President/Vice President of the United States

John F. Kerry / John EdwardsUnited States Senator Patty MurrayCongressional District No. 1 Jay InsleeCongressional District No. 2Rick LarsenCongressional District No. 6Norm DicksCongressional District No. 7Jim McDermottCongressional District No. 8Dave Ross Congressional District No.9Adam SmithGovernorDino RossiLieutenant Governor Brad OwenSecretary of StateLaura RudermanState TreasurerMike MurphyState Auditor Brian SonntagAttorney GeneralDeborah SennCommissioner of Public Lands Doug SutherlandSuperintendent of Public Instruction Teresa (Terry) BergesonInsurance CommissionerMike KreidlerLegislative District No. 11State SenatorMargarita PrenticeState Representative, Pos. #1Zack HudginsState Representative, Pos. #2,No Endorsement. Vote your conscienceLegislative District No. 37State Representative, Pos. #2Eric PettigrewINITIATIVE MEASURE 297 MIXED RADIOACTIVE AND NONRADIOACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTEYESINITIATIVE MEASURE 872 Initiative Measure No. 872 concerns elections for partisan offices.This measure would allow voters to select among all candidates in a primary. Ballots would indicate candidates’ party preference. The two candidates receiving most votes advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.Should this measure be enacted into law?YesINITIATIVE MEASURE 884 Initiative Measure No. 884 concerns dedicating funds designated for educational purposes. This measure would create an education trust fund for smaller classes, extended learning programs, certain salary increases, preschool access, and expanded college enrollments and scholarships, funded by increasing retail sales tax by 1%.Should this measure be enacted into law? NoINITIATIVE MEASURE 892 Initiative Measure No. 892 concerns authorizing additional “electronic scratch ticket machines” to reduce property taxes. This measure would authorize licensed non-tribal gambling establishments to operate the same type and number of machines as tribal governments, with a portion of tax revenue generated used to reduce state property taxes.Should this measure be enacted into law? NoREFERENDUM MEASURE 55 CHARTER PUBLIC SCHOOLSThis bill would authorize charter public schools and would set conditions on operations. Charter schools would be operated by qualified nonprofit corporations, under contracts with local education boards, and allocated certain public funds.Should this bill be: RejectedWASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT Justice – Position 1 Mary Kay Becker (NP)Justice – Position 5 Barbara Madsen (NP) Justice – Position 6 Richard B. Sanders (NP)COURT OF APPEALS, DIVISION 1, DISTRICT 1 Position 1C. Kenneth Grosse (NP) Alternative Proposed Charter Amendments 1A and 1BALTERNATIVE PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS 1A AND 1BREDUCING KING COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS REPRESENTING DISTRICTS FROM 13 TO 9 Proposed King County Charter Amendments 1A and 1B concern reducing King County Council members representing districts from 13 to 9. Proposed King County Charter Amendment No. 1A would reduce the number of King County Council members representing districts, and the number of council districts, from 13 to 9 and make corresponding reductions in council voting requirements. Redistricting of council district boundaries would commence on or around November 17, 2004 and be completed by January 15, 2005. Elections for all 9 council positions would occur at the November 2005 general election. As an alternative, King County Charter Amendment No. 1B also would reduce the number of King County Council members representing districts, and the number of districts, from 13 to 9 and make corresponding reductions in council voting requirements. This proposed charter amendment would also reduce the size of 3 regional committees of the council (Transit, Water Quality and Regional Policy) from 12 to 6 members. Redistricting of council district boundaries would commence January 2006 and be completed by January 15, 2007. Elections for all 9 council positions would occur at the November 2007 general election.1. Should this levy be approved?NO2. Regardless of whether you voted yes or no above, if one of these proposed charter amendments is adopted, which one should it be?Charter Amendment No. 1A Explanatory StatementThis measure presents voters with two questions. The first question is whether either of two alternative proposed charter amendments, both of which propose reducing the number of King County Council Members representing districts from 13 to 9, should be adopted. The second question is which of the two alternative proposed charter amendments should be adopted. If a majority of voters voting on the first question vote “No,” then neither alternative proposed charter amendment will be adopted. If a majority of voters voting on the first question vote “Yes,” then the alternative proposed charter amendment receiving the greatest number of votes in the second question, will be adopted. Voters may vote on the second question regardless of how they voted on the first question.Advisory Measure No. 1ADVISORY MEASURE NO. 1LOCALLY FUNDED TRANSPORTATION PLAN The King County Council passed Ordinance No. 14995 concerning an advisory measure on a locally funded transportation plan. This advisory measure asks whether the voters in King County support development and placement on the ballot in 2005 of a locally funded transportation plan designed to relieve traffic congestion and increase safety through a mix of road and transit projects in King County in the Interstate 405 and State Route 509, 522, 167 and 99 corridors, including replacing the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, beginning to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and extending light rail to SeaTac Airport and the University District. Do you want a locally funded transportation plan to relieve congestion and increase safety to be developed and placed on the ballot in 2005?NOExplanatory StatementThis is an advisory measure seeking voter input regarding a locally funded transportation plan. The advisory measure asks voters whether they would support the development of a locally funded transportation plan that would be placed on the ballot for voter approval or rejection in 2005. The plan would be designed to relieve traffic congestion and increase safety through a mix of road and transit projects in King County in the Interstate 405 and State Route 509, 522, 167 and 99 corridors, including replacing the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, beginning to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and extending light rail to SeaTac Airport and the University District. This measure is advisory only. The result of the election on this measure will provide the King County Council with voter input, but approval or rejection of the measure does not legally require or prohibit preparation of a locally funded transportation plan to be presented to the voters.ADVISORY MEASURE NO. 2TAX SOURCE TO SUPPORT LOCALLY FUNDED TRANSPORTATION PLAN The King County Council passed Ordinance No. 14994 concerning an advisory measure on a locally funded transportation plan. This advisory measure asks which tax source the voters in King County would prefer be used to support a transportation plan designed to relieve traffic congestion and increase safety through a mix of road and transit projects in King County. This plan would require voter approval at a future date. Which one of the following tax sources would you prefer be included in a plan to locally fund road and transit projects in King County?VOTE FOR ONEA flat tax on motor vehiclesExplanatory StatementThis is an advisory measure seeking voter input regarding the tax source for a locally funded transportation plan designed to relieve traffic congestion and increase safety through a mix of road and transit projects. The advisory measure asks voters which of the five following tax sources they would prefer be included in the transportation plan: 1) a general sales tax; 2) an excise tax on the value of motor vehicles; 3) a flat tax on motor vehicles; 4) an increase in the local gas tax; or 5) a tax on total annual vehicle miles traveled. This measure is advisory only. The result of the election on this measure will provide the King County Council with voter input, but approval of the measure does not legally require or authorize that such a tax be imposed. Voter approval at a future election would be needed to authorize any of the five types of taxes.The City Of Seattle Initiative No. 83Initiative Measure Number 83 Concerns Prohibiting Use Of City Rights-Of-Way For Any New Monorail Line The City of Seattle has only one issue on the ballot, Initiative 83 – Prohibiting Use Of City Rights-Of-Way For Any New Monorail Lines. Vote YES on Initiative 83. Why vote for something you can’t use? VOTE yes and recall this city’s taxpayers $1.75 billion GIFT to Ballard and West Seattle. This is yet another example of taxation without representation; the new monorail is the most expensive city project ever and serves only a small portion of the population, even though everyone with a vehicle licensed in the city of Seattle will flip the bill. These are The Seattle Medium’s editorial board’s choices…On Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2004 Vote your choices. Don’t VOTE and the choice is belongs to others….