Madore on C3G2 hater Kimsey: he went over the line on the voter's pamphlet.

This is one of those times where the local GOP ought to bury their collective foot up Kimsey's ass.

The voter's pamphlet has been used by our local Auditor, Greg Kimsey, as a campaign piece for his scam organization, ClarkForward, which has been shilling the rip off of the charter for months now.

CF is a leftist effort, started with RINO KImsey and Steve "I don't give a damn what you think" Stuart during the halcyon days of their effort to try and find a way to recall Madore and Mielke for their lawful hiring of Don Benton.

I'd been hearing rumors that Kimsey was going to lie his ass off in the voter's pamphlet, but his failure to present both sides of every issue is over the top, and while I'm sure his fellow fringe-leftists will be thrilled, I have lost my last shred of respect for this partisan hack masquerading as a Republican.

It will be interesting to see what local GOP'ers do about this clown: they did nothing about the moron we've got in Congress, so I can't see them doing much here, either, but you never know.

Meanwhile, here's David Madore's take on Kimsey's playing fast and loose with the law of this state, something, perhaps, he CAN be recalled over.

David Madore shared a link.9 hours ago · Edited

Voters’ Pamphlet – stepping outside the state guidelines: 

 All county auditors are supposed to be neutral and not have a dog in the fight. They are not supposed to use the Voters' Pamphlet to advocate for the passage of a ballot measure, nor express their selling points and opinions. Normally, an auditor does not form a Political Action Committee to push a charter with the ambition to become the new County Executive Director.
http://clarkforward.org/  

 Yet our pro-charter auditor added two extra pages to Clark County’s Voters' Pamphlet that express opinions not supported by the charter. Focus was given to the carrots while less palatable points were omitted (such as the fact that once adopted, it would become permanent and irrevocable, or that it cannot be amended by initiative, and amending it would be prohibited until years in the future and cost hundreds of thousands each).  

 Those two extra pages understate the extra council members’ taxpayer cost by omitting the cost of taxes and benefits provided by our County Budget Manager.  

 Those two extra pages mislead voters into thinking that we don't already have a commissioner / manager form of government where the county manager already handles the day to day operations of the county but with the advantage that each department is accountable to the citizens through their county commissioners. 

 Here are some examples of the pro-charter opinions found in those two extra pages (58 & 59) of the Voter's Pamphlet at: 

http://www.clark.wa.gov/elections/documents/2014/NOVEMBER_4/General_2014_VP.pdf

 "Adding two council members will increase citizen representation and access, and reduce the concentration of power."  

 Those two extra pages fail to reveal that the opposite is true. All executive authority now shared by three full time commissioners would be concentrated instead in one person, an unelected executive director elevated above the citizen representatives. Citizens would likely have less access to council members because they would be part time and may be working a second job. 

 So much power would be transferred to that bureaucrat, that the council members would have little left to do. They are presumed to be part time (as stated in an earlier version of the charter draft). Those two pages fail to reveal the extra executive director compensation cost for that load shift. 

 Even though the Charter says no such thing, those two extra pages say "Electing councilors by district (the same method by which state legislators are elected) gives minority groups with a geographic base a better chance of being represented on the council."  

 Our Prosecuting Attorney said that if the districts were actually drawn that way, it would violate state law. 

 Those two extra pages omit all of the objections published by the dissenting Freeholders in the minority report including: 

 * The wall of separation between the elected representatives and staff 

 * The transfer of all executive authority to an unelected executive director 

 * The transfer of all authority to appoint all non-elected department managers 

 * The diminished role of council members 

 * The loss of four council members' ability to speak for their office 

 Our state provides clear specifications for the content of our Voters' Pamphlet including the complete text of the ballot measure, the Prosecuting Attorney's statement, pro and con statements, and a rebuttal for each. Those specifications are provided by our state to avoid extra-curricular advocacy content designed to influence voters.  

 In this case, our pro-charter auditor not only added these two extra pages that include pro-charter opinions in the Voters’ Pamphlet, but also objected to publishing the Minority Report on the County Charter Main webpage (so it would have equal exposure with the majority report) and sought to remove the Minority Report entirely from the county records and purge it from the minutes.  

http://clark.wa.gov/freeholders/index.html 

http://clark.wa.gov/freeholders/meetings.html 

 A level playing field and neutrality would have been far better policy if our pro-charter auditor would have exactly followed Washington State specifications

...
Clark Forward.org - information about the upcoming Freeholder election in Clark County
clarkforward.org
To learn more about the upcoming Freeholder election or our Clark County charter. Please feel free to visit the...
5 SharesLikeLike · · Share