Washblog

Thurston County YD candidate forum wrap-up

From blogger extraordinaire Emmett O'Connell's blog Olympia Time, Emmett laments the lack of good dialog at the forum:

From past experience and recent election results, folks that only got into the city council races just before the filing deadline have a small chance of actually winning. Most of what they can expect to do is change what is being discussed during the race so that the winners can be held accountable when they're serving. But how in the hell do you change what is being discussed in the race if you don't even show up? Last night was free advertising for you!

A few days ago I complained about civic life in Lacey and Tumwater, but at least both Dick Yates and John Darby (the only two candidates in Lacey) showed up last night.

This problem of a lack of talent is prevalent in most municipalities in Washington, and an inherent problem with the Democratic party and the progressive movement - a lack of a 'farm team'. Part of the solution is to cultivate talent in organizations like the Thurston County Young Democrats and feed the younger members into leadership positions within the party and have them run for office in targeted local races.

The Snohomish County YD's was recently formed over the summer, and despite not having a four year university, the leadership recognizes the need to recruit from high schools - 16 year olds now will be voters in 2008.

The final list of endorsements from the Thurston County Young Democrats:

Chuck Namit North Thurston School Board, District 2
Karen Messmer City of Olympia, Position 4
Jeff Kingsbury City of Olympia, Position 5
Doug Mah City of Olympia, Position 6
Joe Hyer City of Olympia, Position 7
Ed Stanley Port of Olympia, District 3
Steve Klein City of Yelm, Mayor

Olympia City Council votes no nukes

I had always thought they were a nuke-free zone, but now it is soon to be official. Sounds like they are going to have some PR details to work out:

Foutch raised questions about whether the ordinance applies to the USS Olympia, the nuclear-powered submarine whose proposed visit was at the center of controversy last year. Organizers of Capital Lakefair have invited the sub for a visit next July, he said.

"I don't think the community can afford yet another divisive argument over the USS Olympia," Foutch said. "The USS Olympia episode last year raised enough of a flap that embarrassed state officials, and they were not happy with that. Are we setting up another confrontation and codifying it in Olympia law?"

The law would not apply to the sub if the U.S. Navy certifies that the vessel isn't carrying nuclear weapons. The Navy would need to break from its policy of neither confirming nor denying the presence of nuclear weapons, which Foutch said federal officials aren't likely to do.

The lack of a statement wouldn't trigger sanctions under the ordinance, Green said. The vessel would be excluded from the ordinance if it won't confirm or deny for federal security reasons, Councilman Joe Hyer said.

Olympia City Council votes to keep Wal-Mart out

For the next six months, anyway.

In February, the City Council adopted the moratorium on stores larger than 125,000 square feet, citing concerns such as traffic, parking and the effect on local merchants that need to be studied. It was set to expire in about a week.

This moratorium primarily targets the 'big box' retailers - i.e. Wal-Mart.

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to extend the temporary moratorium until March to give planners more time to study whether such stores fit in town.

The move had the support of the two residents who attended Tuesday's public hearing. It's in the city's interest to study the effect that big-box stores have on downtown and existing businesses, they said.

"I saw the development of the local economy when the Olympia City Commission allowed the (Westfield Shoppingtown) Capital mall to go in, and all the businesses left downtown," said Pat Tassoni, who sits on the board of the Downtown Neighborhood Association. "Now we have a viable and safe downtown, and we should do the research to maintain that in the economy."

Here is some research on the effects of Wal-Mart and the bix box chains, free of charge:

The typical pro Wal-Mart reasoning is that the retailer will bring in new jobs, tax revenue, but it typically only re-allocates revenue that was already spent in the smaller, local merchants that Wal-Mart competes against.

And while Wal-Mart competition does lower prices, it also depresses wages and eliminates jobs. One 1999 study reported that 1.5 jobs had been lost for every job that Wal-Mart created.

Wages are low at notoriously anti-union Wal-Mart—averaging about $9 an hour for full-time workers, around $8 for the roughly 45 percent of “associates” working less than 45 weeks a year.

A 1999 study for the Orange County Business Council forecast that the entry of grocery supercenters such as Wal-Mart operates could cost southern California $2.8 billion in lost wages and benefits each year as grocers cut the jobs or wages and benefits of a quarter million largely unionized grocery workers.

Wal-Mart also shifts many of its costs to taxpayers (or other businesses that indirectly pay costs of Wal-Mart’s underinsured employees). A recent study by Good Jobs First, an organization that monitors economic development policies, found that state and local governments had given at least $1 billion in subsidies to stores and distribution centers. Wal-Mart also pays so little that many of its workers rely on state healthcare subsidies, food stamps, housing vouchers and other public aid. According to a recent study by the University of California at Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, California alone spends $10 billion annually to subsidize Wal-Mart and similar low-wage employers. Congressional Democratic staff calculates that federal taxpayers pay $2,103 per year in subsidies for the average Wal-Mart worker.