Port of Olympia Zita-Farmer Ballot Issues

Port of Olympia Zita-Farmer Ballot Issues

zita  

Above: During a public hearing about the budget, Port of Olympia commissioner candidate E.J. Zita addresses the Port of Olympia on Monday night. She commented on her desire to see a clearer accounting of the cost of dredging. She said that it would add clarity if the costs could be separated. The cost of operational dredging is currently combined with other environmental clean-up costs. Galligan said that those numbers are available. “If there’s a clearer way to report on that, we’d be happy to do that,” said Galligan.

By Janine Gates

www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com

According to the Thurston County Auditor’s Office, the latest tally has E.J. Zita ahead of Jerry Farmer in their race for Port of Olympia Port Commissioner #3. 

Zita was slightly behind on election night, but subsequent tallies put her in the lead with 124 votes on Friday with an estimated 700 ballots left to count.

On Monday, the new tally kept Zita ahead: 26,294 (50.21%) to Farmer’s 26,079 (49.79%), for a difference of 215 votes.

There are still a few ballots to be counted that have discrepancies, such as missing signatures, or those that have questionable signatures.

Little Hollywood spoke late Monday afternoon with Tillie Naputi-Pullar, Thurston County elections manager at the Thurston County Auditor’s Office. She said that as of today, there are 116 ballots that do not have signatures, and 207 that have questionable signatures.

“Each day we generate a letter so voters are being notified on a daily basis if something is wrong with their ballot,” said Naputi-Pullar. She and her staff of three have a process in which they visually examine the signatures of all voters.

“If there is a problem, we send out a letter within 24 hours to the voter. We supply a pre-paid envelope with a signature verification form and the voter can mail it back, come in and drop it off, or email it by scanning it, or fax it back to us. We do our best to help the voter so it’s expedited so we can update their status,” she said.

Little Hollywood asked Naputi-Pullar about an Olympia woman who had an issue with her ballot and said she received a knock on her door on Sunday, November 8. The visitor appeared to be a supporter of candidate Jerry Farmer, as she was wearing a Farmer campaign button.

The westside resident, interviewed by Little Hollywood on Monday, did not want to be named, but shared her story:

“A woman wearing a Farmer campaign button and carrying a clipboard knocked on the door of my apartment. On her clipboard she carried many forms and a list of registered voters, I believe. She stated that she was a volunteer and was at my home because my ballot had an issue, and it was not currently valid as a countable ballot. 

The issue, she said, was that my ballot signature did not match the outside envelope signature. She asked me if I had received an official notice of this problem. I had not. She suggested that I had not received this letter because I had voted at the last minute.

 

She handed me a form from her clipboard and told me that I should fill it out in order to amend the discrepancy in my ballot signatures. She stated that she'd like me to fill it out on the spot and give it back to her.  

I told her I would rather fill it out later and/or wait for the official notice. She checked something off on her clipboard. She then asked me: “Did you even vote for the Port?”  I responded “Yes, I did.” She questioned me further, “Who did you vote for? Did you vote for Jerry Farmer?” I told her that I did not wish to answer her questions at this time.  She thanked me for my time and left. 

To follow up on this interaction, I checked the Thurston County Elections website to ascertain the status of my ballot.  There is indeed a problem with it, and I intend to call the number provided to resolve this issue so that my vote may be counted.”

Before she had a chance to call, she said she received her letter from the Thurston County elections office just this evening, informing her of the ballot signature discrepancy.

The woman says she doesn’t think anything suspicious was going on, but was unclear about the process.

“I didn’t know they gave out that kind of information to campaigns but I guess I’m not surprised now that I know the process,” she said.

It’s called “signature chasing,” and Naputi-Pullar said that the woman who came to the door was not with the Thurston County election office, however, that type of voter information is released to campaigns regarding voters whose ballots have not yet been counted. The form she was asked to fill out on the spot and return to the woman wearing the Farmer campaign button was most likely a signature verification form.

Jan Witt of Olympia is a friend of the woman who received the knock on her door and expressed concern about the incident.

“I believe that Thurston County Elections should not accept any of the forms collected by campaign people. Given that a campaign is asking people who they voted for and requesting the signature verification forms, how do they know whether or not a campaign is turning in all of the forms they receive? Maybe they are turning in only the forms of those who say they voted for their candidate,” said Witt.

Asked how the Thurston County elections office knows that all signature verification forms are turned in by campaign volunteers, Naputi-Pullar expressed assurance in their process, which is set in statute: 

“Three days before the certification date, November 24, my staff sits down and calls those voters if we have not received a form back. If people are concerned, they can contact us.”

Contacted by Little Hollywood this evening, Farmer said that he thought Zita’s volunteers were also out signature chasing.

Asked tonight after a Port of Olympia business meeting if her campaign is signature chasing, Zita said she has several dozen volunteers signed up to do so, but the elections office has informed her that it doesn’t appear to be necessary. Zita said that although a recount will be necessary, it appears to be out of range for a hand recount, and will most likely be a machine recount.

According to the Thurston County Auditor’s Office, the following are the rules for recounts of local contests: 

A machine recount would require that the difference between two candidates be less than 2,000 votes and less than 1/2 of one percent of the total votes cast. A hand recount would require that the difference between two candidates is less than 150 votes and less than 1/4 of one percent of the total votes cast.

Although it may still be too soon to do so, port staff, audience members, and Joe Downing, Port of Olympia commissioner candidate for position #1 who won his seat against George Barner, and was also at tonight's meeting, congratulated Zita on her apparent win.

The election will be certified November 24.

For more information and number changes, go to the Thurston County Auditor’s Office at www.thurstonvotes.org.

Port of Olympia Business Carries On Without Commissioner Gunn

Port of Olympia Business Carries On Without Commissioner Gunn

washington  

Above: Port of Olympia executive director Ed Galligan, left, Commissioner George Barner, center, in striped shirt, and Commissioner Bill McGregor, to his left, conduct business at a special joint commission and port citizen's advisory committee meeting on February 17, 2015.

By Janine Unsoeld

www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com

Among other business, Port of Olympia commissioners George Barner and Bill McGregor heard a presentation at their work session on February 19 about a proposal to create a new berth.

Commissioner Sue Gunn, absent from port meetings since November 24, had open heart surgery in December. Commissioner McGregor said he thinks Gunn may be absent through March and that he doesn’t know if she is going to be back.

Port commissioners divide responsibilities and assignments. Gunn is responsible for attending meetings of the Tumwater Chamber, Grand Mound Rochester Chamber, South Thurston Economic Development Initiative, Legislative Thurston County Shared Partnership Group, and the Transportation Policy Board. McGregor and Barner attended Transportation Policy Board meetings for Gunn in January and February.

At the work session meeting, new draft language regarding administrative procedures for the excusal and prolonged absence of a port commissioner was discussed. In light of Commissioner Gunn’s absence, clarifying language is needed, as this occurrence has not happened before in port history. No action was taken.

Harbor Patrol Discussion

Staff and commissioners had a lengthy conversation about the Harbor Patrol program. McGregor asked staff for more information about the loss of City of Olympia funding for the Harbor Patrol and keenly wanted to try and find a way to save it. He asked staff to see if there was a way the port could take over a portion of the costs, and to find out how much the repairs to their boat is going to cost.

“We get drawn in by association…in my cursory look, it’s a benefit. I’d hate to see it go away without discussion. Let’s begin the process from the Port’s perspective. The boat needs work. Let’s find out what is the true cost of keeping the program alive and what we can take on under our jurisdiction,” said McGregor.

Galligan said he would produce a report to the commissioners about the program by March 2.

Above: An aerial of the Port of Olympia taken in December 2014. A proposal for a Berth 4 is being discussed in the area of the missing "notch" of the current port peninsula.

Berth 4 Proposal

Alex Smith, the port’s director of environmental programs, gave a brief report on a proposal to create a fourth berth in the area of the missing “notch” of the current port peninsula.  The port says a fourth berth would provide greater flexibility, creating between four to six acres of work area for cargo loading or unloading.

The port also sees this as an opportunity to continue its cleanup of Budd Inlet and to have a place to deposit dredge spoils.

An old pier made of creosote pilings in that location is still visible. Commissioner Barner commented that he used to be employed there as a young teenager as a “casual” – a temporary laborer, using pike poles to separate floating logs. They were then pulled out of the water and either loaded on ships or stored them on land.  

“It was dangerous business, and a couple of my buddies were killed, crushed by moving logs,” he said.

Creating the new berth, technically a confined disposal facility, would require the dredging of the federal channel. Due to the contaminated sediment caused by legacy dioxins from mills along the shoreline, the proposed project has years of decisions ahead of it.

The port proposes to use a berm and/or a sheet pile wall to surround the area for the deposit. The contaminated sediment would be capped, fill would go on top of that, then asphalt. Collectively, that creates a new upland area. 

The Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for doing the dredging and pays for the lowest cost disposal alternative. Smith estimated that an estimated 400,000 to 575,000 cubic yards of material would be dredged.

The cost for the berth would be about $20 million. To pay for the berth, the port would pursue a Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant that would pay for about a third of the total cost.

Smith said that the state Department of Ecology would be unlikely to pay for the project because it doesn’t meet their criteria for cleanup. Dredged material from berths 2 and 3 was recently taken away to landfills in Castle Rock, Washington and Oregon.

“The most we can put into berth 4 would be about 180,000 cubic yards. It’s not going to solve all our problems and it’s still a pretty expensive thing to do….” said Smith after the meeting.

Asked how desperate the port is to do this project, Smith said that will be looked at in the port’s marine terminal master plan. Smith says the port will continue to move towards design and permitting. Getting on the Army Corps of Engineers radar for the dredging is a long process.

Harry Branch, Olympia, has a Master’s Degree in Environmental Studies with a focus on marine reserves as a tool in fishery management. He has also served as a captain operating research vessels.

Branch wrote a letter to the port commissioners saying that studies seem to indicate that confined disposal is being viewed less favorably because it impedes natural remediation by plants.

“Dredging and filling nearshore areas reduces potential ecological function by reducing the intertidal and shallow littoral area. Alterations to physical parameters impact chemical and biological parameters.

There is always some degree of mess created during construction. Any time we dig in the benthos, we release contamination into the water column.

Confined disposal facility (CDF) sites are expected to leak but at an acceptable rate. I suggest that in a confined, degraded bay like Budd Inlet, there is no acceptable rate. We need to ultimately get to a point where these things are for all intents and purposes, gone.

How long will this CDF actually survive? They haven't been around long enough to know for sure. The nearshore of Puget Sound is an artesian discharge zone. An interesting case study is the old coal gasification site near the head of the Thea Foss Waterway where a big blob of coal tar was buried about a hundred feet from the water's edge. That’s a big cap. Over the past eighty years this blob has been observed to move, underground, being pushed along by groundwater under artesian pressure. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) ultimately emerged through seeps in the bank.

The half life of dioxin in bright sunlight can be a matter of hours. In a dark, anaerobic environment it can be a matter of centuries. The link below leads to an example of forward thinking on this topic. Placing all toxic material in one pile creates an environment that impedes remediation by natural processes including remediation by plants, fungi and aerobic bacteria. Rather than making persistent toxins biologically unavailable we should think in terms of making them biological available in a controlled setting. Here's what I'd like to see at berth 4:

The land from what's labeled on the port's map as the "cargo yard", across to the Cascade Pole containment cell is clearly the location of a canal in historic photos. This canal appears to have been used to float logs and other material across to the west side of the peninsula. It's a safe bet that those are the most seriously contaminated soils. This material should be excavated, hauled away and spread out in bright sunlight. Then the historic canal should be restored to intertidal habitat. The current dock pictured at berth 4 would be rebuilt and used by ships or become the location of a fuel dock. There'd be usable dock with good habitat behind, the point being to demonstrate how we can have human use along with restoration.

Here's the study mentioned that indicates how confined disposal is being viewed less favorably because in impedes natural remediation by plants. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19533193.”

 

For more information about the Port of Olympia, go to www.portolympia.com.