design for the classroom addition that doesn't require cutting down the 62 large Douglas fir and western Red Cedar trees on the west side of the campus."

"And for God's sake don't tell them about the open grassy lawn on the north side of the school where you could build the new classrooms and not have to cut down any large trees." yelled the Grinch.

The Grinch was last seen dancing a jig and then running away, yelling at the top of his voice, "Cut down those trees now!" Again and again.

Neighbors Urge Seattle School Board to Redesign Ingraham H.S. Project

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:13:00 +0000

To: Seattle School Board
Public testimony by Steve Zemke

of Save the Trees!
Re: Ingraham High School Renovation
April 9, 2008

We am here tonight to urge the Seattle School Board to step back from its in house proposal to add new classrooms onto the west side of Ingraham High School that requires the destruction of 66 large Douglas Fir and western Red Cedar trees. The process has proceeded to the design stage and you are considering design modifications tonight to a building addition that did not undergo any public hearings or community input.

We think it is a flawed process that is in fact offending the neighborhood and the taxpayers in the city that voted to provide the $20 million dollars to add new classrooms to replace the portables. If the public had been told upfront before they voted on the bond issue what you intended to do, we don’t believe you ever would have gotten the bonds approved.

And now citizens of Seattle and taxpayers who voted to pay for the new classrooms are outraged. They are incredulous. They are in disbelief. You have lost credibility in the eyes of the public. They can’t believe you are proposing to cut down 100 foot tall trees that are 40 to 50 years old when alternative sites exist to build the new classrooms. In particular there is a large open area on the north side of the school where an addition can be built with a courtyard and probably more lighting available to the classrooms than the proposed addition.

Cutting down 2/3 of the grove of trees goes against what Mayor Nickels is asking the city to do – preserve existing trees and add significantly more new trees to re-green the city. It goes against what the State Legislature just passed in the urban forestry bill which called for preserving existing trees and planting more trees.

While no budget figures have been made available to the public and we’ve asked for the budget and for copies of alternatives that were looked at and their costs and have not gotten them, the school district has quoted to the media a figure of $1 million dollars more to move the building to the north side. For 66 trees that means you have assigned them a value of $15,000 per tree.

Meanwhile the City of Seattle is paying $9 million for 3 ½ acres to buy the North park and ride lot at Northgate and make it a park. They paid $3 million to buy a 39,000 sq foot lot in Ballard for a Park. Have you ever thought of selling the trees to the City of Seattle? They seem to be willing to pay a lot for asphalt parking lots for parks and here you have a mature forested area you’re gung ho to cut down.

Tonight we're delivering to you signed petitions collected by Ingraham High School neighbors who got other neighbors to sign asking that you develop an alternative design for Ingraham High School that does not require the cutting down of any large old trees in the grove on the west side of the school.

More than 650 citizens and Seattle neighbors signed the petition urging you to save the trees at Ingraham. Signers of the petition include King County Executive Ron Sims; State Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen; and State Representatives Mary Lou Dickerson and Phyllis Kenney.

Other signers include Estella Leopold, Professor Emeritus in Botany at the University of Washington, Joan Thomas, a former President of the Washington Environmental Council, and Marilyn Knight, a former President of the League of Women Voters of Washington. Also signing were 4 Democratic candidates for the State Legislature – Gerald Pollet and Scott White in the 46th LD, John Burbank in the 36th LD and Tina Orwall in the 33rd LD.

We urge that you set an example for the students the public has entrusted to your care for their education by stepping back and showing wise environmental stewardship. Protect the tress at Ingraham High School and don’t cut them down.

Work with the neighborhood and Seattle taxpayers and Mayor Nickels and the Seattle City Council and the state legislature. Pick another site and design a building we can be proud of and that educates all of us in the possibility of living in harmony with our natural environment without destroying it.

Living in harmony with our environment is a priceless lesson. You can set no better example for students than to show we can do better than those in the past have and that we can live in a sustainable healthy urban environment without cutting down our green heritage.

Steve Zemke for
Save the Trees!
2131 N 132nd St
Seattle, WA 98133

King Co. Exec Ron Sims, Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen Sign Petition to Save the Trees!

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 06:22:00 +0000

Efforts to save 62 old Douglas fir and Western Red Cedar trees from being cut down at Ingraham High School are gaining momentum. Neighbors have collected over 650 signatures on a petition urging “Ingraham High School, the Seattle School District, the Seattle School Board and the School Design Team to develop an alternative design for Ingraham High School that protects the 62 large Douglas Fir and Western Cedar trees, currently being proposed to be cut down on the west side of the high school”.

Signers of the petition include King County Executive Ron Sims; State Senators Ed Murray and Ken Jacobsen; and State Representatives Mary Lou Dickerson and Phyllis Kenney.

Other signers include Estella Leopold, Professor Emeritus in Botany at the University of Washington, Joan Thomas, a former President of the Washington Environmental Council, and Marilyn Knight, a former President of the League of Women Voters of Washington.

Also signing were 4 Democratic candidates for the State Legislature – Gerald Pollet and Scott White in the 46th LD, John Burbank in the 36th LD and Tina Orwall in the 33rd LD.

Senator Ed Murray was the prime sponsor in the Senate of the urban forestry bill for Green Cities E2SHB 2844, passed by the state legislature earlier this year that called on cities and counties to inventory existing trees and develop plans to conserve and retain existing trees.

Last week both the Community Council Federation of Seattle and the Haller Lake Community Club voted their support of the petition drive urging the school district to not cut down the trees but look at an alternative site.

The plans by the Seattle School District to cut down what has at latest count increased to 66 Douglas Fir and Western Red Cedar trees, flies smack in the face of the efforts of the Washington State Legislature, as well as a recent order by Mayor Greg Nickels of Seattle, to preserve existing trees in urban areas and overall increase the number of trees in the city.

The grove of trees at Ingraham is a poster child of efforts to save trees in Seattle and the state. If we can’t stop the destruction of over 2/3 of the trees in the grove at Ingraham, then no tree in Seattle is safe.

Neighbors support the effort to renovate Ingraham High School and build new classrooms to replace the old portables being taken down but note that other locations exist on the campus where the classrooms could be built without cutting down any large or old trees. In particular there is a large grassy open space on the north side of the school that could easily accommodate the classrooms.

Copies of the petitions containing over 650 signatures were delivered to the Seattle School Board at their Board meeting on Wednesday, April 9, 2008.

Earlier in the day King TV did an evening news segment on the Save the Trees campaign.

Gregoire Signs Toxic Toys Legislation

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:30:00 +0000

Washington State now has the toughest toxic toy legislation in the country. See Seattle Times: Gregoire signs "toxic toys" bill, making Washington state's standards strictest in the nation.

Washington State takes a leadership role once again. Think Dino Rossi would have signed it?

Governor Gregoire made the right decision in the public interest.

If Obama or Clinton Said That, They'd be Toast

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:30:00 +0000

John McCain continues to get the soft touch by the media. As Frank Rich points out his Sunday New York Times piece entitled "The Republican Resurrection"

... As if to emulate Dick Cheney, who arrived in Baghdad a day behind him, he (McCain) embraced the vice president’s habit of manufacturing false links in the war on terror: Mr. McCain told reporters that Iran is training Al Qaeda operatives and sending them into Iraq.
His Sancho Panza, Joe Lieberman, whispered in his ear that a correction was in order. But this wasn’t a one-time slip, like Gerald Ford’s debate gaffe about Poland in 1976. Mr. McCain has said this repeatedly. Troubling as it is that he conflates Shiite Iran with Sunni terrorists, it’s even more bizarre that he doesn’t acknowledge the identity of Iran’s actual ally in Iraq — the American-sponsored Shiite government led by Nuri al-Maliki. Only two weeks before the Iraqi prime minister welcomed Mr. McCain to Baghdad, he played host to a bubbly state visit by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Whatever Mrs. Clinton’s or Mr. Obama’s inconsistencies about how to wind down the war, they are both models of coherence next to Mr. McCain. He keeps saying the surge is a “success,” but he can’t explain why that success keeps us trapped in Iraq indefinitely. He never says precisely what constitutes that “victory” he keeps seeing around the corner. His repeated declaration that he will only bring home the troops “with honor” is a Vietnam acid flashback recycled as a non sequitur. Our troops have already piled up more than enough honor in their five years of service under horrific circumstances. Meanwhile, as Al Qaeda proliferates in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a survey by Foreign Policy magazine of 3,400 active and retired American officers finds that 88 percent believe that the Iraq war has “stretched the U.S. military dangerously thin.”

So what's the deal with the rest of the media? Not much was said critically of McCain. McCain doesn't deserve special treatment - either he knows what he's talking about or he doesn't. And it appears he doesn't. McCain is a recipe for diasaster. We can't afford a Bush clone in the White House after 8 years of Bush/Cheney.

Seattle School District Says Cutting Down 62 Evergreen Trees in City is Not Significant

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:15:00 +0000

The Seattle School District is proposing cutting down 62 large Douglas Fir and Western Red Cedar trees on the west side of the Ingraham High School Campus in North Seattle. In addition they are proposing adding some 113 new parking spaces to the residential neighborhood, including on street parking.

This action is part of the proposed renovation of Ingraham High School that includes demolishing seven portables and one modular building of 7800 square feet and constructing a 2 story building addition of 14,500 square feet of classrooms on the west side of the existing high school.

Anyone else would likely characterize the cutting down of such a large number of old trees and increasing parking spaces in a residential neighborhood as having a significant environmental impact. Yet the Seattle School District has published a Notice of Determination of Non-Significance in the March edition of the Journal saying that "the proposal does not create any probable significant environmental impacts."

The responsible school official listed for this determination is Ronald J English. English was recently the center of another questionable environmental skirmish in the same Haller Lake residential neighborhood when he was involved with the proposed sale of a Seattle School District building - the former Nellie Goodhue School - located at Meridian Ave N and Roosevelt Way N. The school district initial determination would have opened the residential neighborhood to an onslaught of trucks because of a "determination" that it was zoned for a warehouse. The Haller Lake Community Club sued and the property has now been sold to be converted into 26 single family homes.

A look at the Environmental Checklist prepared by the the URS Corporation of Seattle that the Seattle School District based its decision on, reveals a number of problems that were not adequately addressed. The Environmental Checklist, for example, does not consider any alternative places on campus to construct the new classrooms or look at any other alternative building designs in their evaluation.

The checklist provides no value to the loss of open space or tree canopy as compared to other alternatives. It assigns no value to the loss old growth trees which it minimally characterizes as Douglas Fir and Western Red Cedar. It does not give the age of the trees or the height or the canopy coverage but only says they are 12 to 24 inches in diameter. In reality many of the trees appear to be large mature trees matching the tallest evergreen trees in the neighborhood. I estimate them as 100 feet or more in height.

A person with the design team characterized them in a conversation as mature trees at the end of their life yet they are the same size as other trees in the neighborhood. Douglas fir trees can grow to 48 inches in diameter and cedar even larger. The "ready to die" image is how the logging industries characterizes trees to justify cutting them - is this the school district's philosophy also?

In addition, the proposal does not take into account Mayor Nickels goal for regreening the city over the next three decades -- the planting of 649,000 trees, plus keeping the tree cover we have." as written about in the Seattle PI. The article notes that:

Since the early 1970s, Seattle has lost more than half of its tree canopy as more businesses and people have moved into the city and smaller homes have given way to apartments and megahouses. Invasive ivy and blackberry bushes have smothered and killed native trees.
Nickels is looking to reverse that trend, to keep Seattle from becoming "the city formerly known as emerald." ...

Trees increasingly are being viewed as an asset to urban spaces. They clean pollution from the air and turn a key global warming gas into oxygen. They catch rainfall and slow the flow of contaminated stormwater from roadways into salmon streams....
"The city is increasingly realizing the urban forest is really part of the infrastructure of the city," Nicholas said. "It isn't just about looking pretty."
The mayor's goal is to expand the tree canopy from the current 18 percent to 30 percent over the next 30 years. Canopy is a measure of the land covered in trees, not a count of individual trees.

The current Environmental Checklist does not consider any measure of canopy replacement or any measure of global warming impact equivalency. It does propose adding new trees but most of these appear to be deciduous "street trees" maybe 15 to 20 feet tall at most.

The checklist makes no mention of Mayor Greg Nickels Executive order of Sept 6, 2005 that directs "all City departments to replace every tree that is removed from City-owned land in Seattle with two new trees." One would think that Seattle Public Schools would support this policy also for the school district.

An additional major problem with the Environment Checklist is that it relies on a parking and traffic analysis prepared for URS by Mirai Transportation and Engineering of Kirkland that makes a number of questionable assumptions.

Ingraham High School currently has some 117 parking spaces on campus and has a 50 year agreement with the Seattle Parks Department to use a lot directly east of the school and north of the Helene Madison pool on a shared basis. The school estimates that it uses some 82 of the 165 spaces available in the shared Parks Dept lot.

The Mirai study then makes an assumption that is not borne out by the existing situation. They state that the 50 year "agreement is not assumed to continue and the parking analysis assumes loss of this lot for both daily and special event use. " Yet both a call to the Parks Department and a discussion with Martin Floe, Ingraham's Principal, and also the Project manager for URS, provided no problem with the current use of the Park's Department parking lot or indicated any reason to expect it to end. No other use is planned for the existing parking lot.

But the assumption that it is not available in determining parking needs for Ingraham results in a big impact on the neighborhood, adding some 113 new parking spaces and encouraging more traffic and parking. The only justification seemed to be that the School District somehow couldn't trust the Parks Department or the City to continue the agreement in the future, even though the Athletic Fields at Ingraham are shared with the city and they don't have any problems with that.

Currently peak parking for 1200 students, faculty and staff is 185 cars. At some point the school might add 200 more students but this is not even certain. But the Mirai Parking study suggests that 200 additional students will require some 45 more parking spaces. Seattle is an urban area, yet to calculate the additional cars, Mirai uses something called "the peak trip generation for suburban high schools in the Institute for Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual.

This is almost double the current rate for students at the school. The difference represents some 22 parking spaces. How can you justify using a calculation for suburban schools for an urban school?

The deadline for responding to the Notice of Determination of Non-Significance is 4 PM on March 19, 2008. The DNS and Checklist can be viewed at the School District's website www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities/SchoolProjects/IngrahamLink.xml

Urge that they do a more thorough environmental analysis of their project that assesses the real costs of building in an urban forested area and looks at alternatives to cutting down old growth trees and that also evaluates alternatives and mitigation measures to reduce demand for parking in general at the school rather than adding new parking spaces.

Send comments to:
Ronald J English, Environmental Officer
Seattle School District No 1
PO Box 34165, MS32-151
Seattle, WA 98124
phone: 206-252-0110
fax: 206-252-0110

Seattle Public Schools is also holding a public community meeting on Tuesday March 18, 2008 from 7 PM to 9 PM in the Ingraham School Library to give a presentation of the design team for the renovation.

Eight Washington State Legislators Retiring from House

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 05:39:00 +0000

Washington State House of Representatives Appropriations Chair Helen Sommers leads the list of state legislators retiring this year. Sommers is currently the longest serving State Legislator in Olympia, having served for 36 years in the House.

She has held an iron fist over the budget writing Appropriations Committee for many years, irritating at times various factions in the state. For the last 10 years she has been either the Chair or Co-Chair of the committee. Two years ago she fought and won a high spending primary challenge by Alice Woldt who was backed by the SEIU.

As the Seattle Times reports:

There's already speculation about who will succeed Sommers as chair of the House Appropriations Committee, one of the most influential positions in the Legislature.

Rep. Kelli Linville, D-Bellingham, said she's going for the job. "I think I have as good a shot as anybody. I'm pretty optimistic," she said.

Rep. Hans Dunshee, D-Snohomish, is vice chairman of the committee and often mentioned as a possible successor to Sommers. Dunshee said he's interested in the job but wouldn't say much else.

"We should do this in a way that gives [Sommers] the most grace and dignity," he said. "It seems unseemly to be ripping her name plate off the door already."

Sommers currently represents the 36th LD in Seattle. Two Democratic candidates, aware of rumors of her pending retirement, now confirmed, are charging out of the gate. John Burbank, the executive director of the Economic Opportunity Institute in Seattle is already doorbelling according to an e-mail I received yesterday. The other Democrat running is Reuven Caryle, a former legislative aide.

Reports filed with the Washington Public Disclosure reports that John Burbank has raised $15,161. Reuven M Carlyle filed earlier and has raised $52,810.

Also not running against for the Legislature is Jim McIntire of the 46th L.D. in North Seattle. McIntire is running for Washington State Treasurer. Two Democrats have announced they are running for the McIntire's old vacant seat.

Scott White, former Chair of the 46Th District Democrats, was the first candidate to announce for the seat and has raised some $28,564, with $15,643 still on hand. Gerald Pollet, a lawyer and the Executive Director of the public interest group Heart of America has also announced he is running. As of March 5, 2008 he had raised $2280.

Also stepping down this year are Reps. Bill Eickmeyer, D-Belfair, Mason County; Bill Fromhold, D-Vancouver; Pat Lantz, D-Gig Harbor; Joyce McDonald, R-Puyallup; Lynn Schindler, R-Spokane Valley; and Bob Sump, R-Republic, Ferry County.

Democrat Bill Eickmeyer represented the 35th L.D. Two Republicans and one Democrat are running to replace him. Democrat Daryl Daugs of Belfair will be running in November against either Republican Herb Baze of Shelton or Republican Randy S Neatherlin of Belfair.

No candidates have yet filed with the PDC to run for the 49th LD seat being vacated by Democrat Bill Fromhold of Vancouver.

Democrat Bruce F Dammeier of Puyallup is running for the 25th LD seat being vacated by Republican Joyce McDonald of Puyallup.

Democrat Allister H O'Brien of Montlake Terrace is running for the seat being vacated by Democrat Pat Lantz in the 1st LD.

Republican Lynn Schinder is vacating her 4th LD seat. Two Republicans, Ray G Deonier of Spokane Valley and Matt T Shea are competing for the seat.

Republican Bob Sump of Ferry County is vacating his 7th LD seat. Two Republicans, Peter B Davenport of Harrington and Sue Lani W Madsen of Edwall and Democrat Kelly D White of Kettle Fall are running for the seat.

March 14, 2008 update: Joe Turner at Political Buzz adds a ninth state legislatior retiring - Representative Shay Schual Burke a Democrat from Normandy Park representing the 33rd LD in South King County. Turner notes that Rep Joyce McDonald is leaving the Legislature to run for Pierce County Council and that Rep Fromhold is leaving to take a different job.

March 28, 2008 update: Joe Turner at Political Buzz says Democratic Senator Harriet Spanel of Bellingham has told local Democrats she is not re-running.

Ending Congressional Gridlock

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:45:00 +0000

So who's responsible for Congressional Gridlock? Most Americans have a very low opinion of Congress right now and both parties are blaming the other for preventing action being taken on major issues like health care, immigration, education, transportation, energy independence, and global warming.

In the Presidential race Barack Obama is suggesting that progress will be made by everyone working together while Hillary Clinton is noting the partisan nature of American politics and suggesting that it more complicated than that. John McCain wants to continue the Bush agenda.

I think we are facing a watershed election. The problem is not partisan politics per se but the fact that we are facing a significant and defining difference in political philosophy and goals being expressed by the two major parties that signify a major change in the future direction this country is going to take. And I do not believe that the problem is as simple as merely wishing that we all be nice and work together and we will have a great country.

We are facing a major choice in the fundamental principles and philosophy that govern our country - whether the public interest or private corporate interests will be our guiding principle.Voting Republican or Democrat this November will take our country down completely different paths.

I believe that the Republicans have lost touch with the average citizens in America and under Bush/Cheney/Rove have aligned themselves with the corporate world and special financial interests over that of the public interest. Democrats meanwhile are aligning themselves with the public interest and individual rights and protections over corporate interests.

And I think the Democrats are going to increase significantly their numbers in Congress as well as win the Presidency because the American people are ready for change. They have seen the consequences of putting special interests and corporations in charge of running the country. They are ready to put the public interest back into our government goals and agenda rather than the profit motive of individual and corporate greed.

The March 2008 AARP Bulletin gives some historical perspective and some of the factors contributing to the current gridlock in Congress.

"Many political analysts trace the polarization to the 1980s presidency of Ronald Reagan and his bitter tug of war with a Democratic Congress. Reagan moved the Republican Party to the right, shunning liberal or even moderate Republicans.....
Consolidated around conservatives, the GOP grew stronger and, in the 1994 elections during President Clinton's first term, took control of both the House and Senate, though by margins too slim to exert unrivaled power. In the House, leaders such as Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, who were very conservative, gave no quarter to those who disagreed with them, even in their own party. They took hard-line positions and refused to compromise....
Democrats, crushed under Republican power, moved left and in 2006 returned to power in the House under liberal Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. But they, too, found their majority too slim to govern efficiently. Neither party has the numbers to impose its will nor the inclination to make the kinds of compromises that lead to landmark legislation."

The main reason stalemate remains is because of the filibuster. Because Democrats control the Senate by only a 51 to 49 margin, Republicans despite being the minority, are refusing to compromise on most issues, thus preventing most legislation from passing.

As AARP notes:

"Senate rules provide for filibuster, a procedure that can prolong debate and requires 60 votes to stop. Historically it was rarely used—fewer than seven times a session in the 1960s. Now virtually any vote of consequence requires a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority to close off debate. Last year, minority Republicans used filibusters a record 78 times, nearly 50 percent more than the previous high of 42 in 2002, when Democrats were in the minority."

So what's the answer. AARP goes on to say:

Even the most inspirational presidential vision, oratory and leadership are unlikely to move major legislation. [Emory University Professor Meade]Black says it takes one party or the other accumulating enough seats in both houses of Congress to ram bills through on its own. Gridlock in the early 20th century ended in 1932 when Franklin D. Roosevelt and Democrats seized lopsided control of Congress (a 60-35 margin in the Senate and a 310-117 margin in the House)."It's not the parties coming together, it's one party moving into the position of being a governing majority," Black says.

AARP goes on to quote former Senator Bob Graham as saying that "History tells us that bipartisanship is possible." but I believe that the burden is on the Republicans to prove that point. I don't agree with Graham's optimism based on the recent Republican history. When they most recently controlled Congress they acted as bullies. I have heard both Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott and Jay Inslee repeat how under Republican leadership Democrats were excluded from helping to write legislation and they literally only saw bills right before they were to vote on them.

Bipartisan works only if you agree to share power and Republicans have done their damnest to ignore Democrats and legislate unilaterally when they were in power. And they are continuing to do all they can to obstruct Congressional action by increased use of the filibuster and the continued threat and use of a Bush veto. The only way to stop Republican obstructionism is to vote them out of office. And I think that is what the public is going to do come November.

The Eliot Spitzer Sex Scandal

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:05:00 +0000

Once again a high profile politician confounds his supporters by playing Russian roulette -sooner or later they shoot themselves. It hard to understand yet maybe it the ego that drives them to politics with its do or die outcome.

Eliot Spitzer was a possible Democratic Presidential candidate with a promising future. He built a reputation as a fighter for the public interest, taking on special interests on Wall Street as New York's Attorney General. Just over a year ago he was easily elected Governor of New York State.

Eliot Spitzer was heavily involved in the movement to give New York State both a Democratic House and Senate so that the Democrats could move on issues like campaign finance reform. Just last week a special election moved the New York State Senate to within one vote of becoming Democratic after years and years of Republican rule.

Today Spitzer shocked his supporters and many others with a public apology alluding to his possible solicitation of a prostitute in February when he was in Washington, DC. The New York Times broke the story as we reported earlier. New York Times Reports Spitzer Link to Prostitution.

CNN has Spitzer's brief statement to the press on video. Spitzer apologized to the public but made no comments on his future, including possible resignation. He answered no questions.

Here is the text of Spitzer's brief comments:

"Over the past nine years, eight as attorney general and one as governor, I've tried to uphold the vision of progressive politics that would rebuild New York and create opportunities for all," Spitzer began. "We tried to bring real change to New York and that will continue."
"Today, I want to briefly address a private matter. I have acted in a way that violated the obligations to my family and that violates my -- or any -- sense of right and wrong. I apologize first, and most importantly, to my family.
I apologize to the public, whom I promised better. I do not believe that politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas, the public good and doing what is best for the State of New York. But I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard that I expect of myself. I must now dedicate some time to regain the trust of my family.
I will not be taking questions. Thank you very much. I will report back to you in short order. Thank you very much."

If Spitzer resigns, New York's lieutenant Governor, David Paterson would become the new Governor and serve until Dec. 31, 2010. The AP notes that Paterson would be only the third black Governor in the country since reconstruction.

New York Times Reports Spitzer Link to Prostitution

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:39:00 +0000

The New York Times is reporting that New York Governor Elliot Spitzer is linked to a prostitution ring. The story is just breaking.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer has informed his most senior administration officials that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, an administration official said this morning.

Mr. Spitzer, who was huddled with his top aides inside his Fifth Avenue apartment early this afternoon, had hours earlier abruptly canceled his scheduled public events for the day. He scheduled an announcement for 2:15 after inquiries from the Times.

Mr. Spitzer, a first-term Democrat who pledged to bring ethics reform and end the often seamy ways of Albany, is married with three children.

Just last week, federal prosecutors arrested four people in connection with an expensive prostitution operation. Administration officials would not say that this was the ring with which the governor had become involved.

The New York Times reported last week a story about "Four Charged with Running Online Prostitution Ring." The ring known as the Emporer's Club VIP had clients in New York, Washington, Miami, London and Paris. Speculation involves the possible connection to a Spitzer visit to D.C. in February and phone records.

Obama Wins 7 Wyoming Delegates, Clinton Wins 5

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:10:00 +0000

Obama gained 2 more national delegates over Clinton as a result of the Wyoming caucuses. A total of 12 delegates were at stake.

Several places report the results as votes. The Green Papers reports that Obama received 5378 votes (61.43%) to Clinton's 1313 (37.84%) to 64 (.73%) for others. If these are actual votes and not delegates as other states have reported at the precinct caucus level this would only represent a turnout of 13% of the 2006 registered Democratic voters.

Wyoming is not a state Democrats are likely to win. A look at the last 2 Presidential elections in Wyoming show that by more than 2 to 1, the state voted Republican.

2000 Bush 147,947 Gore 64,481 other 5298
2004 Bush 167,629 Kerry 70,778 other 4543

In 1992 Bill Clinton received 68,160 votes to 131,724 votes cast for the Republican and independent candidates. In 1996 Bill Clinton got 77,934 votes to 163,637 for his opponents.

In 2004 only 60,385 Wyoming voters were registered as Democrats, 162,952 were registered as Republicans and 32,885 were independent or other. In 2006 67,246 voters were registered as Democrats and 152,952 were Republicans. Wyoming does allow same day registration for voters. Current registration figures were not available on the Secretary of State's website.

Caucuses are a reflection of enthusiasm for a candidate by hard core supporters more than any reflection of actual general election voter support. If you can not physically be present at the caucus site at the appointed time you have no vote in the process. Many potential voters wind up being excluded, weather for example was a factor in Wyoming.

If you are an active duty military person, or have to work, or are sick or are out of state, you have no vote in the caucus process. Primary voting with absentee ballots are the most democratic and inclusive. That is why the majority of states have primaries rather than caucuses. More people participate.

"Working Families Credit" Moves Forward in Legslature

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:15:00 +0000

The Washington State House of Representatives took a major step forward by passing the "Working Families Credit". The legislation is a significant step forward in trying to help reverse the negative impacts of Washington State's regressive tax system by providing help to working families in our state.

By a 57 to 37 vote the House passed ESSB 6809. This was despite efforts by House Finance Committee Chair Ross Hunter to amend the bill with onerous requirements not required for any other tax exemption. He got an amendment passed in his committee to require the legislation to be re-approved every year for funding and that a study be done comparing the benefits of the tax break with spending the money for other things like early learning, K12 or higher education for low income families.

Now if Hunter required that for every other tax exemption, particularly all those to benefit business interests, then we would say great. But that is not the case. In fact most tax exemptions passed to benefit special interests have become like tax breaks for eternity. Ideally tax exemptions should automatically sunset after a set period of time, like 5 or 10 years.

But Hunter's hypocrisy is that he was proposing essentially a one year sunset on a tax break for low income working families that would help those hit hardest by our regressive tax system. Apparently Ross Hunter has not considered the plight of poor families in Washington State very seriously.

The national Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy in 2003 called Washington State's tax system the most regressive in the country. The wealthiest 1% making over $1.6 million paid 3.3% of their income in Washington state and local taxes. Meanwhile those earning less than $17,000 paid 17.6 % of their income in state and local taxes.

Hunter's initial amendment was defeated on the floor but he did get a weaker one passed which still requires that funds for the program be limited to initial startup costs and be approved by the legislature in the state omnibus appropriations act.

Besides Hunter, Democrats Clibborn, Grant, Shay Burke and Takko opposed the bill. Rep. Eickenmeyer was excused. Two Republicans supported the bill - Rep. Haley and Skinner.

Democrats deserving priase for supporting this legislation include Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown and Senator Craig Pridemore - the prime sponsor. In the House, Speaker Frank Chopp, a long time advocate for helping those in financial need was critical to this bill passing. as well as Rep Tami Green and Rep Jeanne Darnille who helped push the bill in the House.

The bill now goes back to the Senate for approval of the amended version, requires approval in the budget bill and must be signed by the Governor.

This bill was truly a coalition effort. The Washington Tax Fairness Coalition in conjunction with reseach and technical expertise from the Washington State Budget and Policy Center spearheaded the coordination of this effort. A few of the groups involved included the Statewide Poverty Action Network, SEIU, Washington Sate Labor Council, LWV, Children's Alliance, Solid Ground. Lutheran Policy Center, King County Democrats Leg. Action Committee, UFCW State Action Council, and the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle.

update: see further discussion by Andrew Garber of the Seattle Times Olympia bureau posted after we wrote our post, Seattle Times 3/8/2008 "Strings attached to tax-break bill"

US House of Representatives Passes Landmark Mental Health Legislation

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:55:00 +0000

The U.S. House of Representatives, by a vote of 268 to 148 has passed the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Act of 2007. The struggle to achieve mental health parity with physical illness coverage has been going on for the last decade.

The bill is named after the late Senator Paul Wellstone, a Minnesota Democratic Senator who died in a plane crash in 2002. Wellstone had pushed the legislation for many years.

The Associated Press carried the following reactions to the bill:

''It's a historic step,'' said the late senator's son, David, 42. ''It's a civil rights bill for people with mental illnesses and chemical addiction. It forces insurance companies to treat them as they treat others." ...
The House bill was sponsored by Reps. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., who has battled depression, alcoholism and drug abuse, and Jim Ramstad, R-Minn., a recovering alcoholic who is Kennedy's Alcoholics Anonymous sponsor.
''It's about opening up the doors and ending the shadow of discrimination against the mentally ill,'' said Kennedy.
Former first lady Rosalynn Carter, a longtime mental health advocate, said the bill would help erase the stigma of mental illness that prevents many people from seeking treatment.

The US Senate has previously passed a weaker version of the bill. The Senate bill was sponsored by Rep. Patrick Kennedy's father, Senator Edward Kennedy and two Republicans - New Mexico Senator Pate Dominici and Wyoming Senator Mike Enzi. Senator Dominici has a daughter who has schizophrenia.

The House and Senate bill now go to conference committee. The house bill specifically says that mental illnesses and addiction disorders listed in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders would be covered under any plan offering mental health benefits. The Senate version is less specific and allows more variation in what would be covered.

The Bush White House opposes the House bill - even though Bush has in the past said he supported mental health parity. As usual words are easy for Bush and seem to mean little , his action and inaction tells the truth of his beliefs. Just like his inaction on global warming says more of where he is coming from than the few token utterances he has said about the need to do something about global warming. Words are cheap in the Bush White House.

see also New York Times , "House Approves Bill on Mental Health Parity"

Hillary Clinton Wins Both Texas and Ohio to Surprise of Many

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 08:02:00 +0000

Senator Hillary Clinton decisively won Ohio's primary 55% to 43% and has been declared the winner in Texas but by a smaller margin of 51% to 47% with 90% of the vote counted. As the Washington Post reports on Clinton's comeback:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) roared back into contention for the Democratic presidential primary race Tuesday night after claiming primary victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. These win ensure that her challenge to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) will continue through Pennsylvania's primary on April 22.
Clinton's popular vote margin in Ohio was larger than expected, while she appeared to eke out a very narrow win in Texas. Earlier in the night, Obama won an easy victory in Vermont while Clinton cruised to a triumph in Rhode Island.

As the New York Times notes, voters are not yet ready to write Senator Clinton off:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s victories in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday night not only shook off the vapors of impending defeat, but also showed that — in spite of his delegate lead — Senator Barack Obama was still losing to her in the big states.
Those two states were the battlegrounds where Mr. Obama was going to bury the last opponent to his history-making nomination, finally delivering on his message of hope while dashing the hopes of a Clinton presidential dynasty.
Yet then the excited, divided American electorate weighed in once more, throwing Mrs. Clinton the sort of political lifeline that New Hampshire did in early January after her third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses.

Barrack Obama still leads in delegate counts - some 1466 to 1376 by one estimate Votes in Mississippi and Wyoming are coming up in the next week which favor Obama. Even with the large number of delegates at stake in Pennyslvania, and Clinton being currently favored there, Clinton is in a difficult position trying to overtake Obama.

The battle now is going to shift to the undemocratic process of superdelegates committing and the question of what to do about Michigan and Florida whose delegates are not currently being counted because they broke party rules and moved their primaries to January.

The irony here is that Clinton won both of these states when the candidates agreed not to campaign there. With all their names on the ballot in Florida, Clinton won Florida. In Michigan Clinton's name was on the ballot but Obama's was not. People had to vote uncommitted if they didn't want Clinton and wanted Obama. Clinton still won. Both Michigan and Florida are states the Democrats want and need to win in November.

While Clinton has not won as many states as Obama has, the delegate and vote count is close. Unlike the electoral college which is winner take all, the Democratic primaries and caucuses assign delegates to the Democratic National Convention based on the proportion of the vote each candidate won.

As the New York Times notes:
The nomination is not determined by the number of states won, but Mr. Obama’s inability to win major battleground states beyond Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and his home state, Illinois, is a concern of some Democrats — especially since Ohio and Florida have become must-wins in presidential elections.

Quoting Clinton according to the NY Times:
"If we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win the battleground states, just like Ohio,” she said. “We’ve won Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Arkansas, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Tennessee"

There is plenty for Democrats to think about. The hope is that a resolution can be reached and a nominee selected without splitting and losing the combined passions of the Clinton and Obama camps. The last thing the Democrats need is to enter the fall campaign split and angry at each other rather than united in working to defeat the Republicans and John McCain.

One thing for sure - the Democrats need to come up with a better plan and timing and spacing of primaries for the next party contested Presidential election. Reform of the process should include making the elections fairer by going to an all primary system where voters can see how their votes count and maximum voter participation is ensured - something the caucus system doesn't do.

Clinton Wins Rhode Island, Obama Wins Vermont, McCain to Win Republican Nomination

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:40:00 +0000

The Associated Press according to the Washington Post has projected Hillary Clinton as the winner in Rhode Island. Barack Obama has been declared the winner in Vermont where the Iraq War was listed in exit polls as the major issue.

Meanwhile polls in Ohio have closed. Clinton has a small lead in early results. Weather has been terrible in Ohio with snow in northern Ohio and rains and flooding in southern Ohio. Some polls in Cleveland were kept open later as they ran out of Democratic ballots. Ohio recently changed to all paper ballots that are then optically scanned after problems were assessed with their touch screen machines.

Ohio's election results in 2004 were rife with problems. Robert Kennedy Jr, among others called into question the election results in Ohio in 2004.

Meanwhile Texas is also currently having some problems. Sixty-five percent of Texas 193 delegates are determined by a primary vote and 35% are determined by a separate caucus vote this evening. The Clinton campaign is reporting problems with being excluded from some of their supporters being excluded from the caucuses.

Because of the nature and complexity of the Texas voting process a final tally of delegate allocation may actually take several days.

Overall some 370 Democratic delegates are being determined today. Unfortunately for Hillary Clinton the results will probably not significantly change the delegate lead that Obama has. Unfortunately for Obama if the results are mixed it is likely that Hillary Clinton will continue her campaign which will make John McCain happy.

While some Democrats may lament the lack of a knockout punch, the Democrats continuing to battle will get the two candidates before more voters and allow a further Democratic organizational effort in more states including a key battle in the Pennsylvania primary.

Meanwhile John McCain is the projected winner of all four states - Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Vermont and has gained enough delegates to win the Republican nomination. Mike Huckabee has announced he is withdrawing from the race.

Hastings and McMorris Rodgers Consistently Vote Against the Environment

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 04:46:00 +0000

The national League of Conservation Voters gave Republicans Doc Hastings (WA-4) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA-5) both a 5 out of 100 rating for their environmental voting record for 2007. For the first time in 9 years Hastings scored one environmentally correct vote. For the previous 8 years Hastings had a score of zero. McMorris Rodgers also had a zero for her previous rating.

Hasting is being challenged this year by Democrat George Fearing.

Republican Dave Reichert (WA-8), in a tough re-election campaign in eastern King County, has finally seen the green light through the trees and actually doubled his score from 43 in the previous session of Congress to an 85 rating for 2007. Reichert is facing Democratic challenger Darcy Burner who he narrowly beat in 2006.

Of course one has to evaluate what this score actually represents for Reichert. A careful look at two different bills that Reichert voted for last year and this year show that he opposed the bills at every step of the way up until the final vote. You can read these stories about Reichert at Daniel Kirkdorffer's blog On the Road to 2008.

see "Reichert Votes For Another Bill He Opposes Every Step Of The Way" Jan 18, 2007 and "Anatomy of a Reichert Vote " Feb. 28, 2008

We observed this same voting behavoir by Reichert, when he first voted for an amendment to weaken popcorn worker safety legislation and then was the outcome was clear, voted for final passage of the bill.

see "Republicans Hastings, McMorris Rodgers and Reichert Record Votes Opposing Popcorn Worker Safety" Oct 1, 2007

Meanwhile all of Washington's Democratic Congressmen continued their strong voting records for the environment in 2007. Jay Inslee (WA-1), Brian Baird (WA-3), Norm Dicks (WA-6), and Jim McDermott (WA -7) all received scores of 95. Adam Smith (WA-9) received a 90 and Rick Larsen (WA-2) received the lowest rating of 80.

On the Senate side, Democrats Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell both received scores of 87 for their 2007 voting records.

John McCain Gets Zero Rating from League of Conservation Voters

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:00:00 +0000

John McCain missed so many votes last year in Congress that he scored a zero on the League of Conservation Voters 2007 ratings. He was the only Senator to miss all of the key environmental votes used in the scoring.

As LCV noted in their recent press release:

"The presidential candidates' scores all suffered from the occupational hazard of absenteeism. Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) missed four votes each in 2007, although both made a point of being on hand for the key vote that would have allowed a version of the energy bill to move forward that included a provision to repeal billions of dollars in tax breaks for big oil and put that money toward clean energy programs.
Clinton’s score in 2007 was 73 percent (87 percent lifetime); Obama’s was 67 percent (86 percent lifetime). * Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) scored 0 percent in 2007 (24 percent lifetime) due to missing all 15 votes scored, including the key vote on repealing tax giveaways to big oil – a measure that failed by only one vote."

McCain's LCV ratings:
0 (2007), 41 (2005-2006), 56 (2003-2004), 36 (2001-2002), 6 (1999-2000)

Obama's LCV ratings:
67 (2007), 96 (2005-2006)

Clinton's LCV ratings
73 (2007), 89 (2005-2006), 92 (2003-2004), 88 (2001-2002)

Of the other Presidential candidates who have dropped out of the race Joe Biden missed 4 of the environmental votes used in the rating in 2007 and received a score of 67. Christopher Dodd missed 6 of the environmental votes in 2007 and received a score of 60. Dennis Kucinich missed 3 of the environmental votes in the House and received a score of 80.

Hillary Clinton Receives a Standing Ovation at Texas Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:38:00 +0000

It's worth taking a look. I stumbled across the U-Tube posting at the democraticunderground site.

You can view the clip by clicking on "Clinton Heartfelt Answer at TX Debate - only standing ovation of the night"

You can catch other segments of the debate by going to CNN which has 20 different clips of
the debate between Hillary and Barack.

Whether or not Hillary Clinton ultimately wins the nomination, Democrats are lucky to have both her and Barack Obama as our frontrunners. There is really not a lot of difference between the two candidates as far as the issues go.

When I listened to both of them when they were in Seattle just before the Washington state caucuses, their positions on the issues they talked about were almost identical.

Legislature Completes First Step in Passing Priorities for a Healthy Washington Bills

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:11:00 +0000

The environmental community is half way home this year in enacting their top four legislative bills collectively called Priorities for a Healthy Washington . The following four bills are still alive and moving, after having been passed by their house of origin in the Washington State Legislature before the Feb 19, 2008 cutoff date. They must now be passed by the other house.

* Climate Action and Green Jobs passed the House, 64 – 31.
* Local Solutions to Global Warming passed the Senate, 31 – 17.
* Evergreen Cities passed the House, 73 – 22.
* Local Farms – Healthy Kids passed the House, 95 -1;
companion legislation passed the Senate, 48 – 0.

Brief Description of bills taken from a recent e-mail from Priorities for a Healthy Washington:

* Climate Action and Green Jobs: The Climate Action & Green Jobs bill would lay the framework for limiting the sources and activities that cause the greatest amounts of global warming pollution in the state. It will also establish a program to prepare Washington workers for good jobs in the clean energy economy.

* Local Solutions to Global Warming: The choices made in local land use and zoning plans about where a growing population will live and work and how they will get around have a huge impact on global warming emissions. Local Solutions to Global Warming will help cities and counties shape communities in ways that will reduce climate pollution.

* Evergreen Cities: The Evergreen Cities bill would restore, retain and establish more trees and forests in our communities. The bill would also leverage partnerships with volunteers to steward the urban forests and provide funding for cities' and counties' forest plans.

* Local Farms - Healthy Kids: By getting more Washington fruits and vegetables into our schools, we can improve children’s health and create new and thriving markets for our farmers. The Local Farms – Healthy Kids bill will help preserve farmland and will expand children’s access to locally grown produce through our schools, food banks and farmers markets.

You can help keep the momentum going to pass these bills by contacting your representatives in the Washington State Legislature. Click on this Legislative link to find your legislators and send them an e-mail thanking them for their action to date and urging that they complete action by passing all four of the Priorities for a Healthy Washington bills coming from the other house.

Obama Tops Clinton in Wisconsin

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:31:00 +0000

Senator Clinton was not able to turn around Wisconsin and stop voters going to Obama. It seems that mistakes made by the Clinton campaign are getting harder to turn around as Obama's organizing effort is paying off. He has now won contests in 9 states in a row.

As reported by the NY Times, "With 83 percent of the electoral precincts in Wisconsin reporting, Mr. Obama had 58 percent of the vote to Mrs. Clinton’s 41 percent."

Obama is using skills drawn from community organizing to win. He has invested in working the grassroots which can be effective particularly in caucus states.

When Clinton came to Seattle to speak, her campaign had a few people in the back trying half heartedly to get people to sign up. They did not work the crowd which waited for over an hour for Hillary to come to speak.

Obama's people worked the crowd and someone told me that they got an email from the campaign the next day. Now that's turn around and obviously builds the mailing and contributor base aggressively.

A number of years ago when Senator Bill Bradley came to the Pike Place Market to speak I noticed the same half hearted effort by his supporters to get people signed up. It was a tell tale sign that he did not know how to build a campaign at the grassroots level and his campaign did not build momentum.

The word is that the Clinton campaign took too much for granted and besides ignoring grassroots efforts to build a campaign in caucus and other states, they thought it would all be over on Feb 5, 2008 and did not put into place aggressive campaigns for states after Feb 5, 2008.

It's kind of funny, people are criticizing Hillary for her attempts to confront Obama head on. Actually she is still throwing him softballs. McCain and the Republicans are not going to be so nice and it remains to be seen if Senator Obama, if he emerges victorious from Ohio and Texas, will be up for hardball with McCain.

It would be a tactical mistake for either him or Clinton to not be emotionally prepared for a vigerous onslaught from the Republicans. The Republicans are not going to quietly leave the stage. Republican have a knack even when they disagree of eventually seeing the value of closing ranks and working as one voice.

The Republicans in Congress, when they were in power did that. And even in the minority now, they have closed ranks, particularly in the US Senate, to limit the legislation Democrats have been able to pass so far.

You can expect McCain to accuse the Democrats of abandoning our soldiers and American honor with the Democrat's plans to pull out of Iraq if they take over the Presidency.

We need to remember that the real battle is not between Hillary and Barack, but between McCain and the Democratic nominee. Whoever wins the Democratic nomination is going to have to bring the Democratic Party together and remind them that the difference between Hillary and Barack is miniscule compared to that with McCain.

Supporters of both candidates are passionate and will be tempted to be bitter if their candidate loses. The first task of the eventual nominee will be to bring Democrats together reminding them of their common goals.

Democrats are making history in their choosing a nominee, but the real prize is the Presidency, not the Democratic nomination. There's still a long ways to go before we can change America for the better.

Eyman Running Initiative Campaign without Filing Required Reports with Public Disclosure Commission

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Zemke) — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:30:00 +0000

Tim Eyman and friends are once again in violation of Washington State's Public Disclosure laws. This morning MajorityRulesBlog filed an official compliant with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission regarding the lack of filing of campaign contributiuon and expenditure reports for Initiative 985.

In a phone call this morning I confirmed with the PDC that there was no error on their part - no reports have been received by them from Eyman besides a C1pc on initial formation of a committee entitled Reduce Congestion.org on January 3, 2008. ReduceCongestion.org has not updated this report with any additional information or reported any contributions or expenditures as of today, Feb 14, 2008. The deadline for filing Jan reports is Feb 10, 2008.

Yet they have sent mailings to people soliciting money, have a website up asking for money on behalf of ReduceCongestion.org which they secured on Dec. 18, 2007 , and are sending out e-mail asking for money.

Voters Want More Choices notes a Dec 30, 2007 pledge to Reduce Congestion.org of $42,029,77 yet there is no report from Reduce Congestion.org of any such pledge. There is also a Feb 11, 2008 report by Help Us Help Taxpayers for a pledge made in January of $7,650.02 to ReduceCongestion.org for January office compensation.

ReduceCongestion.org (Initiative 985) has printed up and mailed out petitions yet there are no reported expenses of any kind by the campaign. For all intents and purposes anyone checking public disclosure records whould be lead to falsely believe that no money has been raised or spent on behalf on Initiative 985 by Reduce Congestion.org . This is obviously false.