|
|
Steve Stuart (D)
2005 Clark County Commissioner Candidate
LifePac Opposed
Reflector Debate Excerpts:
Library Internet pornography
When he served in the state legislature, Mielke worked four or five years to remove pornography from libraries, he said. "It's not allowed in our government or schools," he said. "It's amazing that they would allow porn in a library." Mielke stated examples of people getting fired for accessing porn on business or government computers. "If you want to access porn, go to a porn store and get it," he said.
Stuart believes the filters in place at the library are "pretty darn close to adequate," and that they "of course could be made better. "But, "Who determines what porn is for anyone?" Stuart said..."I don't want to have government telling me what porn is. That's offensive."http://www.thereflector.com/PAGES/STORIES/Old%20Stories/10-19-05.html Retrieved 10/30/05
LifePac Commentary
Clark County Commissioners appoint the library board, who in turn establish library policy.
In spite of Stuarts’ lack of support, the FVRL library board for libraries in Clark, Skamania, and Klickitat counties voted to filter out pornography in 2006, by one vote. Whether or not the policy will remain or be enforced depends on the library board, which depends on those who appoint them, the Clark County Commissioners. In August 2010, Clark County Commissioners decided whether to put a library measure on the ballot. Commissioner Boldt voted no and explained it was due to the lack of filtering pornography in the library. Commissioners Stuart and Morris voted yes, and expressed little concern about pornography distribution in the library. The library measure went to a vote, and was voted down by citizens of Clark County.
“ In a meeting with The Columbian's editorial board, Ziegman (FVRL Executive Director) said a survey was conducted of 200 people who ad voted 'no' on the Nov. 8 bond issue, and 42 percent said they opposed the measure for money reasons. Another 28 percent said they opposed it because of the access-to-pornography issue.”
Columbian 12/11/ 05, In Our View - Filter Libraries
Library Porn Update:
In May 2010, the Washington Supreme Court upheld the right of libraries to filter out pornography on library computers. The case was based on the North Central Library system based in Wenatchee, a 28 branch system that filters out pornography on library computers.
More Reflector Debate Excerpts:
Cowlitz casino
" Mielke's concerns lie in the size of the project, that there is not money for the tribe to pay for infrastructure, that low-income workers will create ghettos in the area, and that business in small communities will suffer as well as lose tax income because the tribe is tax exempt."
"Stuart said it's too early to tell if he agrees with the casino plan because the Environmental Impact Statement that will describe specifics isn't finished yet... If the development is smaller than the mega ideas he's seen, he may support it, said Stuart."
Anti-Life Wash. DC Progressive Majority PAC Money
Lands Stuart County Commissioner in 2005
“Cowlitz casino developer David Barnett contributed large amounts of money to a that Washington, D.C., political action committee that spent more than $86,000 to defeat Tom Mielke in the waning days of last year's (2005)Clark County commissioner race.
His contributions to Progressive Majority were made in late October, at roughly the same time the group was spending more than $86,000, primarily on negative mailers, to defeat Mielke and help elect Democrat Steve Stuart, who won by a narrow margin.The Progressive Majority reported those expenditures to the Washington Public Disclosure Commission on Oct. 26, Oct. 31 and Nov. 3. The general election was Nov. 7.But because of a loophole in state campaign finance disclosure laws that exempts out-of-state contributors from meeting some state reporting deadlines, the contributions from Barnett to the Progressive Majority were not reported to the PDC until Nov. 20 13 days after the election....
The Stuart-Mielke race was the most expensive commissioner race in county history. Mielke raised $204,442 and Stuart was close behind with $202,087. That total doesn't count the $86,562.56 spent on Stuart's behalf by Progressive Majority in the campaign's final days." Columbian Feb 22, 2006
PROGESSIVE MAJORITY SPENDS $55,000 (as of Friday Oct. 28)
Clark County Republican Chairman Brent Boger issued the following statement today: “We should keep local elections local and not simply be the pawn in the strategy of a national political action committee. ..
On October 25th and 26th, a Washington, D.C.-based political action committee, Progressive Majority, dumped nearly $43,000 in the Clark Commissioner race to oppose Commissioner candidate, Tom Mielke. See documents on file with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission, http://www.pdc.wa.gov/scr/InepExp2005.rpt The money apparently has been used for negative mailing that grossly distorts Tom Mielke’s record.
One hit piece claims that Tom Mielke is for higher taxes. The Columbian reported on October 16, 2005 that Mielke supports Initiative 912, which would repeal the 9.5-cent phased gas tax increase” while noting that “Stuart has taken flak for opposing the initiative”. Which one of these candidates is for higher taxes? Mielke has a track record of consistently opposing unnecessary tax hikes and insisting on government accountability including performance audits ...
Progressive Majority is supported almost entirely by individuals from outside Clark County including Norman Lear, Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, and Playboy Magazine CEO, Christie Hefner. (See Documents on file with the Federal Elections Commission, http://www.fec.gov ). Contributions are especially heavy from California, New York, and Washington, D.C. Of Progressive Majority’s hundreds or thousands of contributors only about three are from Clark County.
Pro Abortion Progressive Majority Endorses Steve Stuart.
From Washington State Progressive Majority Website:
"Progressive Majority is pleased to announce our first endorsement of 2005: Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart."
From: http://www.progressivemajoritywashington.org/blog/5?from=40, accessed Sept. 2, 2005
Complaint against Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart and CVTV, the local government TV station. November 2005
The complaint is two fold about the use of public agencies and offices to
influence directly or indirectly a campaign by a candidate or a ballot measure.RCW 42.17.130: Forbids use of public office or agency facilities in campaigns
1) The first complaint is about the use of CVTV to broadcast approximately
16 30-minute interview/infomercials of Steve Stuart during the period Oct. 16 through today, November 7. Ballots were mailed on Oct. 18. To add insult to injury, 7 of the 30-minutes are devoted to negative information about Initiative 912, the repeal of the gas tax. Stuart is on record in the Columbian (Oct. 16) as being opposed to I-912. Do repeated one sided broadcasts of candidates for office and ballot measure positions during an election season best serve the public interest?
Clark County and the City of Vancouver are the two elected bodies over the agency, and as such have joint responsibility for this joint department. "Clark-Vancouver Television is the local government, non-commercial cable access channel operated and funded by the City of Vancouver and Clark County, Washington." www.cvtv.org2) The second half of the complaint is about a 3 1/2 page “update from your county commissioners Summer/Fall 2005”. According to US postal records it appears ommissioners sent out the mailer county-wide around August 29.At the federal level, the cut off date for mailings prior to elections for incumbents running for office is 90 days. Federal Franking office, 202-225-9337.
At the state level, RCW 42.52.185 provides guidelines that restrict informative mailings from legislators during an election year “no laterthan 60 days after the end of a regular legislative session”
Is it in the public interest for the county to send mailings featuring candidates for office in the 90 days prior to an election in which a featured official is a candidate for office? Submitted by Margaret Tweet
From the Columbian article on use of CVTV during elections:"In the half-hour program, this Columbian reporter and Tony Bacon from The Daily Insider interviewed Stuart about the county's 20-year growth plan; schools, roads and infrastructure; and how Initiative 912, which would repeal the 9.5-cent phased gas tax, would affect road construction in Clark County. The program is scheduled to air 16 times over a 25-day period…"
"This is not the first challenge of incumbents' interviews on the show during election season. Critics took issue with interviews of Pridemore in 2002 and of Vern Veysey in 1988, Potter said."
“Commissioner Betty Sue Morris suggested voluntarily changing the interview schedule because the issue keeps cropping up.”
“The commissioners agreed to consider such a policy in January, which does not satisfy Tweet.’January is too late,’ she said. ‘It should have stopped last week.’ “
For full story http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/11022005news13377.cfm
www.cvtv.org for informational interviews and candidate debates
Clark County Commissioners have now stopped airing candidates in election season on
CVTV.
Stuart's Appointment as Commissioner October 2005
LifePac Commentary
Senator Pridemore (D-Vancouver) helped fellow environmental activist Steve Stuart to replace him as the $93,224 Clark County Commissioner by resigning on December 20, 2004. The next day, the other two democrat commissioners appointed Stuart as county commissioner effective January 2005. The appointment for the third position should have been made by newly elected Commissioners Boldt and Morris in 2005. However, Morris was first appointed as a county commissioner, and was well aware of the advantages.
Pridemore also favored Stuart in the 2005 legislative session. House Bill 1226 passed to limit campaign contributions to $675 per election for state legislators, county offices, and ports. Pridemore amended the bill to exclude county candidates in Pierce, Clark and Spokane Counties. If the limits had passed, about $92,325 as of Oct. 7 in generous contributions from developers, real estate investors, Georgia etc. would not be allowed. www.pdc.wa.gov/servlet/CCC2005ContServletStuart went to college, law school and worked mostly in Oregon. He was a lobbyist for an environmental group, 1000 Friends of Washington, and moved to Clark County (Vancouver) just recently in 2002, where he has worked for Friends of Clark County and a few months for Urban Reserve prior to his appointment as commissioner in 2004.
Family Status: October 2005
One of our members asked Mr. Stuart in mid September and again in October for this information via his website, but has not received an answer. We've heard though that he's divorced and has a 15 year old son who lives with his mother.
From Columbian: "Steve Stuart, Age: 34, Family: Divorced, one child."
****************************************************
Progressive Majority's Agenda Excerpts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from http://www.progressivemajority.org/values/freedom.asp, accessed September 6, 2005.
Political Favors Boost Stuart Campaign Funds ....
Bill exempts urban candidates
The News Tribune. Tacoma, Wash.: Apr 18, 2005. pg. B.01
Steve Stuart probably would have been required to give back most, if not all, of $40,000 in campaign contributions under a bill being considered in the Legislature. But Stuart’s friend and predecessor as Clark County commissioner, Sen. Craig Pridemore (D-Vancouver), made sure that wouldn’t happen.Pridemore removed a provision from a bill that would have limited contributions to candidates running for county offices in Pierce, Clark and Spokane counties as well as the ports of Tacoma and Seattle.
Big donors influence politics in Pierce County and other counties and port districts. But groups representing counties and ports supported Pridemore’s amendment because they contend it’s hard to raise awareness and money for local races.
The bill, House Bill 1226, also would limit the amounts of campaign contributions that could be given to candidates running for state Supreme Court and appeals court. It would require candidates running for the affected offices to return contributions exceeding the proposed limits or spend them by the time bill is signed. It’s unclear, though, whether they’d have to give back the entire contribution or just the amount that exceeds the limit.
For Stuart, who received four $10,000 contributions this year for his special election in November, the original bill would either require him to spend or return at least $37,300 – the amount that’s in excess of the proposed $675-per-election limit.Stuart was appointed in December to the Board of Clark County Commissioners to fill a seat vacated by Pridemore, who left the three-member panel when he was elected to the Senate.
Purchase full article from publisher or obtain through FVRL ProQuest Document Search
