Press "Enter" to skip to content

Oldest, hottest

June 27, 2006

The oldest town in Idaho has apparently just become the hottest - in percentages, anyway.

Franklin, so close to the border with Utah that its first settlers - the creators of the first town in the state - thought they still were in Utah, is getting a new subdivision. Its population currently is a little above 600 (and actually growing a bit in recent years, unusual for small rural towns away from metro centers). Now, with a big new subdivision in the works, it looks likely to roughly double in size. (Credit to the namers of the development: Legacy Ranch.)

Think of another small town outside a metro or resort area doing that.

A question on the proper role

June 26, 2006

On his website Butch Otter, the Republican nominee for governor of Idaho, has an intriguing internal link which raises at least one question, maybe two, for this notably philosophical candidate.

The link is to an essay on "The Proper Role of Government," which as it turns out is not written by Otter - which would be worth his writing and our reading - but by Ezra Taft Benson, former leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The web site notes that it was reposted "In response to popular demand," though it may have been intended as well to build bridges to Mormon eastern Idaho. Its positioning in the site suggests that Otter endorses its views, though the site doesn't specifically say so. (Note that we don't ordinarily get into matters of church doctrine - the subject comes up here because Otter's campaign has injected it so prominently.)

In re-reading the piece (it has circulated widely since 1968), we were struck by one passage especially, in which Benson quotes a church document, the Doctrine and Covenants:

"(I) believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, which protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience." (D&C 134: 1-2,5)

So, a question of the candidate: A couple, actually. Was the American Revolution - a revolt against the established government of English - wrong? And were Iraqis who cooperated with Americans in the overthrow and defeat of Saddam Hussein wrong to do so?

Just wondering.

Gregoiristan?

June 26, 2006

Single-line quotes are so apt to be taken out of context that you have to be careful with them. But this one by Washington Governor Chris Gregoire was startling: "Washington is more like a small nation than a state."

Governor Chris GregoireThe context was the recent spate of visits to the state by foreign leaders: Hu of China, Fox of Mexico and (she was announcing) Rasmussen of Denmark, and the comment was a reference to the latter's visit.

Also, allowing Stefan Sharkansky's easy snark, "Yes, but which small nation?
Cuba? Turkmenistan? Honduras?"

But, more substantively, it provides backdrop for the governor's more recent statements on national security.

She said (to be sure, much as California's Arnold Schwartznegger has done) that should not send Washington national guard troops to the Mexican border - that Washingtonians need the security help at home.

Then there was the concern expressed over the reports about North Korean rockets, powerful enough to reach the American west coast. That triggered an unusual call for getting out of Iraq.

And then, the Seattle Times David Postman quotes her as saying this:

"I'm disturbed by what we're hearing. It is not the news that I think any of us should have to hear from North Korea and I want Washingtonians to understand the security risks to the nation and to us, but to understand that we've got to remain ever diligent and I ask every Washingtonian to be smart about their own personal security, and again any time they see something that raises a concern they get to law enforcement right away."

Has all this been just an odd confluence of statements, or are we seeing some new direction in the Gregoire Administration?

And do we hear a third?

June 25, 2006

The Independent caucus in the Oregon Senate has just doubled in size. And maintained the partisan balance in the process. But all that may be the least of it.

Last winter, Senator Ben Westlund, a Republican from the Bend area, said he switched his party registration to independent. He's now running for governor under that label.

Senator Avel GordlyFriday, another senator joined his bolt from the parties: Senator Avel Gordly, a Portland Democrat.

In some ways her departure is even more striking than Westlund's. If in a number of respects Westlund seems to have been diverging from the Republican Party in recent years, it's a lot less surface-obvious in Gordly's case. Her background could hardly fit a Portland Democratic legislator more tightly: Coordinator of Albina Head Start, member of the Albina Community Bancorp Board, director of the American Friends Service Committee, Youth Director for Urban League of Portland (although she also was a parole and probation officer). Her key areas of interest include social services and education, and she has gotten a 100% rating from the Oregon League of Conservation Voters. Her northeast Portland district (23) is solidly Democratic. She's now in her third Senate term.

There's no overt evidence of a philosophical break with her party, with which she's served in the Legislature for 16 years. So why the change?

A short report on the Oregonian's political blog said that "Gordly has made no secret that she believes extreme partisanship gets in the way of doing what's best for the people of Oregon. She's talked for months about switching from Democrat to independent. She stopped going to her party caucus meetings months ago, when Democrats voted to close them to the press."

In other words, the reason seems to have less to do with differences with her own party (apart, maybe, from the closed caucuses) than it does with the whole idea of partisanship. That may make her a more powerful advocate for the idea even than Westlund.

Might she be the precursor, then, to yet another breaker of the ranks?

Small but not forgotten

June 25, 2006

Pretty much all daily newspapers across the United States, and some sub-dailies - some twice- or thrice-weekly or larger weekly papers - along with most news-providing broadcasters are members of the Associated Press, which supplies all those stories with the (AP) tag 0n them. The AP has has its own large newsgathering staff, but most of those stories come from the member newspapers. That creates an enormous reservoir of potential news items, but there's still a large gap: What about all those stories in weekly or other newspapers, stories coming from the smaller communities which aren't picked up?

Small Town Papers News Service, founded (ironically?) in Seattle, aims to remediate that, spreading news from smaller communities.

It's a national service, but Washington seems to be one of its strong points. Its list of participating titles there includes the Edmonds Beacon, the Mattawa Area News, the Mukilteo Beacon, the Bonney Lake & Lake Tapps Courier-Herald at Enumclaw, the Boomerang at Palouse, the Enumclaw Courier Herald and the South County Sun at Royal City.

Oregon papers are the McKenzie River Reflections at McKenzie Bridge, the Clatskanie Chief and the Elgin Times. In Idaho there's the Latah Eagle at Moscow, the Aberdeen Times and the Power County Press at American Falls.

Let’s appoint a commission

June 24, 2006

Now assuming the news reports on this are correct (and please do alert us if they're not), here's the situation in Boise:

Somehow, at some point in the past, an ordinance was put on the books in Boise banning businesses from allowing customers to use sidewalk cafes after dark. Why they did this, no one seems to know. The ordinance has been obscure enough that numerous businesses around town have allowed such cafes to operate extensively, and they're often integral to those businesses. There have been, apparently, no complaints about the practice. The ordinance has not been enforced for years at least, if ever. The facts of the situation recently were brought to the attention of Boise Mayor David Bieter.

There are several ways this could have been handled. Two, primarily.

One is the slam dunk. Since there's no civic controversy here - just about everyone interested is on one side of the matter - the solution seems simple: Draft and pass a new ordinance reflecting an existing reality which is apparently fully acceptable around town. If anyone has a problem with it, they can surface during the ordinance hearing process to say their piece. Most likely, the issue would have been over with already, and Bieter would have gotten points for decisiveness.

The other is what Bieter actually did. He appointed a task force to consider the matter. It plans to deliver a report to the city council on Tuesday. The council will then consider what to do. In the meantime, a lot of people will be on pins and needles over an issue that needn't have been.

There's a lesson in the subtleties of governance here.

UPDATE: As hoped for, a reader brings forth more information (a tip of the hat) which suggests the issue is a little different than the news report had it. (We're not shocked by that.) At the same time, we're not sure our conclusion is much changed - other than that the city's, as it turns out, is closer to it than we thought. Regardless, anyone reading the previous also needs to know the following. (more…)

Open to the world

June 24, 2006

There's such a thing as blurring the lines between government and private interests to the point that a government supported by all of us might operate to the benefit of some. It's a reasonable ethical issue.

Oregon Legislature siteBut there's also such a thing as shutting government off from from people and the world around it - of shutting down interaction and communication in the interest of ethical purity. And that's hardly any better.

Credit the Legislative Administration Committee, meeting Friday at Salem, with seeing as much. (more…)

The voting shot

June 24, 2006

Idaho Democrats peel off a really strong shot at Idaho Republicans so seldom it's worth notice when they do. And notwithstanding that the speaker in this case, Boise attorney Grant Burgoyne, is a friend of long standing, it should be noted too because it could carry some resonance.

The target was a proposal adopted last weekend by the Idaho Republican Party, then as the Democrats are now meeting in convention at Idaho Falls. That party chose to adopt a voting system much that like used in Oregon and a number of other states, a party registration system: Voters declare which if any party they declare, and then vote only for those candidates for nomination. Idaho's current system allows people to enter the voting booth and vote for the candidates of any (single) party they choose.

In years past, Republicans have been wary of such approaches, because Idaho has so many voters who consider themselves independent but ordinarily vote for Republican candidates. If you force them to define themselves more closely, the logic has gone, they might take that independent tag more seriously, and start splitting their votes instead of voting straight Republican. That's the viewpoint that exudes confidence. The alternative, where the Idaho Republicans went last week, was to worry about Democrats and others crossing over to weaken the Republican position. In truth, there's seldom been much evidence that's been a significant factor in Republican primary results. But the Republicans opted for the party-registration approach.

Burgoyne's riposte: "There are a lot of people in this state that refuse to identify with a specific party. ... What the Republicans are really proposing is to take away the rights of people to vote."

Try coming up with a positive-sounding response to that one.

Don’t take it to the bank

June 23, 2006

When a committee of experienced financiers this fall examines the financial options available for rebuilding or replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct in Seattle, it probalby will slow down a groan a bit when it gets the proposal offered today by Mayor Greg Nickles.

Not because it's irrational or unfeasible. But there's an uncomfortable amount of betting on the come involved in it, and for that reason we suspect the search for a winning formula probably will go on.

To back up: The Viaduct is a roadway roughly paralleling the shoreline of Elliot Bay in Puget Sound, between the water and the downtown hillside. the roadway is raised and limited-access. For some , it is a visual abomination; for us (and we fit mainly into this camp). It's a great piece of transportation workmanship, because it actually allows drivers to swiftly (most of the time) cross from one side of downtown to the other. The problem is that it is unstable. A single serious geologic jolt could bring it crashing down.

Dealing with it somehow is going to be expensive, and there's no way around that. Maybe the least expensive way would be eliminating it and throwing traffic onto the surface streets, but in this already traffic-clogged city, few have the stomach for that. The other options: Rebuild it more sturdily more or less where it is, or build a tunnel underneath. The former now has an estimated price tag of up to $2.4 billion, the latter about $3.6 billion. You can reasonably expect both numbers to rise with time. (more…)