UPDATE:
The totals are in and the CHS endorsements for the 2009 fall election are official. We’ll write up the endorsements in another post but you can see the vote totals blow. Thanks for your votes, delegates.
Original Post:
This should be interesting. Each of you has been given a paper envelope. Please proceed to your favorite chair and don’t open it. Inside, you won’t find this Web page. That paper stuff is your real life King County ballot. Put it in a safe place.
This page is home to the 2009 fall election CHS Endorsement Polls. The goal is to give the CHS community a say in the endorsement process. Because we have registered accounts, we’re one step closer to making online polls more than Web traffic popularity contests. But one step might not be enough. I’ve yet to run an online poll process that didn’t produce hiccups, screw-ups and cheats. Expect some of each here. That’s politics.
Here is how the polls work:
- Registered CHS accounts may vote in each poll once
- Polls close Friday night at 9 PM
- If you do not have an account, you may create one here
- Log in here
- If you do not wish to have an account, you can have your say in the comments
- There are no error messages, by the way, if you try to vote without being logged into an account. So if you think you are voting without an account, you are not. You are clicking on a link that does nothing.
- The CHS Endorsements and final results will be published over the weekend. In the meantime, if you’ve voted, you *should* be able to see the poll results when you return to page without clicking “Show Results.” If you haven’t voted, you’ll need to click the “show” link. It’s a drag, I know. We’ll give you a good way to view once the results are in Friday night.
- Unlike some endorsement processes, the top vote getter does not need to achieve a certain percentage.
- Want to say something about your favorite candidate or cause or add a voter guide for people to consider? Please add to the comment string on this CHS 2009 Election Endorsement Process post.
Initiative Measure No. 1033 Initiative Measure No. 1033 concerns state, county and city revenue. This measure would limit growth of certain state, county and city revenue to annual inflation and population growth, not including voter-approved revenue increases. Revenue collected above the limit would reduce property tax levies. Should this measure be enacted into law?
Referendum Measure No. 71 The legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5688 concerning rights and responsibilities of state-registered domestic partners and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill. This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage. Should this bill be:
King County Charter Amendment No. 1 Repeal of Section 350.20.30 and Portions of Article 9 – Transitory Provisions Shall those no longer relevant portions of King County Charter Article 9 relating to the county’s prior transition to a home rule charter and King County Charter Section 350.20.30, relating to the county’s transition to a metropolitan form of government, be repealed, as provided in Ordinance No. 16484?
King County Charter Amendment No. 2 Repeal of Charter Section 475 – Work Programs and Allotments Shall King County Charter Section 475, relating to preparation of work programs and requested allotments and to appropriation transfers, be repealed, as provided in Ordinance No. 16546?
King County Charter Amendment No. 3 Amendment of Section 800 – Charter Review Shall King County Charter Section 800 be amended to clarify that charter commission appointees are to be confirmed by the council and to provide that the council is required to consider proposed charter amendments and act on them at an open public meeting, as provided in Ordinance Nos. 16547 and 16599? 
King County Charter Amendment No. 4 Adding New Section 897 – High Conservation Value Properties Shall the King County Charter be amended to add a new Section 897 that would provide enhanced protection for certain county properties designated as high conservation value properties by prohibiting the county from conveying or relinquishing its interest in those properties or authorizing their expanded use, except in specified circumstances, as provided in Ordinance No. 16600?
County Executive
Sheriff
Assessor
Court of Appeals Division No. 1, District No. 1, Judge Position No. 3
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position No. 1
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position No. 3
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position No. 4
City of Seattle Mayor
City of Seattle City Attorney
City of Seattle City Council Position No. 2
City of Seattle City Council Position No. 4
City of Seattle City Council Position No. 6
City of Seattle City Council Position No. 8
City of Seattle Proposition No. 1 The City of Seattle’s Proposition 1 concerns a seven-year property-tax increase for low-income housing assistance.
This proposition would fund affordable housing and other housing needs of low-income households. It authorizes collection of regular property taxes above limits otherwise allowed by state law. It allows $145,000,000 in additional taxes over seven years beginning in 2010, limited to $20,714,286 annually. In 2010, the increase would be up to $0.17 per $1,000 of assessed value. The City’s total regular property-tax rate would not exceed the state law limit of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value.
Should this housing levy be approved?
City of Seattle Proposition No. 1
Seattle School District No. 1 Director District No. 4
Seattle School District No. 1 Director District No. 5
Seattle School District No. 1 Director District No. 7
Good work. Interesting at the early stage, Mc Ginn has the votes.
all the polls have showed mcginn taking the 43rd, but to win the city he needs a lot more than that, particularly the south end and west seattle, where his anti-tunnel stuff doesn’t play so well.
5 votes for McGinn on a Capitol Hill blog is no surprise. Of course Capitol Hill is not an accurate representation of the rest of the city.
McGinn now says he won’t fight the tunnel. Personally I’m relieved. I don’t know if it’s the right decision, but I’m tired of hearing about the viaduct. Seems like the electorate is on the same page and McGinn got the message.
Are there 11 people on CHS who hate democracy that much that they want to deny the people the right to vote on as many policy issues as possible?
I voted yes on 1033 because I believe in, and celebrate, democracy and believe in the good will and intelligence of the people of Washington to vote in support of those taxes that are for the common good.
It’s a shame so many people here think the citizenry needs to be protected from itself. It’s a shame so many people here would vote to limit the rights of the people to participate in their government. Then again, the Germans voted Hitler into the Reichstaag so I suppose – when times are tough – all bodies politic eventually vote to abjure their rights and self-limit their own political participation. I, personally, learned from the Holocaust. I guess not everyone else did, ergo all the ‘no’ on 1033 votes.
Can we get rid of this poster?
I don’t think these posts come from any place of respect or to encourage purposeful real discussion. His/her posts simply ruin threads, and seemingly it is done with relish.
Kinda fascinating to watch the totals come in. Having some regret that we didn’t constrict to one day but wanted to give a lot of people time to weigh in. Thanks for participating, everybody.
Yeah, I am not sure that voting your preference (Yes OR No on any given ballot initiative) equates you with Nazis am I find this kind of rhetoric offensive.
Can we get rid of this poster?
Mike – I’m sorry you’ve made the choice to be opposed to a diversity of opinion, thoughts and experiences.
I enjoy reading your comments. I always appreciate hearing opinions different from my own. I’m sorry if you don’t feel likewise. Perhaps we don’t need a vote or discussion for endorsements? Perhaps you feel it would be better if Mike just issued a dictate?
I hope all is well. I remain, as always, your faithful servant,
ZAN
I find people who would vote against democracy by voting no on 1033 offensive. I’m glad we can air our offense with each other in a civil and dignified manner.
What a wonderful place this blog is that allows us to celebrate our different and shared experiences in this diverse marketplace of ideas!
Most Cordially,
ZAN
I’ve always heard that the rule is in any internet debate that the first person to equate something with Nazism or Hitler loses.
Mike, give Zan-O a break. You can see he’s trying – he didn’t even mention Nazis this time.
I’m not sure that this post deserves a reasonable response – but here goes:
First off, please VOTE YES on Prop 1. The Seattle Housing Levy has been an incredible success over the past 28 years. It has kept people in homes that they can afford and moved people off of the streets. Without the Levy we would not have been able to build the thousands of units that have made living in doors a reality for the most vulnerable families and individuals in Seattle.
Prop 1, the Housing Levy is a vital part of the solution to ending homelessness in our city. The bottom line is that we need to build housing that people can afford and the Levy does this (Levy developments must be affordable for 50 years). It leverages additional public and private funding at a 3 to 1 ratio. This allows agencies to build housing and provide services for that housing (employment training, financial education, case management, etc). The Housing Levy brings money into Seattle and creates local jobs – another thing that we desperately need right now. In the end, the most important thing that the Levy does is build housing to help us provide thousands of our neighbors the opportunity to live in a safe, decent, and affordable home.
Please VOTE YES on Prop 1. We’ve made the commitment is Seattle to provide support for the most vulnerable – the Housing Levy is a big part of that commitment.
How odd for someone who promotes diversity to be someone who suggests to “get rid” of someone with an opposing view.
I’m not sure that this post deserves a reasonable response
I always consider those who disagree with me with a measure of respect and reason. I’m sorry you have chosen to do otherwise.
It is telling, however, about the elitist attitudes of the big business Pro-Prop 1 crowd (Prop 1 was written by mortgage bankers and predatory lenders who made themselves fat and rich off the plight of the impoverished.*) who want to throw scraps to the homelesss show through in their disdain for what, in their view, is opinions other than their own – opinions of the “mere commoners” who “don’t deserve” a reply.
Don’t Make Yourself a Dupe of Predatory Lenders and Big Bankers – Support the Homeless / Vote NO on Prop 1
* Members of the Housing Levy Committee:
Chuck Weinstock, former VP of Lending – the bankrupt WAMU
Christine Rush, VP of Commercial Real Estate – Wells Fargo
Don Brewer, Western Regional Manager – Chase-Manhattan Bank
Dinah Thorsen, VP of Revenue Opportunities – KeyBank
Dianne Wasson, Executive VP of HomeStreet Bank
Donald Burton, CEO of Evergreen Home Loans
Zan-O
Affordable housing is a complex thing to fund and build. It is largely a product of a financing mechanism called Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, of which large banks are one of the biggest participants (in buying and syndicating the credits). Every large bank has a “community development” arm, to invest in worthy community-oriented projects, many of which build affordable housing. This is one of the reasons that the Housing Levy is so successful, because it leverages outside private investment (for every 1 Levy dollar, over 3 dollars is leveraged) to build beautiful, respectful and dignified permanently affordable buildings for low-income members of our community. Here are some great examples of Levy-funded projects on Cap Hill that we as a community and City can be proud of:
http://capitolhillhousing.org/bldg_broadwaypine.asp
http://www.hrg.org/Search/apt_details_b.aspx?PropertyID=FHLP
http://www.hrg.org/Search/apt_details_b.aspx?PropertyID=CCLP
http://capitolhillhousing.org/bldg_pantages.asp
The Levy keeps affordable projects local, built largely by neighborhood based nonprofits and allows low-income folks to live close to transit, jobs and services. VOTE YES on PROP 1 this fall.
This is known as Godwin’s law, and Zan-O has violated it.
Affordable housing is a complex thing to fund and build …
Here comes the spin folks! Don’t let yourself be played as dupes. To recap the conversation so far:
Zan’s Comment: “I’m concerned about Prop 1. Could someone address my concerns?”
Line 1 from the Pro Prop 1/Pro Big Business/Predatory Lending Crowd – “you don’t deserve a response you piece of commoner garbage! just shut-up and vote yes”
Zan’s Polite and Reasoned Response – “Many, many, many community leaders are concerned about the fact the housing levy was written by a cabal of bankers from the worst of the worst offenders who have caused mass foreclosures across the country and the destruction of the lower and middle class. Here is a list of the predatory lenders who wrote Prop 1 …”
Line 2 from the Pro Prop 1/Pro Big Business/Predatory Lending Crowd – “IGNORE THE FACT we never mentioned their participation previously! Also, ignore what we previously said about you not deserving a response – here’s 20 paragraphs about why we need predatory lenders and why the issue is too complex and you’re too stupid to understand it – vote yes you piece of street trash, the bankers and Wall Street know what’s best!”
Some of my best friends are currently homeless. Please don’t vote to kill them. Please vote ‘NO’ on Prop 1.
Wow, the Housing Levy must be getting some notoriety if the crazy Larouchies are now using their Hitler rhetoric against it the way they did during the Health Care reform town halls.
I’m taking my cue from how Barney Frank dealt with it, remember this clip?
You’re right – “if you vote ‘yes’ it means you are a selfish hatemonger” is bursting with respect.
VOTE YES on Prop 1. Thousands of people – seniors living on a fixed income, low wage workers, those who can’t work due to a disability – have a home that they can afford because of the Housing Levy. The Housing Levy is a solution that works.
A broad coalition of citizens, funders, service providers, non-profits, housing developers, public officials sit on the steering committee for the Levy. You can see the full list here: http://www.yesforhomes.com/default.aspx?ID=15. Without the Housing Levy (considering the looming budget cuts and the potential devastation to future budgets if 1033 passes) we will have a difficult time finding sustainable solutions for the nearly 2,000 people who are on the street every night (without shelter), the more than 4,000 people who struggle to find temporary shelter every night, and the tens of thousands of people who are making the choice between housing and food, housing and education, etc…We need the Levy.
So. What is your solution? Please school us poor, selfish, Nickelsian, incompetent hatemongers.
So. What is your solution? Please school us poor, selfish, Nickelsian, incompetent hatemongers.
I already outlined it. Vote “NO” on the “Kill All The Homeless” Prop, Prop 1 and allow an enlightened McGinn administration to write a reasonable levy free of the influence of predatory lenders.
Please, MichaelKelley, I don’t want my friends to die. Please stop schilling for big business, MichaelKelley.
More about the people who wrote, and who are backing, Prop 1:
Washington Mutual stands out as a singularly brazen case of lax lending in a financial landscape littered with wreckage.http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/business/28wamu.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q26pagewantedQ3D1Q26hp&OP=2a6e44b0Q2FUQ7EQ2AxU2YXl5YYLyUyQ26Q260UQ27yUy0UxslTkQ2AllUy0Q7EQ60psh-LpQ3C
Please Don’t Vote to Kill the Homeless. Please Vote “NO” on Prop 1.
Zan-o, the Seattle Housing Levy has been working for our city for 28 years, building high-quality, affordable apartments for low income Seattle residents. Prop 1 isn’t “Nickelsian policy”– in fact, it’s a policy that Seattle voters have themselves chosen to keep in place, through the democratic process, four times already. I sincerely hope Seattle voters will uphold their previous generosity and support the Housing Levy this time around, too. We need that housing now more than ever.
Also, whoever can name the mayor of Seattle 28 years ago gets a cookie. NO USING THE INTERNET. That’s cheating. :)
Amysee – Seattle has supported a housing levy for 28 years. The current renewal was written by big bankers and predatory lenders selected by the “wildly popular” Greg Nickels.
Please don’t vote to kill all my friends and to put all homeless people to death. Please vote ‘NO’ on the Pro-Big Business/Pro-Banks Prop 1.
Don’t be played for dupes and fools by the Big Biz noise machine and their bought-and-paid-for friends, Seattle. Show your streak of compassion and vote against killing the homeless. Just because they’re poor doesn’t mean they should be exterminated. Just like we came together in a spirit of HOPE and CHANGE to elect Obama to vanquish big business and special interests let’s come to together and HOPE we can pass a vote of NO on killing the homeless. NO on Prop 1.
I’ll give a tug job to the next person who votes ‘no’ in the endorsement poll.
You lost me at “please don’t vote to kill homeless people”. I’m confused.
I’m confused because homeless people die on the streets, they die living out of doors. The Housing Levy and other programs like it (the State Housing Trust Fund, the Federal Housing Choice Voucher program, etc) provide people with the opportunity to live in a home. The Levy is a tool that the city has used to augment funding from private and public sources to get people into housing.
The diatribe against banks is a tired trope and does nothing to further the conversation. This potential “enlightened McGinn administration” has endorsed the Levy wholeheartedly – as has every other elected official or candidate in this city. To not pass Prop 1 now will put us behind. The people who will most feel the effects of a delay would be seniors, people who are unable to work due to a disability, the working poor, and the homeless. Prop 1 is an essential resource as we work to end homelessness. The Housing Levy has been and will be a success.
VOTE YES on Prop 1!
The diatribe against banks is a tired trope and does nothing to further the conversation.
Tell that to the millions of Americans who have been foreclosed on by the authors of Prop 1:
Chuck Weinstock, former VP of Lending – the bankrupt WAMU
Christine Rush, VP of Commercial Real Estate – Wells Fargo
Don Brewer, Western Regional Manager – Chase-Manhattan Bank
Dinah Thorsen, VP of Revenue Opportunities – KeyBank
Dianne Wasson, Executive VP of HomeStreet Bank
Donald Burton, CEO of Evergreen Home Loans
Zan-O
I was honestly not trying to be condescending when explaining how complex it is to build and fund affordable housing. I was merely trying to explain why lenders are involved in the process of advocating for the Levy. The Steering Committee list has been open and available for as long as there has been a campaign and a whole variety of people testified before Council when the Levy size was being crafted earlier this year, not just lenders. From my perspective, banks being involved in this Levy has nothing to do with “predatory practices”. For sure, many large banks were involved in the sub-prime crisis, but this is a very different issue from their commercial community lending divisions, which have been for years very good partners with the nonprofit community here in Seattle.
Proposition One, the Housing Levy, is but one tool that gives homeless people a chance to live indoors, free of the stress and danger of living on the street. Vote Yes for Homes this fall.
For sure, many large banks were involved in the sub-prime crisis, but this is a very different issue from their commercial community lending divisions …
cracks start to emerge in the arguments of the big business apologists
Lucifer himself could appoint “the Deputy Devil for Community Affairs” and some of the big business dupes, apologists and paid-for friends would think that was probably a pretty swell guy. Throwing the word “community” into a predatory lenders name is meaningless marketing drivel. Utterly and completely meaningless. It’s hysterical and I’m literally ROTFL to suggest otherwise.
Have an Independent Mind that Doesn’t Succumb to Transparent Marketing Drivel and Spin / Don’t Let Yourself Be Played as a Fool By Big Business and Greg Nickels / Vote Against the Slaughter of the Homeless – Vote NO on Prop 1
IF YOU VOTE “YES” YOU’RE BFFs WITH DICK CHENEY
“PROGRESSIVES ARE OPPOSED TO PROP 1: VOTE NO ON PROP 1 / KNUCKLE-DRAGGING NEO-CONS SUPPORT PROP 1”
Love it! I’ve never been called a knuckle-dragging neo-con before – I’m going to put that on my resume and email signatures. But seriously, I feel like you’re yelling at me with the all-caps thing. And I’m totally feeling your respect for people who hold a different opinion.
Last time: You keep coming back to the banks argument – you don’t seem to have anything else. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater here – the shenanigans on Wall St have nothing to do with the Seattle Housing Levy.
So here goes: We need housing the low income people can afford. A YES vote on Prop 1 helps to provide that. We need local jobs. A YES vote on Prop 1 creates them. We need more investment (public and private) in Seattle. The Housing Levy, Authorized by a YES vote on Prop 1 leverages 3 dollars for every Levy dollar.
Vote YES on Prop 1
This is a new departure for Zan-O, who has previously been simply a strident opponent of adding city parks. Part of me thinks this is just performance art, a Warhol-ian commentary on the apparent accountability-free nature of comment boards. But a growing part of me thinks this kind of rhetoric is dangerously misleading; even though commenters here are smart enough to see through Zan-O’s bizarre lies, the fact remains that he’s lying, and thus violating CHS’s Terms of Service (see Section 2f).
A yes or no vote on 1033 has nothing to do with Nazis and nothing to do with supporting or crushing democracy. As a joke, it’s possibly amusing. Paired with Zan-O’s misleading and decpetive comments below about “big business support” for Prop 1 and how it will “kill homeless people”, I think he’s crossed a line.
Thanks Uncle Vinny. I actually really enjoy the back and forth perspectives on CHS, especially with Mike with Curls and others. It is enjoyable when it is respectful and honest. I am not sure that CHS comment threads are “moderated” in the same way other blogs around town are. I am curious to see if CHS weighs in on your reference to their “
terms of service”
No should ever use the “N”.
Oh, Zan-O, you’re so funny! “IF YOU VOTE “YES” [on Prop 1] YOU’RE BFFs WITH DICK CHENEY”. Seriously, the best laugh I’ve had all week.