Save the Trees Wins Temporary Restraining Order but, Needs $7500 to post a bond.

Special Appeal for fundraising Help from Save the Trees

Save the Trees won a two week TRO to stop the logging by the Seattle School District at Ingraham High School this Friday.This allows the case to be heard. Unfortunately the judge also put a financial burden on Save the Trees.

Things are moving forward having scored this underdog victory.

Save the trees won the Temporary Restraining Order when Judge Erlick agreed that the case would be mute if the trees are cut down. He also turned down the School District’s request for a $400,000 bond with the school district arguing that was the inflation cost of not being able to build the project. The Judge noted that with no MUP application pending and no timeline they had no project.

The Judge did somewhat buy the Seattle School District's bogus contract that the School District signed with Weiss Trees to be used against Save the Trees. The Seattle School District signed a contract that paid them $33,000 for the trees with a penalty of $10,000 to $17,000 if the trees aren’t cut on Friday. It’s a contract Save the Tree's Attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann argued that no businessman would sign such onerous terms, noting that the issue of a pending lawsuit would also have prevented the trees being cut down.

Keith Scully argued well and got an initial $20,000 bond reduced to $7500. If Save the Trees does not post the bond by tomorrow they can’t stop the trees being cut down. If they lose the case they also lose the bond money. Some deal right.

As of the end of Wednesday night Save the Trees has received pledges of over 2/3 of the needed bond money - some $5500 of the $7500 needed.

Anyone reading this can help with a contribution to Save the Trees to come up with the bond money by e-mailing Steve Zemke at stevezemke@msn.com and pledge what you can send to help cover the rest of the bond. You can even deliver your pledge to Steve's house Thursday. His address is 2131 N 132nd St one block off of Meridian N.

You can also call Steve at 206-366-0811 to make or leave a pledge. If he gets the money pledged and put in the mail, Save the Trees can cover the bond deadline.

But it is up to you. If you want Save the Trees to go forward, now is the time for you to step forward. If you don't like the extortion tactics the Seattle School District is doing, respond with a pledge. They are trying to intimidate Save the Trees and neighbors to go away. This is all planned out on their part to crush Save the Trees and their right to judicial review. But we can fight back.

So dig deep and let Steve know what you can help with. Thanks

Send checks to:
Save the Trees
c/o Steve Zemke
2131 N 132nd St
Seattle, Wa98133

Judge blocks tree-cutting at Ingraham
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008111148_webtrees13m.html

Judge Prohibits School District from cutting Ingraham High Trees
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/374851_trees14.html

Seattle School District Rev's Up Chainsaws, Save the Tress Files for TRO

A hearing has just been scheduled for 3:00 PM today Wed, August 12, before Judge Erlick of the Superior Court in Rm W 10-60 on the Save the Trees Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order to stop the trees at Ingraham High School from being cut down this Friday.

The Seattle School District is further trying to stifle legitimate review of their decisions by asking that a bond of $10,000 be posted because they signed a contact with Weiss Tree Company that money be paid if the trees aren’t cut on Friday. Weiss would pay the Seattle School District $33,000 for the trees.

This contract as viewed by citizens would appear to have been written and signed by the School District to be an impediment to Save the Trees or any other group filing any legitimate appeal of their actions. In addition the School District is asking for a bond of $400,000 for inflation costs for the delay of a project that they just withdrew the building permits on from the city review process.

The TRO is being requested to halt the Seattle School District from cutting down 68 Douglas fir, Western Red Cedar and Pacific madrone trees on the west side of Ingraham High School before a hearing can be held in Superior Court to resolve the environmental impacts of the project.

Among other things the tree grove is comprised of a plant habitat that is identified by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources as a rare plant community in King County. The area has also functioned as a school and community park and has been used by Ingraham High School biology and ecology classes for education purposes.

By having withdrawn their construction permits and trying to just cut the grove of trees down, the Seattle School District is trying to avoid any consideration of Washington State and Seattle environmental and land use laws. They are saying the issues will be settled by the chain saw not the rule of law. To date the environmental issues have only been evaluated by the Seattle School District which obviously has a conflict of interest. The appeal before a hearing examiner was before a hearing examiner hired by the Seattle School District. The issues have yet to reach the Superior Court. The Seattle School District is playing the school yard bully and trying to prevent the normal process by which citizen’s have a right to seek redress from actions or decisions of their government which they think are wrong.




Press Advisory
Save the Trees
For More Information Contact:
Steve Zemke
206-999-6095 (cell)
206-366-0811 (home)

Breaking News – Press Advisory

The Seattle School District has just informed Keith Scully, the attorney for Save the Trees, that they will not halt their decision to cut down the trees at Ingraham High School while the environmental issues are being reviewed by the King County Superior Court. A hearing has been set for Sept 2, 2008 but the Seattle School District intends to ignore it and proceed with cutting down the trees this Friday, August 15, 2008.

Keith Scully will be filing a request for a temporary restraining order before the King County Superior Court at 516 Third Ave in Seattle before the Ex Parte division at 11:30 this morning

You can check at the front desk for the location of the hearing.

The Seattle School Board obviously decided last night in their special executive session to ignore the unresolved legal issues and also the position of Mayor Nickels, the Seattle City Council, many Seattle citizens and neighbors opposing cutting down the trees at Ingraham. The School District is opposing letting this issue be resolved on its merits through a court of law and has decided instead to use the chain saw to just get its way!

Lawsuit Filed by Save the Trees against Seattle School District

For Immediate release:
August 12, 2008
Save the Trees Press Release
For More Information Contact:
Steve Zemke
stevezemke@msn.com
206-366-0811


Save the Trees has filed a lawsuit with the King County Superior Court against the Seattle Public School’s proposal to cut down 68 old evergreen trees at Ingraham High School without adequate environmental review.

The King County Court has assigned the case a hearing date of Sept 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 PM. The Case number is 08-2-26887-0SEA. The Case Caption is Save the Trees, et.al. v. Seattle School District No.1, State of Washington.

The lawsuit alleges that the Seattle School District has violated the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C and SEPA Rules, WAC 197-11, by deciding to proceed with the Ingraham High School Renovation, Demolition and New Construction Project without adequate environmental review.

Plaintiffs have exhausted all remedies within the Seattle School District including appealing the project through a Seattle Public Schools hearing examiner. In order to avoid further city review of the proposed project, the Seattle School District said last Wednesday that “the District has withdrawn their pending application for a Master Use Permit for the projects, as well as the building permit application and grading permit application”

By this evading of further review by the city as to land use and environmental laws the school district hoped to avoid review of whether building a new addition at Ingraham High School in a large grove of 75 year old, 100 feet tall would violate city environmental laws.

Seattle environmental law under SMC25.05.67N2a states “It is the cities policy to minimize or prevent the loss of wildlife habitat and other vegetation which have substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological and/or economic value.”

Overlooked by the Seattle School District and discovered by the plaintiffs during their review of the project was that the grove of 130 Douglas fir, Madrone and western red cedar trees on the west side of Ingraham High School was a unique environmental habitat. Unknown by the Seattle School District was the fact that the Washington State Department of Natural Resources under their Natural Heritage Program had classified the plant habitat actually present at Ingraham as a rare plant community in King County.

The Seattle School District also had not acknowledged the fact that the tree grove was used as a school and neighborhood park. These and other facts will be part of the appeal by Save the Trees.

Meanwhile the question remains as to whether the Seattle School District will agree to put their proposed tree cutting and removal scheduled on August 15th and 16th on hold.

The School District has incurred tremendous public outrage from both Seattle public officials and citizens for this blatant attempt to get around existing land use and environmental laws.

The Seattle School Board has called a special executive committee meeting for this evening (Tuesday August 12, 2008) from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM to discuss their response to the law suit.

It is hoped by Save the Trees that the Seattle School District will withdraw their threat of cutting down the trees this Friday and Saturday and allow the environmental review process to proceed as normal and delay any action to cut the trees until the case is properly reviewed by the Courts.

Ron English, an attorney for the Seattle School District has written an e-mail to Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann who is representing the plaintiffs, noting that he did not have the authority to stop the tree cutting and that the decision was up to the School Board. That is one of the issues they are discussing tonight.

If the Seattle School District decides not to cancel the tree cutting, Ron English said that the plaintiffs would have time to go to King County Superior Court to request a restraining order as the District had no intent of cutting the trees down before Friday.

Of course with the construction permits withdrawn, the Seattle School Board also has the option of dropping the proposal to build the addition in the grove of trees and move it to another site, like the open lawn area on the North side of the school.

This would remove any further delay from the project, as litigation regarding the trees is expected to take 6 months or more and the School District has no certainty they would prevail with a full review of the project and alternatives if the Court rules an EIS is needed.



END///END///////////

Urgent Update -Help Needed to Save the Trees at Ingraham High School -

It’s been a hectic couple of day here in Seattle battling to save the old trees at Ingraham High School! A somewhat ordinary environmental review process has turned into a battle to stop the chain saws as the Seattle School District has resorted to dirty developer tactics and an all out attempt to bully their way over the public by just cutting down the trees. On Thursday they withdrew their building permit applications with the City of Seattle, claiming that without the pending land use applications they could just cut down the trees. Neighbors and Seattle be damned they said! The School District said they plan to cut down the trees on August 15th and 16th .

Once the trees are cut down the Seattle School District plans to resubmit its plans to again add the building addition where the trees once were. Oh and don't despair. They said you'll be able to comment on their proposal again at that time. But this time there won't be any trees in the way for angry neighbors and tree lovers and park lovers to complain about losing.

We urgently need the help of the public to stop them. This blatant evasion of the normal planning process is outrageous and a callous attempt to avoid environmental protection and land use laws. One might expect such arrogant bullying from a private developer but the Seattle Public Schools are owned by the taxpayers. Its our money and our schools. Please help now to save the trees at Ingraham.

Please note: It’s not a question of trees versus school renovation. It never has been. Save the Trees supports replacing the decaying portables with new classrooms. We support putting the new addition on the North side of the school on an open lawn area where no large trees have to be cut down. The Seattle School District, without seeking public input from neighbors and the community, chose to build the addition in a grove of 75 year old 100 foot tall Douglas fir, Pacific madrone and western red cedar trees. Some 68 trees would be unnecessarily cut down. They have long been are a neighborhood park. They also constitute a rare plant community in King County under the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program.

You can read our press release here on MajorityRulesBlog: http://www.majorityrules.org/blog/2008/08/seattle-school-district-seeks-to-avoid.html

There has been major coverage in both the print and broadcast media.

In the Seattle Times by Susan Gilmore http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008101880_ingraham09m.html

And a post by Lisa Stiffler. http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/environment/archives/145622.asp

A link to the KOMO site http://www.komonews.com/news/26442089.html

A link to the King 5 news story is here: http://www.king5.com/education/stories/NW_080808WAB_seattle_school_tree_controversy_TP.2a35ef0b.html#

Great Blog Post - http://smarterneighbors.com/2008/08/09/seattle-school-districts-bad-faith-decision-to-fell-trees-at-ingraham-high-angering-neighbors-and-mayor-nickels/

Also you can find a series of blog posts on the Ingraham battle as it has evolved over the last several months at www.MajorityRules.org/blog


We need people to email or call Seattle City Council members, the Mayor’s office and Seattle School Board and the Seattle School’s Superintendent expressing outrage at the Seattle School District’s decision to evade environmental scrutiny by a developer’s loophole.

Urge the School District and Superintendent to continue the environmental review process in the Courts or just move the proposed addition to the North side of Ingraham High School where they could build without cutting down any large trees. Urge specifically they not cut down the trees.

http://www.seattleschools.org/area/board/index.dxml

http://www.seattleschools.org/area/sup/index.dxml

Urge the Seattle City Council and Mayor to pass now a strong tree preservation ordinance to close this and other loopholes and give protection to saving and expanding tree cover in the city! Urge action now, not next year. If you are outraged by this slimy trick to evade environmental review tell the city council and mayor to end these developer loopholes.

http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/mayor/contact.html

http://www.seattle.gov/council/councilcontact.html


Send a contribution made out to Save the Trees! to help pay legal expenses. Initial costs are several thousand dollars. More costs are anticipated if the School District digs in further. Send as generous a check as you can to “Save the Trees!” c/o Steve Zemke, 2131 N 132nd St, Seattle, WA 98133 206-366-0811

Seattle School District Seeks to Avoid State and City SEPA and Land Use Laws.

Save the Trees Press Release:
August 9, 2008


Seattle School District Uses Developer Loophole to Avoid Environmental Laws.

The Seattle School District is attempting to avoid Washington State and Seattle Environmental Protection laws and Land Use Regulations using an unscrupulous developer loophole. In the process they are about to destroy an urban forest tree grove at Ingraham High School in North Seattle that has unique environmental value.

The Seattle School District yesterday notified the city of Seattle and neighbors that they “have withdrawn its pending application for a Master Use Permit (MUP) for the project, as well as the building permit application and grading permit application. So long as these applications are not pending, no city permits are required for removal of these trees….”

The forested area is classified as a rare plant community in King County by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources under its Natural Heritage Program because of its unique combination of Douglas fir, western madrone trees and salal understory.

The Seattle School District’s action is the same as loggers killing spotted owls or developers filling in wetlands prior to applying for permits, so they can avoid environmental laws. In this instance the Seattle School District’s bringing out the chainsaws is adopting the worst environmental practices to evade environmental protection laws to end a legal appeal process.

They seem to have decided that allowing citizens the right to appeal their decisions is something they don’t have time for or that they need to do. This is not a single action here. Last week they did a similar destructive bullying tactic at Denny Sealth School in West Seattle. They bulldozed down the trees there that were part of a DNS appeal hearing while the hearing was still going on – ending any effective appeal. They apologized for their “mistake” but the trees were gone.

Here at Ingraham they are also playing the same school yard bully. We are in the middle of an appeal process to save the Ingraham tree grove and the school district is again picking up the chain saw and saying the game is over. At stake are over 68 evergreen trees that are 75 years old and over 100 feet tall.

We have warned the school district that if the trees are cut down because they want to end the public legal appeal process that they are facing a recall effort of the entire school board for their dereliction of their responsibility to allow the legal public appeal process to continue.

They have made a mistake by locating the proposed school addition in a unique and rare environmental habitat - a rare plant community. They made their decision without involving the public in the planning process.

Their argument that it will cost them to move the building addition to another location is the same argument polluters make when they asked to clear up toxic waste or air pollution or a developer is told they can’t build on a wetland. Yes it may cost them more but they need to do the right thing and follow the law.

The Seattle Public School District is in charge of educating our city’s children. They need to teach and lead by example. You can not teach our children we are a nation of laws and then seek to evade the law applying to you.

We urge the School District to rescind their order to cut the trees down on Aug 15 and 16 and continue with the legal process. If not we will be pursing our legal options to stop them.

Under city environmental law SMC 25.05.67N2a it states “It is the cities policy to minimize or prevent the loss of wildlife habitat and other vegetation which have substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological and/or economic value.

Under SEPA regulation SMC 25.05.675N.2c if a city “finds that a proposed project would reduce or damage

1. Rare uncommon or exceptional plant or wildlife habitat

2. Wildlife trail ways or

3. Habitat diversity of species (plants or animals) of substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological or economic value

The decision maker may condition or deny the project to mitigate its adverse impacts.”

The Seattle School District is seeking to avoid the project being evaluated under these regulations and is instead seeking to destroy the environmental habitat so that it can do what it wants without environmental oversight or mittigation.

end press release///////

This action could be reversed by the Seattle School Board but no one wants to break ranks and admit they made a mistake. Arrogance, not reason rules at this point.

Contact the Seattle School Board and urge them to abandom their wild west cowboy gunslinger attitude and move the proposed addition to the north side of the school where an open lawn area would allow a new building addition to be placed without cutting down any old trees.

This issue is not education versus trees as the Seattle School Board suggests. We can have both. The Ingraham campus is the largest Seattle School District campus at 28 acres. The west grove of trees is only 1.2 acres in size and is a unique asset to the campus and the neighborhood.

Democrats Asleep at the Wheel Regarding Initiative 26

Democrats in King County have been asleep at the wheel and are about to crash unless they snap awake. The Republicans under Peter Von Reichbauer and Republican dollars have been busy trying to change the electoral landscape in their favor by putting Initiative 26 before voters.

Financial backers of both Dino Rossi and the BIAW are behind this measure.

Initiative 26 would be passed by a 2 step process. It is both on the August 19, 2008 Primary and the November 4, 2008 General Election ballots. It would amend the King County Charter to make the offices of King County Executive, King County Assessor and King County Council members nonpartisan.

The sleeper in all this is that it would also make the selection of the re-redistricting committee members nonpartisan. That means you would no longer have a balance between the two major parties but would have no idea of where these members stood politically. These members would draw the boundaries of the council districts.

Looking at who funded this measure to get on the ballot tells you who thinks they would benefit. As Josh Feit wrote on the Slog in March in a post entitled "Nonpartisan My Ass":

"Proof that the idea is a GOP ploy: Citizens for Independent Government (the group pushing the initiative) has collected $145,000 and, according to finance records, more than 90 percent of the money comes from three donors: George Rowley, John Stanton, and John Hennessy.

Rowley, CEO of Rowley Properties, is one of the biggest supporters of Republican candidates and issues in this state. Dating back to 2002, his donations have included: $8,000 to Dino Rossi; $95,000 to the $172,250 to the Washington State Republican Party; $60,000 to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee; $28,000 to the King County Republican Central Committee, General; $125,850 to the King County Republican Central Committee; and $6,000 to John Carlson in 2000.

Telecom mogul Stanton has an equally impressive list of contributions to conservative recipients: $5,300 to Rossi; $255,500 to the Washington State Republican Party; $100,000 to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee; $30,750 to the King County Republican Central Comm Non-exempt; $25,000 to the BIAW’s PAC, ChangePAC; and $4,800 to John Carlson in 2000.

Nuprecon CEO Hennessy: $6,100 to Dino Rossi; $115,000 to ChangePAC (and ChangePAC 2004); $5,000 to the Washington State Republican Party; $10,000 to the King County Repub; and $3,400 to Carlson in 2000.

So the backers of I-26 are major supporters of Dino Rossi , John Carlson and the state Republican Party as well as the BIAW - the Building Industry Association of Washington which is behind Change PAC.

The Republicans know that voters in King County reject the politics of George Bush and Karl Rove, the divisiveness of politics like those Newt Gingrich supported and the corruption of politicians like Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska. So they want to hide behind a nonpartisan label and not tell the voters what their political beliefs are.

Initiative 26 isn't needed. Any politician can now run as an independent on the ballot, particularly under the Top 2 Primary System. Republicans do not need to declare they are Republicans if they are so afraid of the label and ashamed of their party.

But Initiative 26 wants to also prevent Democrats running as Democrats by prohibiting them from being identified as Democrats on the ballot. They want to deny voters the right to know when they vote which party best represents the views of the candidate. Voters will be less informed as to the political philosophy that a candidate supports. This will allow more Republicans an opportunity to hide their true political leanings behind a non-partisan label and sneak into office with a barrage of money from the BIAW or the Republican Party or Chamber of Commerce.

I-26 takes away voter choice and allows for big spending campaigns by special interests to mask a candidate's true politics. We have a system that works. The voters have put Democrats in charge of the County Council and this is the Republicans campaign to try to regain control by not telling the voters the political party that the candidate belongs to.

Vote No on Initiative 26 Part 1 on August 19, and November 4, 2008! Part 1 asks"Should either of these proposed ordinances to place a charter amendment before the voters in November 2008 be adopted?"

In case question one wins you have a second chance If you want to retain some ability to id candidates by party. Vote for the King County Council's alternative to I-26 in the second part of the ballot question.

Part 2 reads "Irregardless of whether you voted yes or no above, if one of the proposed ordinances is adopted, which one should it be?" Vote for the Council-proposed alternative.

Candidate Endorsements for August 19, 2008 Washington State Primary

Lots of good progressive organizations are making endorsements for the upcoming August 19, 2008 Primary in Washington state. Here are links to some of them:

Washington State Conservation Voters - Statewide Races

Washington State Conservation Voters -Legislative Races

Washington State Conservation Voters - Local races

Cascade Chapter Sierra Club - Political Endorsements

Progressive Majority - Washington candidates

Washington State Labor Council - Endorsements

Washington State Democrats - Statewide candidates

Washington State Democrats - Congressional candidates

Washington State Democrats - Legislative candidates

King County Democrats - Endorsements

Snohomish County Democrats - Endorsements

Spokane County Democrats - Endorsements

NARAL Pro choice Washington - Endorsements

I will add more to this list as they become avaialable.

Washington State Republicans Running Away from Party Label

The Washington State Secretary of State's Office has up on its website the 2008 Primary Election Voter's Pamphlet. The Primary this year is on Tuesday August 19, 2008. This election will feature the new Top 2 Primary approved by voters by Initiative 872 in 2004.

Voters will be able to vote for candidates of either major party or minor parties without having to select either a Democratic or Republican or independent ballot.

This may actually create a certain amount of confusion because of how candidates have chosen to identify or not identify any political affiliation they may have.

As the Secretary of State notes:

"Each candidate for partisan office may state a political party that he or she prefers.
A candidate’s preference does not imply that the candidate is nominated or endorsed by the party, or that the party approves of or associates with that candidate.
Candidates may choose not to state a political party preference."

This of course means that candidates have self identified themselves as to their party association but that, among other things, means that there is no way from their stated party preference on the ballot to determine if the candidates actually adhere or believe in the principles of the party they claim.

In addition there is a deliberate attempt by many candidates who have been Republicans in the past to try to obscure their association with the Republican Party by using a number of different ways to describe their political affiliation. It definitely appears as if they are afraid to call themselves Republicans. Do they really think that voters will be more inclined to vote for them if they try to hide their party affiliation?

In Legislative races Democrats did not have a problem calling themselves Democrats. Some 128 candidates claimed that they preferred the Democratic Party. One claimed he preferred the "True Democratic Party" and another the "Progressive Democratic Party"

But it was a different story with Republicans, or what I assume were Republicans in some cases. Some 102 candidates said they preferred the Republican Party.

But then another 25 candidates said they preferred the GOP Party. Is that something different from the Republican Party? What's wrong with saying they prefer the Republican Party? If any of the GOP candidates get elected are they going to hold a separate caucus in Olympia from the Republican Party caucus? Two candidates said they preferred something called the "R Party". One said he preferred the "Cut Taxes GOP Party" and another the "Grand Old Party."

I was particularly intrigued by the "prefers R Party". Is this a new party? I wanted to give the two candidates the benefit of the doubt and so I googled on "R Party". Here's what I came up with. This is the closest I could come up with - there was no immediate association of the Republican Party with the R Party. Try it yourself.

Urban Dictionary: R party

New R. Party Video - "Trapped In The Men's Room" - Video - Stereogum

Daily Show: R. Party - Trapped in the Closet Pt. 2 - Truveo Video ...

So who are the R Party candidates? One is Dan Kristiansen in LD 39 and the other is Herb Baze in LD 35. I think if elected they will be in a pretty small caucus. One wonders why they had trouble saying Republican and couldn't get beyond the first letter.

There was a smattering of other stated party preferences:

Independent Party 3
Green Party 2
America's Third Party 1
Progressive Party 1
Libertarian party 1
Salmon Yoga Party 1
no party preference 4

Peter Goldmark's Opponent Raking in Timber and Mining Money

Peter Goldmark is the Democrat running for Public Lands Commissioner in Washington state. Goldmark leads in raising money over his Republican opponent Doug Sutherland, the incumbent. But the two campaigns are drawing money from very different donors.

Sutherland's campaign is awash in special interest money from timber and mining companies. His donor list reads like a who who in the resource extraction business, whether it be trees or minerals.

Peter Goldmark has raised over $418,667.81 in cash and in kind contributions. Doug Sutherland has raised $353,121.40.

A breakdown of Sutherland's contributions finds some 219 contributions from timber and timber related interests contributing a total of $145,809. This comprises 41.5% of Sutherland's contributions. This is a conservative figure because not all contributors were identified as to their employer or their occupation. State law, for example, does not require this disclosure on contributions under $100 total.

Some of Sutherland's larger timber associated contributors include:

Buse Timber & Sales (Everett, WA) $1600
John D Crow, Chairman, Green Crow (Port Angeles,WA) $3200
Freres Lumber Company, Inc (Lyons, RI) $3200
Hampton Lumber Sales (Portland, OR) $1600
Roseburg Forest Products (Roseburg, OR) $1600
RSG Forest Products, INC (Kalama, WA) $3200
Janes Warjone, Chairman, Port Blakely Tree Farms, LP (Seattle, WA) $3200
Zip O Log Mills (Eugene, OR) $1600
George Emerson, Manager Sierra Pacific Industries (Bella Vista, CA) $1400
Bob Lewis, Manager Columbia Vista Corp (Vancouver, WA) $2800
Murphy Hardwood Plywood Division (Eugene, OR) $1400
Murray Pacific (Tacoma, WA) $1400
Rayonier (Hoquiam, WA) $2800
SDS Company (Bingen, WA) $2800
Sierra Pacific Industries (Redding, CA) $2800
Simpson (Tacoma, WA) $1400
Weyerhauser (Olympia, WA) $1400
George and Wendy Weyerhauser (Lakewood, WA) $2800
American Forest Land Company, LLC (Ellensburg, WA) $1300
Green Crow (Port Angeles, WA) $2300
Columbia Cedar (Kettle Falls, WA) $1200
Forest Capital Partners (Boston, MA) $1200
Georgia Pacific Financial Management LLC (Jackonville, FL) $1200
Port Blakely Tree Farms LP (Seattle, WA) $2500
Murphy Hardwood Plywood Division (Eugene, OR) $1000
Plum Creek Administrative Corp (Columbia Falls, MT) $1000
Starfire Lumber (Cottage Grove, OR) $1000
Stimson Lumber Company Coeur D'alene, ID) $1000
Seneca Jones Timber Company (Eugene, OR) $2600

Another prominent source of contributions has come from mining and mineral extraction interests which do business with the DNR.

Echo Bay Minerals (Republic, WA) $1600
Tim Spraldin, owner Spraldin Rock Products (Hoquiam, WA) $1600
Asphalt Paving Association (Seattle, WA) $1400
Glacier Northwest (Seattle, WA) $2800
WA Aggregates & Concrete Association (Des Moines, WA) $2800
Cadman Heidelberg Cement Group (Redmond, WA) $1000
Kinross (gold mining) (Oroville, WA) $1000
Lakeside Industries ("asphalt, heavy highway construction") (Issaquah, WA) $1000

The Commissioner of Public Lands oversees leasing and management of tidelands in Puget Sound and waterways on public DNR lands. Various shellfish and other seafood interests have also given to Sutherland. These include:

Northwest Marine Trade Association (Seattle, WA) $2200
Washington Geoduck Association (Bainbridge Island, WA) $1000
Bill Taylor, owner Taylor Shellfish (Olympia, WA) $750
Alaska Ice Seafoods (Bainbridge Island,WA) $500
Chelsea Farms LLC Olympia, WA) $500
Coast Seafoods Company (South Bend, WA) $500
William F Dewey, owner Taylor Shellfish (Shelton, WA) $500
Intertidal Farms (Olympia, WA) $500
Penn Cove Shellfish (Coupeville, WA) $500
Seattle Shellfish LLC (Olympia, WA) $500
Earl Steele Owner Rock Point Oyster Co. (Quilcene, WA) $500
Paul Taylor ,owner Taylor Shellfish (Olympia, WA) $500

Another source of contributions for Sutherland has been from energy and oil companies, particularly ones interested in leasing sites for wind power:

ConocoPhillips (Sacramento, CA) $1000
Iberdrola Renewables (Portland, OR) $900
MPC Shareholders Fund (Tacoma, WA) $900
Puget Sound Energy (Bellevue, WA) $1600
Pacific Power/Rocky Mountain Power (Portland, OR) $ 800
ENXCO(wind) (Carlsbad, CA) $600
BP North America Employee PAC (Warrenfield, IL) $500
TESORO Companies, Inc (San Antonio, TX) $ 500
Daren Huseby, Brookfield Power (wind)(Portland, OR) $300
David W McClain VP Everpower Renewables Corp (Beaverton, OR) $300
Dana Peck, developer, Horizon Wind Energy(Goldendale, WA) $300
James Walker,wind industry, self employed (Carlsbad, CA) $300

Seventeen people listed as employees of the Department of Natural Resources which the Commissioner of Public Lands oversees have given $11,200.

By contrast almost all of Peter Goldmark's contributions have come from individuals. The only two exceptions are 6 contributions( including two in kind) totalling $46,577.02 from the Wa ST Democratic Central Committee and fourteen contributions from labor unions totaling $12,800.
Labor contributions to Peter Goldmark include:

Electrical Workers #46 PAC (Kent, WA) $1600
Sheet Metal Workers Local 66 (Kirkland, WA) $1600
Watate Construction and Building Trades Council (Olympia, WA) $1600
Washington Education Association (Federal Way, WA) $1600
IBEW Local 77 PAC (Seattle, WA) $1000
IBEW Local 76 (Tacoma, WA) $1000
Washington Teamsters Legislative League (Tukwila, WA) $2000
Washington State Labor Council (Seattle, WA) $800
IBEW Local 112 PAC (Kennewick, WA) $700
Amalgamated Transit Union (Seattle, WA) $ 300

Individual donors contributing $3200 included Julie Edsforth and David Tagney Jones.
Inslee for Congress gave $3000 and Peter Goldman $2800, Martha Kongsgaard $2800.
More individual donors can be seen on the PDC's website.

Note - This contribution analysis is based on donors to both campaigns as available on July 13, 2008 on the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission's website at http://www.pdc.wa.gov/.
Also for the record I have donated a total of $65 to the Peter Goldmark campaign.
Steve Zemke