Written by Jane Roush | 01 February 2012

County and City:
The annual meeting of city and county officials with representatives of the congressional delegation and state legislature took place on January 5th at the county public works office. The discussions centered on the priority of funding and other issues for the 2012 sessions. The three city commissioners, county commissioner Steve Bloomfield, Rep Kathy Haigh (35th LD) and representatives of Senators Murray and Cantwell, Rep Norm Dicks and the Governor were present.

County: Steve led off by introducing Charlie Butros, director of Public Works. Charlie talked about the proposed Hwy 3 changes including the Johns Prairie interchange and public records requests. John Keats, Tom Moore and John Cunningham of Utilities and Parks then talked about the Belfair Waste Water System project, wetland problems and other similar projects. Debbie Riley of Public Health discussed the need for permanent funding for community and family health services and surface water quality issues. Sheriff Casey Salisbury also talked about public records requests, early release of offenders into the community with no supervision, and the rising cost of medical treatment for offenders. The priority list for the county was: Environmental Health, Public Records and Safety.

City: Gary Cronce, the mayor of Shelton, introduced Steve Goins, the Community and Economic Development and Public Works director. He in turn introduced Mike Michael, the City Engineer. Mike talked about several projects including the Franklin Street Improvement project and the proposed K St Project. Mike also discussed the issue of local entities having to match grant funds when the city/county are in such financial binds. He suggested either the state/federal temporarily ease or cancel the requirements of matching funds for selected projects. Steve presented a slide show on the Shelton Heights project. There are still problems to be worked on for this project including cleaning up Goose Lake and the opposition of the port to the project. The city's priorities were: public records, sales tax and the large increase number of court cases for indigent people increasing the court costs.

The city officials did not address the problem of the sales tax or court costs until this point in the meeting. Last year the city residents passed a sales tax earmarked for safety. The Dept of Revenue has collected the tax but will not give the funds to the city. It was not explained why the state will not turn over the funds. It was also not made clear why the costs for the court for indigent residents are increasing (I must assume it is the economic decline).

Two port officials were present – Jay Hupp and Dick Taylor. Jay said the port gave the city/PUD3 (I couldn't hear very well) $160,000 in 16" pipe for the Johns Prairie water main. Jay said the port also gave another $10,000 in pipe to put the water into MCRA softball fields. The port wants the federal government to give them $500,000. The port will use the fund to buy pipe to hook up the businesses on port property in the John Prairie area.

Anyway, Kathy, Sara Crum and the other representatives all said the same thing – THERE IS NO MONEY THIS YEAR. With the end of this exchange I left.

Citizens United (again)
The decision by the US Supreme Court in 2010 has spawned lawsuits. Here is a summary of a couple of them.

In August 2011, the US District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a case brought by two foreign nationals (Canadians) in the US on temporary work visas. One person wanted to contribute to a political party, print flyers in support of a candidate and pass then out in Central Park NYC. The other person wanted to make contributions to the conservative "Club for Growth."* Legal representatives for the two men argued that the law forbidding foreign nationals to give political contributions was similar to the Citizens United decision - the First Amendment rights were violated. The district court said there was a line between lawful permanent resident and other foreigners and that foreign citizens did not have a right to make contributions to influence American elections. The US Supreme Court in late December quietly upheld the decision.

*Club for Growth – "The primary tactic of the separate Club for Growth PAC is to provide financial support from Club members to viable candidates to Congress who believe in pro-growth policies, limited government, low taxes and economic freedom, both in Republican primaries and general elections. " Source: www.clubforgrowth.org

Source: New York Times, January 9, 2012, "Supreme Court Retains Ban on Foreign Campaign Contributions," by John H Cushman Jr.

The most interesting lawsuit is the decision by the Montana State Supreme Court that Montana election laws limiting contributions and expenditures in statewide and local initiatives, ballot measure and candidate races were still valid. The Montana Supreme Court said the Citizens United decision is limited in its application to Presidential and congressional races in Montana. The election law was pass in Montana in 1912. Prior to that time the state had a long history of big business buying elections and candidates. In late December 2011 five of the seven justices on the Montana Supreme Court voted to keep the election law intact saying the long history of corporations buying power in the state elections was still important to the citizens of Montana. They said that Montana is a small state and a successful candidate for a US Senate seat only spent $17,000 in a recent election. A sixth justice said clearly a corporation is not a person, but felt the decision of the US Supreme Court should be upheld until overturned. The justice wrote an eight page report outlining why he thought the Citizens United decision was bad. The American Tradition Partnership brought the lawsuit, which is expected to be appealed to the US Supreme Court. Hurray for the Montana Supreme Court.

Sources: The National Law Journal, January 5, 2012, "Montana Supreme Court Defies Citizens United Ruling, by Amanda Bronstad"; Seattle Times, January 6, 2012, "Montana puts Supreme Court's corporate-cash ruling on notice," by Kim Murphy.

< Prev		Next >