The Seattle/King County Municipal League has released its candidate ratings for the February (yes, February) King County Elections Director election, and just two candidates—current elections director Sherril Huff and former Republican KC Council member David Irons—received a rating of "outstanding," meaning, "Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, and brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office." Another, former bank manager Bill Anderson, was rated "very good" (one level below "outstanding"); and the remaining candidates, schoolteacher Chris Clifford, fired former elections director Julie Anne Kempf, and state senator Pam Roach (R-31), were merely "adequate" ("Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge").

Unlike, say, City Council questionnaires, the questionnaires filed by candidates for this position are as dry as week-old matzo. Pam Roach brags about getting her ham radio certification, and Kempf—who was fired for lying about the late mailing of absentee ballots, and subsequently arrested in an investigation of forgery, theft, criminal impersonation and assault—actually has the gall to brag that she "successfully managed this elections office in a time of crisis"—but honestly, that's about it. Still, given that this the only thing on the ballot in February, you literally have no excuse not to mail your ballot in before February 3.

This morning, the King County Council had its turn interrogating Metro general manager Kevin Desmond, KCDOT Road Services Division director Linda Dougherty, and other county officials about the performance of Metro and the county's transportation network during the December snowstorm. Desmond's presentation, which dominated the second half of the meeting, was—as promised—a more detailed rehash of of his presentation to the Seattle City Council last week. However, council members' questions did elicit some new information.

First, it's now clear that Metro made a decision to run as many routes as possible poorly than to run fewer routes more reliably. Dow Constantine, the new chair of the county council, asked Desmond why Metro couldn't have simply limited service to streets it knew it would be able to keep open—major arterials like Aurora and Lake City Way. Desmond responded, essentially, that it would have been embarrassing for Metro to have shut down routes if the snow hadn't ended up happening. "Had we that morning told the public, we’re in a weather emergency, and now we’re going to go to this massively truncated system… and you wake up in the morning and there’s no bus for blocks and blocks or miles, it’s a tough choice." Even if Metro had switched to a reduced schedule, Desmond said, it might not have made any difference in terms of reliability and the ability to get information to riders. "Even on those corridors where we think we can guarantee service, if a tree falls down, as it did on Aurora, we were massively delayed. And the buses then stack up and we really have no effective means to tell people downstream what’s going on."

Larry Phillips, who's challenging County Executive Ron Sims in November, has questioned the executive's low profile during the storm. In contrast to Mayor Greg Nickels, who's made a point of at least appearing to demand answers from city departments (he has three open houses scheduled to discuss storm response, for example), Sims has let Desmond take the heat—although he, unlike Seattle Department of Transportation director Grace Crunican, was at least in town during the storm, his office confirms.

At today's meeting, Phillips had a barrage of questions for Desmond—so many, in fact, that Constantine eventually tried to nudge him along so others could speak. One somewhat reassuring detail that came out today was that, according to Desmond, Metro did manage to get people to medical appointments, by recommissioning Access vans (which actually do better than buses in the snow). One question I'd still like to hear answered in more detail: Given that Metro took articulated and trolley buses out of service almost immediately, why did it take so long (until January 5; the snowstorms started on December 17) to get buses back in commission? And what was the exact nature of the "vehicle maintenance" that left many riders stranded for more than a week after all the snow had thawed?

The city council's released its 2009 priorities in a meeting that just wrapped up a few minutes ago.

Going around the dais, show-and-tell style, each council member presented the two or three council priorities that most closely concerned his or her committee. The scintillating details:

• Tim Burgess wants to improve the city's relationship with the school district, make neighborhoods safer, and improve delivery of city services. Vague, but not as vague as things quickly became, as you'll see...

• Richard McIver—retiring to his villa in Mexico later this year—said he wants to create more housing and jobs (see? vague) and "make sure that Seattle has a vibrant and creative industry that thrives on live music as well as recorded, but primarily live because that has been a major part of blah blah blah" (bizarrely specific).

• Sally Clark wants to improve South Downtown so that "it's a place that we are proud to look at" and update the neighborhood plans.

• Jan Drago's "theme is continuing to move forward" on transportation, including 520 and the viaduct. Drago is expected to retire this year.

• Jean Godden wants to "continue to put people first" in the city budget and improve customer service. She also quoted Obama at length—something about blood, sweat, and tears making the world "just a little bit better than the one we have today."

• At this point, Bruce Harrell dispensed completely with the pretense of introducing priorities, and went on for a while about "very strategic issues" and "critically important... regional and national relationships." I think it had something to do with City Light. Plus he wants the city to make some kind of system that will tell people they have to clear snow off their sidewalks and "what to do when their televisions no longer work." I believe this magical system was part of his campaign platform as well.

• Tom Rasmussen wants to make sure the parks levy gets off to a good start and improve Seattle Center, including Key Arena and the saddest little amusement park in the world, the Fun Forest.

• Nick Licata wants to enhance the arts, increase police oversight, and improve pedestrian safety.

• And Conlin wants to "take steps toward the goal" of reducing homelessness and hunger.

Well, who doesn't? The problem with that worthy laundry list (apart from the fact that it's basically the same every year) is that there isn't one single proposal in there that might cause anyone to raise an eyebrow (in disapproval or even interest). Why doesn't the council use the opportunity—the TV cameras, the assembled audience—to roll out some real initiatives, along the lines of the proposals Nickels rolls out in his State of the City speech every year? (In 2008, for example, Nickels proposed amping up spending on youth gang violence, passing a levy to fix up Pike Place Market, and increasing restrictions on guns. Two out of three ain't bad).

The council is made up of nine people with nine different agendas, but that doesn't have to be a liability. Instead of trying to paper over their differences, the council should use them to their advantage—introducing individual priorities, rather than inventing collective ones. Council members often complain that the mayor hogs the civic spotlight, but that isn't really fair—the mayor gets attention because he demands it. If council members want citizens to pay attention to them, they need priorities more substantial than "we want to make Seattle a better place for everyone."