Turnout could hit 38 percent, near the high of 40 percent for a primary election in Washington state
CLARK COUNTY — Believe it or not, the August primary election is this Tuesday. That means, if you haven’t gotten your ballot by now you should contact the Clark County Elections office immediately, either by phone (564-397-2078), e-mail (elections@clark.wa.gov) or in person by visiting their office at 1408 Franklin Street to request a replacement ballot.
The contest receiving the most attention is the statewide senate race for the seat currently held by Maria Cantwell. A total of 28 other candidates filed to challenge the incumbent, who is seeking her fourth term in the nation’s capital. The 29 candidates nears the record of 33 set during the 1983 special election to fill the seat of Washington Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson who died while in office.
Washington is the first state to go with a top two primary, meaning the two top vote getters, regardless of party preference, will go on to the general election in August. That means Cantwell could, conceivably, face another democrat in November. With 13 registered Republicans in the race, it’s hard to say who has the best shot of getting through this Tuesday.
Vancouver’s Joey Gibson, leader of the controversial pro-Trump Patriot Prayer group, is hoping to pull off an upset, but had raised just over $8,000 as of July 10 according to OpenSecrets.org. Cantwell is outraising her closest competitor, Republican Rocky De La Fuente, by nearly 9 to 1.
In the 3rd Congressional District, Republican incumbent Jaime Herrera Beutler faces six challengers. Democrats David McDevitt and Carolyn Long are closest in overall fundraising, but Herrera Beutler had almost $600,000 more in the bank as of July 18 according to OpenSecrets.org.
Here locally, voters will be deciding on a county chair, two county council district races, a Vancouver City Council seat, a new treasurer, and more. One proposition is on the ballot for people covered by Clark County Fire District 13. Proposition One would allow an exemption to the 1 percent property tax levy limit, and restore FD 13’s property tax levy to the previous rate of $1.25 per $1,000 of assessed value.
Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey says turnout for the primary has been fairly strong to this point. “We’re thinking it’s going to run around 38 percent for the primary,” says Kimsey. He says primary races can run as low as 25 percent turnout, or as high as 40 percent, so this year is on the high end.
“What we don’t know is what effect the prepaid postage is having,” Kimsey says. “Is that causing people to return their ballots earlier? We believe it’s resulting in a reduction of people using the drop boxes.”
This is the first year that voters don’t have to use up a stamp to put their ballot in the mail. Earlier this year, King County approved funding to provide prepaid envelopes for voters there.
“A real important principle of election is that all voters in a jurisdiction are treated the same,” says Kimsey. “And so the Secretary of State’s office and the Governor’s office provided funding to the other 38 counties to provide that kind of consistency of elections processes across the state.”
Since much of the funding for that prepaid postage came from one-time funds, Kimsey says it’s unclear if the state will continue to provide it. His office has already put in a request for $100,000 from the county for next year to keep the prepaid option alive. In the meantime the various county auditors will be pushing the legislature to provide permanent funding.
“King County will continue to provide prepaid postage in the future, so I just think it’s really important that we have the same process across the entire state,” says Kimsey.
If you haven’t already mailed your ballot in, you’re running out of time to make sure it gets counted. They need to be postmarked no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday.
“I would encourage people to either take it to the post office and give it to a real live person, or take it to one of our drop boxes,” Kimsey says. “We’ve got a lot of them around.”
You can find a list of dropbox locations here: https://www.clark.wa.gov/elections/ballot-deposit-locations
The vote-by-mail process now allows ballots to be scanned as they arrive. The data is stored securely on magnetic disks, via computers that are not connected to the Internet. That allows the county to have preliminary counts online by around 8:20 pm on Tuesday.
Stick with ClarkCountyToday.com, as well as our social media feeds, for results as they come in.
What is the “need” for light rail? How many bus trips are there daily over I-5 Bridge?
IBR written presentations to the cities and county council (twice) in 2025 have not included transit ridership data, although the program has spent $10,377,973 on transit planning and engineering. What is the justification?
of $7.5 Billion currently estimated for IBR I-5 Bridge, $2 Billion is allocated to Light Rail, How many people ride the buses to Portland daily? Ridership?
“We will provide an update as this process moves forward and when there is more information to share.” Feb.26 Clark County Council presentation
Over half Interstate Bridge proposal allocated to transit, pedestrians and bicyclists
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/over-half-interstate-bridge-proposal-allocated-to-transit-pedestrians-and-bicyclists/
IBR, ” “We want to accommodate folks who do not drive.” How many folks take transit buses, walk, Bike, or use a mobility device over I-5 Bridge?
What about freight? service and commercial vehicles? Emergency vehicles? Vehicles? motorcycles? How many freight vehicles cross I-5 daily?
Purpose per DSEIS, a primary purpose of IBR is to” improve highway freight mobility and address interstate travel and commerce needs in the Program area;”
“Truck-hauled freight movement over the I-5 Columbia River crossing is critical for industrial centers, for employment, and for the regional and national economies”
Whatever happened to the freight lane? Apparently it was replaced with light rail, which seems to be top priority for IBR.
.
If I could, I’d click on the ” + ” to give you a thumbs up on your comment. But CCT has evidently taken away that feature.
This bridge boondoggle, unless checked, will result in a massive tax burden for Clark County residents for generations to come.
Hi Susan, I’ve fixed that feature. Thank you!
Look, folks like the idea of light rail.It doesn’t use petroleum products to operate and it’s quiet. So the enthusiasts feel everybody will be happy paying for it. Wrong. CTRAN has no jumbo slush fund to pay for the operations. Their next budget projection has them using their income from sales taxes and fares to pay for what they’re doing now. So Saying CTRAN can help fund light rail means they need to get more$ from our sales taxes. I read somewhere that the legislature is thinking about letting tolls help repay the bonds which help pay cost of light rail- which will never be self supporting. So if we get light rail the tax payers and toll payers will be supporting it forever.
There’s an unconsidered impact on Oregonians considering visiting our new waterfront development. Let’s see. You get to pay toll both ways, increased sales taxes,and a less than great pay parking garage. Can somebody explain any real benefit of light rail to the vast % of us who will never use it?
There is no net positive. The bums will have an easier time getting up to Vancouver’s downtown and waterfront district.
Sounds like the new Vancouver mayor is getting kickbacks for pushing this project. Classic corruption from our elected officials.
On Monday evening, the Battle Ground City Council voted to reject light rail on the IBR.
They also object to paying for any aspect of TriMet’s operations and maintenance.
The city council of La Center has also spoken against the light rail component and funding TriMet O&M costs.
Our small cities are all coming out against the proposed light rail and spending taxpayer dollars to pay for TriMet’s MAX light rail.
Will Vancouver pay attention to the representatives of our many small cities, and the majority of Clark County voters?
To preface, I have no qualms whatsoever about due diligence and ensuring that our taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely and well. Nor do I take issue with you presenting your arguments for how we should think about those issues.
With that being said, this article is objectively not “News” – it belongs in the “Opinion” section. You are an elected official who campaigned extensively on this very issue. Every quote is from a person aligned with your position. There is no representation of the opposing viewpoint whatsoever, nor any indication that you sought any.
With due respect to the editorial staff, this should never have been categorized as “News.”
Kudos to Rep. John Ley for sharing his findings with the public. I agree with his proposal to Audit the IBR, as the CRC was audited and found to be wasteful. Other candidates hid their support for light rail on the campaign trail and claimed to support affordable transportation options. $2 Billion currently estimated for Light rail is the most expensive, least flexible public transit option for I-5, and it duplicates existing bus service unnecessarily. Practically, the sensitive overhead electric lines freeze in winter, and over-heat in summer, stopping the trains and the cost to operate and maintain the system is also higher than buses. On a bridge over the Columbia River in winter, light rail could unreliable.
I’ll just point out again, that I think Mr. Ley should be free to share his own opinions of the bridge replacement plans. It just isn’t a news article.
First, because as much as he is obviously dedicated to the issue, there is absolutely no metric by which he could be considered even remotely neutral on the topic.
Second, because I’m sure that, were we to have comments from proponents of the rail, they would have their own perspectives and analyses to share. Alas, we don’t know, because no such person was contacted for comment.
That’s why this isn’t a news article – it’s an opinion piece.
Forthright — I appreciate your perspective. My guess is that most people didn’t know that TriMet lost $6 billion over the past decade.
My guess is that most people didn’t know that their financial projections indicate they will lose an additional $1.1 billion over the next decade. Those huge losses may or may not be “news” to most people. But thank you for reading the article. 🙂
Hi John, I appreciate you weighing in. I think we can safely imagine that there are a great many things that most people don’t know.
We could, for example, wonder from whence you derive your claim of $6 billion in losses over the past decade. It is a curious statement, given that TriMet’s most recent audited comprehensive financial report (FY2024) does not reflect an overall deficit of that magnitude. There is a conveniently formatted “Statement of Net Position, Last Ten Years” section (pages 106-109), but you seem to have missed the additional lines below “operating expenses” in your calculations. If we look at the final totals (called, “Net Position,” down at the bottom), it seems that TriMet is doing just fine.
We have further support for that idea in the form of TriMet receiving yet another AAA bond rating (the highest possible rating) from external auditors in 2024. KBRA (the rating group) specifically cited, “TriMet’s diverse and strong economic base” in support of that conclusion. Quite a curious position for them to take, if we are to believe your statement about their ongoing dramatic losses.
The simple answer is that TriMet, like C-Tran, is not primarily funded by operating revenues, but by tax and grant revenues. By only subtracting operating costs from operating expenses, you have incorrectly excluded the majority of their income. In fact, if we were to apply your method (specifically, “operating revenues minus operating expenses”) to the most recent C-Tran financial report (page 63), then we would be forced to conclude that C-Tran has experienced losses of half a billion dollars over the past 10 years.
I’m assuming that this oversight on your part is a result of your unfamiliarity with how financial reports are written. This is an understandable mistake, as audit documents are highly technical. And though understandable, it has nevertheless led to you make erroneous claims – errors that no doubt could have been avoided had you consulted with individuals more experienced in the field of accounting, for example.
Given, as I hope has been adequately demonstrated above, that you are in error regarding the overall financial performance of TriMet, it stands to reason that your other analyses may contain similar inadvertent mistakes. And again, I don’t at all begrudge the calls for greater oversight and scrutiny of public projects. That said, I do think it’s important for that oversight be conducted in a rigorous and systematic way by folks who are expert in the field – not, with no offense intended, on the back of a napkin.
Happy to provide feedback on some of the other questionable analyses in your article, if that would be helpful to you. Thank you for your interest and investment in our community.