Washblog

"Hidden" Conservation Election: Interviews with the 2 Candidates


"It's nice to put one in the win column"
Attributed to Luke Esser, Chair WA GOP, at the "hidden" King Conservation District (KCD) election, Renton polling place, 2/13/07*.  Esser's choice for KCD Supervisor, Matt Livengood, the current District Chair, received 768 votes.  Max Prinsen, a past District Chair, received 327.  Read below for interviews with Livengood and Prinsen.

Washington State Conservation District elections are like none other.   As per RCW 29A.04.330, it is the intent of the state legislature that elections of conservation district supervisors "not be conducted under the general election laws".   And they aren't. No voters pamphlets are mailed in advance.  There are no absentee ballots, no provisional ballots.    During the last election there were seven polling places in the entire county -- only one of them in Seattle.

Year after year, voter participation in these elections reflects their undeserved obscurity.  This year, less than one-tenth** of one percent of people eligible to vote in King County participated  (1,095 voters out of 1,373,786 = .000797% *).   Tiny as that percentage is, however, if Andy McDonald at Sound Politics correctly understood his conversation with Geoff Reed of the KCD, that's ten times greater than the number who voted in 2004.  That year, McDonald reported, only about 100 people voted in the KCD election.

A Polarized Election
Washington Conservation Supervisors are volunteers.  They help manage salmon recovery efforts.  They provide consultation and technical assistance to community groups and property owners on land development and restoration projects.  They help farmers employ best management practices.  And they provide assistance to property owners in navigating complex land use regulations.  Supervisors can authorize the loosening of certain regulatory requirements on a case-by-case basis when owners work with the District to ensure that environmental values are upheld. In King County, these activities are funded with approximately $5.8 million per year, raised primarily through a $10 assessment on each property parcel.

This is not partisan work.   Yet this year's election was championed as a cause by a partisan coalition.  The Republican Party and the Citizen's Alliance for Property Rights (CAPR) teamed up to support incumbent Supervisor, Matt Livengood. Last year, both of these groups had aligned with developers on Initiative 933, an initiative that challenged government's ability to regulate land use on private property.  In support of Livengood, these groups used I-933-type rhetoric.

One of those groups mailed 5,000 postcards to constituents in support of Livengood. Pro-Livengood announcements were made on listservs, web pages, and blogs.  According to an email message sent to the property rights listserv by Steve Hammond, the fire and brimstone preacher from Enumclaw who was once my King County Councilmember, KIRO host Kirby Wilbur also talked it up.  The right-wing blog, Sound Politics urged its readers on Feb 8: "Elect property rights candidate: Your vote for Matt is critical! Matt supports voluntary conservation, true land stewardship, farmers and your property rights."    

I was told by friends voting at two different locations that they stood in line surrounded by people holding the property-rights postcards.  One friend, who overheard Luke Esser's comment, quoted above, told me that a group of five to seven people had carpooled in to vote together and stood in line, holding the same cards.   Steve Hammond's email also notes the effectiveness of this organizing: "Got a call from someone who voted in downtown Seattle.  A voter said, `It's terrible. Some property rights group on the Eastside is turning out lots of voters.' Congratulations to Matt, CAPR and all who helped."  

In this tiny election, such focused organizing among a passionate interest group did the job.   Despite a couple of last-minute posts on progressive blogs and a flurry of emails in the last few days on a couple of progressive listservs, the candidate championed by property rights advocates won, 768 to 327.  The general public remained unaware that the election had even been held.

RCW 89.08, the authorizing legislation for the districts, declares that the lands of the state of Washington are among the basic assets of the state and that the purpose of the districts is to encourage land-use practices that protect this asset.  After this election, many people wondered whether if we had just elected someone, through a nearly invisible process, who was philosophically opposed to the regulations he was charged to support.  I decided to call both candidates.

Conversation with Matt Livengood
I identified myself to Matt Livengood as someone who had helped to campaign against I-933.  I was hoping, I told him, that he was not in favor of  mooting out of Washington's land use regulations on private land or championing of private property rights above all others.  

I also mentioned that I'd read of the Blickle-Livengood horse farm, which he and his wife, Alayne Blickle, own.  Blickle is the founder of Horses for Clean Water, and the farm is run according to environmentally sensitive principles.  Livengood noted that they operate the farm according to a Conservation District farm plan.

His environmental stewardship was reassuring to me, I said.  But did he believe only in voluntary conservation?  And did he see individual property rights as superior to all others?  Would he consider his win to be a loss for supporters of environmental regulations?

Balancing Environmental Protection and the Economic Interests of Property Owners
The voters in the election, Livengood said, had two good choices.  Both he and Max Prinsen are very committed to the District and to the best interests of the environment and the people of King County.   He appreciated the support of the Republican Party and the Citizen's Alliance for Property Rights (CAPR) and he supports advocacy for fair application of environmental regulations.  But he had not sought their endorsement.  He didn't see I-933 as I did entirely, as a nearly complete mooting out of land use regulations on private property.  He also recognized a compensation element in it.  But, nevertheless, he doesn't fully subscribe to the I-933 positions.  

'I understand these positions.  I am aware of and sensitive to concerns over environmental regulations.  Some regulations, if applied as hard-and-fast rules without consideration of the impacts on individuals, particularly in agriculture, reduce people's ability to use their  their land.  But I don't support letting anyone do anything they want on their property regardless of the impact on other people.  There is a need for environmental regulations.  There is a need for government to set standards.  We can look at how laws are implemented, how they affect individuals.    Are there mitigations that would achieve the intent of the environmental regulations and minimize interference with the economic interests of a property owner?  

Livengood outlined some of the types of projects that people can seek District help with.   A community group might want to daylight a section of a creek.  A property owner might want to restore a section of natural shoreline.  Livestock owners with wetlands on their properties might want consultation or assistance in meeting regulatory requirements.  Adapting a farm plan through the District allows best management practices to be customized for a property.  In the context of a farm plan that preserves the environmental protections intended under the law, legal requirements might be loosened.  For example, the size of a buffer on a creek or wetlands might be negotiated with the County through the District

A "Third Way" for Conservation Policy?
This approach of the District, I said, facilitating more site-specific and collaborative application of the law, is one I've heard described as a "third way".  There have been calls from a number of directions to change the way we think about regulatory enforcement of conservation on private land -- to develop ways that reward stewardship more than they punish non-compliance, that account for the unique qualities of each place and property and that better respect most people's ability to understand and invest in the long-term environmental value of the land.   But I wondered how well this approach worked in practice.  For example, wouldn't many property owners be hesitant to allow a District representative on their land?  Do the Conservation District Supervisors issue citations or refer to other agencies when they see violations of the law?

We don't have an enforcement role, Livengood said.  We're not prohibited from acting on an obvious violation, but we're not required to.  That's not our job.  If someone put up a structure without a permit, we wouldn't know.  We wouldn't ask the question.  When we're working with folks, we're in a liaison role, we're trying to help them comply.  This is an essential function.  

Matt Livengood, struck me as a reasonable person, passionate about his work with the District, and committed to good environmental practices.  The trust that people in the property rights movement have for him is likely to be an asset at a time when one of our major environmental challenges is getting beyond an us-against-them public sentiment.  But was I missing anything?  Was there anything about this election that I hadn't learned from Mr. Livengood?  As a due diligence follow-up, I called Max Prinsen.

Conversation with Max Prinsen
Max Prinsen, an engineer from Renton, is a recent King Conservation District Chair.  He's founder and President of S.H.A.D.O.W -- Save Habitat And Diversity of Wetlands, an organization responsible for restoring and protecting Shadow Lake Bog, a unique habitat in Kent.  S.H.A.D.O.W.'s partner page indicates that Max Prinsen and his wife, Erin Wojewodzki-Prinsen, bought the initial 18-acre property and that this land, along with an adjacent donated property, has been put into the public trust.  A complex mix of funding and partnerships (King Conservation District was in that mix) was put together to restore the habitat. Fill and trash was removed (much of the land was being used as a garbage dump), native vegetation was replanted, an amphibian pond was restored, a boardwalk and interpretive center were built, and so on. Nearly 70 varieties of birds live in Shadow Lake Bog.  It is a critical habitat, tucked away in a heavily developed area of the county, and preservation efforts continue.  In addition to this work, Prinsen is also a member of the Cedar River Council.  He was endorsed in this election by Washington Conservation Voters.

I explained to Mr. Prinsen at the start of our conversation that I had been concerned about the polarized nature of the election and that talking with Matt Livengood had reassured me.  But was I missing anything?  Why had he challenged Livengood in the first place?

Why Prinsen ran.
Prinsen explained that he had left his position as District Chair because his father passed away and he knew he'd be unable for several months to  devote the 20-30 hours weekly that the work required.   He holds Matt Livengood in high regard.  When he stepped down, he asked Matt if he would take on the responsibilities of District Chair.  "My running had nothing to do with Matt," he said.  He simply wanted to get back on the District to continue with his work there, what he felt was his contribution to advancing the District's mission for farmland and environmental preservation in the County.  

Prior to this election, there had been a vacancy on the board for an appointed position.  Prinsen had applied for that but a different applicant was chosen.  His intent was not to displace any particular board member, but simply to keep trying, by appointment or election, to get back onto the board.

King Conservation District is unique
King Conservation District, Prinsen said, is unique among the Districts in the state.  We are the most highly urbanized county.  Farmland preservation requires different considerations here.  First, we don't have the large farms that you find in Eastern Washington.  Instead you tend to find smaller farms, including hobby farms.  There's much less farmland here and it's facing more intense development and flooding pressures than other counties.  We need to protect as much of it as we can.  He mentioned the Hmong farmers in the Snoqualmie Valley who were recently so affected by floods.   We're going to lose farmland if it continues to flood like this, if we can't address this issue.  In a followup email, Prinsen noted:

We cannot control or anticipate all outcomes, but we most certainly can look at recent events and say that we need some method to help accommodate and make reasonable accommodations to help in these instances.  Many of these rules that are affecting these individuals are not rules by King County, but are state and federal rules that need us working together as partners to make changes to.  King Conservation District, King County, Washington Conservation Commission and the Watershed Forums (Water Resource Inventory Areas 7,8, and 9,) plus the affected cities, should all have a united voice.

I have heard and understand those landowners' concerns,  I also know that many of them appreciate the salmon coming back and I also know that they would like to work to create a fair resolve to their issues.  King Conservation district is a great partner to do that with.  King Conservation district should and can bring forward practical solutions using the best available science and keeping our environmental concerns on the forefront.  King Conservation District working hand-in-hand with our partners makes a strong and effective team with many voices.

There is also a great need in King County, particularly in smaller cities, Prinsen noted, for the kind of technical and grant assistance that the Conservation District provides.  We have 32 cities in King County, he said.  When you look at a little city like Black Diamond, you realize that, when it wants to do something, it's going to have challenges with staffing and funding.  That's where the District is needed.  

Optimizing limited resources through partnerships
So, with all these needs and limited funding, how do you employ limited resources to the best effect?  Partnerships with other agencies, community groups, and funding organizations are essential.  Building these kinds of partnerships is something that Prinsen excels at, as he demonstrated with Shadow Lake Bog.  We are also in a time when King County, the cities within the county, and the Conservation District are defining their respective roles and responsibilities.  Prinsen was part of this process until recently.  He felt there was forward momentum, and he would like to help that momentum continue.

While District Chair, Prinsen was instrumental in increasing the base funding for the District from a $5 per parcel assessment to its current $10.  The assessment had been at $5 "forever", Prinsen said.  Over the years its value had steadily decreased while the need for District services was increasing.  Prinsen led an effort on the District board to work with Washington's legislature to increase the assessment.  Then they worked with the County to define how that funding would be apportioned.  Previously, only $1 out of $5 had been available to the District after fixed costs like the salmon recovery programs.  It took some negotiating, but the District was able to secure $3 out of that $10 (rather than simply a doubling of the initial $1) in order to work with property owners and organizations on individual projects as the need arises.  

A clear and responsible method for investing in protection of state land
We have a very clear and responsible method in the District, Prinsen said, for addressing these land use and environmental needs.  "There is not a single dollar that flows out of the District without a clear understanding of what that investment is achieving."  Prinsen feels that he can help further the partnering and advocacy that is needed to optimize the District's budget at a time of intense environmental, regulatory, and economic pressures.  There are 16 people on the King Conservation board, he said.  There's no way to advance its mission and do all the work that's needed -- from helping to create farm plans to teaching urban community groups to put in better docks -- without creating partnerships that can leverage our skills and resources.

Luke Esser was right
Luke Esser is probably correct that, in the case of this election, we did put one in the "win column."  According to the candidates themselves, either result, Livengood or Prinsen, was a win for for the public.  I believe that it would serve public interest, as well, to see Max Prinsen back on the KCD, that his vision, energy, and experience are needed there.  

To really make this election a win, however, I think we need to heed its lesson -- that the public does not know enough about the Conservation Districts, what their potential is, and what is at stake for us.  

The law that sets the terms of these elections and the funding and duties of these positions is at RCW 89.08.  Why shouldn't these elections be held at the same time as other local and county elections?  I'd be interested to know what is behind the legislative intent statement in RCW 29A.04.330 that they should be exempted from regular election requirements.  

Secret elections for this important position may have worked well before the intense economic, development, population, and climate pressures we see now.  That is no longer the case.  First, although the Republican Party and the property rights group had every right to campaign for this election, it is simply unfair for an election to be structured in a way that makes it so vulnerable to domination by such a small group of "people in the know".  

More importantly, the approach of the Conservation Districts, which rewards stewardship more than it punishes non-compliance, which accounts for the unique qualities of each place and property, and which respects most people's ability to understand and invest in the long-term environmental value of land, this should be expanded and promoted, not hidden.  This is an approach that can help us get beyond our land use battles and onto common ground in this state.


Notes
Also see Conversation with Rose Ehart.  This Washblog story from last May details the experience of Pierce County Conservation District Supervisor, Rose Ehart, who signed up her own constituency - 220 of her neighbors - and campaigned a 20-year incumbent out of office, 122 to 62.  Peter Callahan of the Tacoma News Tribute covered that election: In this election; it's easy to win but hard to vote

*Esser's remark was repeated to me by a trusted friend  who was at the polling place at the same time and didn't want to be identified for this story.

*The number of registered voters in King County was obtained from King County Elections by telephone between 2/13/07 and 2/16/07

**Math error corrected here -- previously off by 2 decimals.


< Critical time for public financing of judicial and local campaigns | Why the Sonics matter >
Display: Sort:
I'm glad you took the trouble. This is the most information I have seen on this election in one place. Thanks Noemie.

If perception is reality, then the world must be flat and the sun must revolve around it.

by ivan on Tue Mar 13, 2007 at 10:10:51 AM PST

* 1 none 0 *


  • Thanks, Ivan by noemie maxwell, 03/13/2007 11:12:00 AM PST (none / 0)
Yes, Noemie.  This is a fine piece of work.  I appreciate that you present the better Republicans in a good light.  It is very heartening to know that there are some reasonable people on that side.  I sometimes forget.

by nudger on Tue Mar 13, 2007 at 05:42:12 PM PST

* 3 none 0 *


Display: Sort:

 

 

 

PNW TOPIC HOTLIST

Login

Make a new account
Username:
Password:

 HELP

Recommended Diaries

Washblog RSS Feeds

Political Contacts

Local Media

Coastal/Grays Harbor
Aberdeen Daily World
Chinook Observer
Montesano Vidette
Pacific County Press
Willapa Harbor Herald
KXRO 1320 AM

Olympic Peninsula
Peninsula Daily News
Bremerton Sun
Bremerton Chronicle
Gig Harbor Gateway
Port Orchard Independent
Port Townsend Leader
North Kitsap Herald
Squim Gazette
Central Kitsap Reporter
Business Examiner
KONP 1450 AM

Sound and Islands
Anacortes American
Bainbridge Review
Voice Of Bainbridge
San Juan Journal
The Islands' Sounder
Whidbey NewsTimes
South Whidbey Record
Stanwood/Camano News
Vashon Beachcomber
Voice Of Vashon
KLKI 1340 AM

North Puget Sound
Bellingham Herald
The Northern Light
Everett Herald
Skagit Valley Herald
Lynden Tribune
The Enterprise
Snohomish County Tribune
Snohomish County Business Journal
The Monroe Monitor
The Edmonds Beacon
KGMI 790 AM
KELA 1470 AM
KRKO 1380 AM

Central Puget Sound
King County Journal
Issaquah Press
Mukilteo Beacon
Voice of the Valley
Federal Way Mirror
Bothell/Kenmore Reporter
Kirkland courier
Mercer Island Reporter
Woodinville Weekly

Greater Seattle
Seattle PI
Seattle Times
KOMO TV 4
KIRO TV 7
KING 5 TV
KTBW TV 22
KCTS 9
UW Daily
The Stranger
Seattle Weekly
Capitol Hill Times
Madison Park Times
Seattle Journal of Commerce
NW Asian Weekly
West Seattle Herald
North Seattle Herald-Outlook
South Seattle Star
Magnolia News
Beacon Hill News
KIRO 710 AM
KOMO AM 1000
KEXP 90.3 FM
KUOW 94.9 FM
KVI 570 AM

South Puget Sound
The Columbian
Longview Daily News
Nisqually Valley News
Lewis County News
The Reflector
Eatonville Dispatch
Tacoma News Tribune
Tacoma Weekly
Puyallup Herald
Enumclaw Courier-Herald
The Olympian
KAOS 89.3 FM
KCPQ 13
KOWA FM 106.5
UPN 11

Cascade/Okanogan
Ellensburg Daily Record
Levenworth Echo
Cle Elum Tribune
Snoqualmie Valley Record
Methow Valley News
Lake Chelan Mirror
Omak chronicle
The Newport Miner

Spokane/Palouse
The Spokesman-Review
KREM 2 TV Spokane
KXLY News 4 Spokane
KHQ 6 Spokane
KSPS Spokane
Statesman-Examiner
Othello Outlook
Cheney Free Press
Camas PostRecord
The South County sun
White Salmon Enterprise
Palouse Boomerang
Columbia Basin Herald
Grand Coulee Star
Walla Walla Union-Bulletin
Yakima Herald-Republic
KIMA 29 Yakima
KAPP TV 35 Yakima
KYVE Yakima
Wenatchee World
Tri-City Herald
TVEW TV 42 Tri-cities
KTNW Richland
KEPR 19 Pasco
Daily Sun News
Prosser Record-Bulletin
KTCR 1340 AM
KWSU Pullman
Moscow-Pullman Daily News