Evan Smith on Politics: A course correction in Lake Forest Park
Sunday, November 10, 2013
By Evan Smith
Results of the Lake Forest Park election show some loss of strength for the Lake Forest Park GovWatch organization that had dominated City politics in recent years.
In 2010, the organization brought prominent Democrats and Republicans together to defeat a tax measure on the August primary ballot, giving the levy-lid lift a 78 percent "no" vote with the highest election turnout in King County.
In 2011, the organization helped Mary Jane Goss win the mayor’s race over longtime Deputy Mayor Dwight Thompson and saw its endorsed candidates win two of three City Council contests.
This year, however, both of the candidates that the organization endorsed in contested city council elections – Jason Colberg and Alan Kiest – appear to be headed for defeat in votes counted through Friday night.
Both winners had a big financial advantage over the Gov-Watch backed candidates.
Hilda Thompson, daughter of the losing 2011 mayoral candidate, who led Colberg 60.84 percent to 38.92 percent, led all Lake Forest Park candidates in fundraising with $20,233 raised and $15,116 spent to no fundraising for Colberg.
John Resha, who led Kiest 60.34 percent to 39.55 percent, reports raising $14,184 and spending $11,827 to Kiest’s $4,595 raised and $2,943 spent.
Kiest also was hurt by a late report that he was being investigated for a complaint of sexual harassment on his state job.
The one winning GovWatch-endorsed candidate is incumbent Councilman John Wright, who ran unopposed. He did no fundraising or spending.
Colberg attributes his loss to Thompson to a combination of a financial disadvantage and attacks by groups opposed to the GovWatch-endorsed candidates.
“I think it's both,” he said Saturday. “It looks like this is the first election season where GOVWatch has been attacked on a broad scale.
“I do think that took a toll. People don't want partisan politics and bickering. I think GOVWatch had done a pretty good job of staying out of that fray. This year, probably mostly and not necessarily positively from me, the attacks on GOVWatch, in my opinion, needed response.
“Money also played a role,” he added. “Getting into this race I was not aware of how effective mailers can be. I see now how presenting my message more professionally and more clearly via one or more mailers probably would have helped. The other thing about the money factor is that I was able to ‘save’ my campaign a lot of money because I do have the skills to be able to add elements to my campaign that it didn't look like my opponent was able to do on her own.
“It looks like I was able to contribute in-kind services to my campaign that my opponent had to pay for.
“There are other factors. I did walk and knock on a lot of doors. But, my commitment to my family and our life took a toll on how much time I could spend out on the campaign trail. I think that and the race being made partisan are probably the greatest factor that contributed to my defeat.”
Lake Forest Park political activist Jean Thomas cited several factors:
One is money.
“In the past, candidates limited their campaigns to a maximum of $5,000 raised and spent (and frequently less)” she noted. “Three of the candidates this year raised several times this amount.”
Another is outside involvement.
“One candidate (Resha) raised a substantial amount -- $6,800 -- from unions and other special interest groups; much of this money from outside the local area and in some instances, from out of state,” she said. “He also received substantial personal contributions from outside our city. Mr. Resha used outside organizers both to doorbell in Lake Forest Park and to phone bank. I personally received a phone call from Pierce County, insisting that I should vote for Mr. Resha because he was the only Democrat in his race (a blatant falsehood I have heard Mr. Resha mention on multiple occasions).
“These are nonpartisan offices, and the Lake Forest Park City Council currently and in years past has consisted of residents who represent the spectrum of political interests in our city. One result of GovWatch’s previous success was an organized effort during this campaign season to discredit the nonpartisan PAC with ongoing misrepresentations that it is a ‘tea party’-based organization and that its endorsed candidates represent tea-party values. There is no question that this affected our endorsed candidates (one of whom is a life-long progressive Democrat). The GovWatch focus has always been -- and continues to be -- promoting transparency and accountability in our local government, a position that represents the interests of all Lake Forest Park residents. It is unfortunate that there are a few individuals in Lake Forest Park who continue to stir up divisiveness rather than focusing on the common good and the real issues our city faces.”
Thomas also noted that all but one of the races was contested, whereas many past campaigns have had several unopposed races.
The organization had not endorsed a candidate for the fourth position on the 2013 ballot in which Mark Phillips led opponent Edgar Escandar 71.96 percent to 27.99 percent.
Phillips has reported raising $11,263 and spending $6,948 to no fundraising for Escandar.
Officials had counted 9,720 Lake Forest Park ballots Friday with 5,189 on hand ready to be counted.
Posts
17 comments:
Evan,
Thank you for this article about the new mandate by LFP voters away from GOVWATCH and their teaparty approach to politics and governance in LFP.
I would like to point out a couple of corrections to your blog. Both Mr. Escandar and Mr. Colberg did in fact raise funds. The reason no funds were shown on the PDC Website is that they both elected mini-reporting and are not required and did not report any fund raising or expenditures. Due to their choice they were restricted to $5000. No one except the candidates know how much they raised or spent. Mr. Kiest attempted to change reporting to full reporting late in the campaign. This request was denied by the PDC as to late in the election period. Everyone is aware that Edgar, Jason and John Wright had yard signs which cost money to buy. So there were funds raised and expenses for all campaigns.
It is also important to note that the independent expenditures by GOVWATCH on behalf of Kiest, Colberg and Wright were made via mailings, e-mails, letters and web-site are not reported here. Also there were the Google ads by Mr. Friese that are not reported that touted many untruths and inaccuracies about the newly elected candidates. Although unfortunate, they were supposedly his own (he is a previous GOVWATCH candidate campaign manager) personal opinion and protected by our First Amendment.
GOVWATCH currently has a complaint filed against them at the PDC due to late and inaccurate filing. For a group who touts transparency as a fundamental element of their political philosophy--- I would say they failed to set the example for our community. Unlike Thompson, Resha and Phillips who followed the letter and spirit of the disclosure law.
The three new councilmembers were elected based upon their message, background, hard work and wide community support. Like King County District 1 Council District, that position is also non-partisan yet the district is demographically made up of about 65% Democrat leaning voters. So is LFP. GOVWATCH's statements pretending to be bi-partisan are misleading as clearly the 46th District Democratic Organization's platform, membership majority and elected members do not support and openly reject a platform like that of GOVWATCH. That is why the three Democrat endorsed candidates - Thompson, Resha and Phillips were endorsed by over 70% of those voting at the endorsement meeting and all of the district's Democrat legislators. Mr. Wright was rejected by the Democrats because of his platforms supporting GOVWATCH as was Mr. Kiest.
One last comment on bi-partisanship. Someone calling themselves a Democrat or a Republican joining an organization does not necessarily make it bi-partisan. It is the platform of the organization that makes the difference.
There have been over 3 election cycles now that candidates in LFP have raised in excess of $5000. On this point I would agree with Ms. Thomas that it is too bad that it costs so much. However, we should note that Mary Jane Goss and Dwight Thompson both raised well over $20000. In addition, Mary Jane had independent expenditures from GOVWATCH (of which she was once a treasurer) and the REALTORS while Dwight received one from the Cascade Bicycle Club.
As of today, each of the winners--- none who were incumbents--- won with over 60% of the vote. Unheard of in LFP. This is not because of broad based 'attacks' on GOVWATCH--- it is because the citizens clearly see GOVWATCH approach to government and the current administration need redirection to focus on a positive future to make LFP sustainable for all and to preserve our environment, our safety, our community-centered values, and our city's infrastructure. Its a message-- a mandate-- that with the continued leadership of Deputy Mayor Stanford, with Thompson, Resha and Phillips, LFP residents are assured that they will keep LFP headed in the right direction until a new 'non-GOVWATCH' mayor can be elected in 2015.
Yes, Mr. Smith, "Thank you for writing this report!"
Folks, politics in Lake Forest Park has now moved beyond the election and into preparation for the next campaign season. And, yes, I am a part of it as I communicated I would be from the start. It would be nice if there wasn't bickering as I indicated I know is important to you in the article above. The problem is that the group which got trounced in the last election cycle is mad and they will not let their loss of power and self-interest in 2010/11 rest. And make no mistake, it is not going to rest until it has been regained (as they will definitely be attempting to do) for 2015. I do expect that the initial effort to demonize GOVWatch, really beginning this year, will continue as it has even in just the first response to this article.
Important items to note about GOVWatch are:
~ a hugely successful campaign to defeat Prop 1 (the largest property tax slush fund proposal by a 78% margin as Mr. Smith originally identified) in 2010. This effort saved a lot of Lake Forest Park residents undue financial hardship that would have been magnified by an unnecessary tax increase after the 2008 economic collapse.
~ the group is made up of democrats, republican and independents who are working together to improve Lake Forest Park government efficiency, effectiveness and transparency. This is a good thing for Lake Forest Park because it is what LFP residents want. AND they have been able to do it without hurting the city by reducing the city revenue stream. On a personal note, the group does call themselves non-partisan, and I would say this was fairly so during my endorsement interviews, but I see the group as tri-partisan, at least in the fact the membership has representation from ALL of these political groups in Lake Forest Park (democrats, republicans and independents). Also, the notion that they are only made up of LFP residents and only focused on LFP issues is important because that keeps the effort truly representative of the community as a whole.
~ GOVWatch has been trying to promote government transparency (which was truly lacking to non-existent when George Piano, Dwight Thompson and Catherine Stanford were running the ship without GOVWatch around). GOVWatch has been extremely effective in correcting the practice of ignoring public input. It is obvious based on 2013 city council candidate statements (mine included) and even serving city council actions that this is the case. GOVWatch is important to the health of Lake Forest Park governance. The slate-Democrat diehards like George Piano, Dwight Thompson and Catherine Stanford will try to communicate differently. BUT, I will ask them to show you the actual proof. GOVWatch has it in the form of results. They do not and they cannot honestly point to anything the slate-Democratic organization via the 46th Legislative District has done for Lake Forest Park in this important regard and solely in the best interest of Lake Forest Park residents.
That is the good news and many reasons why our population should support GOVWatch as will be extremely important to the next election. If LFP residents vote otherwise, you can see how the slate-Democrats raise and spend money. They don't care where it comes from and they spend it lavishly. This is evident through the campaign financing and spending from at least the past two election seasons. They will not hesitate to do the same in 2015 and beyond. That is how they operate.
(This blog is limited to 4096 characters. It will be continued I the next entry. Sorry about the length. I do believe the details are important).
~ Jason Colberg
2013 LFP City Council Candidate who cares enough about his community to stand up, speak up AND put his name in association with his writing.
Part II - Discrepancies in the Article and First Blog Response (continuance from Jason Colberg's first blog response).
Please, now humor me as I identify some of the discrepancies in both the article (even though, in general, it was extremely well written) and the first anonymous response to the article:
~ one is that, yes, I did raise some money - $2200.21, mostly without asking for any contributions. People that contributed did so voluntarily knowing the same thing I do about campaign financial needs – that being some money is needed to run a campaign. This is important because a campaign should be financed by the population of the community, not the candidates, not outside organizations. I did contribute some of my own money, roughly $1700.00, but that was pretty much seed money needed to get started and to cover a part of an unplanned mailer. My goal all along (as I reported in my GOVWatch interview) was to keep my budget under $5000.00 even though I knew my opponent would be raising/spending a lot more. I am proud to say that I operated by the principles I would have brought to city governance.
~ from the first anonymous blog response calling this a mandate against GOVWatch. Hardly. It is the first time GOVWatch has been deemed an enemy and demonized on a broad scale by the 46th Legislative District Democrats. This did take a toll, but it was certainly not a mandate. That statement is just propaganda.
~ no untruths or inaccuracies by Mr. Friese in his blogging that I can recall. This statement is just an effort to discredit specific Lake Forest Park reporting on his part.
~ no outstanding complaints on GOVWatch to the PDC (Public Disclosure Commission). Anyone can file a complaint. I have been told George Piano did, probably in an effort to be able to write this false statement. I had been told he did file several complaints, but that all were unsubstantiated and the one that wasn't was due to missing a filing deadline, a minor infraction. I believe all have been resolved and GOVWatch has not been identified of any wrongdoing. Again, just another statement included in this blog to discredit GOVWatch.
(This blog is limited to 4096 characters. It will be continued I the next entry. Sorry about the length. I do believe the details are important).
~ Jason Colberg
2013 LFP City Council Candidate who cares enough about his community to stand up, speak up AND put his name in association with his writing.
Part III - Discrepancies in the Article and First Blog Response (continuance from Jason Colberg's first two blog responses).
~ the 46th Legislative District Democrats operations are a sham. I would have applied for their endorsement, but my opponent had already been selected as the candidate of choice before I received my endorsement application questionnaire (which, by the way, was a 4-page,33-question questionnaire emailed to me just seven-hours before the 12pm, Tuesday evening deadline AND I was not invited to what I have been told was a rigged endorsement meeting; rigged by non-other than my opponent's father, Dwight Thompson, rigged because he invited and apparently paid for non-regular members to be in attendance). Don't know that for sure. That is what has been reported to me by people who were there. And, even though I would have completed the questionnaire and showed up for the interview, I was not given a fair opportunity. THIS is in complete contrast to the GOVWatch endorsement process where ALL candidates were given ample heads up to call and make arrangements for an interview. GOVWatch reserves the right to endorse more than one candidate for any position, but my opponent and all the other slate-Democrat candidates elected not to compete. I also like how the author of this message used the term rejection of Mr. Wright just to try to discredit him. Mr. Wright is one of the best things we have going for us on LFP city council. Just attend a meeting or two to make this observation yourself. He is one of the few who knows what is going on with pretty much everything AND has educated questions and contributions to make to the decision making process. He is also about as non-partisan as a council member can be. The 46th Legislative District should have looked at his commitment and skill as a council member as opposed to his ties to GOVWatch (not that this is a bad thing) in regard to endorsing him. The good news here is this pretty much shows the contrast of the differences between GOVWatch and the 46th LegiSLATEive Democrats and the responsibility they are bringing to their respective populations and the City of Lake Forest Park.
~ anonymous blog statement (from above), “the platform of the organization which makes the difference.” In regard to people actually being democrats. ...if and only if you want to and allow yourself to be controlled by the organization (saying that their candidates and members really have been assimilated and would not be endorsed or recognized as members if not). Also, maybe if they don't agree with the party platforms, this would make them an Independent??? Either way, that doesn't mean the group is a Tea Party group (not that that is a bad thing). Whatever is said, GOVWatch is definitely more representative and has a greater commitment to Lake Forest Park residents than the 46th Legistative District Democratic organization AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT THIS BEEF IS ALL ABOUT ...CONTROL OF GOVERNANCE IN LAKE FOREST PARK BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND MOST SPECIFICALLY THE 46th LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT DEMOCRATS. REJECT THIS NOTION!!! LIKE THE GOVWATCH FB PAGE. SIGN UP FOR THEIR EMAIL REPORTS. CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY, ALOT. CONTRIBUTE VOLUNTARILY (THAT MEANS WITHOUT BEING ASKED SO THEY DON’T HAVE TO FOCUS ON MONEY) TO GOVWATCH ENDORSED CANDIDATES. VOTE FOR GOVWATCH ENDORSED CANDIDATES. ENCOURAGE YOUR NEIGHBORS TO DO ALL OF THE ABOVE. GO TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. TAKE NOTES OF YOUR OWN. MAKE YOUR OWN OBSERVATIONS. REPORT WHAT YOU WANT TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND FELLOW RESIDENTS. GOVWATCH is the best thing we have going for good governance in Lake Forest Park BAR NONE! If you don't, you will be assimilated. :-)
(This blog is limited to 4096 characters. It will be continued I the next entry. Sorry about the length. I do believe the details are important).
~ Jason Colberg
2013 LFP City Council Candidate who cares enough about his community to stand up, speak up AND put his name in association with his writing.
Part IV - Discrepancies in the Article and First Blog Response (continuance from Jason Colberg's first three blog responses).
So, I will leave you with this question. We know what GOVWatch has contributed to our city - greater efficiency and transparency. What has the 46th Legislative Democrat organization contributed? A twenty-three year old with little work experience who will probably be a parrot vote for Catherine Stanford. Some my say that I have a chip on my shoulder about losing an election. I don't. I don't have a problem with it personally. I am thrilled with my campaign despite it's deficiencies. My beef (which, yes, I do have) is in regard to our local political system being railroaded by people who don't have the best interests of the community (the environment, active park space, community input, financial hardship, fiscal responsibility, seniors on fixed incomes) in mind and at heart.
THANKS FOR READING. SORRY IT IS SO MUCH!
~ Jason Colberg
2013 LFP City Council Candidate who cares enough about his community to stand up, speak up AND put his name in association with his writing.
Hey Jason, why don't you join a City commission and get more involved? There's no harm in educating yourself about your local government. You may think that joining a commission or otherwise volunteering in some fashion would harm the "outsider" status that allows you to enjoy lobbing rocks and keeping an arms-length relationship with City government, but many people might think that you truly just enjoy conflict that would preclude a friendly relationship with City electeds and staff.
I note now that you are naming names as it pertains to guesses about who is doing this and that not GovWatch. I would tread cautiously if I were you. Such behavior seems undignified and churlish, if not childish. Have you taken the opportunity yet to review the GovWatch mailers from the previous election?
Evan Smith, is there any reason your post election wrapup here only contains Jean Thomas' biased screed and the usual pablum from loser Colberg? Surely you could have contacted one of the newly elected councilmembers or...just about anyone...to lend a fair and balanced flavor to your report. The idea that GovWatch is just some benign group of reasonable people who just "want the best for LFP" is disgusting and contemptible. There is another message out there other than GovWatch's timorous and incessant anti-government claptrap. Do you know what it is? Are you willing to find out?
Mr. Colberg,
In the last five years, what commissions have you volunteered for in Lake Forest Park?
OK, people. Let's dive in (in no particular order):
+ Credit to Jason, regardless of what you think of his posts, for including his name. Note the three detractors chose to hide behind the safety of anonymity.
+ I wish you guys and Linda Holman would get it right. There was no real meat in the Google or Facebook ads. They linked to my posts, which is where the content is. So it's my posts that you have issues with.
+ Regarding my posts, it's so easy to say my posts had untruths and inaccuracies. A bit more difficult to cite them? (You could even call attention to them right in the comment area of the posts themselves. In fact, I asked Hilda to, and she chose, instead, to call a Council member to tell me to take them down. Great approach to conflict resolution there.)
+ It's the weapon of the ignorant to call groups or candidates names instead of using substantive examples. Unfortunately, there's a rich history of that being effective. But for the sake of the conversation, humor me and tell me how Gov Watch is anti-government. If they are, what're they doing at each and every council meeting, no matter how painful it can be?
+ No fewer than 10 candidates won by more than 60% in the previous 7 election cycles. 60% is hardly unheard of (facts... gosh darn 'em).
+ I was not the campaign manager of a previous Gov Watch candidate. I was the former campaign manager of a sitting Council member who sought and received an endorsement by Gov Watch.
+ The parts of my posts that are opinion are my own (curious what you are implying). The parts that are fact, are just that.
+ Gov Watch claims "to raise awareness about the activities of our local government, to encourage citizens to take a more active role in our City." They also tout living within our means and being fiscally responsible. Given the Democrats aversion to Gov Watch, it stands to reason they are averse to fiscal responsibility?
+ Every candidate mailer in the past three elections mentions infrastructure, environment, blah, blah, blah. How are you deciding who to trust?
+ Fact: Hilda has no job experience. So what does it say about the judgment of nearly all local Democrats who endorsed her. Based on what? That candidate was in the bag before filing day. We know that because she had all those endorsements on her site from day one. On what grounds did she earn them?
+ The idea that GovWatch is people who want the best for LFP is disgusting? Sounds like an opinion based on sound logic, fact and reasoning. But again, sadly, many will read that and say, "Gee, I guess Gov Watch is bad. It said so in SAN." Too bad no one has to support anything they say anymore.
+ Long monologues, born of emotion and devoid of facts, often qualify as rants.
We all live in LFP, and I would think we all want what's best. Sure, we have different opinions, but who among us doesn't want great schools, safe roads, low crime, etc. Let's remember we're all on the same team. We just need to decide on a playbook.
Jon
I'd like to add two more thoughts:
+ There are far more effective and substantial ways to volunteer and learn about LFP than serving on a commission. While the commission is sitting around, meeting and creating recommendations, active citizens like those on LFP Stewardship Foundation (which by the way, (brace yourself) has members of both Gov Watch and the Dwight Thompson camp on it... gasp, how can they possibly work together toward a common goal), are out cleaning up parks, raising awareness and making a real difference.
+ I notice that the person who asked that question, like the other detractors before, chose to remain anonymous. What I wrote on my blog was controversial, to be sure. In fact, I have many friends in LFP who are pro-Resha/Thompson/Phillips (notice we never talk about one of them without the other two). We get along fine.
But I have many other friends here with whom I've never talked local politics. I always tended to play that close to the vest, as it's really only my own business. I took a real risk and changed my life a bit by writing and promoting what I wrote and doing it under my real name. I'm sure it cost me a few friendships that I don't even know about as some suddenly just drift away. Likewise, some may suddenly gravitate toward me. I just had to rely on the philosophy that if someone is no longer my friend because of what I write, than they're no kind of friend, anyway.
That's why I have little respect for the "anonymous" posters on here. True cowardice on display, if you ask me - one who put my name, for better or for worse, to what I believe.
Jon
It would be good for the community if there was an unbiased source of local LFP news. Patch is dead and SAN is represented by Evan Smith's review of the election results, in which he is unable to find a voice for the majority of LFP voters, who rejected GovWatch recommendations. Instead he gives our only forum to two anti-majority voices. Then Jason Colberg in the comments brings the sour grapes view, blah, blah, blah and blah.
Where is the voice for the majority? Where is the journalism?
Stuart,
I couldn't agree more, and in fact, I wrote a post about that during the elections, as well. With no media, we're limited to the marketing of the candidates. LFP needs some sort of dedicated news, or we're doomed to be uninformed about our own community (because let's face it, things are going pretty well in LFP, and most people are not out there seeking news about it).
Hell, if nothing else, it could serve to inform people that there are even elections and open spots. It would be great if we could get some people to run for office that weren't recruited by Gov Watch OR Thompson's crew. Just normal people with independent ideas. Wouldn't that be novel. When's the last time that happened?
And I don't think it helps to have our city government own it. It needs to be privately-owned. Anyone?
Jon
The aspect I have liked, and thought fair, of Mr. Smith and the Shoreline Area News, is that for most of the reports candidates were given the opportunity to submit their own statements. I prepared my own statements. ...some obviously think that hasn't necessarily been a good thing. BUT, most important, the statements reflect my own thinking, not GOVWatch, not consultants, not endorsers, not my parents, not my friends, not even my wife. They have been meant to be what I think is an open, honest and true reflection of what I think residents from our community want for our community. This is why I am adamant about parties coming together. I think, ultimately, given enough time, given clear communications, given a willingness to consider others thoughts and experiences, void of politics, void of less money, most people from Lake Forest Park DO want the same things.
Also, to note for the record, GOVWatch did not recruit me. I made the decision to run independent of any outside influences and filed to do such. GOVWatch just sent me a letter, just as they did all candidates, asking me to call to make an appointment for an endorsement interview. I knew, though, before this even happened that the GOVWatch endorsement was the only one which mattered to me because I did consider it to be the most representative of Lake Forest Park residents. Thus, I did work hard to earn it. This did include thinking on my own, and I am proud to say coming up with what I think are some creative, and semi-realistic ways to help our city financially.
~ Jason (Colberg)
Thank you Mr. Colberg for answering questions no one is asking.
NP. Glad to know you can read!
~ Jason
Bravo. Perhaps for your next tour de force you can concentrate on realistic ways to help our city. Semi-realistic is short of the mark for a policy maker, natch.
Semi- refers to wanting to get more community input before forcing an idea forward.
~ Jason
Post a Comment