Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

County Switching Horses and Raising Taxes?

Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:14 PM

In an unexpected move, the King County Council voted unanimously yesterday to push acting King County Assessor Rich Medved from office while he runs a campaign to become the elected assessor. The former assessor, Scott Noble, had resigned last week after being sentenced for felony vehicular assault. But denying the interim position to Medved could upset the office during its busiest time of year appraising properties—resulting in uneven distribution of property tax obligation—and slaps Medved in the face.

“I was surprised,” says Medved, who has served as the office’s chief deputy for the past six years. “It represents a deviation from the way they have handled interim appointments for other electeds.”

For example: When former King County Sheriff Dave Reichert left his post in 2004 for a seat in Congress, the King County Council appointed his deputy, Sue Rahr, to the interim position while she ran for the office; when County Prosecutor Norm Maleng died, the council appointed his chief of staff, Dan Satterberg, who later won the seat; and when Ron Sims left his post as the King County Executive, the council looked for a new candidate and picked—of course—his former chief of staff, Kurt Triplett.

But the council's bill essentially excludes Medved from being named interim assessor. The ordinance states that “it will be important for an appointed county assessor to focus on the operation of the department of assessments, rather than on the demands of campaigning for office.” It added that the process “would make it unlikely that the appointee would run for any elective office while serving as appointed assessor.”

The decision may be risky.

Switching assessors right now would be an especially bad choice, says Bob Rosenberger, who worked as a commercial appraiser in the assessor’s office for 24 years and is acting as Medved’s campaign manager. “Some appraisers will appraise at the high end of range and others at the low end, and the job of the [head] assessor is to make sure those are equalized so that you don’t have folks in their Rainier Valley subsidizing property owners in Medina.” He says, “It is really imperative to have a consistent philosophy in reviewing those appraisals” or people could end up “paying more than their fair share of the property tax bill.”

More, including added comments from Ferguson, after the jump.

The bill is written to suggest that an assessor is incapable of simultaneously running the office and running a campaign. But the sponsor of the bill, County Council Member Bob Ferguson, is juggling the demands of office and campaigning just fine. He’s up for re-election this year, and, according to reports filed with the Public Disclosure Commission, he has raised $120,671.40 in contributions. And like all incumbents, Ferguson holds an advantage in the election. Five of the nine county council members are running for office this year (all but one is unopposed).

In part, it seems the council’s wants to avoid giving a candidate an unfair advantage. But the last time the council appointed an interim assessor, Norwood Brooks, in 1992, he lost the election to Noble.

You can’t help but wonder—given the councils rickety logic despite the clear benefits of keeping Medved in the office—what’s going on here. One theory: They don’t want to piss off Seattle Port Commissioner Lloyd Hara, who announced on May 25 that he would run for the seat. The switch would be a lucrative one—he makes only $6,000 a year as port commissioner but would make $146,000 as assessor. Hara has raised $19,525 to Medved’s $5,520.

Ferguson, who says the council's motivation was to avoid saddling the interim appointee with a campaign workload, acknowledges that the process could be imperfect. “I’m not saying there is a right way or a wrong way on this thing,” he says. But the county council scrambled to establish a new process for appointing interim officials after county voters passed a measure last year making races nonpartisan (previously parties suggested interim appointees and the council picked one). “We had this debate with the county executive and decided that we should go for the caretaker option, putting in someone there who is not going to take the office.” However, he says, “I agree it is not exactly apples to apples and there are difference between executive race and the assessor’s race.” Ferguson adds, “We are feeling our way on this.”

Share via

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Email
 

Comments (9) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Medved actively took part in a conspiracy to hide Noble's alcoholism from the King County Council and the taxpayers. He deserved to be fired.
Posted by I Got Nuthin' on June 24, 2009 at 1:47 PM
GlennFleishman 2
"when Ron Sims left his post as the King County Executive, the council looked for a new candidate and picked—of course—his former chief of staff, Kurt Triplett."

But Triplett explicitly stated he won't run for the position.
Posted by GlennFleishman http://blog.glennf.com/ on June 24, 2009 at 1:52 PM
3
Omitted the word "allegedly" from my post. Let the record show it's been inserted here.
Posted by I Got Nuthin' on June 24, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Dominic Holden 4
@ 2) The exclusion of appointees running for the position is a new policy--a policy that works fine in the case of Triplett but seems seriously flawed when it requires kicking out the person who knows how to run the office.
Posted by Dominic Holden on June 24, 2009 at 2:10 PM
5
Appointing someone to a position that they are planning to run for makes them the incumbent and gives them a major edge in the race. It's a matter of whether you want to give the King County Council the power to annoint a chosen candidate or not.
Posted by Power Trip on June 24, 2009 at 2:18 PM
Max Solomon 6
if he's related to that douche michael medved i'm not going to vote for him.
Posted by Max Solomon on June 24, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Will in Seattle 7
All because they refuse to cut police/jail money during a down economy - half of the budget.

Sigh.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on June 24, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Will in Seattle 8
@6 - i've seen both - it's not the same person, but that's an excellent question - wish there was some place with reporters that could figure that out for us and write an amusing article about it ...
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on June 24, 2009 at 3:42 PM
9
Something in the headline about raising taxes? Where is that in the story?
Posted by RonK, Seattle on June 24, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use