Ridenbaugh Press/Northwest

Fort Townsend, midday on the 4th/Stapilus

The roads north to the Kitsap and Olympic peninsulas were packed with traffic on the 3rd. Around Gig Harbor it was awful; try to pull off into even one of the smaller community (Purdy, for instance) and even there you’d be likely to be stuck in your car in stop-n-go, for extended periods. The whole of the Northwest seemed on the move.

On the fourth, things seem to have settled down a bit. Port Townsend, a popular destination and a popular one on sunny summer days like this, was busy but not jammed. The boat-repairers at the shipyard were busy, and people were out and about. Still, the energy level seemed high. Higher than usual?

Wednesday night we sat on a deck overlooking Puget Sound, across to Whidbey Island, and saw something that seemed remarkable, and we were told was unusual for the area: A series of full-scale fireworks shows. Not on the 4th, you notice, but on the 3rd. These were in small communities (Langley, Freeland, maybe Port Ludlow), that delivered up substantial shows, pre-weekend. The speculation was that they did this so residents and others would be free to watch still other shows on the 4th.

We shall see. But if the shows of the 3rd were solid, we’re looking forward to those of the 4th.

Often is - more often than people typically think - that bankruptcies and other reorganizations aren’t fatal problems for businesses. A good many have come out of them whole and prosperous.

But this from the Idaho Statesman, concerning the Tamarack ski resort near Donnelly, gave us pause:

An Idaho judge on Thursday refused to let Bank of America Corp. repossess two ski lifts from Tamarack Resort, providing at least a brief reprieve for owners trying to keep the failed Valley County vacation getaway intact for a possible buyer.

On Thursday initiative developer Tim Eyman turned around 314,000 signatures to put his latest measure on the ballot. The secretary of state’s office indicates it is likely to be the only citizen initiative on the ballot, which could be a plus: Rather than fade into a fog of issues, this one is likely to stick out and get some attention.

It ought to. Voters will have the opportunity to check it out, and they shouldn’t like what they see - a measure not identical but comparable to one that seriously damaged one state (Colorado) and was subsequently suspended by the voters there (in 2005), and to a clutch of ballot measures which since have been rejected by a bunch of other states, including Oregon. Which, like Washington, has had some history of friendliness toward many anti-tax measures, which 1033 is. (There were also rejections in Maine and Nebraska, and many others didn’t make the ballot.)

Eyman’s pitch on the measure is simple: “The Lower Property Taxes Initiative substantially reduces property taxes by controlling the growth of government. 1033 says that the growth rate of state, county, and city general fund revenue cannot exceed the inflation rate plus population growth. Revenues collected above the limit will reduce property taxes. Not only does 1033 provide meaningful property tax relief, but it stops politicians from shifting the tax burden by raising taxes someplace else. 1033 provides ‘net’ property tax relief.”

This essentially is the same as TABOR, the “Taxpayers Bill of Rights,” which Colorado voters adopted. And then, as we posted in November 2005: “In that state, services have been strapped and fees have risen to the breaking point. That assessment might be taken as the wailing of government burteaucrats except for what happened Tuesday: Statewide voters decided, 52%-48%, to in effect - for a five-year stretch - throw out TABOR restrictions and increase state budgets, and their own taxes. That action had been endorsed by the conservative Republican governor, Bill Owers, who said that TABOR restrictions had put the state in an untemable position.”

The best single piece we’ve spotted on 1033 so far is a new piece in Horse’s Ass, the liberal blog with, to be sure, no enthusiasm for Eyman (the blog’s name derives from the founder’s preferred title for Eyman). It’s worth a read, most specifically for one point.

Eyman’s logic on budgeting initially sounds sensible: If government costs are limited to inflation plus population growth, shouldn’t that be enough? It’s easy logic to accept, and not many people have been able to break down the problem with it. (In Oregon, activist Steve Novick is one of the few to do it well.) Horse’s Ass quotes a report explaining why the formula doesn’t work:

But researchers long have recognized that the services provided in the public sector, such as education, health care, and law enforcement, tend to rise in cost faster than many other goods and services in the economy in general. This analysis was first put forward by economist William Baumol, who pointed out that technology and productivity gains may make goods cheaper to produce, but the services that government provides are different. Baumol said public services typically rely heavily on well-trained professionals — teachers, police officers, doctors and nurses, and so on — and technology gains do not make these services cheaper to provide. It may take far fewer workers to build an automobile than it did 30 years ago, but it still takes one teacher to lead a classroom of children. (In fact, as education has become increasingly important, the trend is toward more teachers per pupil, not fewer.) Doctors generally still see patients one by one, and nursing care remains labor intensive despite technology.

You can look at areas from law enforcement and corrections to colleges and health inspectors to see the problem: The cost of these kind of services rises faster than the overall rate of inflation.

Conveying that point will be the challenge facing the initiative’s opponents.

Going back a few years, remembering the fall of 1983 - October specifically - in Idaho. I was in Pocatello then, and the city seemed almost to be gasping for air . . . which is to say, business and jobs. A chunk of the downtown shuttered; a big factory in operation since World War II shut down. Hard times.

With that in mind, news today from the Idaho Department of Labor:

June’s rate was the highest jobless rate since October 1983 when the state was pulling out of the double-dip recession that ushered in a major economic shift from natural resources to services augmented by some expanded advanced manufacturing – particularly in the high technology sector.

Another 3,400 Idaho workers lost their jobs in June, driving the number of unemployed to over 62,000 for the first time ever. Over 40,000 of those workers shared $59 million in unemployment insurance benefits paid out during the month. A year ago, Idaho’s unemployment rate was 4.7 percent, and the number of workers without jobs was under 36,000.

This is not an argument that the system of background checking is getting out of hand or that these in particular aren’t merited. But after a while, you do start to think that some overall parameters should be set around the practice, lest we wind up with half the country doing background checks on the other half.

From the Idaho administrative rules posted Wednesday:

The Department [of Health & Welfare] has added certain individuals and providers who are required to have a criminal history and background checks under other Department rule chapters. This chapter of rules is being updated to add those individuals and providers to the list of those who are required to have checks, including references to the programs’ rule chapters. The programs or individuals being added are: Alcohol or Substance Use Disorders Treatment Facilities and Programs for Adults, Designated Examiners and Designated Dispositioners, Idaho Child Care Program, and Nonhospital, Medically-Monitored Detoxification/Mental Health Diversion Units.

Ron Wyden

Oregon Senator Ron Wyden doesn’t often find the word “radical” in close proximity. His manner doesn’t suggest it, and neither does his trademark bipartisan work; such gripes as you hear about him back in Oregon tend to come from the left, form people arguing that he’s too compromising.

So even in the context - mainly supportive - what President Barack Obama had to say about Wyden’s health care plan, using the term “radical” to describe pieces of it really jumped out.

The point of difference is Wyden’s proposal to move the linkage between people and health insurance from employers to individuals.

Politically, Obama has a point here. As corrupted as the health care system is overall, a great many people still have health coverage that works decently for them, and they’d reasonably be very concerned about something that would upend it quickly. Obama said that such a “radical restructuring” would face “significant political resistance . . . families who are currently relatively satisfied with their insurance but are worried about rising costs … would get real nervous about a wholesale change.”

Our view has been that employer-based insurance is a structural mistake, and it should be based around individuals. Getting from here to there, though, might have to be more than a one-step process.

Making that change would pull a lot of the structure out of the Wyden proposal. Could be, as the tale progresses in the next few weeks, that large chunks of the rest of the plan are strip-mined for pieces fitted into a different framework.

Obama didn’t sound, in this Oregonian interview, critical of Wyden and sounded as if he was open to working with him: “”He was in the Oval Office just two weeks ago where we spent time thinking about this. He is a real thought leader, and I’m confident his voice will be prominent in the debate going forward.”

Your thoughts, senator?

In Washington, certain kinds of wells for certain uses such as domestic, stockwater and some manufacturing and noncommercial, can be drilled and used without a permit. A 1945 state law established that, and limited water extraction to 5,000 gallons per day. A 2005 state attorney general opinion, however, concluded that “the first proviso to RCW 90.44.050 makes it plain that groundwater withdrawals for stock-watering are exempt from the permit requirement, and that the exemption is not limited to withdrawals of less than 5,000 gallons a day.” Withdrawals for stock water, in other words, could virtually be without limit.

That’s the water backdrop for Easterday Ranches’ plan to double the size of its 30,000-head of cattle feedlock northeast of Pasco. Easterday has obtained a water right (approved June 11) from the state Department of Ecology for controlling dust and for cooling cattle, a transfer the former Pepiot water right, to the location near Eltopia (north of Pasco). But it also plans to drill a well to water the cattle, probably drawing more than 5,000 gallons daily.

That in turn has led to a counter-reaction. On June 30, a group of local farmers (including a group called Five Corners Family Farmers) and several environmental groups (including Earthjustice and the Sierra Club) filed a lawsuit at Olympia to challenge the state’s interpretation of the well law. From their release: Continue Reading »

The good news is that someone is actually wrestling down the needs of the long-troubled Washington ferry system, including the purchase of five new boats in the next five years. The Washington State Department of Transportation Ferries Division has just released a plan that looks as if it may make sense for the ferry system.

That’s the good news.

The bad news: “The plan identifies a net funding gap of $3.3 billion over the next 22 years with most of that deficit in the capital program. WSF will continue to work with the Legislature to identify a sustainable funding source for the ferry system.”

So they need another $3.3 billion to make it work. At least they have some time . . .

Most places have limitations of some sort on 4th of July fireworks, but outright bans are relatively uncommon. Spokane, and communities around it, have had such a ban for 17 years.

From a city release: “Fireworks-related fires in the City of Spokane dropped from 1,044 in the 10 years prior to the ban to just 46 in the 10 years after the ban. In a similar manner, fireworks-caused injuries dropped from 290 to 37. In 2008, no injuries from fireworks were reported in the City of Spokane; there were five small grass fires. Clearly, most people are honoring the ban. Violations of the ban can be reported to Crime Check at 456-2233.”

And: “The Colville Tribe lost over $15 million in timber on July 4, 2003, after someone lit a bottle rocket from a boat on Lake Roosevelt. In 2006, about $6 million in damage to schools in Washington State was caused by fireworks.”

Odds are, most northwesterners still are unlikely to want to go there. But food for some thought anyway.

Representative Arnie Roblan at one of the last debates/Oregon Channel

Oregon House Speaker Dave Hunt had remarked that he hoped to adjourn for the year by sundown today. He missed that mark, but by less than an hour - a close bit of timing, indicative of the kind of tight operation the Oregon Legislature (moreso in the House, but largely too in the Senate) has had this year.

There are a number of familiar complaints from the not distant past you can’t make about this session. You can’t say it was unproductive; this may have been the most productive session in a generation (probably moreso than 2007, which also delivered a lot of substance). You can’t say it was an especially bitter session; there were occasional scrapes, but the House particularly seemed (at least so far as we could tell) to run without excess conflict. Did it address the issues before the state? It clearly did.

The big unanswered point is what Oregonians will make of all that productivity. Were the answers - most notably on taxes, but maybe on some other subjects as well - acceptable? Did the controlling Democrats, in other words, overreach?

The initial guess here is, probably not; the tax measures and a lot of the most sensitive legislation generally seemed pretty carefully trimmed and crafted to survive attack. But it’s a close call. Ballot issues are in the wind, and they may provide a good indicator of what the 2010 voters have to say about the makeup of the next legislature. And other offices too.

A fun thread about Oregon gubernatorial prospects for 2010 at Blue Oregon; a longish list of prospects followed by some (sometimes cutting) reviews.

Don’t miss the comments by Jack Roberts, a Republican who gives his nickel’s worth along with the Democratic regulars.

Bottom line after review: The odds seem to favor a wide-open situation, though mainly if you think that the ultimately candidate sheet won’t include the names of DeFazio, Kitzhaber or Walden (which is probably where the weight of guessing would go).

Our current president is a former U.S. senator, but historically that’s an anomaly: In recent decades, and even no so recent, a lot of them have come from the ranks of governors. (Bush II, Clinton, Reagan, Carter . . .)

So Ken Rudin of National Public Radio decided, just as an exercise, to rank the nation’s current Republican governors - Republicans since Democrats probably have their next party nomination taken care of - in terms of probability of ever (either in 2012 or later) becoming president. His top-ranked was Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (our guess, until the last moment, for GOP VP last time), and second is Utah Governor (though not for long) Jon Huntsman. Alaska’s Sarah Palin was 7th.

In the Northwest? Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter came in 15th out of 22. Though considering that Rudin still has South Carolina’s Mark Sanford at number 9, Otter certainly should rise at least one spot.

This list was shortly followed with another one (developed by other bloggers) for Democratic governors, which was led by Brian Schweitzer of Montana. Washington’s Chris Gregoire was No. 9. Oregon’s Ted Kulongoski did less well, ranking at 26 (out of 28 total).

Absolutely nothing scientific about any of it.

Richard Devlin

It was supposed to be dead. Although a lot of the individual members of the Oregon Legislature were on board, a measure enabling easier and more widespread activities by minor political parties, including explicitly approved cross-nomination, seemed dead in the water. (The Oregon Education Association was apparently one of the key reasons for that.)

Just now, however, Senate Bill 326 passed the Senate - concurring with House amendments - and from a minor-party point of view, it’s a big deal. A quick rundown from the Oregon Independent Party (via a release):

SB 326 consists of two parts:

1) It repeals HB 2614 (2005), a law that made it much more difficult for non-affiliated candidates to obtain sufficient signatures to be nominated for public office.

2) It now includes the provisions of what used to be HB 2414 (prior to its recent gutting), which allows a candidate who is nominated by more than one party to list up to 3 such party names on the ballot next to her name. More information on HB 2414 is available at http://indparty.com/node/174.

Despite strong bi-partisan support, the passage of the provisions contained in this bill have been in doubt for much of the latter part of the legislative session. For details see: http://wweek.com/editorial/3531/12669/

SB 326 (including the terms of HB 2414) passed last week in the Oregon House on a vote of 42-17. The provisions of this bill are among the top legislative priorities of the Independent Party of Oregon.

Senator Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin, said the finished bill had flaws, but he would push for correction in those in next year’s session (since this year’s is fast approaching completion). The few senators who voted against (all Democrats) said they did so out of concern for the flaws, but all said they’d be at work on those. Meantime, the small partiers should have an existing law on books - not a bad place from which to defend unflawed provisions.

Many are the paths to passage.

Central Tacoma/Stapilus

Some battles never end. Those between the Emerald City and the City of Destiny, for example. In modern-day style . . .

The Port of Tacoma tries to entice a key shipper away from the Port of Seattle.

The city of Seattle tries to lure away one of Tacoma’s most prestigious businesses.

A solid rundown on the current state of the matter turns up in today’s column by Tacoma News-Tribune’s Peter Callaghan. Search for Seattle rebuttal (though Callaghan’s take was pretty neutral) will get underway shortly . . .

How much of all that public school money is actually making it to the classroom?

That’s a question that ought to be asked a lot more. There’s some useful information toward answering it in a new post by Wayne Hoffman of the Idaho Freedom Foundation:

“Records from the State Department of Education indicate while Idaho’s student population has grown about 16 percent in the last 15 years, the ranks of school employees have grown disproportionately. Teaching staff grew by 26 percent, but school bureaucracies fared better: District administrations grew by 33 percent, while school building administration grew by 27 percent. But the big growth market is in school classified staff - computer techs, secretarial staff, bus drivers, custodians and similar support professions - which has grown 55 percent since 1994.”