This year's summer primary is technically on August 18, but that's a bit misleading. This will be the first regular election held under the state's mandatory all-mail voting rule, so ballots will be mailed to voters on July 29, and votes will then trickle in from now through the August 18 postmark deadline.

Combine the off-year, all-local election with the state's idiotic summer primary--since most sensible people in these parts don't pay attention to local politics when it's hot out--and the upshot is that incumbents and previous office holders (this means you, Greg Nickels and Jan Drago) have even more of an advantage than usual. In fact, since the top two vote-getters from each race advance to November regardless of party (or lack thereof), a number of November races (the ones with two or fewer candidates) aren't even on the ballot this time. Since Seattle's mayoral race is one of the few races that has more than two competitive candidates, much more on that below. Happily, once past the mayoral debacle, there are actually a surprising number of decent candidates this year. Pity so few people will know who they are.

Let's take the candidates and issues in the order they'll appear on your ballot, with the usual caveats. These are only our opinion, one of many. Do your own research, make up your own mind. And don't stop with voting. Social movements change the world; if voting alone changed things, well, "Meet the new boss..." wouldn't be the first half of an instantly recognizable couplet.

ELECTED OFFICES

King County Executive: Four Democrats and an uber-reactionary former TV newsreader are the main candidates vying to replace Ron Sims. The fear is that the zealot in the race, creationist Susan Hutchison, will get through to the general election on the strength of the Democrats canceling each other out while Hutchison benefits from her name recognition in a low-information primary ("Say, wasn't she that nice woman on teevee?") and complete ignorance of Hutchison's actual political and social beliefs. (Hint: before the launch of her campaign, her former employees at the Discovery Institute, the nation's foremost deniers of evolution and science, dutifully scrubbed mention of her board service from their web site. "Complete ignorance" is, indeed, the watchword here.)

Happily, beyond stopping her at any cost--and any of the other seven people running, even loopy permacandidates Stan Lippman or Goodspaceguy, would be less dangerous as County Exec than Hutchison--there's also someone to vote for. County council member Dow Constantine has been consistently more progressive on the campaign trail than his three main Democratic rivals: Eastside state legislators Ross Hunter and Fred Jarrett (both running as "moderate," i.e., "I'm conservative but I'm not crazy like her!"), and county councilman Larry Phillips from Seattle, seeking an inexplicable promotion after 16 years of doing absolutely nothing on council, in the way that only Seattle's endless class of smug officeholder-for-life Democrats can be. Constantine is easily the best of this bunch for the most powerful job in the county.

None of the County Council races are remotely competitive or interesting. Incumbents rule, with rarely a challenge. This is how we get the Larry Phillips types, in both parties, running our city, county, and state, year after year.

Port of Seattle Positions No. 3 & 4: The bad news is that only two of the five Port Commissioner seats are up for election in this, the first Port election after the series of tip-of-the-iceberg scandals that have rocked the permanently corrupt agency over the past two years. The good news is that they're both open seats (the execrable Pat Davis is retiring to a new waterfront wax museum named, no doubt, in her honor, and Lloyd Hara is running for King County Assessor), and both races feature a candidate who's promising the necessary fumigation services. Rob Holland and Max Vekich are far superior to their competitors. Vote early and often: it's the Port of Seattle way.

City of Seattle: Mayor: Oy. For four years, ever since the debacle known locally as the Al Runte Disaster, we've been clamoring for someone to run against our vile would-be Mayor-for-Life, Greg Nickels. Now, we stand before you, abashed, in the realization that we weren't nearly specific enough. What we meant was that we want someone good to run against Hizzoner.

Remarkably, despite Nickels' huge war chest, and his long record of at all costs (to taxpayers) offering fellatio to the city's biggest developers and businesses, seven mayoral challengers have filed this year. Five of them--Mike McGinn, James Donaldson, Joe Mallahan, Jan Drago, and Norman Sigler--have raised significant money. And none look likely to be a significant improvement on Nickels. In fact, the biggest names of the bunch, veteran city council member Jan Drago and former local basketball star James Donaldson, are if anything to the right of Nickels. Drago is former head of the big-business Downtown Seattle Association, and has faithfully served their interests on council; Donaldson is running on an I-Ran-A-Business-So-I-Know-Everything, anti-tax platform, and has hired reactionary former Monorail Board member Cindi Laws (last publicly noted for a notorious anti-Semitic outburst) as a campaign consultant. Oy. Sigler hasn't been heard from much at all.

That leaves McGinn and Mallahan as the best hopes for a strategic vote to avoid a horrid Nickels/Drago general election. McGinn is a former local Sierra Club head, tapping the enviro crowd and running as, remarkably, the only one of the eight candidates to oppose Nickels' Big Bore budgetary tunnel disaster. Unfortunately, McGinn is also running a demogogic campaign against Seattle public schools--he wants the city to take over the school system, a "solution" that's been disastrous everywhere it's been tried--and in every respect other than the tunnel is perfectly aligned with Nickels' "it combats sprawl!" developer-friendly war on neighborhoods, the poor, and civic livability. The main difference is that when Nickels' environmental "agenda" is in conflict with his need to please big money, as with the tunnel and waterfront development, the money will always win. McGinn's a true enviro believer (and, by accounts, an arrogant one). But that, as Nickels has shown, fits quite nicely with the developer fellatio routine about 95 percent of the time. Five percent is not much of an improvement.

That leaves Joe Mallahan, a business leader with social service credentials whose appeal has been broad enough that he may be the best chance to crack the Nickels/Drago duopoly. Mallahan, as someone who's never held political office, is something of a cipher; his business roots and tunnel support prevent any sort of enthusiastic endorsement here. But he's good on the stump, says many of the right things, has gotten support from some good local pols, and promises better management and neighborhood services. (But who doesn't?) A weak endorsement for Mallahan, with the hope that if he survives the primary, he'll pose a genuine alternative to Nickels. None of the other viable candidates would. And Nickels must be stopped.

City Council: Position 4: Happily, some of the council races aren't nearly so dire as the mayoral campaign. This seat boasts the best progressive challenger with a real shot at winning since Nick Licata first ran in 1997: former minister and longtime housing and homeless advocate David Bloom is facing a well-monied challenge from downtown apologist Sally Bagshaw. Vote for Bloom--and then volunteer for his campaign between now and November. He's that good.

City Council: Position 6: Licata himself, after flirting with a mayoral run, is running for re-election, and facing his most serious challenge in years from the money crowd. It's very easy to get cynical about politicians if you follow them for long enough (or even if you don't), but in my humble opinion Nick Licata has done the best job, both ideologically and in terms of simple effectiveness, of any politician, at any level, I've ever covered. He deserves medals, but four more years will do. Did I mention you should vote for him?

City Council: Position 8: Unfortunately, the choice here isn't quite as easy as the other two. Mike O'Brien is, like McGinn, a former local Sierra Club head (hmmm) who opposes the tunnel but otherwise loves developers because they're so green. (Well, they worship it, right?) Two others are sons of local icons: Jordan Royer (son of former mayor Charlie) and Rusty Williams (son of former city council powerhouse Jeanette), with all the dynastic old-boy-ism that implies. (Reminder: that's how we got Cheryl Chow.) Bobby Forch is an SDOT planner and small business advocate. Robert Rosencrantz, a repeat candidate, has a good social service and enviro past, but then, so do a lot of Seattle's Democratic Party permapols--and he sounds a lot like them. Maple Leaf activist David Miller made his name saving a stand of neighborhood trees, which doesn't sound like much of a job audition, but he seems to be the best of this batch. Here's hoping Miller makes the general election, and we get more time to evaluate whoever else survives.

Seattle School District: District No. 5: Mary Bass has served the interests of her Central Area constituents vocally and well--which is why the downtown crowd that once again dominates the school board hates her, and why she is once again facing an establishment challenge. If ever a boat needed rocking (sorry for the mixed Port of Seattle metaphor) the cabal now running our public schools would be it. Bass is perfect for the job.

Seattle School District: District No. 7: Longtime district critic Charlie Mas is pledging to "hold the superintendent and staff accountable." It's about time someone had that bright idea. He means it, too. Charlie Mas.

BALLOT MEASURE

There's only one, but it's a doozy: the American Chemistry Council's staggeringly well-funded astroturf referendum on Seattle's disposable bag tax. It's kind of ridiculous--Edmonds recently banned such bags without anywhere near this fuss--but that's what a well-funded lobby that makes money from environmental harm can do.

What does Edmonds (and cities like Washington DC and San Francisco) know that Seattle voters should? That plastic bags didn't exist 30 years ago, but now they're ubiquitous; our city alone uses 360 million of these petroleum-based, landfill-hogging, marine life-killing environmental nuisances. Many local businesses have gotten ahead of this issue by offering their own bags to shoppers; under the new ordinance, so will the city, and only folks who continue to use disposable bags will pay the fee. It's a fairly harmless solution to a serious waste disposal and environmental sustainability issue--harmless, that is, unless you make your living manufacturing the things. Like the members of the American Chemistry Council.

An "approved" vote retains the bag fee as passed by Seattle City Council; a "rejected" vote repeals it. Environmental merits of this tax aside, this is checkbook democracy at its worst. Don't let them get away with it. Vote Approved.