It’s a bit of tradition for FederalWayan to indicate how we intend to vote in upcoming elections. This one should come as little surprise, but for completeness’ sake, here goes.

CANDIDATES

FederalWayan supports a straight Democratic ticket. The top candidates of our concern:

Barack Obama

Like no one else that has run in this election cycle, Obama is the first and only 21st Century candidate. Unfettered by outmoded ideas, not pressed into a mold of a previous presidency, not tied to a failed system of policies, and with a forward-looking perspective that sees to an America beyond racial, class, and even political lines. While his opponent tacitly harvests the vote of the ever-divisive, Obama engenders not just hope, but unity; and inspires people to take ownership of their country. The greatest presidents are defined by those that inspired and unified; not by those that divided and conquered.

Chris(tine) Gregoire

Even before being governor, as state attorney general, Gregoire placed Regular Joe far ahead of big business. As governor, she kept the state’s economy strong after being injured by an early teaser of a national recession and bust, without resulting in devastating cuts to government services. While that recession may seem pale in respect to what might be forthcoming, that fact makes it even more critical to retain such governing going forward. Gregoire places individual social freedoms and needs ahead of the interests of padded pockets, and to eliminate that for the alternative is to pretend that “change” doesn’t mean anything.

Randy Dorn

To repair our state’s schools (and Federal Way’s) will need a non-entrenched, non-complacent leader to focus the state’s education efforts and standards. Passive acknowledgement of an imperfect system won’t do anymore. Far from passive, Dorn is an enthusiastic voice for reform in the state’s education system, but not only that, he’s a knowledgeable everyman who has been on the ground in that system as well.

Carol Gregory

Skip Priest converted an early mayorship of Federal Way — during the years of a miniature city Republican Revolution that saw most city founders quickly unseated and now mostly long forgotten — into a state representative seat. This year, joining fellow Republicans like Dino Rossi, he wants people to think of him as a nice friendly local guy who transcends politics — and ignore his actual record of voting like nearly every other Republican congressman in the state legislature. With little else to run on except for name recognition in a city where it is excruiciatingly hard to unseat an incumbent, we have an alternative in rising star Gregory, who has stirred up the local Democrats into an eager bunch behind her campaign, running on a credentialed platform of education reform and job development, instead of photo ops of a too-well-known face.

INITIATIVES AND PROPOSALS
Sound Transit Proposition 1: YES

Light rail now, light rail forever, light rail yesterday would be even better. Roads — even roads packed with more and more magical silver-bullet buses — won’t solve any transportation problems. Light rail is always popular wherever it has been placed; no opponent of Seattle metro light rail can name one instance in the past 60 years where a light rail system has fallen out of widespread use. Forecasts will tell you no one will want to use it; but faced with dealing with difficult traffic and unpredictable buses, a dedicated transit system will become increasingly popular. Once it’s built, and becomes a regular part of transit options, you’ll find that instead of being reviled; it’ll be in demand throughout the region. And Federal Way should be part of that system. Prop 1 doesn’t go nearly far enough nearly quickly enough in doing that; but saying no to light rail expansion — again — won’t make it come any faster.

Initiative 985: NO

The name “Eyman” associated with any initiative will immediately lower my expectations. Overall, I have no love of red light cameras, but if they do serve as a valuable deterrent, Eyman’s latest travesty will lead to their decline and probable removal. Beyond that, an illogical and unresearched mandate on HOV hour limits has no effective purpose (opening carpool lanes to traffic during times they are theoretically not even necessary) other than thumbing his nose at state transportation. While some may applaud the idea of making sure that highway incomes only go to highway expenses, a holistic metropolitan transportation approach does not make such rigid limitations, as there is more than one way to skin a congestion cat.

Initiative 1000: YES

People who have limited time left in their life should not be forced by law to spend their last days of life either in severe pain, or in a debilitating helpless condition. Those who read the actual text of the initiative — as I did — will note the explicit language and careful rules of the proposed program takes it miles away from the nightmare scenarios presented by those who wish to selfishly and autocratically enforce their individual morals (more strongly held among the perfectly healthy) on the terminally ill.

Initiative 1029: NO

Proponents of the bill make the sensible point that, taken in comparison to regulations for hairdressers and dog groomers, the requirements for a home care provider are much smaller — but not, mind you, nonexistent. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the requirements for home care providers need to be jacked up to be in line with them. We can live with less hairdressers, manicurists, and dog groomers; but not everyone can live without a home care provider. Certainly the regulations we have among these trades is a little out of whack — but if so, I’d be more willing to advocate lowering those other standards rather than jacking up those for (and thereby limiting the availability of) home care providers. There will always be isolated incidents of horror stories of untrustworthy home care providers, but we do not have an epidemic of irresponsible home care providers torturing our old people. Better that our seniors have easy access home care rather than be forced to live alone without assistance, or in expensive facilities.

King County Amendment 1: NO

It would be conflict of interest, I think, for the director of elections to be directly elected. Better that the person in charge of making sure our elections are run well, fairly, and securely not have to also be part of the system. Perhaps with a single term limit, this would be more reasonable. But unlike, say, a city mayor, the elections director doesn’t represent anyone or anything, or make decisions that affect the public sphere, but is simply an administrator who needs to run a serious and focused operation of an important democratic engine.

King County Amendment 2: YES

You should not be allowed to fire someone because they are gay (or not gay) or because they act in a manner not typical for their biology. This proposal makes the county follow that principle.

King County Amendment 4: NO

Making it more difficult for citizens to enter government is not a democratic principle, any more than poll taxes or reading tests to vote are. I don’t approve of requiring any sort of arbitrary set of credentials to hold public office. If the people can’t be trusted to make good decisions, then democracy is a failure. Assuming that it is not, then the people do not need to have their candidates pre-filtered by the government they are trying to get them into. Often, those who are not entrenched in established circles do a far better job in government than do those who have been vetted by a self-important professional old boy’s club.

King County Amendment 7: NO

Again, we do not need higher arbitrary hurdles to climb for entering the democratic process. Washington has a proud citizen initiative tradition; it should be maintained and made more open rather than more prohibitive.

King County Amendment 8: NO

I am opposed to nonpartisan elections. I think we need less nonpartisan elections, not more. Some are convinced of the notion that they can determine who will govern best based on what character they can pretend to glean from a political campaign. As a result, instead of being able to vote for values you support, campaigns are run based on who is (or appears to be) the nicer guy rather than who has the best ideas and who is best likely to support your principles in the decision making role of governing. Charismatic people do not necessarily lead to good government or good policies; charisma alone is not enough. Party identification (and endorsement) is a generally reliable gauge of whether they will govern in way that you likely to approve of; even when it isn’t, it is a good gauge of who is more likely to.

Federal Way is….

• the 8th largest city (by population) in Washington state
• the 5th largest city on Puget Sound, and within 100 miles
• the 3rd largest city in King County
• the largest city between Seattle and Tacoma

• the 13th most dense city in Washington
• the 18th largest city (by area) in Washington
• the 6th largest (by area) and densest city in King County

(The densest city in Washington after Seattle is Mattawa, which is 0.5 sq. mi. large and has 2,600 people, for a density of 5,200 ppl. per sq. mi.)
Values taken from Wikipedia and Access Washington.

If sea level were to rise 15 meters, Federal Way would be located on a Puget Sound island running from West Seattle to Edgewood.

What would you call it?

Following up on my comment in my last post about how Federal Way’s logo focuses exclusively on the fact that you can see Mount Rainier from the city. The problem I have with focusing on this aspect of Federal Way is that, along with evergreen trees and the Puget Sound, it is one of the least special things about the city.

I asserted that practically every other South Sound town uses Rainier in their city logos or seals. I thought I’d better back that statement up with a little quick research. Here’s what I found, confirming my assertion.

Granted, a few of these cities (Rainier, for example) that are actually really close to the mountain have a legitimate excuse for emphasizing the mountain nearby. But the towns whose only relation to the mountain is that you can see it from there? Not so much. It’s a big mountain. Being able to see it is nothing special.

Since a number of other local blogs are doing it, I’ll blab here, for the remotely curious, how I intend to vote tomorrow (yes, the increasingly unfashionable old-fashioned way)… and a bit about why.

Prop 1: YES

What it comes down to, really, for me, is this: Light rail from Federal Way to Seattle, plus Tacoma and Bellevue. Having spent most of my life in a city whose transport lived on its subway, the lack of non-bus mass transit in this supposedly modern, supposedly world-class metro area is a glaring omission. The more we put it off, the more glaring it will be, and the more expensive it will become.

Light rail proponents who are against Prop 1, like the Sierra club or the Stranger, argue that the roads portion of the bill is a poison pill. The Stranger criticizes it as “getting urban voters to support a suburban agenda.” What they miss is that the exact opposite is also true: getting suburban voters to support an urban agenda, namely light rail. The roads-and-transit combination is a painful compromise, but one that provides a benefit to those who won’t be benefiting directly from the light rail, such as the sub-suburban areas in the southeast and northeast corners of developed King County. They get better roads, we get light rail. Everyone’s happy, if we’d only allow ourselves and each other to be.

I-960: NO

If the name Tim Eyman wasn’t enough to turn me off to an initiative, the first few sentences does. The proposal says that any tax increase of any sort must receive a 2/3 supermajority in either the legislature or public election. Sounds like an effective check and balance on taxes, until you realize that almost nothing ever passes in this state or county or nearly anywhere else these days with that sort of majority. Eyman and cohorts know this, of course.

Compare also the irony that we have this initiative on the ballot at the same time as one that seeks to eliminate supermajorities for the approval of school bonds.

R-67: YES

We pay for health and other insurance so that we can have peace of mind that, when serious problems happen, we have a safety net that will either take care of it or cushion the blow. We don’t pay for it just for discount meds and routine visits, but for disabling injuries and illnesses too.

Bottom line is, if we can’t count on the insurance companies to make a good faith effort to satisfy their ostensible purpose, then we need to hold them to it with the rule of law; just like if we can’t count on our fellow individual not to drive through opposing traffic or steal candy bars, we likewise hold them to it with the rule of law.

The scare tactics by the insurance companies and business interests say you should vote no, because if you vote yes, insurance rates will go up. (Frankly, that sounds more like a threat than a prediction.) Well, I don’t know where you’ve been, but insurance rates are going up anyway, and have been for some time. We’re paying more for insurance already — are we sure that our insurance company will pay out when we need it the most, or try to weasel out of it with circumstantial evidence or misrepresentation? If we are going to pay for insurance, then we need to make sure we get our money’s worth.

While insurance companies and business interests oppose the law, firefighters and nurses support it. Who’s more likely to have your interests at heart?

JR4204: YES

After seeing last year’s FWPS bond fall just short of the current 60% supermajority, I have to say that the supermajority doesn’t serve either kids or their communities. I’ve heard that one of the reasons that we have this supermajority in the first place is that people feel guilty voting against school funds. Well, good; they probably should feel that way, because our country’s public education is important. Presumably, people likewise feel guilty voting against police or fire funding, but we don’t have a 60% supermajority for those votes. It doesn’t make sense, and our schools need funds.

Dovey vs. Freeman: FREEMAN

Basic math here: Freeman is in favor of an elected mayor. Dovey is against the EFW annexation (thanks FWG). For me, that puts Freeman up one and Dovey down one. (Both opposed Symphony, sadly, so no points for anyone there.) The local papers may argue that Freeman is a newcomer and Dovey has lots of experience. Personally, prior to this election, the name Jack Dovey evoked thoughts of … nothing at all. Given that I can’t think of anything he’s done (apparently he was pro-Celebration Park; more on that hot button issue later), and his positions vs. Freeman’s, I have to add that FW’s political circles could use some new blood.

Duclos vs. Elder: DUCLOS

This is, to me, perhaps the most meaningful election in the city this year. While the Tribune supports Elder, citing her preexisting council experience and years of involvement, the Mirror (surprisingly) supports Duclos.

Why is this the most meaningful election? Federal Way is currently embroiled in a simmering struggle between a homey small-town desire and a growth-oriented urban vision. To me, Elder represents the former, and Duclos mostly represents the latter (although my primary pick, Eric Stavney, who came in a close third, probably represented it better). I for one am for the latter: Symphony, a walkable downtown, light rail, growth, diverse community identity and pride; rather than a nice, quiet, reverent, sleepy little suburb with some nice parks and tightly condensed shopping complexes.

The News-Tribune touts Elder’s “gutsy” move to support Celebration Park years ago. While I won’t debate the value of Celebration Park, this frames the contest: Hope Elder supported the (then-unpopular) construction of a park that gave middle-class kids an unnecessary surplus of places to play soccer and baseball. Meanwhile, Dini Duclos ran a nonprofit company that provides services to lower-class people, young single-parent families and seniors to help them gain self-sufficiency. Hope Elder dreams of an imaginary white-bread Federal Way, Dini Duclos opens her eyes and sees a real modern city with real modern issues both present and probably approaching. Moving forward, it’s clear to me which one Federal Way will need.

Larson vs. Walker: WALKER
Castellar vs. Bronson-Doherty: BRONSON-DOHERTY

Not to pour salt into Larson’s wounds, which he displayed proudly despite not really feeling much pain from them, but last year’s national embarrassment, the Inconvenient Truth debacle, made the city of Federal Way look like a laughingstock, and rightfully so (even without Frosty Hardison’s appearance on the Daily Show). Larson claims to listen to the parents of Federal Way, but when a single notoriously vocal local family (and an unmentioned number of unnamed others) voiced their obscure concern, Larson and a majority of the School Board (including Castellar) were happy to oblige with a rare show of book (or movie) burning. Later, when a deluge of opposing mail (not counting that from outside the district) came in, Larson was not apologetic, only lamentatious. And while the ban on the movie was ostensibly overturned, I’ve not heard a word as to whether or not teacher Kay Walls was ever able to show it.

The school board is run by ideologues; sadly, the stay-at-home parents that have the time to get involved deeply with school and district issues likely share their ideology. But that by no means means that the rest of the parents and other residents of the city (which has consistently voted 54-56% for Kerry, Gregoire, and yes, Gore) share them, and our city’s schools and its children’s education shouldn’t be based on them. The more we can upset that apple cart, the better the community and its kids will be.

Everyone from the Times to the Stranger to the FWBlog are abuzz over Proposition 1, the RTID Roads and Transit Initiative. Even the City Council has thrown in their fourteen cents.

The Times and Stranger are against the plan. But don’t think that these two antitheses are on the same side — the Stranger is against the roads, while the Times is against the light rail. Meanwhile, the City is for the plan, but for the roads, not so much for the light rail, though they’d like that too.

If there’s anything that everyone can agree on, it’s that really no one likes the whole thing. Either you like the light rail or the road expansion, never both.

Most Metro Seattleites probably have not had a lot of experience with light rail. (Most KC suburbanites probably don’t have much experience with the bus system, either.) But, here’s one for the opponents: Find me a place where light rail or other non-roadway-bus mass transit system has been introduced and *not* been popular. Even the little pilot-project Tacoma Link blew out its ridership numbers in its first month. Where such projects have failed, it’s been due to bad management, underfunding, and cultural shifts like the increased popularity of private automobiles starting in the late 1920s.

Light rail is superior to express bus service, because (if elevated [as Link will largely be] or underground) you don’t have to worry about highway or other traffic, no crazy reroutes due to construction, and no getting on the wrong one and accidentally going 20 miles beyond where you wanted to go (as I’ve seen some poor saps do on the various Seattle-FW express buses).

I welcome the light rail. I can’t wait until a proud elevated rail track starts bringing its trains full of people (this includes shoppers and visitors, not just northbound commuters!) to and from Federal Way on an easy, low-hassle, rapid transit dedicated causeway. It’ll mean that Federal Way is truly connected to the Seattle area and has entered a new age.