Madore/Mielke propose CRC advisory vote, Stuart freaks and Moeller doubles down on his lies.

Did you ever notice how hard those in favor of the CRC fight to keep the people from having a say in this rip off?

Why is that, anyway?

In keeping with Article 1, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution (quoted at left) it seems the Commission majority is interested in a vote, county wide, on the CRC scam.

Predictably, the left freaks:

However, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Bronson Potter reiterated to commissioners his opinion from 2010, when he said they could not have an advisory vote on a matter over which they lack the authority to decide.

Potter said Wednesday that commissioners could ask voters only about whether county money should be spent on the project. He said commissioners could adopt a draft resolution saying no county money would be spent on the planning of the Columbia River Crossing or in support of the bi-state project, and then ask voters whether the resolution should be formally adopted. The language resembles that of a resolution anti-light rail activists are trying to get the Vancouver City Council to put on the ballot.

Commissioner Steve Stuart said county money isn't much of a player in the CRC, as plans call for state and federal funding.

Commissioner David Madore asked if the county has any role in issuing permits for the project.

No, Stuart said. All of the work will be done in the city of Vancouver.

Stuart said the vote still wouldn't be what Madore has wanted, which is a straight up-or-down vote on the Columbia River Crossing.

"You are finding out the limits of our authority," Stuart said.

Were I a commissioner, I would ignore Potter.  First, Potter incorrectly told us that Marc Boldt, who violated black letter ethics laws when he voted to give county funds to his wife's employer from which he would directly benefit, falsely told us that Boldt had violated no laws; went on to find a justification to keep an advisory vote off the ballot knowing that the commission majority at that time, democrats Stuart and Boldt, did not want to hear from the voters.

As a result, I would get an outside opinion and weigh that much more heavily than the institutional opinion Stuart keeps babbling about:  in short, since advisory votes have no force in law, this is NOT a matter of a "limit to our authority."

This is a time to stand up for what's right.  And what is right is doing whatever it takes to give the people a voice in this debacle.  Stuart, of course, does not want the people of this county to have a say, although we certainly will in November of 14 when Stuart is voted out.

Even more predictably, Rep. Jim Moeller (Communist-49) doubles down on all of his many talking point lies.  Moeller, who hates the very idea of allowing the people a voice when that voice is likely to oppose his agenda.... just look at his efforts to sue his own constituents over their repeated votes to limit Moeller's ability to steal our money for his fringe-left projects...

Lew Waters ·  Top Commenter · Works at Stateside Associates Best Local Politics Blog

Is Stuart on dope? "county money isn't much of a player in the CRC, as plans call for state and federal funding."

Uh Steve, in case you forgot, the county is we the taxpayers who are going to be stuck paying off this monstrosity for generations and you don't even want to ask us if we want it?

Did you forget your words from back in 2010 campaigning for reelection? 

"Stuart has endorsed a vote on light rail, and said Monday that if Clark County residents don’t support it, 'then the states have the wrong project'.”. 

http://www.columbian.com/news/2010/sep/14/clark-county-commissioner-candidate-svehaug-largel/

And now you still refuse to ask us?

At least Madore and Mielke are willing to try to keep campaign promises. When will Commissioner Stuart?

Reply · 3 · 

 · about an hour ago

• 
  

  Jim Moeller ·  Top Commenter
  

  Lew you wrote: "Uh Steve, in case you forgot, the county is we the taxpayers who are going to be stuck paying off this monstrosity for generations and you don't even want to ask us if we want it?" Through what means? No local sales tax. no local property tax, no local bond and still no local B&O tax. Tolls? Those that use the bridge help pay for the bridge. What could be a more conservative method? 

  Reply · 1 · 
  

   · 51 minutes ago
• 
  

  Lew Waters ·  Top Commenter · Works at Stateside Associates Best Local Politics Blog
  

  Stop your lies, Jim. Even the Columbian published word of the legislature considering a 10 cent per gallon gas tax increase and a return to a .07% excise tax based on the assumed value of your cars yesterday for "transportation" that includes CRC.
  
  And you know Leavitt has also spoken of adding a $20 yearly fee to car tabs.
  
  You also know that our new Secretary of Transportation is an advocate for tolling the I-205 bridge and that the amendment added to block tolling the 205 bridge can be repealed.
  
  Stop trying to misled people to believe that manna will fall from heaven in the form of dollars to pay for this monstrosity.

  Reply · 1 · 
  

   · 22 minutes ago

The more "conservative method" would be to allow the people to have a vote.  But slimeballs like Moeller are certainly NOT interested in that.

In some respects, Moeller's fringe-left efforts, which never end, to hurt the people by stealing our money has an admirable, doggedly insistent quality... not unlike one of his heroes, Joe Stalin.

But his constant drum beat of lies, delivered over and over and over, his reckless disregard of the will of the people... a thing of legends... has achieved a certain Goebbellian, Baghdad Bob tone and timber in about everything he says or does.

There's no lie he won't tell to get this built, and the LAST thing he wants is to allow the people of this county to have a say, because our say to him is meaningless.

Thanks to Commissioner Madore for pushing for this, and thanks to Lew Waters for locking that frringe-left moron's heels for lying... again.