Clark County political puzzle waiting for pieces to connect

As the filing period for local candidates draws near, and as the commissioners prepare to name a replacement to Stuart’s seat on May 27, the picture of county politics is set to change yet again.

And still, questions remain.

Leading up to this week’s filing deadline, Craig Pridemore, a Democrat and former county commissioner, has announced his intention to run. He was joined Friday by Republican Jeanne Stewart, a former Vancouver city councilmember.

Pridemore, who left county politics in 2004 to become a state senator, is also considered the top appointment candidate to fill Stuart’s seat, but that decision will be left up to Republican commissioners Tom Mielke and David Madore. Stewart, meanwhile, was first elected to the Vancouver City Council in 2001 before losing to Alishia Topper last year. Her announcement Friday answered one important question: Who would the Republican candidate be?

Before her announcement, questions swirled about who’d fill the void. Just two weeks ago, Auditor Greg Kimsey, a Republican, said during an interview that he found it strange that, in a county where Republicans outnumber Democrats, a GOP candidate hadn’t yet announced a bid for what’s essentially an open seat. “I would think there’d be strong, credible candidates,” he said.

Kimsey’s curiosity was echoed by the Republican county chairman.

Kenny Smith said the timing was an issue for all campaigns, and he was confident the county would have a GOP option. And this time around, given the moving pieces, it wasn’t surprising that candidates were carefully mulling their options before jumping into the thick of a campaign.

“Historically, the campaigns I’ve witnessed, people either make a decision early, or they make a decision late,” he mused. “I don’t know if there’s a formula to it.”

Perhaps Stewart learned from her previous attempt to mount a campaign — a short-lived bid to unseat Stuart in 2010. That year, she filed to run for the position before disbanding her efforts to let Alan Svehaug shore up the conservative vote.

“This is a new step for me, as I have not been strongly aligned with any particular party in the past,” Stewart wrote in her letter to county Republicans.

But while Pridemore hasn’t started campaigning in earnest — he’s raised only $250, according to PDC filings — he has set his eyes on what he’d like to change in county government. At the top of his to-do list, he said, is bridging the divide between the county and organizations such as the Columbia River Economic Development Council, local chambers of commerce and the Humane Society for Southwest Washington.

“The biggest thing we need to do is restore our relationship with community groups,” Pridemore said. “Throughout history, the way this community has thrived is through the partnership with these organizations. Clark County cannot do it alone.”

Stewart said she would support long-term stewardship of the environment and “work for a fair, just, and honorable society” and make the board of commissioners a less divisive place.

“We have to be adult; we have to be respectful; we have to be strong, and we have to stand our ground, based on evidence and knowledge,” she said. “But there is little room for abruptness. There is little room for rudeness …. We need to keep our heads, so we can make the best decisions possible.”

The big shift

To understand the fragmentation of county politics, one has to look back to 2012.

That election saw the rise of Madore. His campaign against fellow Republican Marc Boldt, the incumbent, focused on the Columbia River Crossing and perceived wasteful government spending in equal measure. Madore’s ascension changed the complexion of the board. A champion of the private sector, Madore blasted into office with his eyes set on reforming the system from within. With a background in business, having brought his electronic component company to the county in the 1990s, Madore spoke highly of running the government more like the private sector. He continues to do so, using his oft-repeated catchphrase, “Git ‘er done.”

But dividing lines were quickly drawn — between the Mielke and Madore tandem, and Stuart — with the lone Democrat falling consistently on the minority side of controversial issues. He vocally opposed the hiring of Republican state Sen. Don Benton as environmental services director, balked at the expansion of the county’s fee waiver program for new development and scoffed at Madore’s “integrity resolution” for local governments.

Even before all that, Madore was characterized as a “game changer” for bankrolling his own expensive and ultimately successful political campaign that nonetheless appeared driven by grass-roots factions.

The campaign was nothing new for Madore, who was building a reputation for himself as a disruptive political force, a man with deep pockets and clout — a kingmaker. In 2010, Madore bankrolled Svehaug’s unsuccessful campaign for county commissioner. While Svehaug lost, he gave his opponent, Stuart, a run for his money, despite declining interviews and attending few campaign events.

For his 2012 run, Madore, who couldn’t be reached for comment for this story, used his own money in a local campaign like never before. And, unlike Svehaug, he made himself visible.

He received $331,897 in campaign contributions, much of it his own — nearly four times what Boldt netted, for a position that pays $106,000 a year (before cutting his pay by 20 percent after taking office).

Establishment v. disruption

Adding to the jumbled puzzle of county politics, where money has become a paramount issue, is the work being done by the Clark County Board of Freeholders. The 15 freeholders, who were elected last November, are drawing up an overhaul to the county charter.

The freeholders, who include representatives from both political parties, are set to approve their proposed home rule charter on May 27. That’s the same day county commissioners are scheduled to appoint an interim commissioner to fill the vacant District 3 seat.

Among the freeholders’ proposed changes are expanding the board to five members, diminishing the commissioners’ administrative duties — such as hiring department directors — and lowering their pay. Citizens will have an opportunity to vote on the charter in November.

Meanwhile, some political players are looking for a return of the establishment.

One of those players is Paul Montague, formerly of Identity Clark County. He has vowed to fight money with money by forming a political action committee to promote what he believes to be centrist candidates. He’s set his sights on balancing Madore’s influence.

Madore, Montague said, has shown a lack of “responsiveness, a lack of reasonableness and, really, a lack of reality in decision making.”

This election cycle, players like Montague say they hope to realign the political pieces. Money, and a consistent message, will keep a moderate in Stuart’s District 3 seat, they believe. Montague’s as-yet-unnamed PAC hasn’t raised a dime — not officially, at least, as it’s still working to receive nonprofit status — but its backers plan a bold approach.

Montague wants the PAC to align itself with the organizations like the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce and the Columbia River Economic Development Council, two groups with which Commissioners Madore and Mielke have butted heads.

Both of the current candidates, Stewart and Pridemore, have thrown their support behind that idea of forging relationships. Stewart, in particular, said she would work to rebuild the relationship between the city of Vancouver and the county.

Montague says the PAC won’t focus on supporting one party or another but will instead back moderates. He hopes to raise between $200,000 and $500,000 to launch the PAC.

“The political balance has been lost,” Montague said. “We want to bring rhetoric back to the center.”

Kelly Love Parker, executive director of the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce and a candidate to be appointed to Stuart’s commission seat, said such an alignment could be difficult to accomplish.

“Because (the chamber doesn’t) endorse candidates, I find it would be difficult for us to align ourselves with PACs that support candidates,” she said.

While Love Parker said she’d engaged Montague in preliminary discussions, they didn’t center on how the PAC and chamber would work together. She suggested a relationship similar to the one between the chamber and the Building Industry Association, which also runs a PAC.

Even with questions swirling about the immediate future of the board, one thing is clear: It will remain, for the time being, a partisan enterprise.