|
|
Steve Stuart (D)
2005 Clark County Commissioner Candidate
LifePac Opposed
Barnett gave to pro-Stuart group; PAC put $86,000 into contest against Mielke for county seat
Columbian Feb 22, 2006"Barnett, his wife and two limited liability companies that have the same address in Seattle each contributed $25,000 to the committee, for a total of $100,000.
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."
*******************************************
November 2, 2005
Out of state Progressive Majority last minute contributions for negative campaign skyrocket, dumps another $18K for total of $74K+ in support of Stuart.
Search PDC Reports. Put "Progressive Majority" in "Filer Name" box.
*******************************************************
October 29, 2005
National group spends $55,000 to oppose Mielke (Excerpts)
http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/10292005news12886.cfm
" Progressive Majority has spent $55,219 on mailers and phone calls to oppose Republican Tom Mielke's bid for Clark County commissioner, according to reports filed with the state Public Disclosure Commission as of Friday. "
" Progressive Majority donated $1,267 worth of training and staff assistance directly to Stuart's campaign last summer. But the group spent its big money as a so-called "independent expenditure," separate from Stuart's campaign... The group's spending adds to what's already a high-dollar countywide race. Stuart had raised $184,039, while Mielke had $189,035 as of Friday. Progressive Majority's Web site lists 20 candidates the group is supporting around the state this year. But the only independent expenditures it has reported so far were to oppose Mielke, a former legislator. "
" Progressive Majority paid Winning Connections of Washington, D.C., $13,176 for phone calls, according to public disclosure reports. "
PROGESSIVE MAJORITY IS PAYING FOR NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING AGAINST TOM MIELKE. TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR NOW $55,000 (as of Friday Oct. 28)
http://www.clarkcountygop.org/display_news.htm?nid=18
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.
Progressive Majority’s agenda is to build a “farm team” to elect liberal Democratic candidates to office without regard for local needs and concerns. (See Atlanta Journal-Constitution article dated August 7, 2004 “Liberal Group takes Cue from Gingrich”, and Seattle Weekly article dated April 13, 2005 “A Liberal Minor League: Progressive Majority says Left Needs to Develop a Good Farm System it is to Take Back Congress.”). Progressive Majority Washington’s own website says its objective is “to fill the political pipeline with candidates who will continue to seek higher office, and to ensure the vitality and continued growth of the progressive movement for decades to come.” (http://progressivemajoritywashington.org/about).
*********************************************************
The Public Disclosure
Commission is going to investigate a citizen
complaint against Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart and CVTV, the
local government TV station.
> 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
> <http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?section=42.17.130&fuseaction=section>
> 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. At the end of
> the e-mail is a schedule of tapings of commissioner interviews since 2000
> from CVTV with my notes on which years were election years and when
> candidates for office appeared.
> 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.org
> 2) 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 commissioners 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 later
> than 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?
>
> Read the complaint here:
> http://www.pdc.wa.gov/compliance/complaints/pdf/ccvtv1005.pdf
Submitted by Margaret Tweet
> **************************************************************************
> ***********************************************************************
> Clark County Focus on county commissioner Interview Taping Dates 2000 -
> Present
> Interviews are taped, and according to CVTV staff typically air 5/6
> times/week for the following month.
> The taping dates are from CVTV. The election year notes I added.
>
> 2000 is a n election year for commissioners Positions 1 Morris and
> position 2 Stanton final election date Nov. 7
>
> 1/7/00 Commissioner Pridemore Position 3
>
> 2/8/00 Commissioner Morris Position 1
>
> 3/14/00 Commissioner Stanton Position 2
>
> 4/20/00 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 5/19/00 Commissioner Morris
>
> 6/13/00 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 7/11/00 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 8/15/00 Commissioner Morris
>
> 9/26/00 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 11/17/00 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 12/11/00 Commissioner Morris
>
>
> 2001 is a n on election year
>
> 1/12/01 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 2/8/01 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 3/27/01 Commissioner Morris
>
> 4/24/01 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 5/24/01 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 6/26/01 Commissioner Morris
>
> 7/23/01 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 8/22/01 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 9/24/01 Commissioner Morris
>
> 10/22/01 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 11/26/01 Commissioner Pridemore
>
>
> 2002 was a n election year for position 3, Comm. Pridemore ran again
> election ended Nov. 5
>
> In this year a Voice Mail Message was sent to county questioning whether
> Pridemore should be featured
>
> on the Focus program near an election. County legal counsel replied in an
> e-mail dated August 21, 2002.
>
> 1/15/02 Commissioner Morris
>
> 2/14/02 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 3/18/02 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 4/16/02 Commissioner Morris
>
> 5/23/02 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 6/27/02 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 7/31/02 Commissioner Morris
>
> 9/19/02 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 11/7/02 Commissioner Pridemore
>
>
> 2003 was a non-election year
>
> 1/6/03 Commissioner Morris
>
> 2/10/03 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 3/10/03 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 4/7/03 Commissioner Morris
>
> 5/8/03 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 6/13/03 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 7/9/03 Commissioner Morris
>
> 8/11/03 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 9/15/03 Focus: 20 Years of Clark County Government (All three
> Commissioners participated.)
>
> 10/21/03 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 11/17/03 Commissioner Morris
>
>
>
> 2004 was an election year for position 1-Morris, and position 2-Stanton.
> Only Morris ran in this year.
>
> November 2 final election date
>
> 2/2/04 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 3/11/04 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 4/13/04 Commissioner Morris
>
> 5/20/04 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 6/21/04 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 7/15/04 Commissioner Morris
>
> 8/19/04 Commissioner Stanton
>
> 9/23/04 Commissioner Pridemore
>
> 10/20/04 Commissioner Morris
>
> 11/15/04 Commissioner Stanton
>
>
>
> 2005 is an election year for position 3-Stuart, final election date
> November 8
>
> broadcasts began Oct. 16 and may be scheduled to air up until the final
> election date.
>
> 1/31/05 Commissioner Stuart
>
> 3/24/05 Commissioner Morris
>
> 5/19/05 Commissioner Boldt
>
> 6/30/05 Commissioner Stuart
>
> 7/29/05 Commissioner Morris
>
> 9/15/05 Commissioner Boldt
>
> 10/14/05 Commissioner Stuart
>
**********************************************************
October 2005
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."
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."
Retrieved 10/30/05 from http://www.thereflector.com/PAGES/STORIES/Old%20Stories/10-19-05.html
**************************************************
October 2005
Spring Hill Review Article
The Spring Hill Review, a Journal of Northwest Culture, features a face off between Clark County Commissioner candidates Mielke and Stuart in the October issue. Candidates are questioned about growth, sheriff services, county employee benefits, the FVRL library board, and the proposed casino. The Spring Hill Review may be picked up at local libraries, restaurants, coffee shops etc. throughout Clark County. For more information on articles or affordable advertising, contact Springhillreview@aol.com or tel- 892-1178.
*******************************************************
October 2005
Stuart's Appointment as Commissioner
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.
*******************************************************
Your CVTV
CVTV Focus on County Commissioners airs program on Candidate Stuart during election
Clark County/Vancouver government TV (CVTV) taped a 30-minute interview with appointed Democrat Clark County Commissioner Stuart who is running for county commissioner right now. The program , "Clark County Focus: Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart is interviewed" has been or will be aired about 14 times between Oct. 16 and Nov. 8 election. Ballots were mailed Wednesday Oct. 19, and arrived in some homes the following day. Does the use of CVTV for candidate infomercials/interviews during the election season serve the best public interest?
There are 3 county commissioners, and only one is running for office this election. The two non candidate commissioner interviews could have been scheduled during election season, instead of the commissioner/candidate. The fact that county commissioner position 3 was up for election in November 2005 was public information and should have been considered in any scheduling of candidates during election season.
Contact the officials responsible:Clark County Commissioners boardcom@clark.wa.gov
CVTV Director donna.mason@ci.vancouver.wa.us
CVTV and Clark County Commissioners have been contacted about this, and continue to air the candidate interviews.
RCW 42.17.130: Forbids use of public office or agency facilities in campaigns
Background
The Clark County Focus program heavily focuses on county commissioners and has for 20 years. One commissioner is featured for an interview taped mid-month which is broadcast by CVTV 5-6 times/week for the following month or so, year round. Meanwhile, open public meetings such as the Ft. Vancouver Library (FVRL) regular board meetings aren't broadcast at all. The FVRL board of directors is appointed by Clark, Skamania, and Klickitat County Comissioners with recommendations also from Vancouver for some positions. CVTV is funded jointly by the City of Vancouver and Clark County with tax dollars.
Some county open public meetings are held right next door to the hearing room on the 6th floor of the County Public Services Center in downtown Vancouver. A simple move to the hearing room for open public meetings would improve citizen access county-wide to local government processes. The Clark County hearing room has the equipment to broadcast CVTV already installed and ready to go at the direction of Clark County Commissioners, depending on CVTV availability etc. The City of Vancouver also directs CVTV on which which city open public meetings and city events to broadcast. CVTV Programming is produced under the direction of the CVTV Media Services Director who serves as Executive Producer.
http://www.cityofvancouver.us/cvtv/cvtvindex.asp?section=18718
From the Columbian:
"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."
"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."For full story http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/11022005news13377.cfm
A complaint regarding the use of public office and agency facilities in campaigns in violation of RCW 42.17.130(hyperlink) has been filed with the PDC and is currently under investigation.
*******************************************************
October 2005
Clark County Commissioner Candidate Debate
CVTV will broadcast the debate between Tom Mielke and Steve Stuart hosted by Marvin Case of the Reflector newspaper that serves Clark County. The October 19-25 edition of the Reflector reports on the debate and can be picked up at newstands around the county. The Reflector is known for not editing letters to the editor, and printing as many as possible. The Reflector also prints candidate responses to questions "in their own words" and are a valuable source of information for elections and local issues.
Tuesday, October 18 4:30 PM 23 (channel)
Friday, October 21 3 AM 21
Friday, October 21 9:30 AM 23
Sunday, October 23 1:30 PM 23
Monday, October 24 2:30 AM 21
Friday, October 28 7 AM 21
Monday, October 31 10:30 AM 23
Wednesday, November 02 4 AM 21
Thursday, November 03 12:34 AM 23
other candidate debates are also shown and can be viewed online as well
www.cvtv.org
*****************************************************
October 2005
Mr. Stuart's Family Status:
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."
****************************************************
Pro Abortion, Pro Homosexuality Progressive Majority Endorses Steve Stuart.
Sept. 2, 2005
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
******************************************************************
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
KENNETH P. VOGEL.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
