Nov 3, 2015 election (Seattle)

Here is how I’m voting and a brief blurb on why (only including races that have choices).  It’s also fun to check out The Stranger and Seattle Times endorsements for comic value if not complete substance!

  • State Initiative 1366:  NO.  I don’t like the idea of hostage-taking and I don’t like Tim Eyman.  I would love to decrease sales tax in the state dramatically and add a revenue-neutral income tax, but until that happens…  certainly we don’t need to tie the hands of our elected legislature.
  • State Initiative 1401:  YES.  There are lots of pressing problems in the state and I would have preferred to vote on one of them.  But given that this is the choice in front of me..  yes, it makes sense to restrict extinction-threatened-animal trading.  Is it our most urgent problem?  Perhaps not.
  • State Advisory Votes 10, 11, 12, and 13:  MAINTAINED.  Did I mention that this is another byproduct of Tim Eyman that we have to vote on these meaningless “advisory votes” anyway?  What are they?  Nothing!  That’s right, is has zero impact either way you vote.  Thanks to Mr. Eyman, we get to spend lots of taxpayer dollars getting all these advisory votes anytime there’s a tax change in the state done by the legislature and not a full 100% vote of the people.  Because, you know, representative democracy evidently can’t be trusted.
  • King County Charter Amendment No. 1:  YES.  I support the police and the vast majority of them are great, honest, and admirable citizens trying to do their best.  I less like the police unions who seem to close ranks around accused officers, regardless of the actual reality.  Are there some bad cops?  I’m sure there are.  Do I want some more citizen oversight that actually has some authority to balance the one-minded union?  Yep.
  • King County Proposition No. 1: APPROVED.  I’m all for investing early to help kids not born into the lottery of wealth, status and intact family units.  Plus selfishly, investing in early childhood education now is a pretty sure-fired way to save money on incarceration later.  It’s a no brainer.
  • King County Assessor:  JOHN WILSON.  When both the Seattle Times and The Stranger endorse the same person, you know you’re likely not going to be more well informed than either.  Who am I to disagree?
  • King County Director of Elections: JULIE WISE.  See above..  Seattle Times and The Stranger both agree..
  • Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 3: COURTNEY GREGOIRE.  Seattle Times and The Stranger both agree.. plus who wants to vote for a crazy? It would be fun, no doubt, to watch the meetings, but the Port actually controls important things.  So we’ll experiment elsewhere..
  • Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 5: MARION YOSHINO.  Both candidates are in favor of the typical environmental concern and alternative energies.  Marion seems to be the more pragmatic of the two, which is important when dealing with not only the waterfront commercial shipping activities but the airport itself.  Plus Alaska Airlines donated money to support her.
  • Seattle Council District 3:  PAMELA BANKS.  I voted for Sawant on her first term and I do think she’s been a majorly positive force in pulling the city towards progressive approaches.  I applaud that.  I also think I want a reality-check and the ability for consensus on the council to smartly move things forward?  Do I think rent control should be established in Seattle?  Nope.  Does Sawant?  Yep.
  • Seattle Council District 8 (citywide): JON GRANT.  This is sort of my make-up-for-not-voting-Sawant.  Jon would be a newcomer, more liberal than Tim Burgess and yet not as vocal as Sawant.  I fully expect Tim Burgess to win this vote, and that would be okay, too.
  • Seattle Council District 9 (citywide): LORENA GONZALEZ.  Did I mention The Stranger and Seattle Times rarely agree on anything?  They do for Lorena.
  • City of Seattle Initiative Measure No. 122: NO.  The Seattle Times makes some convincing arguments against this.  I do like the idea of partially publicly-funded campaigns to ensure everyone has the potential to engage, but this initiative doesn’t seem to cut it.
  • City of Seattle Proposition No. 1: YES.  This “Move Seattle” proposition is huge and isn’t 100% perfect.  But the reality is that we NEED to continue investing in safety, traffic improvements and infrastructure repair.  If there were multiple flavors of this, maybe I’d vote for a different set of details – but there isn’t and we simply can’t afford to sit by and complain.  I also like that we don’t lock in 100% of the exact details.  We have the categories, proportion spent within each, and then will iterate to work out the details.  That’s fine and anyone who thinks we should know 100% of the details isn’t realistic.
  • City of Seattle School District Direction No 1: SCOTT PINKHAM.  Although, the Seattle Times has a good argument for Christophersen also.  It’s a toss up.
  • City of Seattle School District Direction No 2: RICK BURKE.  Both Seattle Times and The Stranger agree..
  • City of Seattle School District Direction No 3: JILL GEARY.  Somewhat of a toss-up, but I like Jill.
  • City of Seattle School District Direction No 6: LESLIE HARRIS. Both Seattle Times and The Stranger agree..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s