Open forum, Jan 20-26

Published:

 

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your Columbian.com ID or register for an account at Columbian.com.

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com.


148 comments

Comments

Well, apparently some states can build bridges, even if it's eventually.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/20/nyregion/a-colossal-bridge-will-rise-across-the-hudson.html?hp&_r=0

jacjak — January 20, 2014 at 6:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Portland City Council held a hearing 9 Jan on whether to grant a permit for the next Hempstalk, and whether to allow it to be held at McCall Waterfront Park. Whether a decision was reached isn't entirely clear (I'm thinking it was a fact finding session), but I'm attaching this link to a WW article covering it for a couple of reasons.

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-21750-willie_weed_high_drama.html

The theater of the hearing can't be overlooked. Here on our side of the river we get middle aged preppie liberals coyly repeating trite phrases like "I am Ed Barnes", and angry NeoCons droning on incessantly while chastising office holders for trampling and spitting on The Constitution. If this hearing is anywhere near representative of Portland City Council's norm, then imagine a room full of Alleycats - entertainment to the max. Attendance would have to be SRO - the best show in town, and for free.

I've been noting my dissatisfaction with what the APIL crowd has been serving up - boring and repetitious. If they're going to satirize, or otherwise poke fun at the local shirts and players on the scene, then they ought to learn from this guy - Willard Greene's article had me chuckling several times. His article is truly funny; most of what we get from APIL rarely moves beyond mean spirited.

roger — January 20, 2014 at 7:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: I enjoyed that story, too. As for APIL, successful humor in writing or performance is hard to sustain over time.

jacjak: We'll get our bridge. Someday.

Indulge me, please, with another Madore observation: he is having trouble keeping his public commissioner profile separate from his personal profile in his social media endeavors. I think most of his fans think that's OK, but it will bite him and the county someday soon. Boundaries should be clearer.

For example, he used to have a website called "Prosper and Thrive (his most overused sound bite)." It could be found at prosperandthrive dot org. On it, he had started to post what he said was "official" Clark County information, as seen through his filters only. He implied that it was a county-sanctioned website, but it was decidedly was not.

Some people, myself included, expressed concern about this blurring of lines to him directly, as well as to the county attorneys who advise him. What was wrong with it? There was no county oversight or official endorsement of its content, yet he was presenting it to the public as if it was a county website spinoff. Truth in advertising, remember that?

Reality, as interpreted by Madore, should stay on his personal opinion pages. I am all for him expressing his interesting opinions, but don't present it as if it were official government policy. Present it as your own ideas. Add a disclaimer: "These opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of my employer."

Anyway, the website has been removed.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 8:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


jacjak — January 20, 2014 at 6:29 a.m.,

A few comments on the Tappan Zee replacement project:

Your article notes a $3.9 billion build cost. As with most of these projects, they leave out the estimated pay off cost, which is estimated at somewhere between $5 and $6 billion. Still, for a 3 mile long bridge planned with 4 lanes on each span, that's a whole lot cheaper than what we're planning for our 1 mile long I5 bridge.

They say tolls are $5. If I'm not mistaken, that's the toll now - on the old bridge, to help pre-pay the new one. And that's one way. The tolls are expected to rise to between $12 and $15 round trip. Still, that is cheaper (as noted) than on the George Washington Bridge. This difference appears to be attainable by selling the naming rights. (Hmmm... Do we get the Jay Zee Bridge, with Beyonce songs playing on a P.A. system to entertain us while crossing? Or perhaps the Trump Bridge, with a trap door section of road to open at times, dropping the poor unsuspecting driver into the river, while The Donald booms "You're fired!")

They also have this obsession with fish - how much was the cost increased for that "bubble zone" to protect the sturgeon? Assorted bird and mammal carcasses litter our landscape as an "unfortunate" trade off for progress, but for some reason fish are sacred? (The CRC was planning down time with building, due to the salmon runs.)

On the positive side, this project shows compromise at work. Both a commuter rail span and BRT were dropped as too expensive, with the caveat of "Providing a crossing that does not preclude future trans-Hudson transit services." (That was the original CRC plan, by the way.) Instead, they're planning dedicated express bus lanes for rush hour use.

The Tappan Zee carries I87, and is considered critical to interstate travel and commerce in the Northeast (sound familiar?). It has also been tagged as a "project of national significance." They received a $1.6 billion TIFIA loan from FTA - less than was asked for (note to Oregon!!!). Why they didn't go for a New Starts grant isn't clear.

I'm seeing Tappan Zee as a good example of planning a needed project in economic times when funding from all sources is uncertain. And they're still concerned about meeting debt payments! All the more reason to kill the CRC, and return to the table to plan a reasonable project that will meet real needs without breaking the bank.

(And this CAPTCHA is again becoming very ridiculous)

roger — January 20, 2014 at 8:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 19, 2014 at 10:03 p.m. ,

All very good questions about that Figg visit.

Madore's interest is obvious - He wants that 192nd Ave bridge, and the hell with anything else. And while that may be the cheapest bridge to build, it would also deliver the least benefit - it could benefit our east County and Gresham, but would mostly just redirect the traffic jams that will still end up at the I84/I205 juncture.

Today's paper has a Political Beat article covering a 13 Jan Clark County Democrat party resolution asking Gov Inslee to veto a Transportation bill that doesn't include $450 million for the CRC. (Hmmm... Ed Barnes again.) The local Chair, Mike Heywood, observed that this is a long shot, but it's also consistent with what the 49th District legislators were saying a couple of months ago, when the Trans bill without CRC funding was gaining momentum. So just perhaps they, and Vancouver City Council, are continuing to refuse considering anything other than the CRC? If so, then why bother inviting them?

What I'm afraid of, though, is that this is more "politics as usual." You know how a whole lot of us here on the east and north sides weren't too happy because our input on the CRC wasn't considered necessary? I'd hate to think this is another "You had your turn; it's our turn now) tactic. (And as a side note, I've heard since 2008 or 2009 that Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the House Repub leadership this when they complained about lack of input to the ACA, but have yet to track down the actual conversation.)

roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 8:45 a.m.

Why are you on last week's page?

At any rate - Yes, that is (in my mind) a liberal viewpoint. A conservative one would be to say each person needs to pay for what they want - there ain't no free lunch.

My idea is that everyone should pay something, but all share equally in the benefit. The only people who should get a free ride are those physically or mentally incapable of doing any work at all. Categorize that as you wish. The problem with my line of thinking is that it isn't workable in our current political environment that preaches the need for jobs, but continues to allow the large corporations to kill smaller competitors or move jobs offshore - all in the pursuit of the dollar. And rather than working to correct this, our so-called liberals would rather increase the handouts which keep so many people dependent on government largesse, to the detriment of those who do work for a living.

roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


One brave and honest soul posted this to David Madore today on his FB page (subject: his invitation to Figg Engineering to submit a CRC alternate proposal):

"I trust, David, that you will continue to make arrogant, unilateral decisions which attempt to override the democratic process. That is the foundation of trust I have in your narrow-minded, self-serving style of "governance." And that you will attempt to buy those decisions."

As with all dissenting opinion expressed via his FB page, it will be gone soon.

Thought I would document it now because she expresses the concerns of others, too.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"The same thing happened on the national level that year, due to the health care plan and the refusal of Speaker Pelosi to allow Repub participation in the planning."

roger — January 19, 2014 at 5:14 p.m.

(And as a side note, I've heard since 2008 or 2009 that Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the House Repub leadership this when they complained about lack of input to the ACA, but have yet to track down the actual conversation.)

roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:40 a.m.

roger- I've heard you beat this drum many times. (twice in two days!?) It's quite the conservative talking point that says the GOP was shut out of the health care debate. Pretty tough road to hoe when conceptually the ACA was founded on their ideas. That, and republican leadership insisting their party be unified in their efforts, not only against the ACA, but all things Obama. Your repeated assertions, which align themselves perfectly with the "woe is us" GOP base, doesn't wash.

This Pelosi bashing is as old as "Obama's gonna git yer guns" argument.

All bun-no beef.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/republican-ideas

http://billmoyers.com/2013/10/29/why-republicans-have-no-business-being-upset-about-obamacare/

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 10:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 8:45 a.m.

"Why are you on last week's page?"

Because that is where the conversation was.

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 10:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"My idea is that everyone should pay something, but all share equally in the benefit."

roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:58 a.m.

You know what some of your conservative friends would say about that statement...

If I'm understanding correctly, it stands to reason that everyone should pay into the system on a scale that's commensurate with their income for the sake of balance, is that correct? If so, would our system which allows various forms of taxation be improved if we went to 50's-60's era type tax rates? Would the state of our nation benefit?

I think if we are to tax anything directly, it should be war. Let everybody chip in a healthy and continuous amount. A war tax to be revisited often. I guarantee our wars would be shorter and our conflicts fewer.

Only a small percentage of American's are directly involved with America's war games. Spread the wealth. Sprinkle some of the pain.

A fun and pertinent interview snippet featuring O'reilly & Hillary.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/may/02/hillary-clinton/rates-were-a-lot-higher-back-in-the-day/

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 11:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


As I predicted, the comment to David Madore I copied at 10:04 am is gone, gone, gone from his sanitized FB page.

The only evidence that she was ever there is in his admonishing reply:

"Marcia McReynolds, any new project must embrace open honest transparency and full disclosure as its foundation. Only then can we create a shared vision that becomes part of our identity."

Open, honest transparency, Marcia, but only as he defines it.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 11:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Sychophants, of course. But sycohpants is a good nick-name for someone. :)
manthou — January 19, 2014 at 10:05 p.m.

At times, Psychopants would work!

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 11:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit: Indeed! Perfect nickname for mentally interesting politicians.

Hey, is anyone hoping to make a trip to the "Pot Bowl?" I am clueless when it comes to football (soccer and lacrosse I get), but thrilled to see the Pacific NW represented this year.

How much do you think tickets will cost? :)

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 11:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 20, 2014 at 11:26 a.m.

I looked at that manthou. How people embrace these canned, disingenuous responses from Madore, is a mystery that can only be solved at the alter I'm afraid.

Hallelujah! David has slain the CRC Goliath and is building us a new bridge without light rail!!!
(just don't get into details:)

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 11:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 20, 2014 at 11:34 a.m.

I wonder if they'll change the start time to 4:20?

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 11:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — January 20, 2014 at 7:36 a.m.

Good post and I appreciate your take. I think the "I Am Ed Barnes" crowd is a decent counter to the, "Don't Tread On Me" faction. In the end, any results most likely will be akin to lighting a fuse at both ends.

---

"People will elect those who they are certain won't change their story once elected (e.g., Leavitt running with the support of the Repub party) for big issues like this (and the ACA on the national level)."

roger — January 19, 2014 at 5:14 p.m.

Considering last election results, isn't that like spinning doughnuts in your driveway? Two-Term-Timmy is still mayor, and this last election tilted left.

And besides, what politician has never changed their story? I remember when the much celebrated Marc Boldt reversed his revenue position concerning the Yakima Bears and cost us this project. No heart. Yet you rarely see him criticized for it. Such wonderful alternatives local republicans provide us with. Great candidates. Spineless or Delusional, take your pick.

At least Leavitt is proudly hypocritical.

Like most political leaders.

:)

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 12:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


That's a good one Nail. I had never heard of proudly hypocritical. That could apply to 99 percent of our elected leaders. The reason you never heard anymore about Marc Boldt is because both parties wanted him out. He was to much center for either one.

timerick — January 20, 2014 at 3:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Here on our side of the river we get middle aged preppie liberals coyly repeating trite phrases like "I am Ed Barnes",
roger — January 20, 2014 at 7:36 a.m.

Today's paper has a Political Beat article covering a 13 Jan Clark County Democrat party resolution asking Gov Inslee to veto a Transportation bill that doesn't include $450 million for the CRC. (Hmmm... Ed Barnes again.)
roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:40 a.m.

And rather than working to correct this, our so-called liberals would rather increase the handouts which keep so many people dependent on government largesse, to the detriment of those who do work for a living.
roger — January 20, 2014 at 9:58 a.m.

Not to get all sensitive here, but what gives? 'middle aged preppie liberals coyly...'? Preppie? Coyly? Really? Then here again, 'so-called liberals...' why are liberals 'so-called'? And, Ed Barnes? Why is he being thrown under the bus for a catchy throw away phrase in order to discuss a totally unrelated subject? Maybe I've not been paying attention, but this seems a bit off the beaten path for usually well phrased, well researched, and informative contribution to all that needs to be mulled over.

Then again, it is getting on to tax season...maybe we all are a bit more raw around the edges...

jacjak — January 20, 2014 at 3:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick — January 20, 2014 at 3:03 p.m.

Proudly hypocritical. I think of A. Weiner fitting that description perfectly. On Boldt, if you say he was too much center, I'll take your word for it. You've lived with his politics more than I have. I remember him as having the ability to degenderize himself in the public arena like nobody's business.

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 3:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


HEY DAVID MADORE, DID YOU READ THIS????

President Barack Obama says smoking pot isn’t “more dangerous” than drinking alcohol.
“As has been well-documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life,” Obama said in a lengthy profile in the current issue of the New Yorker magazine. “I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol.”

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/19/22360951-obama-pot-not-more-dangerous-than-alcohol?lite>1;=43001

Of course, you probably don't drink either, do you.

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 3:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Party extremism happens on both sides of the aisle, but not with equal measure. Tea Party factions are destroying the republican party from within. Extremism has become the order of the day.

-Sen. Mitch McConnell's Biggest Foe May Be Conspiracy Theorist Greg Fettig-

WASHINGTON -- The leader of an audacious tea party plan in Kentucky to oust Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) believes unknown forces orchestrated the 2008 financial collapse to give Barack Obama the presidency. "It's too coincidental in my opinion," Greg Fettig of Unbridled Liberty tells The Huffington Post. "It’s just timing. It’s just extremely suspect in my mind."

Fettig is also convinced that President Obama was not born in the United States and, in his podcast, calls him “an illegal president” who “is intent on collapsing and destroying the United States of America. He hates America.” When a Democratic member of Congress got robbed, he tweeted that it was merely “chickens coming home to roost.”

Fettig is no marginal activist. U.S. News and World Report highlighted his role in Kentucky last week, noting that Fettig was the organizer behind the effort that helped challenger Richard Mourdock topple Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar, which cost the GOP the general election race. Fettig said he sees that race as a victory nonetheless, and hopes to replicate it in Kentucky. If "we beat McConnell, we can prove we can do back-to-back Senate races and we can take anybody out if we work together," he told U.S. News.

..

Fettig's social media presence is dedicated in equal parts to trashing Muslims, Obama and the GOP establishment. He insists that Obama is not just Muslim, but also a communist. "This man is a Muslim communist; he’s not a Christian. There’s a war on Christianity worldwide. President Obama says this isn’t a Christian nation, it wasn’t founded by Christians and there were Muslims in our founding fathers. That’s B.S. That’s crap, it’s a lie," Fettig said recently on his podcast.

That's not all Fettig believes. Back on the issue of revolution, Fettig thinks that if there is a new Civil War, it could be started by the Department of Homeland Security. “Right now as I speak, there is a second American Revolution going on,” Fettig said on his podcast last week. “No there hasn’t been bloodshed, there hasn’t been shots fired, yet, and I don’t think there will be until the federal government starts it. But they have started it with Obamacare. Why do you think the Department of Homeland Security has bought enough bullets to shoot every American six times over? It’s not for target practice. You don’t buy hollow point bullets to shoot at targets. That is highly expensive ammo.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/20/mitch-mcconnell-tea-party_n_4631923.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 3:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


jacjak & Nails - Well, I've got to give you someone to yell at.

roger — January 20, 2014 at 5:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Something is going on at the old Best Buy off Hazel Dell. The parking lot is full of cars with their trunks open and there are lots of cops on the street. No idea what's happening.

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 6:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — January 20, 2014 at 5:50 p.m.

Well, that's generous, but not necessary. Not much of a yeller myself Or, perhaps it's more of an ongoing goal more than something I'm not. Where is it written that every opinion should be delivered respectfully? Different points of view are not out of the norm, derisive words and all, tho not so often lately. It's cool.

jacjak — January 20, 2014 at 6:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Uh-Oh, crazy Carolyn is at it again;

Vancouver resident Carolyn Crain has announced that she'll again run for the legislative seat currently held by state Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver.

Crain, a retired business owner, will formally kick off her campaign for the 49th Legislative District's second House position with an event Thursday.

Among the Republican's top priorities are taxation issues, the economy and individual rights, she said.

Crain said she decided to make another run for the Legislature this year because she believes the 49th District needs a change. "We are fiscally conservative across the board on issues that are fiscal, and that really is who I am. And that's not really who he is," Crain, 54, said of Moeller, 58. "I think we really need representation who thinks about fiscal issues the way that we (do)."

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/ja...

I think Moeller is really OUT there but you'd get whiplash between those two.

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 7:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 7:57 p.m.

I was just about to post the same.

Must be an awful slow news day for the C's carousel. Complete with pic...(what were they thinking)

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 8:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"We are fiscally conservative across the board on issues that are fiscal, and that really is who I am. And that's not really who he is,..."

Is english her second language?

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 8:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk and Nailingit: Maybe she'll dump her snarky delivery along with the CRC topic.

One can only hope.

My favorite interchange between Moeller and Crain happened after she lost the election to him last time. She asked him something to the effect: What are you doing in the legislature?

Moeller's quip of a reply: Because I beat you like an old rug, Carolyn.

He's gonna do it again.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 8:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail you should meet her in person. That would answer all your questions.

timerick — January 20, 2014 at 8:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Tomorrow's going to be a full agenda at the BOCC. Tune in or, better yet, show up.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 8:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick — January 20, 2014 at 8:37 p.m.

That would scare the hell out of me! I've heard her speak several times and it always leaves me not wanting more.

manthou — January 20, 2014 at 8:35 p.m.

Will the right have a serious challenge to Moeller? If this is the best local republican leadership can do, Moeller will have a cake walk.

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 9:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


SERIOUSLY???? If I had hair, I'd pull it out.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) celebrated Martin Luther King Day by urging President Barack Obama to honor the civil rights leader's legacy by not "playing the race card."

The former vice presidential candidate took to her Facebook page to mark the holiday, quoting King's historic "I Have A Dream" speech.

She followed the quote with a message of her own to Obama.

"Mr. President, in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. and all who commit to ending any racial divide, no more playing the race card," she wrote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/20/sarah-palin-mlk_n_4632831.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D432572

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 10:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick — January 20, 2014 at 8:37 p.m.

Isn't 'The Crain' Lew's girl? Is this the answer republicans have to replace Moeller? Is Crain the conservative prototype local republicans are pushing through the ranks? If so, I'll invest in a popcorn machine. Is anyone in charge at our local GOP? Or is it just bloggers, Madorites, and rednecks running the place.

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 10:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I don't know about her being Lew's girl. she does respond to most of what he says. I think they all try to be tea party types. They are going to learn the tea party is not going to work. The way of saying my way or the highway is wrong and people are seeing that. On the other hand we have Moeller doing the same thing from the other side. The 49th is not going to have much to chose from. I have had several talks with Moeller and he does not listen to any voice but his. My brother is a staunch democrat and he even won't vote for Moeller. Coming to a balance seems to be a thing of the past. Thats why nothing gets done anymore. Complete lack of respect from some from both sides is and has been lacking for a long time.

timerick — January 20, 2014 at 10:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Nail, why don't you run against Moeller AND Crain. Nobody wants either of them so you might just pull it off. Hell, I'd vote for you.

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 10:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


jacjak - Thanks again for Pacific Standard; I'm truly enjoying what I'm finding there.

Several months ago I posted a link to an article that said there's not just a Red and a Blue America - I think they decided there are 12 distinct regionally formed subcultures. Along a similar vein, this article says that we as a society are markedly different from much of the rest of the world - that the Western, industrial world holds entirely different views on basic human interactions, and that we're even different among that group.

http://www.psmag.com/magazines/magazine-feature-story-magazines/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135/

Taken a step further, people in a relatively stable population tend to have a homogenous culture. It's where we have a relatively large population of transplants (like here) where extreme differences can be expected. Steve Stills wrote many years back "There's battle lines being drawn. Nobody's right if everybody's wrong." Change that 'wrong' to another 'right' - We are not going to accomplish anything useful when we spend so much time categorizing ideas and people as one or the other.

Point 1 - I irritated a couple here yesterday by making some rather snide remarks about Ed Barnes. But it's perfectly OK to make similar comments about Carolyn Crain? In their own groups they're both right. Why is one side "righter"?

Point 2 - We're trying to apply labels to each other, and failing. That's because we don't agree on what the labels mean. I've always considered myself more of a liberal, but that's based on the meaning placed of that term that was held in the old Pennsylvania factory towns, where the so-called Protestant work ethic held sway. We "liberals" there believed in things like racial equality, decided homosexuals were OK and didn't need to be beaten up just to prove some unknown point, etc. We weren't into forcing others to see life according to our terms as much as our parents were. But we still looked down on those who didn't work and relied on a government handout, among other things. There was room for difference, but only so far. That's changed. We no longer really know what these labels mean when used, and some of us prefer to shy away from them altogether.

(There's also an article this month on why the techie crowd is moving into the cities, and a belief that the suburbs aren't cool. I guess I'll have to get to that next. Perhaps Russell will explain the "war" between those who want to build a city in the old downtown, and those who want to maintain our suburbs? On that topic - I AM RIGHT!!!)

roger — January 21, 2014 at 5:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: You are well-read, my friend. I always was impressed with that from the start of your participation here. Remember when I called you our Reader's Digest for matters-of-consequence? Deep thinker. That's a compliment in a world that not only rejects the suburbs, it rejects intelligence.

timerick: The local Repubs are infighting, as you know. The last Vancouver City Council election showed that they cannot just run any warm body, especially one that harps on the CRC and is seen as obstructive across the board. Roger, you bemoan Alishia Topper's inexperience. The voters chose her over Stewart partially because Topper ran on YES. Carolyn Crain says she will not focus on the CRC for good reason.

Forum: I will be watching the BOCC this morning. Join me, please. I'd be there, but I am having a ductless heat pump installed at the beach cabin (after suffering a $300 electric bill for baseboard heat last month) today. The meeting should give us all more good information.

Speaking of BOCC, when will Stuart announce his decision to run? He spends so much time in Olympia, I keep thinking he has his goals set elsewhere.

manthou — January 21, 2014 at 7:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This made me smile:

The most popular New York Times story last year was written by an intern:

http://www.businessinsider.com/most-popular-story-in-new-york-times-2014-1

manthou — January 21, 2014 at 7:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good Lord! Incomprehensible... and some of the comments were horrid.

http://rt.com/news/wealthy-rich-85-billion-879/

jacjak — January 21, 2014 at 7:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — January 21, 2014 at 5:43 a.m.

"Good post and I appreciate your take. I think the "I Am Ed Barnes" crowd is a decent counter to the, "Don't Tread On Me" faction. In the end, any results most likely will be akin to lighting a fuse at both ends."

nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 12:47 p.m.

On your first point. How you derived I was irritated with you I have no idea. (hesitant to single out jj?) I feel like a prop. (woe is me!:) I even complimented your reasoning. Do you assume I'm enamored with the Ed Barnes crowd because you label me as a liberal? My point was both most likely will cancel each other out. Neither one trumping the other.

On Crain. You're conflating an obviously flawed candidate with a principled local movement, a flake and a face. Of course one is "righter". You're injecting your own form of Political Correctness into the conversation. Putting Bozo The Clown on a pedestal and decrying anything but equal treatment.

When you state some of the things you do, the way you do, then play the no labels card.....was it to deflect attention away from jj's questions? jacjak — January 20, 2014 at 3:16 p.m. Maybe not addressing the politics of your latest-repeated assertions about the ACA? nailingit — January 20, 2014 at 10:11 a.m.

Normally I would agree with manthou's complimentary take on your postings, and I agree with jj's post on your "usually well phrased, well researched, and informative contribution..."

But this time...

Please don't become another high maintenance conservative! :)

nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 9:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Hey Nail, why don't you run against Moeller AND Crain. Nobody wants either of them so you might just pull it off. Hell, I'd vote for you."

Hawkman — January 20, 2014 at 10:38 p.m.

And cavort around with the likes of Pike and Rivers? Run a few laps with Stonier? It does sound intoxicating, and thank you for your support. Will they accept an avatar for a candidate? Something to think about.

Regardless of my decision, a write-in vote come November would be unashamedly appreciated.

(_8(l)

nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 9:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Citizen Pollard just had him some commissioners for breakfast. Heh.

Drift — January 21, 2014 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal



Nail do you still have a suit like those on your youtube video? Drift it looks like the whole state is going to fight pot producers. They won't give them the same tax breaks as other agriculture producers. Seems a bit unfair to me. It looks like they will go to any means to see them all fail. Hard to make it a success if all the card are stacked against you from the start.

timerick — January 21, 2014 at 11:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick — January 21, 2014 at 11:31 a.m.

No. Most likely it was selectively donated

Hey, is that Susan Sarandon in drag playing bass on the far left?

nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 11:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


They kind of looked alike. I don't remember having hair like that. But then again I don't remember have any hair!!.As a kid back then I remember my grand folks saying we were all doomed. Sometimes I think they were right. My brother and I got flat tops regardless if we wanted it or not. Grandma did it with old hand clippers. They looked like what you would use to clip sheep with. Not a pleasant experience.

timerick — January 21, 2014 at 12:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Two and a half hours and the Commissioners are still debating. Steve making some good counterpoints.

manthou — January 21, 2014 at 12:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DRIFT:
i believe that every pot plant should be dug up and destroyed. every seed should be irradiated to prevent the capacity to reproduce. having said that, i voted 'for' legalization because the unbiased review of the issue calls for that position.

ROGER: administrative order;
the prior uses of this 'privilege' was target-specific, usually having to do with national security. the current office-holder is not bound by such irrelevancies; he ignores current law on immigration, intends to change it by fiat, as an example. he does the same with health care. i read an interview with one of his former staffers who said he treated the presidency as a 'shiny new toy'.

this does NOT instill confidence that our constitution is being reasonably handled. given that our constitution-protector is the attorney general, i'm not hopeful that it's separation of powers is a given anymore.

DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


HUH, imagine that. A corrupt politician. AND his wife. It must rub off. I wonder if anybody will look into Benton.

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife were indicted Tuesday on corruption charges after a monthslong federal investigation into gifts the Republican received from a political donor.
The 14-count indictment against McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, includes one count of conspiracy to commit honest-services wire fraud; three counts of honest-services wire fraud; one count of conspiracy to obtain property under color of official right; six counts of obtaining property under color of official right; and one count of making false statements to a federal credit union.
Bob McDonnell is also charged with an additional count of making a false statement to a financial institution, and Maureen McDonnell is charged with one count of obstruction of an official proceeding.

http://www.mycenturylink.com/news/read/article/ap-former_va_gov_bob_mcdonnell_wife_indicte-ap

Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 2:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


this does NOT instill confidence that our constitution is being reasonably handled. given that our constitution-protector is the attorney general, i'm not hopeful that it's separation of powers is a given anymore.

DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:43 p.m.

I believe the "constitution-protector" would be the Supreme court. Would it not?

Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 2:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


NAIL et al:

ok, i'll go ahead and ask: just who the he77 is ED BARNES?

MANTHOU: "The local Repubs are infighting, as you know. The last Vancouver City Council election showed that they cannot just run any warm body, especially one that harps on the CRC and is seen as obstructive across the board."

which would you rather have....? a group that has active differences in priorities, or one that is, like the old russian communists, forced by threat to be of one mind?

DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I believe the "constitution-protector" would be the Supreme court. Would it not?

Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 2:49 p.m.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

this is uncharted territory. in order for the supremes to be involved, somebody has to file a constitutional challenge. seen anybody do that? the executive order issue isn't even adequately covered in the constitution; the supreme court really doesn't have much it can use as established constitutional law; it's not actually defined in the constitution. that means the supremes will be writing constitutional law.

DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:58 p.m.

Seems to me they had something to say about the ACA. I can't imagine somebody in the House that doesn't like what the Pres is doing, not filing a challenge. Seems to be a given. Here, this list is interesting, give it a look.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

And this one, a little informative.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/obama-executive-orders-guns.html

Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 3:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"NAIL et al:

ok, i'll go ahead and ask: just who the he77 is ED BARNES?"

DeeLittle — January 21, 2014 at 2:53 p.m.

I think he's some community activist union guy or something.

__

On another note:

Already more than 46,000 Clark County residents have expressed their support if I choose to challenge The Crain and MoeJo for one of Olympia's golden keys.

http://www.morethan46thousoundccresidentsexcitedifnailingitranagainstmoejo&crain-;###unbelievablytrue.com

Normally I would say thank you. But all this support has left me speechless.

nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 4:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Any assessment of today's BoCC from manthou or anyone? I wasn't able to watch it.

nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 4:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Any assessment of today's BoCC from manthou or anyone? I wasn't able to watch it.
nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 4:33 p.m.

Same here. Drift made a tantalizing reference to Pollard at 10:51. Manthou, what was the debate with Stuart counterpoints about?

CVTV airs it at 7pm I think. Will see what I can catch then, too.

jacjak — January 21, 2014 at 5:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Funny, I can't seem to get that link to work..... But I TOTALLY believe you!!!

Dee, Ed Barnes is the guy that goes to the BOCC meetings and complains about Benton every meeting. Benton threatened to sue him for harassment or some such thing.

Of course you could have done this yourself but I'll help you out in the spirit of full disclosure.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/no...

Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 5:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — January 21, 2014 at 4:12 p.m. -- Sadly, the link doesn't work. And I was wanting to make a donation.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, I stand corrected - We can get entertaining at our meetings here too.

David Madore has to say something after every consent agenda item.

The first speaker on the consent agenda was Ed Barnes. He and Madore had a nice little argument over whether we were saving or losing money due to removing park fees. Stuart threw a couple of details in of his own - not sure, but I think they decided we were saving a few bucks. But somewhere along the way Barnes said the parks were overrun or something, and the elimination of fees kept them from hiring new sheriffs to be on the roads to keep people from being run over. Madore says they're studying the Sheriff's Office budget looking for ways to save the money to hire 8 new sheriffs. I figure Lucas is thrilled to hear he's got about $750,000 being wasted, and that Madore is there to help him. (Maybe he'll recommend they sell the armored car?)

The second comment on the consent agenda was a long speech by someone going by first name only (Bill, or Bob?) bringing the Board to task for their needing 6 months to gain information that they were supposed to have gathered already. Along the way he says he came from under a rock, has apparently been arrested or is on the run, needs a job, can buy weed here for $120 per ounce, and - at the end - says there's probably a little orange dot trained on him. He was supposed to give them his plan to make a half billion $$ per year, but was told that it would have to wait for the February hearing.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Smarmy - I think that's the best word to describe Madore. He begs you to want to dislike him with that voice and oh so sincere delivery of his. I'm wondering how many people actually listen to the words?

roger — January 21, 2014 at 6:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Public comment.

Ed Barnes, again. (Oh yeah, he chastised them on the bridges last time up.) This time he's asking about Benton being gone, and wants to know why he's needed if the people here can handle the job. Rant rant rant - Benton sued me, David banned the papers, Madore says the papers lie, and then suddenly a 360 back to Benton being unqualified and not here.

Espinosa. Input on a general plan. What plan? Lot determination and higher fees. A comparison to Cowlitz County where we don't come off too well. I agree with Mielke!!! I have no idea what he's talking about, and neither does he. Madore says to go talk to Anna - maybe she can figure it out.

Yokum. Ridgefield and zoning issues. Urban hold? Appears a zoning change for two lots when these are supposed to be on hold. Stuart spoke on 2016 growth plan. Didn't answer the question. Property zoned MX? Stuart says you can sell under old zoning. Guy says OK. Sidetracked to not wanting to be in urban growth area, and a few other gripes about mixed use (that's what MX is) and how someone sold some land for use this guy doesn't like. See Anna again.

Royce Pollard. Prayer out of place. Advisory votes a waste. Congratulate on transparency and get rid of dead wood (all the people who left). Yabba yabba yabba. Did you want to say something, Tom? Tom (wisely) declines. This is a tired, angry old man trying to get someone to think he's relevant.

Carol someone. We need to be involved with the 2016 Plan. (Seems something about land use to find out more about.) Clark County United.

You know, City Council "gaveled down" and otherwise did everything possible to shut the anti-CRC speakers up a few years ago. I'd say our County Board is a lot more tolerant, considering that they (Madore and Mielke) get the same lectures week after week after week....

roger — January 21, 2014 at 7 p.m. ( | suggest removal


2016 Comprehensive Plan update. (I guess this is what was mentioned earlier. A powerpoint brief. Looks like we can plan population growth rates? OK, Oliver, what's your point? Where is this going? We keep getting different stats on historical and projected growth rates. Time to fast forward - he's just rambling. OK - now the public participation plan. I don't care about the process. Cities and some school districts want medium growth accepted. Madore says we haven't talked about the public participation plan???? What did he just spend 5 minutes on?

I presume this is important to planning, but for someone who hasn't been following the Plan, this is as clear as mud. Madore and Oliver are doing a great job of seeing who can talk the most and say the least, but....

Stuart says we'll use GIS technology. Madore congratulates the world for this decision.

Testimony time.

Snodgrass (Vancouver). They support the two recommendations Oliver gave. We're growing faster than the average.

Irish (La Center). Says why public participation plan is good. Told what that city's growth plan is. Growth stays steady due to fee waivers. Wants a medium range growth plan. Allows land and employment growth. (I'm getting a little of an idea now.)

Wall (Ridgefield). Agrees with Vancouver and La Center.

Howsley (Building Industry committee of some sort). Seems to be saying the stats aren't entirely relevant due to a projected rapid upswing in growth as a catch up, and too much relevance given to the recession. They want more land to be made available for building.

Carol Levinin (Clark County United). Agrees with last guy. SR502 interchange upgrades will accelerate growth. She made a vague reference to a bridge and growth there - presumably the I5 and Waterfront Development.

Stuart talking about using GIS to see what's actually there - sounds like a combination of identifying what can't be built on, identifying where infill can be done, and expansion needed. What they're doing today is purely residential, and they want to target a ratio of jobs per household.

Galimo (SGA Engineering). Agrees projections too low. (OK - This is about trying to get the proper amount of land allocated for new housing starts. The builders want more.)

Fast forward. Stuart makes point that the problem is not enough jobs here to support a housing boom.

They adopted the medium growth estimate and the public participation plan.

So, if I understood what this was all about, we're going to take a middle of the road approach to new residential housing zoning permits - we need to keep too many homes from being built because we don't have the jobs on this side of the river to support the people.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 7:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The biggest lesson from that session is NEVER EVER let a numbers man talk. Oliver was wallowing in his stats.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 7:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The five Transportation Advisory votes. The intent of the votes. (West side failed by 49 votes? I missed that.) (Awful lot of blue saying we want those votes!!!)

Public comment.

Ed Barnes left.

Lee Jensen. Against East County bridge. Hasn't consulted with business groups. Gave a very thorough analysis of why the alternate bridge routes won't fix the I5 bridge problems. (The question is, why are we trying to maintain everything in that area, rather than build to push for expansion? A major difference in philosophy here.)

Levinin supports the east bridge. Notes the same thought process against alternate routes existed before I205 was built. Need more bridges!

Bridget McLeman. Clarify that the advisory votes meant we want to vote, not that we were for or against the projects.

A whole lot of talk on what the vote meant.

Stuart wants solutions. On boards where all three sit, they should each vote their own way, rather than being forced to follow the Vancouver bloc vote requirement. (Excellent point.) Then he starts waffling on the light rail - the only impact he considers relevant is the neighborhood affected by rail. (He's removing cost, and the impact on the bridge itself.)

Mielke gave the best counter argument - many in the County were left out of the process. If we're going to pay tolls approaching $2K per year, we should have a say in if we want it.

Stuart says that wasn't what the vote said. A lot more yabba dabba. And the vote was 2-1. I'm going to skip the rest because this is all old stuff, and votes will (presumably) remain 2-1.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 8:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


And in closing, there will never be agreement until we have that discussion on where we want this County to go. There are different factions wanting different things, and so much keeps getting back to the lack of bridges across the river. Without more bridges we can't support a higher residential population growth, unless we can somehow figure out how to have jobs here rather than in Oregon.

The only way to support growth with just a new I5 bridge is the downtown city plan, but this will take from others who won't benefit. (The CRC is the ACA for downtown Vancouver - and we in the rest of the County are the 26-35 year olds who have to pay to support their need.)

And way too many of us just plain don't like cities. Drag out the Vancouvria video and let's head off to WalMart - we are a suburb and will continue to fight to remain one.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 8:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well - surprise, surprise. The Columbian apparently has a new approach to how to handle coverage of the County Board proceedings - leave and don't bother reporting on what they don't want heard. If you read today's paper, the whole second half (the advisory vote discussion) never happened.

From what I heard before shutting down last night, Mielke and Madore were repeating what they've always said - vote the will of the people. Madore continued to insist the vote meant we didn't want light rail, while Mielke (more accurately) said it meant we wanted a say in these matters via a ballot vote of some sort (I presume an initiative).

Stuart is tap dancing. He correctly (in my mind) says we shouldn't lock the Commissioners into a mandatory vote at other meetings as Vancouver City Council has. But he qualifies this - If only one Commissioner is on a board, then that vote should be per what the County Board as a whole wants - The independent vote should only exist for boards where all three sit (C-Tran and SW WA RTC). He notes he lives in a neighborhood by the I5, and makes it clear he believes the physical impact of the project is all that matters. (Hmmm... I'll have to check back and see if this same reasoning applies to the BRT - that project will affect neighborhoods on the 4th Plain corridor. By his reasoning, what anyone who doesn't live or have a business there shouldn't have an opinion.) But then he contradicts this by noting his problem with the votes was how they were worded - if they had specifically addressed whether to support paying for these projects, then he could have backed them. And that is inconsistent with his recent vote on the TriMet contract - he did support committing us to paying. Without the vote that he had supported at numerous C-Tran Board meetings over the preceding two years.

And the only real point to this is to say that you need to take the anti-M&M; blinders off and understand that Stuart is no better than either of those two.

roger — January 22, 2014 at 6:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkman — January 21, 2014 at 5:25 p.m.

roger — January 21, 2014 at 5:35 p.m. (thanks for the BoCC notes)

I hired some guy to manage my website (this has all happened so quickly) who was canned from Cover Oregon a few days ago. I can't imagine what went wrong.

nailingit — January 22, 2014 at 7:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: Wow. That was a long meeting to summarize! We disagree a bit on the interpretation, but not by much. I think Stuart's counterarguments to Madore's alternate reality are critical points someone needs to make and he does a good job of it.

I agree that Madore lectures too much. He has a need to explain everything as if the citizens are children or slow-witted adults. It is yes, smarmy (perfect adjective).

There is a battle going on for the future of Clark County. I wish more citizens would become involved, if only to send an email now and then. I wish more citizens had voted in the last election. It plays out at these BOCC meetings, but rather clumsily at times.

Whomever the Columbian hires to cover Clark County government needs to be experienced, smart and dogged. Oh, and responsible. :)

manthou — January 22, 2014 at 8:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Essential reading. What makes a press story or video go viral? Good research article from The New Yorker! Sadly, the majority of Americans don't read magazines like The New Yorker (or the Pacific Standard, or Harper's or Utne…….) but the Press does. :)

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2014/01/the-six-things-that-make-stories-go-viral-will-amaze-and-maybe-infuriate-you.html?utm_source=www&utm;_medium=tw&utm;_campaign=20140121

manthou — January 22, 2014 at 8:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Reading Madore's FB page should be required daily ritual of every tax payer. The spin, rationalization and self-promoting propaganda is so thick…even one of his loyal supporters confessed to me today: It is getting embarrassing. Wish he would tamp it down a notch or two.

Here's my favorite gem of the day. In response to concerns that he might be criticized for not participating in King Day community service, Madore quips:

"Caroline Plumlee, I appreciate your thoughts. Working from home for the citizens of the county I love is another way to honor the memory of Dr. King."

What was he doing? Extending conversations with Lisa Figg and Kevin Peterson on his 192nd Street Bridge fantasy and working on another spinoff website to promote it. Get 'er done, David. Get 'er done.

Look: his free time is his own. But don't doll it up as anything else but what it is: a self-serving ego trip, a diversion that takes attention away from matters-of-greater-need in our county.

manthou — January 22, 2014 at 9:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It seems the more affluent skiers & snowboarders coughed up the dough to hire private security for themselves at the Olympics. Organized, protected, with six aircraft at their disposal in the event of a violent attack.

The rest, well, not so much. They get to rely on the IOC.

must be nice!

mrd — January 22, 2014 at 3:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 22, 2014 at 9:27 a.m.

OK manthou, I took your advise and read his page. Almost made me throw up. I could almost see him patting himself on the back. And his "minions", unbelievable. All they do is blow smoke up his bum so they don't get banned. Makes my skin crawl.

Hawkman — January 22, 2014 at 7:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawkeye: Glad you enjoyed the FB romp. :)

I see Lisa Ross will be jumping in to run against Moeller, too. Her school board platform was scary, and she makes Carolyn Crain seem liberal. I'd vote for Carolyn, between the two.

A tea party Republican has no chance in the 49th. Yay, 49th!

manthou — January 22, 2014 at 8:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


MANTHOU

once again,' tea party' is not a synonym for' republician'.

oh, and just what's so scary about the tea party, again....?

DeeLittle — January 22, 2014 at 11:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


ROGER

oh gawd.

based on your meeting description, west-side vancouver has been written off as the bedroom community for portland's anticipated mass move to cheaper apt living cuz their expected population increase won't be able to buy housing.

and *OUR* reps are insiders helping it all happen.

eastside is the 'new' vancouver. that's why there's such a fight to keep a bridge addition away. no future for a trimet lightrail out there.

clear picture of why everyone's OREGON nose in in vancouver's business.

kinda makes ya want to go find a pitchfork and some heavy boots.

DeeLittle — January 22, 2014 at 11:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DeeLittle — January 22, 2014 at 11:51 p.m.

There was a point in there where I was wondering the same thing. We've also got the fights going on over subdividing larger lots out in the rural areas to build residential developments. But I don't know enough about this area to give an opinion based on anything except an overview of everything going on and what seems most plausible. Where my disconnect is that urban growth sets outer boundaries, and I'm understanding all the talk over population growth estimates to be geared toward a level of density infill to plan for. If this is anywhere near accurate, then it would seem the planners would be pushing for the higher end and not the middle one they agreed on.

There will be a fight in the future, though. East Vancouver is where the growth is, and where the new businesses are currently locating. Building that city in the old downtown is going to put a strain on various services like power, water, police and fire. Read the article on Gov Kitz and his happiness quotient (whatever he calls it) - everything we're doing with the economy is geared to creating higher end jobs for the educated (business and techies, that is), and low wage jobs for the masses. We who are in the middle, and who populate a lot of the areas like here in Orchards, are going to find it very difficult to compete for those services because we'll find them priced out of our income level. The usual experience that leads to further outward expansion - except that urban growth limits and land parcel size regulation will keep this from happening. I'm planning on working another 10 years and then completely retiring. That should be plenty of time to see how all this is actually going to work out. If my fears are wrong - Great!!! It'll still be livable here. If they're right, though, I'll have the option of selling and moving. (I still have this urge to go check out Costa Rica - loved it back in the '80s, and that was before it became a retirement destination.)

roger — January 23, 2014 at 5:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: I have friends who have moved to San Miguel de Allende in Mexico. They love it. Colonial architecture and cobble streets. Large number of ex-pat Americans. Artsy. Good food. Many volunteer opportunities. If people want a Starbucks-on-every-corner, this ain't the place. We are going for a visit to check it out. I think, if your community moves in a direction you don't like, it is fun to explore other options for sure. There are many American retirees in Costa Rica, for sure. :)

I think it is appalling that two of the Commissioners did not realize that, if they approve smaller lot zoning and cluster home development, property taxes are raised. D'uh. Peter Nortwick has his work cut out for him, but he did a great job of explaining why. I voted for Peter (appalled that Linda Franklin had not voted in years) and he has done his job in a conscientious manner.

Bhutan is another place I want to visit: the desire was there long before Kitz and his lady discovered the "Happiness Index" this county has adopted. It is the destination resort of the rich and privileged however, and I heard this little Shangri-La limits tourism. Or vets its tourists. Not sure I would pass muster. :)

manthou — January 23, 2014 at 8:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


By the way, I don't see why Vancouver cannot have a vital downtown/uptown AND a vital East County. Both attract good residents with different needs and wants. More on the menu from which to choose. I sample business offerings in both areas weekly. Just frustrated that I need my car so much in East County.

Captcha: suburbs

manthou — January 23, 2014 at 8:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The Kingdom of Bhutan's tourism regulations (from its official tourism department website). The catch phrase is "High Value, Low Impact." In other words, unwashed masses need not apply. :)

All tourists (excluding Indian, Bangladeshi and Maldivian passport holders) who wish to travel to Bhutan require a visa and must book their holiday through a Bhutanese tour operator or one of their international partners. The tour operator will take care of Visa arrangements for visitors. A listing of licensed Bhutanese tour operators can be found at the link below.

Comprehensive list of Tour Operators: http://www.tourism.gov.bt/plan/tour-operators

Learn more about visa requirements: http://www.tourism.gov.bt/plan/visa

In keeping with the Tourism Council of Bhutan's policy of "High Value. Low Impact" tourism a Minimum Daily Package is required for tourists. To learn more about the Minimum Daily Package, please follow the link below:

Minimum Daily Package: http://www.tourism.gov.bt/plan/minimum-daily-package
- See more at: http://www.tourism.gov.bt/plan/travel-requirements#sthash.5FcSZueC.dpuf

manthou — January 23, 2014 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


One may ask questions because they do not know the answer, or in order to clarify their own understanding. One may also ask questions so that others, such as attendees or viewers from home, understand the issues involved, rather than assuming.

kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 12:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One may also ask a question already knowing the answer. Many times to display knowledge emanating from an insecure sense of self.

Waxing Confucius, or posted to the wrong forum?

nailingit — January 23, 2014 at 1:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Two may ask questions simply because they were too dense to realize what the outcome would be before promoting their agenda.

Duh...

Hawkman — January 23, 2014 at 2:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk: One of the two composed another fantasy-based FB story, just to cover his slippery tracks. Duh is right. Oops works, too.

manthou — January 23, 2014 at 3:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Say it ain't so!

Stuart won't run for re-election

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/ja...

nailingit — January 23, 2014 at 5:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Steve Stuart has said he won't be running again. He's supposed to explain on his facebook page tomorrow, but notes he hasn't liked the shift from working together to ideology once Madore joined Mielke. I'm thinking he didn't want to face the ugliness the coming campaign would bring - and that C-Tran vote to support the light rail contract with TriMet would probably be used to unseat him in the generals, if there was a reasonable opponent. (Hmmm... Is Jeannie Stewart District 3?)

Now we can expect a whole new dynamic - The District 3 Dems are going to have to decide between finding someone who would continue to try to reason with Mielke (Madore doesn't comprehend compromise), or decide it's a lost cause and instead find someone who will go out of their way to brawl with the two of them. (And I suspect there are several who would volunteer for the latter role.)

roger — January 23, 2014 at 6:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I really am sorry that Stuart is not going to seek reelection. He would have won his Vancouver primary easily, but assuming that the second place finisher was a Republican, he’d have lost in the county wide vote. It was the Republican’s race to lose anyway. I think Stuart suspected so much. And yes roger, I think it was over that C-tran vote, which is a big deal for anyone who watched what happened. This is good news for Democrats, who now have a better chance to field a candidate without the baggage. Jeanne Stewart (as the Republican candidate) is an interesting thought roger. She’d be a good one.

And Grasshopper; I don’t follow other forums, and this one got old a long time ago. You Leftists are birds of a feather. Insults and all.

kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 6:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 6:47 p.m.

Don't see anybody twisting your arm to be here.

Hawkman — January 23, 2014 at 6:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It's the dark side of the force, Hawkman.

kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 7:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not surprised about Steve Stuart's decision. It's a good one for him and his family. He will bag a plum job somewhere and wonder, "What took me so long?"

I don't know anyone who would want the job, unless they shared M and M's ideology.

What scares me more than Stuart's leaving? The loss of those 4 attorneys who used to advise the BOCC. That is another job no experienced lawyer will take on with enthusiasm, either. Their leaving tells me something and I don't like what I hear.

manthou — January 23, 2014 at 7:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 6:47 p.m.

Harumph!!

nailingit — January 23, 2014 at 8:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn-dalai it has not gotten old. The thoughts and ideas that are posted here are more of a learning experence. I see more moderate views here than any where in this paper. Take what is good and use it. Nail has been trying to get me over for sometime. A lot of the posts he makes are good some not so. I think I am more aligned with Roger and Manthou. We seem to be middle of the road. Right is right no matter which side comes up with it. Hawk is also toward the middle. We need the different view points to come together for the good of all. I believe Stewart felt that way to. But got over whelmed by Madore. I voted for Madore thinking he would be more moderate. I am begining to believe I was wrong. Keep posting we need your views.

timerick — January 23, 2014 at 8:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — January 23, 2014 at 8:03 p.m.

Man. You think with some sort of crazy stereotyping mental imagery. You alway have. Glad I don’t do that. Peace, love and all of that bud.

kn_dalai — January 23, 2014 at 8:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Is the CRC finally going to die? This paper has an article quoting an Oregon State Senator serving on that state's committee for the project who says it's doubtful this legislative session will continue with it.

The article also goes on to note that the meeting which included a presentation from Figg Engineering actually was attended by many leaders from this area, to include Sharon Wylie and Larry Smith. From the article:

"State Rep. Sharon Wylie, D-Vancouver, said the meeting was informative, but she’s not convinced there’s a clear path to pursue if the CRC falters. “But I’m certainly willing to keep an open mind,” she said.
Wylie said she still supports the CRC and believes Washington should have moved forward with the effort. Any plan still faces a divided community after a CRC process that left plenty to be desired, she said."

"Vancouver City Councilor Larry Smith also came away impressed, but he reiterated his support for the CRC. Regardless of what happens, keeping local leaders at the table together is a good thing, he said.
“Anything to keep the doors and communications open to get that bridge replaced, that’s where I am,” Smith said."

I'm very curious why it took so long for us to learn about this. This meeting happened last week. David Madore pulled his little facebook stunt to promote Figg, but the only thing we were told was that Ann Rivers was doing something - apparently on her own. So she gets clobbered in The Columbian for a couple of days by the loyal crowd, and then we get this "Oh, by the way...." buried in another article? Was that meeting truly hush hush, with no reporters allowed to attend or informed of what transpired? Or has this paper moved beyond mere partisanship (political or issue driven) to where they'll actually suppress and manipulate the news to further their agenda?

roger — January 24, 2014 at 6:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The CRC is one of a few interrelated pieces to the picture puzzle. We've still got the Tesoro facility at the Port, and how Gramor is going to react to the latest developments. Tesoro is probably the wrong tenant, though I also believe the oil trains (and coal trains) will happen and pass through with or without that project - the refineries up north are depending on that oil now that the Alaska source isn't meeting the need. I still maintain that the Waterfront Development project is being planned for the wrong location - What's being envisioned is going to result in a conflict between the industrial nature of the Port and the "upscale" environment being sold by the project.

Manthou asked yesterday why we can't all share in growth according to different needs and desires. There's got to be that discussion across the area to gain a consensus for this to happen. On our smaller scale, Vancouver City Council has tried to drive the train - The CRC struggle was a push back by many of the rest of us. On an area wide basis, we really need to get all the counties together (Clark and Cowlitz at a minimum here, and the four in Oregon) to hammer out a transportation grid to be developed. And if Metro and Portland are going to continue to refuse to allow more highways and bridges, then we ought to be pushing our legislators to fight against this. The dependence on the I5 as being the center of our world is strangling us.

roger — January 24, 2014 at 6:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: I was wondering about the apparent media void with respect to the Figg presentation at The Heathman, too, last week. My questions are similar to yours: Was it intentional? Did the C agree to keep it on the down-and-low? Were reporters denied access? Looks like there was a good variety of elected officials in attendance. I'd love to interview some of them myself. Maybe I will. :)

Reality is that the vast majority of Clark County residents are not engaged in the critical issues that many of us discuss here (voter turnout says it all). They have other pressing personal needs, perhaps, like daily survival, that do not allow them to expend precious, dwindling energy on collective matters-of-consequence.

One person or a small group of persons can make a difference and can influence the future course of Clark County. Share your ideas with people in power. Present your ideas in a way that allows them to listen (not that they will, but don't give them an excuse not to). At least you can go to bed each night with the comfort that you tried.

If anyone has any Nirvana cities, places in the US with ethical governance and human-centric vision, please share them here. I am all eyes and ears and ready for a road trip. :)

manthou — January 24, 2014 at 6:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Not here is the U.S. manthou, but I hear Havana's quite nice.

kn_dalai — January 24, 2014 at 7:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit: Here's some national news with a Washington state twist:

Spokane legislator Cathy McMorris Rodgers will be giving the official Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address.

She must be considered a rising and promising star by her party.

manthou — January 24, 2014 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 24, 2014 at 6:32 a.m.

While what you say is valid about the lack of engagement in Clark Co., I think it is also true that discouragement is a factor. It is difficult to WANT to examine critical issues when those who do 'engage' others through posts, FB, blogs, etc. are so negatively vocal about the fly in the ointment while avoiding any mention of what the ointment itself may have to offer. I had one discouraged voter tell me flat out that they didn't speak the 'code'. When asked what they meant, he said words and phrases like 'the people' or 'values' were code for 'like me'. He was convinced 'the people' talkers are speaking exclusively for and to those who think like themselves and not Clark Co. as a some sort of whole unit. He said it was a phrase like 'bread and circuses'. I've thought about it and think there may be something to it. At least I am more aware who uses repeat phrases like 'the people' as some sort of prop to confirm their point or seperate those who may have a POV that perhaps is unconventional or new from the group who belong to 'the people'. Tho any new thinkers seem to have taken some monastic vow of silence or moved on. It's one of the reasons I try to read the forum everyday - a way to evaluate some point other than what I already think I know... that, and the links to other good reads. For me, changing or incorporateing new ideas may be at a glacial pace but not ready to quit listening quite yet.

jacjak — January 24, 2014 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"We the People of the United States..."

“We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Sounds like code words to me. Almost as sneaky as mentioning Detroit as an example of a bankrupt city. What's with them anyway?

kn_dalai — January 24, 2014 at 10:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 24, 2014 at 8:12 a.m.

She's a republican establishment approved right winger female, (not very common) from a state Obama carried generously. If she screws up she can be tossed aside without any real repercussions.

Republicans are starved for female representation as well as female votes, and if nothing else, Cathy wears the right shoes.

nailingit — January 24, 2014 at 2:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


jacjak @ 10:04 am: Interesting thoughts. Keep reading, thinking and participating. :)

I had this dreaded thought, inspired by Steve Stuart's decision to move on. Maybe the only persons left willing to take on political leadership roles are ones who are deeply dysfunctional. You know, bullies, egomaniacs, narcissists: personality disorders. People who are drawn to power for the hot high it brings, not for any altruistic motivation. Just a fear of mine. Hope it is irrational.

I worry that the honorable people get out or politics or refuse to enter because that's what healthy people do to take care of themselves.

manthou — January 24, 2014 at 3:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


going local here, it appears our only rep -(Jamie)- is full of it. She's gonna chase " immigration reform" while the economy flounders, she's gonna chase older chit-basically the gopper's mantra. Tell that to a guy 60 years out of work for 26 weeks. BTW-I'm not-doing OK. Sorry-but we need (blank). Just another GOP corporate stooge. These idiots are still selling their "free market" chit at the same time passing out corporate subsidies like Halloween candy. Talk about FU'd priorities........ But's let's get back to the money (what's it's all about) and the perceived issues-they'll make 'em up. That also gotta fire up the "base", and we'll have an election. YEE-HAW?

mrd — January 24, 2014 at 6:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 24, 2014 at 3:58 p.m.

I would LOVE to see Temple Lentz run for Steve's job. She would screw up the "boys" so bad, they couldn't function. Not that they can, anyway.

Joke of the day:

Justin Bieber.

Hawkman — January 24, 2014 at 7:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Just a fear of mine. Hope it is irrational." -- manthou — January 24, 2014 at 3:58 p.m.

Rest assured.

kn_dalai — January 24, 2014 at 8:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd @ 6:08 PM: There are many tax payers living in the Seattle area who are expressing your same concerns, especially over the Boeing subsidies. Can we really afford it?

Hawk @ 7:11 pm: I agree that a new Commissioner may emerge from one of the Freeholders. The importance of increasing checks and balances with this "team" is critical now more than ever. I think that will help the voters decide to pass a new Charter: Stuart's leaving. If we get another idealogue who agrees with Madore and Mielke, Clark County will have more do-over legal issues. The attorneys who advise these clowns see the risks in the cards and that's why 4 of them are on to saner pastures. I'd like someone to interview Tony Golik to get his take on the departures. Is he having an easy time replacing these experienced lawyers? What desperate candidates would apply?

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 7:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Freeholder Meeting covered live this morning on CVTV Channel 23. 9:00 am.

Some people think Royce Pollard should step back in the political ring. Maybe Craig Pridemore. A neophyte might have too much of a learning curve to prevail against a Madore-funded challenger. Paul Harris? Lord, M and M and Harris and Benton. Pack up the station wagon and load the family and the dog now.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 7:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd: How the Boeing deal will make tax reform more difficult in our state:

http://crosscut.com/2014/01/22/mossback/118395/how-boeing-deal-washington-tax-reform-harder/

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good morning all! Great sunshine out there and no rain. I finished some leftover work this morning already and will head out to work outside. Getting rid of invasive ivy and chopping dead wood... so refreshing. It might distract me from our latest blow to the county, namely our one sane commish leaving.

Manthou, here is an interesting article about the burbs and city living. Thought you might find it worthwhile reading.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/25/american-cities-from-1970s-horror-to-the-last-vestige-of-the-american-dream/

luvithere — January 25, 2014 at 8:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Stuart's leaving can do one good thing. It will make what ever the freeholders come up with easier for the voters to pass. Most will see it may be our best hope to balance the board.

timerick — January 25, 2014 at 8:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere: I enjoyed reading that article. Families who are most mobile (first time young home owners and retirees) seem to be the ones settling in my downtown neighborhood. There are also the long-time residents like timerick. :) We have homes being rehabilitated and new ones being built for infill. The demand is high.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Straw vote: Appointed or Elected Exec? Appointed: 9; Elected: 6. Two are absent, but both favored Elected (Zarelli and Lucas). If their votes are included, the Appointed option still wins.

It's not a strong consensus and I wonder if this is what will be played out for most issues decided?

Silliman's argument against an elected exec: Dems: think of David Madore being elected in that position. Repubs: think of Tim Leavitt being elected.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 10:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I haven't paid much attention to what the freeholders are doing. If appointed who would they answer to. A 3 member board? The way our board is now that would let the 2 have complete control over the county. That does not sound like a good idea. We need a balance.

timerick — January 25, 2014 at 10:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick: So far, the Freeholders mostly agree: 5 commissioners. One wants 7. One or two elected at large with the others being elected by district. This all could change, but they do want to draft a charter that will pass.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 10:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Makes sense to have at least 5. That way we won't have one side or the other having complete control. But does the county have the money to pay for 2 or more. Do they take a cut in pay and spread the money or do we add more money to cover them?

timerick — January 25, 2014 at 10:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


timerick: The discussion for now is to NOT increase total salary expense. Five commissioners would make less, then, the current three do.

Madore has already said: this job cannot be done for less than $100,000 a year each.

There is no consensus to increase salaries, however.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


You have to appeal to the County, not the City, if you want to bring the County Board back to some form of normalcy. There's an excellent choice out there, if he can be talked out of retirement - Joe Zarelli. If he ran, Mielke would be sent packing. And Zarelli would tell Madore to shut up very quickly.

Craig Pridemore is a good call for Stuart's position (if he lives there). Again, he'd have to be talked out of retirement.

Manthou, Nails, et.al. - Jim Mains has potential, but I see Ron Goodman as the only one of the rabble rousing crowd you guys like who seems inclined to get out there and dig into the details of a topic. (Or is it only bad when Madore and Mielke have to ask the experts to explain things?) And as much as I slam Ed Barnes, at least he's coherent; Royce Pollard is ready for the nursing home. Kind of reminds me of Reagan toward the end of his reign.

But I think the best bet, from the Dem side, would be to convince Annie O she's wasting her time playing second banana on City Council. I've read her website, and she seems more than knowledgeable enough to fill the County Comm role and do some real good.

As for adoption of a Home Rule charter - we'll see. I'm curious about the process they'll use to carve the County into 5 districts; hopefully they get into that.

roger — January 25, 2014 at 11:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I think the intent is to make the County Exec a full timer, with a competitive 6-figure salary (if hired). The Commissioners would become part timers, with that drop in pay to go along.

I haven't been following too closely - have they decided what the details of the Exec position will be? Last I checked in, they were still debating elected vs. hired.

roger — January 25, 2014 at 11:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I got Ann Rivers' newsletter - she's busy up in Oly. I presume the same can be said for Liz Pike and Jim Moeller. Is there any input from them?

roger — January 25, 2014 at 11:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"You have to appeal to the County, not the City, if you want to bring the County Board back to some form of normalcy."

roger — January 25, 2014 at 11:30 a.m.

roger- Zarelli, seriously? Don't you think conservatives should put folks into office who best represent the heart, soul, and mind of Clark County republicans?

Elect Debbie Peterson and Carolyn Crain to best define local conservatism.

Then ask Tonya to be a republican spokesperson. She has experience, as well as having roots in Vantucky.

""Tonya was a spokesperson for the Republican Party and had Al Gore and John Kerry whacked in the kneecap IRA style so George W. Bush can win the 2000 and 2004 Presidental elections. She later went on to perform as a rodeo clown at the Laerato Rodeo Championship. The horses complained when one was found clutching it's knee, screraming "why me?""

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Tonya_Harding

___

Profound!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/25/maher-gop-toughness_n_4665402.html

nailingit — January 25, 2014 at 12:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger @ 11:35 am: I haven't been following too closely - have they decided what the details of the Exec position will be? Last I checked in, they were still debating elected vs. hired.
_______
See my post at 10:08 am. Straw vote taken this morning, with a slim majority favoring Appointed Executive (my personal favorite). They want to discuss it more. Also will look at these districting options: leave it as is at 3 with 2 at-large commissioners; 4 districts with 1 at large commissioner; 5 districts.

Jim Moeller only speaks when asked, it seems. Makes me wonder if he is self-muting for political reasons. He asked about a concept Ann Rivers discussed at the last meeting (he had to leave early) and I wanted to say, "Why didn't you watch last week's video?" Ann and Liz were quieter today, too. Peter Silliman, Paul Dennis, and Randy Mueller shared their thoughts the most. I like many of their points and ideas.

This is a very interesting process to me to observe. You can tell a lot about a person by the way they express themselves and interact with their co-horts.

I agree with you that Joe Zarelli would be a viable commission candidate and that he would not always auto-agree with the M's.

manthou — January 25, 2014 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, here's a switch---

Jan 23 (Reuters) - U.S. treasury and law enforcement agencies will soon issue regulations opening banking services to state-sanctioned marijuana businesses even though cannabis remains classified an illegal narcotic under federal law, Attorney General Eric Holder said on Thursday.

Holder said the new rules would address problems faced by newly licensed recreational pot retailers in Colorado, and medical marijuana dispensaries in other states, in operating on a cash-only basis, without access to banking services or credit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/marijuana-bank_n_4656145.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Hawkman — January 25, 2014 at 3:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


NYPR Archives & Preservation

-When Weed Grew Wild in Williamsburg-

In this notably candid episode of WNYC's Campus Press Conference from 1951, not only does State Supreme Court Justice John Murtagh reject punitive solutions to drug problems, but he also says that science supports the notion that marijuana is non-addictive and potentially safer than cigarettes.

The interview is surprising for two reasons.  First, it debunks the perception that people were completely freaked out by weed in the 1950s. Between mass hysteria-inducing cult films like Reefer Madness and the shock and awe of educational television, it's interesting to learn that our views about marijuana haven't changed all that much.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/weed-in-brooklyn/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/25/brooklyn-marijuana_n_4665886.html

nailingit — January 25, 2014 at 4:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nails - Can't forget this one. The first time I saw it I was stoned, and laughed my butt off. Joe Friday always was a favorite with my crowd - and when word got around about his 714 badge number, he became a bit of a cult hero back in central PA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXGTPd...

roger — January 25, 2014 at 4:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 25, 2014 at 1:42 p.m.

I think a lot of the people who ran for freeholder didn't think it all the way through, and are now scrambling to figure out the ramifications of the different choices.

I didn't want to increase the number of commissioners; one big reason was the fight that's going to happen over new district boundaries. The way we are now, the 1st is going to stay Repub, the 3rd Dem, and we in the 2nd can go either way. (Softball lob for Nails or whoever.) Put too many changes in the new charter and its odds of failing to pass go up dramatically.

I like a hired County Exec, though I'm very unsure about how to go about protecting the integrity of the office if the County Comms hold hiring/firing authority.

roger — January 25, 2014 at 5 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Random or other wise musings.

Joe Zarelli received much criticism from Democrats over the years. Certainly because he’s a Republican. One of the last that I can remember to include the old forum’s own: aintnogod, (who occasionally posts on the FB side) who lamented that Zarelli is a ‘rich man’. Envy politics to be sure, and also wholly incorrect, as Zarelli has had his own financial problems and is anything but rich. He was heavily criticized for sometimes having received unemployment compensation benefits while he was a state legislator.

Marc Boldt is impressive in his own way. I’d think it’s a little unusual to have a county commissioner who’s a truck driver in his day job, and his fellow truck drivers don’t even know he was a county commissioner. Talk about a citizen legislator. I didn’t vote for Boldt last time around, but I didn’t disrespect him either. Sometimes the collectivist mentality becomes overwhelming, and one needs to step back and take a larger look at a bigger picture. Sure, take that as you will, but your big picture, may be others’ small picture. Anyway, many of you may not have been around long enough to remember, but there was a demeaning phrase used by local Democrats which was “three nuts and a Boldt”. Not sure who all three Republican state legislators were, but Zarelli was one. I recall that the esteemed Democrat Dan Ogden was one who used that phrase. And you people go around calling your political opposites “mean spirited”. What a total joke. Then again, that can easily be explained by the forum’s own nailingit as “proudly hypocritical”.

Temple Lentz makes me wonder (well not really, but I use this rhetorically), about paper and pencil thinking big thinkers, with no hands on experience of organizational management, at any level, public or private. Sure, she’s got a good wit for some political humor, but what else? Ms. Lentz seems to be pretty quiet at these freeholder meetings. Fine. I’d likely be the same way myself. These freeholder meetings seem to be very civil, with no acrimony. A lot of smart and experienced eggs in their own way, putting forth ideas from their own perspectives, and doing so by explaining themselves well. Quite excellent. From what I’ve seen in the two meetings (only two, that I’ve viewed some substantial portion of), Ms. Lentz doesn’t participate too much. She’s a nice girl and all, no doubt a good head on her shoulders, but I think she’s a little in her head when it comes to real politics. It’s only my opinion, but I think it’s why she doesn’t say much.

kn_dalai — January 25, 2014 at 5:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Interesting that the Columbian finally had a (short) article today on Jeff Lamm’s pay increase. His last pay raise was not 15 years ago, hawkperson, as he didn’t even work for Ctran then. If the Columbian reporting can be believed, then he received a pay raise in 2008 and now; a few weeks ago. This short Columbian article is not attributed to anyone in particular. Just “the Columbian”. In this case, I really do wonder if LouLou, or others, actually do pop their heads in the Whine Cellar sometimes, for whatever reason, and realized their Fourth Estate malfeasance by what they read here. Feet to the fire sounds about right. Hey LouLou – I like those sunglasses. They’re really cool. They’re so – YOU. I’m not sure if it’s the Fonz or Ziggy, but I’m pretty sure it’s in there somewhere. And gosh dern it! Where’s the Coffee cup in today’s freeholder meeting?!

kn_dalai — January 25, 2014 at 5:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Feel better?

nailingit — January 25, 2014 at 7:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Jeff Hamm was appointed in 2006, received a pay raise in 2008, received a $4300 raise last year, and a $4700 one this year. According to Madore's facebook page, he also got another $14,800. The Columbian says he got $4000 something ($4800??) for his vehicle allowance. I'm wondering if Madore is talking about the same allowance and got the dollar figure wrong, or if there's another $10,000 in that package we haven't been told about.

Hey, EDITOR LOU!!! What are Jeff Hamm's pension details? Think it should be converted to a 401(k)?

roger — January 25, 2014 at 7:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


kn_dalai — January 25, 2014 at 5:29 p.m

OK, maybe it wasn't 15 years, all the info wasn't (and still isn't) available. But I still maintain that a raise of $4300 after 5 years isn't out of line. However, that being said, I think his latest raise IS too much and he shouldn't have received one this year. That's just my opinion.

Hawkman — January 25, 2014 at 10:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Climate science controversies on my mind:

Bill Turlay has good-naturedly challenged Jim Moeller to a debate on global warming. Neither of these politicians are climate scientists. Turlay claims his being a pilot makes him an expert. Hmmmm.

Big news, from my perspective: Michael Mann, the esteemed scientist from U Penn, has won the anti-SLAPP hurdle, a big one, in his defamation suit against the global warming deniers who compared his evidence-based research techniques to Jerry Sandusky (among other things). Ken Cuccinelli tried to have this man charged with fraud because he didn't like the results of Mann's peer-reviewed research.

I am watching this battle closely because of its precedent-setting implications.

When government or citizens don't like what current research tells them, they often attack the scientists who published the research and they do so viciously with the intent of destroying good reputations and lives.

Michael Mann has the Union of Concerned Scientists behind him, as well as many other professionals who understand the importance of academic freedom.

Go, Michael Mann! A junk scientist he is decidedly not.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/01/michael-mann-climategate-court-victory

manthou — January 26, 2014 at 8:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


-Confessions of a former Libertarian: My personal, psychological and intellectual epiphany-

What’s interesting to me now is not why this kind of thinking is wrong but why it was once so attractive to me.

I found my way to libertarianism in my teen years when I began reading some of its introductory texts and was attracted to the internal consistency of its policies. If you accepted that the individual was sacrosanct and the government’s only role was to protect the individual, everything else pretty much followed. Unlike mainstream liberalism and conservatism, which were constantly engaged in negotiations between social and economic freedoms, libertarianism was systematically clean and neat. So much so that I quickly stopped concerning myself with how ideas played out in the world. The ideas themselves were enough.

As a kid, you learn to refute anyone’s “theory” by snidely mocking — “In theory, communism works.” When I was in college, I knew that communism did not work, even in theory, and I was happy to tell you why. Only libertarianism worked in theory.

That in switching the terms of the joke I made myself its butt was, regrettably, lost on me. When the lens of ideology grows so thick it’s all a person sees, a sense of humor is often the first thing to be occluded.

So what accounts for my transition from orthodox libertarianism to an unremarkable liberalism? At the risk of putting the cart before the political horse, I’m not an isolated reasoning subject and individual actor but a complex and conflicted human in various social and environmental contexts, and the reasons I abandoned libertarianism are personal and psychological as well as intellectual.

Read more @ http://www.salon.com/2014/01/26/confessions_of_a_former_libertarian_my_personal_psychological_and_intellectual_epiphany/

nailingit — January 26, 2014 at 9:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


These pics are really cool. Take a look

http://icoolbuzz.com/20-unbelievable-places-swear-arent-real.html

Hawkman — January 26, 2014 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 26, 2014 at 8:51 a.m.

Not sure if this is relevent to your post, but thought it interesting when I read it earlier.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/26/us/politics/fissures-in-gop-as-some-conservatives-embrace-renewable-energy.html?ref=politics&_r=0

jacjak — January 26, 2014 at 10:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nice pics hawk.

___

I was looking at Madore's face book, (I know, I know) and am amazed at the talk of a third bridge, like it's a foregone conclusion. I guess what I find fascinating are the sycophants who keep praising this guy regardless of job performance or promises made. (Thank You For All You Do David!:)

Nice that he sat down with Leavitt and the C for an interview.

nailingit — January 26, 2014 at 10:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


-How Marijuana May Influence The 2016 Election-

"It appears having marijuana-related initiatives on the ballot produce a greater turnout among younger voters," Mason Tvert, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project, said in an email. "If a candidate takes a position against marijuana policy reform, or if they choose to ignore it, they shouldn't be surprised when those younger voters choose not to vote for them."

If a candidate comes out against legalization in 2016, said Colorado Democratic consultant Jill Hanauer, "it will be to their peril, because millennials will be such huge segment of the voting public in 2016 … they're going to lose a huge segment of the voting public for good if they try to stop what's happening in American culture."

The data around marijuana and the youth vote is murky, but there is some to support the point made by Hanauer and Tvert. Exit polls conducted in all three states with 2012 legalization referendums -- Colorado, Oregon, and Washington -- found 5 percent to 12 percent increases in voting by people ages 18 to 29.

People ages 18 to 34 favor legalization by as much as 64 percent, compared with 31 percent for the 65-and-up crowd.

Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to support legalization. That means the issue will likely be far more significant in Democratic primaries than in Republican primaries.

But Democratic operatives are also mulling a more radical prospect: Could pot in 2016 essentially be gay marriage in 2004, in reverse -- a wedge issue Democrats put on the ballot to drive up their presidential turnout?

Read more @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/marijuana-2016-election_n_4647715.html

nailingit — January 26, 2014 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk: Beautiful eye candy! Thanks for sharing.

jacjak: Eventually people make their own decisions based on what supports their personal needs best. Getting off the electrical grid, saving money and resources is a win for anyone, regardless of political affiliation. Some are actually telling the party line NO. I am still smiling over the impossible new alliance that has been forged in the region over the anti-CRC efforts. Suddenly hippie "tree-hugging" environmentalists don't look so bad to the far-right wing and maybe vice-versa. Funny how that goes. Let's have more uniting issues, please.

manthou — January 26, 2014 at 11:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 26, 2014 at 11:10 a.m.

(Sigh.) Tim - Are you a far-right winger or a hippy "tree-hugging" environmentalist?

When it was just those two groups, the opposition was pretty much a fringe element. After we started getting a cost vs. impact vs. benefit picture, a whole lot of us who don't identify with either got involved.

Would it be fair to say the CRC also brought two other groups together - the liberal "stop killing the environment with your hydrocarbons" crowd and the Korporate "I deserve to get richer at your expense" elite? Hmmm????

roger — January 26, 2014 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — January 26, 2014 at 2:01 p.m.

I hugged a tree once. The next morning I felt like a sap.

If the CRC brought anyone together, it was most likely a one night stand.

The next day can bring many regrets, as well as second thoughts.

JJ's article brings to light when common interests prevail such as the bottom line, it can make for some strange bedfellows. (also relevant to article is 9:49 posting about blind ideology) In the CRC's case, I don't think the hangover has started.

nailingit — January 26, 2014 at 2:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


My better half and I just finished watching season 1 to prep for season 2. Great political drama if you're looking for some tube entertainment.

-Netflix Releases New 'House Of Cards' Season 2 Images-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/26/house-of-cards-season-2_n_4669450.html#slide=3359080

nailingit — January 26, 2014 at 2:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 25, 2014 at 1:42 p.m.

I finally watched the tape of that meeting, and you've pretty much hit the high points. I got the feeling they were leaning toward the 4 district commissioners, and 1 at large to serve as a lead person. The part about this that I found interesting is that they're going to pursue the redistricting option as part of this effort, rather than leaving it for the future. I'm thinking the plan that Kelly what'shisname's group comes up with could be one of the critical parts of this process. He kept emphasizing fair and impartial, but given that the positions will also probably be partisan (that seemed to be the majority view), I'm not so certain this is how any result will be perceived. I was hoping they'd try to make an effort to steer away from party politics.

I'm finding the dynamics quite interesting. You noted the main participants, and those who've said little. Temple seems to be coming around; I guess I'll have to quit being so harsh in my criticism of her. Val Ogden is a complete waste of a seat - Sunshine or Sunrise or whatever her name is should have stayed in - I see she attends anyhow. But although she still talks too damned much, I'm finding Nan Hendrikson to be a very important part of the process. She did a good job of getting Randy Mueller to back off at one point (the vote call) without causing offense. She is quite good at the "I hear you to say" summations, and on reading the nonverbal cues to know when she can safely call on someone without embarrassing them. She's got her humorous exchanges, like the one with Wilson and his flip flop. And that one with Jim Moeller made watching the 2 hour video worthwhile! Jim spoke for a few moments on why he wanted the positions to be partisan, and then said the at-large one should be nonpartisan. She nailed him on that, and we got to see him tap dance through a lame explanation.

But that fairly noncommittal part being played by the Big 3 (Jim, Liz and Ann) is a bit disconcerting. They're the ones who'll have to mobilize public support to get anything passed by the voters.

roger — January 26, 2014 at 2:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


JJ, great article. On my last trip to Las Vegas, I was amazed that nobody had solar power panels on their roofs. I did see some hot water panels for pools but not for electricity. It baffles the mind to think that they don't seem to be interested, especially since their power bills in the summer hover around the $200 to $300 mark for air conditioning and that's only to keep the home temp at 85 deg. Maybe Nevada has rules against it or something.

Hawkman — January 26, 2014 at 3:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit: You recommended House of Cards last season to me and we loved it. Cannot wait for Season 2.

I am woefully behind in my TV series. We just watched West Wing, if you can believe that, in its entirety over several months this year and just started Breaking Bad. The good thing about being late to the party? We have loads of good TV to do weekend marathons during bad beach weather. Hooray for Netflix and Roku! Double hooray for an early retirement. I never had time to enjoy good TV series before. "Bout time.

roger: I worry about having partisan commissioners, but am grateful for the appointed preference on the executive so far. And yes, those current electeds are suddenly mute, aren't they? So afraid to make a misstatement that might be used against them in a campaign? I don't know.

manthou — January 26, 2014 at 3:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


1000 Friends of Oregon published a detailed analysis of the major problems associated with the CRC. Wanting to understand how this well-established environmental group views this mega project, I read the document.

Something caught my attention. 1000 Friends of Oregon take the position that Washington's sprawling growth pattern is significantly different from Oregon's and the CRC supports Washington's "unhealthy" habit of rural growth and dependence on cars. It asserts that the CRC will overbuild to accommodate these cars and then try to limit sprawl through tolling.

Here's an excerpt (pp. 15-16):

"In the past 20 years, the pattern of development in Southwest Washington has been more favorable to rural residential sprawl. Sightline, an independent national research group, recently produced a map depicting where population growth has occurred in the region between 2000 and 2010.

As the map shows, population growth outside of the area’s urban centers has been concentrated in Washington state. This pattern of development is more car-dependent, more difficult to serve by rail transit, and deleterious to the goals of healthy sustainable communities.

The current CRC proposal facilitates this development pattern. The project suggests that sprawl can be limited through tolling. However, this puts the proposal in the unusual position of overbuilding to facilitate cars, then tolling traffic to limit sprawl. Either the proposal is overbuilt or it will produce sprawl in Southwest Washington. Rural sprawl slowed on both sides of the Columbia after 2000. Yet Clark County’s rural areas still saw substantial population growth over the decade, while Oregon’s rural areas did not."

If you feel up to reading the entire tome and looking at the urban sprawl map, here is a link:

http://www.friends.org/crc-facts

manthou — January 26, 2014 at 5:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Not political at all unless government/corporate secrecy as a backdrop counts, but we recently marathoned on all 5 seasons of "Eureka" TV series. It's sort of like 'Picket Fences' and 'Northern Exposure' meets 'Under the Dome'. Strange, funny, fantastical, entertaining. Never heard of it til our military child got hooked and sent us the whole series on CD.

jacjak — January 26, 2014 at 5:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 26, 2014 at 5:24 p.m.

There are so many reasons that study is so wrong. People will go where the houses are cheaper, the taxes are less and the commute is short. The Portland metro area in Oregon is and has been built out for so long and the traffic is so bad as well as the commute from any place "rural" , "sprawl" is unheard of. Clark County , on the other hand, has large rural areas close in and building has increased in those areas as needed. Between Vancouver and Battle Ground, there are huge areas of undeveloped land that are now being developed. That area is on average 10 to 20 miles from Downtown Portland, that same distance in Oregon is already developed and can't be considered. Stupid study.

Hawkman — January 26, 2014 at 5:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


jacjak — January 26, 2014 at 5:38 p.m.

I loved Eureka. It was one of the best and was supposed to be in Oregon. Of course it was filmed in Vancouver. It was very sad when they canceled it, kind of like Firefly, another great show. If you haven't seen that, it's worth a look as is Warehouse 13. Of course if you like Firefly, you should like Castle.

Hawkman — January 26, 2014 at 6:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — January 26, 2014 at 5:24 p.m.
Hawkman — January 26, 2014 at 5:57 p.m.

I haven't seen the study yet, but it sounds as though they're ignoring the growth westward in Washington County and down 99W in Yamhill. Ten years ago they wouldn't have had to buy out too many in the Hillsboro area to build that western bypass; now it would probably cost in the billions. Back then Tigard to McMinnville was pretty much a country drive. Not anymore. I don't recall the exact location, but a year or so ago they were talking about building a toll road down there - maybe Newberg over to the I5 around Wilsonville?

The CRC was not going to make the commute across the river any easier, because the light rail component couldn't transport enough people to make a difference. (I rode the Yellow line one afternoon when I had off just to see what it was like. SRO out of downtown Portland around 1530, but at Rosa Parks and Lombard a lot of the people were gone - perhaps 20 people were left for the trip to Delta Park and the Expo Center.) And what they're calling urban sprawl is going to happen with two bridges, more bridges, a new I5 bridge, or no change from the one we have there now. I have a hell of a time getting into my cul de sac when the Duckies have a big game - a bunch of Oregon transplants gather at a neighbor's house. WSU and UDub are very under represented in comparison. (I put out a Penn State banner one year, but no one knew what the Nittany Lion was, so....)

roger — January 26, 2014 at 7:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Well, I have been curious: since Clark County's rural sprawl is antithetical to the goals of a healthy, sustainable community (according to that 1000 Friends of Oregon report I posted earlier), what exactly IS a sustainable community?

There is a ton of info out there, so I focused on transportation:

Active transportation (walking and cycling) is crucial to a healthy sustainable community. Living near interesting places to walk and cycle TO are important. Obviously.

A variety of public transportation choices are critical to a healthy sustainable community.

Do the folks who are posting this report on their FB pages (Peter Silliman, for starters; David Madore has touted it) realize that it disses Clark County (in a most condescending manner, IMHO) along with the CRC?

manthou — January 26, 2014 at 10:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login