My apologies - this article is so complex that I’m still working on it. So in that vein, I’m simply going to say that Kremen’s office sent an attorney memo back to the Democratic Party and have stated they believe the appointment of Nelson is valid and legal.
No attorney general opinion is being sought. Barring some other official legal challenge, Nelson will be sworn in with the three new County Council members at 12:15 p.m. on Monday, Jan. 11.
Kremen has not returned two phone calls today seeking comment and, unfortunately, I’m past deadline.
Take a look at the attorney’s opinion, right here. Remember you can check out the Democratic Party’s letter with its concerns and legal claims in the post below.
*UPDATE* - Here is the article that will run prior to seeing an editor. Clearly what I’ve written is designed for a print edition. had to cut quite a bit out, as the legal issues are so complex.
Check it out below the fold.
Democrats request, are denied AG opinion on Nelson appointment
By Sam Taylor
Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen’s administration says that county attorneys are confident that appointing County Councilman Ward Nelson to a vacant seat was legal.
The issues surround Nelson’s selection to fill the District 1 seat vacated by Councilman Bob Kelly, who resigned on November 26.
The opinions have been flying back and forth over e-mail and in personally-delivered letters from constituents, the Whatcom County Democratic Party and the administration as well as attorneys for weeks.
Democratic Party Chairwoman Natalie McClendon requested on Wednesday, Jan. 6, that Kremen ask the Washington Attorney General’s office for an opinion on the situation.
By the afternoon, that request was denied, with Kremen’s administration sending out a memo from Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Randy Watts that stated Nelson’s appointment was legal.
Barring some type of official legal challenge, Nelson is scheduled to be sworn in with three new County Council members at 12:15 p.m. on Monday, Jan. 11.
The debate of the appointment centers around three concerns. First, Nelson was already a council member when he accepted the nomination of Councilman Sam Crawford on December 8, because the charter says any elected official cannot hold another county office at the same time.
Watts in his analysis argued that “Nelson will never hold to offices simultaneously” and basically ended his discussion of it.
The Democrats and others, however, argued that as soon as Nelson was announced as the selection Executive Pete Kremen, he automatically filled the spot, and thusly held two seats.
Second, the Democrats cited a 1965 Attorney General opinion that states a it is an inherent conflict of interest for a governing body to appoint one of its own members to a position.
Watts said the AG opinion had nothing to do with the situation at hand because it dealt with a board of commissioners appointing one of their own, illegally, to be the county auditor. Watts also noted that the opinions are not legally binding, and that a previous opinion from the state was contrary and so there obviously is a “difference of opinion on this issue.”
Finally, others have argued, including one resident, Shane Roth, that Nelson should have recused himself from all voting on the nominations because he had a monetary interest in the vote — that being a council member salary. While county attorneys during the nominating and voting process did advise Nelson to recuse himself from any vote on himself, they were fine with him voting for the other members.
In essence, Nelson was the only nominee who had a vote, Roth and others argue, and so it’s unfair.
Roth supported former County Councilman Dan McShane for the position, as did the Democrats. Roth said in a telephone interview that he believed Kremen acted in good faith in his pick of Nelson, but that he still had a duty to ensure the overall process was ethically and legally appropriate.
But Watts said that, first, as a District 1 councilman, Nelson had a right to represent the voters of the district and he was acting in their interests, not his own when he voted on those nominations.
Watts also said that it wouldn’t have mattered if Nelson recused himself, because if he had done so, the council would still require four voters to approve a nominee.
He cited a section of the county code on council procedures that states “a majority (four members) of the council shall be in attendance to constitute a quorum and shall be necessary for the transaction of the council’s business.”
To Watts, that means that not only does the council need a four-person majority of members to hold a meeting, which is required under state law to have such a majority quorum, but it means four people would have to be ‘Yes’ votes.
That doesn’t make sense to Tim Ford, the special assistant attorney general for government accountability.
“I would agree that if there’s only four members that show up to a meeting, they (can) have a meeting, they hold a meeting. But then you’re going to say they can’t take any action? A minority could hold the council hostage on every single issue. They could just not show up to the meeting.”
January 6th, 2010 at 6:36 PM
Refusing a request from the Democratic Party to obtain legal guidance regarding compliance with ethical standards will create a crisis of confidence in the integrity of our system. This is particularly true since the County’s legal opinion overlooks important provisions of law and policy.
WCC 2.104.043A, contained within the Whatcom County Code of Ethics, and entitled “Prohibited Acts”, states that no county official may use his position to secure a special privilege.
This County statute was violated when, by virtue of his position as a County Council member, Mr. Nelson obtained the privilege of being the sole nominee who was allowed to vote on his opponents. This privilege provided Mr. Nelson the theoretical ability to throw his votes in a way that would weaken the potential success of his strongest opponents, or result in a tie vote.
Additionally, Mr. Nelson’s nomination itself was a special privilege. He was the only person who was nominated that did not submit an application. Instead, he was nominated by a fellow Council Member based on the personal associations connected with his office. This is not only a violation of County Code, but of public policy.
Nor did requiring Mr. Nelson to recuse himself from his own nomination prevent a conflict of pecuniary interest associated with the appointment. Mr. Nelson’s ability to obtain the paid appointment was integrally linked to the success or failure of the other 24 nominees, which he influenced through his vote.
Common law, state and federal laws and our own County Code require elected officials to recuse themselves from voting on a matter that creates a personal benefit. In these situations, highest priority is given to protecting public confidence in a fair system. This is how we ensure continuing compliance with our system of government. It is unfortunate that our County government has chosen to ignore the importance of this principle.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:00 PM
I’d say the county legal Dept. is fairly confident. A lot of folks are buying beers for AFY.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:14 PM
Wendy, how can there be a “crisis of confidence” in the Kremen/McEachran cabal when no reasonable person had confidence in them before?
January 6th, 2010 at 7:21 PM
And, Wendy, may I add; though Dan and Lisa may have believed they had sufficiently greased his mellifluousness, it appears there “confidence” was horribly misplaced. That the Dems remained in denial and neglected to address Kremen’s pandering to the Rs who financed his campaigns, and lord know what else, just leaves one laughing.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:25 PM
Seems clear :
If Ward had recused himself from ALL the voting, and not stalemated all his competition, then the remaining 5 councilmembers would have voted on all races without him and reached a 3-2 majority on a half dozen candidates, and somehow selected from those finalists.
Ward personally ensured that 24 of the races would be no more decisive than 3-3 deadlocks at best. How ever you slice it, Ward’s votes for the other 24 races did result in essentially facilitating Kremen to be given the pick.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:28 PM
I would be confident too if, as a County Attorney, I felt at liberty to treat the Attorney General’s Opinions as non-binding guidance, rather than the position of the state’s highest ranked attorney that should be followed unless and until overturned by a court of law.
I would be confident if I felt it was proper to cite to a “conflicting” previous Attorney General Opinion, when the more recent AGO had specifically stated that the previous AGO was overruled.
I would be confident if I felt at liberty to ignore the vast body of common law policies that were cited within the Attorney General Opinion,
I would be confident if I felt that I could dismiss the legal policies established in an Attorney General Opinion simply because the facts in my case were not identical to the facts in the AGO even when the legal policies from the AGO were broad enough to cover different factual situations.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:30 PM
But as it has been explained to me, only had Mr. Nelson added his vote to a candidate who otherwise had 3 supporters, none could have gained the 4 votes needed to prevail.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:32 PM
Their confidence may be unfounded. But I’d say they are willing to take the gamble.
What’s the next step?
January 6th, 2010 at 7:37 PM
And Wendy, welcome to Kremen/McEachran county. If AGO opinions were followed, we would have stopped granting building and permits to subdivide based on exempt wells 20 years ago.
But alas, we do live in Kremen County.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:40 PM
Indeed, according to county legal staff, county code requires there always must be a majority vote of 4 in order for a vote to actually pass.
The code could possibly be interpreted that way … and I know of no legal opinion that challenges it, let alone addresses it … but I’ve literally never experienced this in any of the government entities I’ve ever covered. It has thrown me off. County Councilwoman Barbara Brenner called me at home this evening and during our chat about various topics she said this is how they’ve always done it. She is of the opinion that there have been 3-2 votes in the passed that “failed” because there wasn’t a four-vote majority.
Since there seems to be no legal challenge forthcoming, that appears to be how it will remain. The same goes for the Nelson appointment.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:45 PM
Greg, as Sam’s article notes, there appears to be a difference of opinion on how many votes were needed. But assuming that without Mr. Nelson’s vote there would still be an insufficient majority to approve any appointment, this amounts to a “harmless error” argument, While this technical defense is a persuasive argument in a court of law, it will not persuade public opinion that County government is just, ethical and beyond reproach. Moreover, it does not address the fact the there was a “prohibited act” under County Code when Mr. Nelson was provided with a special privilege.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:07 PM
Jurgen - you’re saying you have confidence in the county legal department?
The initial bad and lazy advice came from Karen Frakes the night of the meeting. She was asked about Ward’s conflict of interest and said he couldn’t vote on his own nomination but could on the others. Given his large conflict of interest in the success/failure of the other nominees, that was bad advice. It’s hard for a department to admit they messed up. Of course this department, with a long history of poor decisions, thinks there is no need for anyone else to take a look at it.
If they’re certain they’re right why not forward it to the AG’s office for a review? It costs nothing and is painless and fast.
It seems like anyone with an interest in good, transparent, ethical government would agree.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:07 PM
But, alas, in another week the precious public will have forgotten the whole matter. As they forgot the salary scam and so many other matters that have made this the place it’s become.
I know Ward, I know Dan. I know ‘em all. I do not know if the die hard Dan McShane crowd has thought through the potential outcomes should Ward be shoved aside.
And frankly, I am too calloused to believe all the hoopla is anything more than the McShane’s unable to overcome their denial.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:11 PM
The whole 3 votes v. 4 votes question is an interesting one. Once Ward was nominated and accepted (in violation of the county’s own ethics rules) fair process ended. It raises a question of intent: did Sam and Ward know that they were violating ethics rules?
January 6th, 2010 at 8:16 PM
Sam - there have been many times when there were just 5 councilmembers present and votes passed with 3 votes. Both Ward and Barbara have had extended absences from the council that meant that there were days with 5 members. It’s not unusual.
The question is, can an appointment be made with just 5 voting members present?
January 6th, 2010 at 8:32 PM
Suzie - i’ll try to look into this tomorrow.
If that’s the case, then it just doesn’t make sense what the legal interpretation is. If someone has any extra info, it’d really help this very busy reporter out. Believe it or not, this isn’t the only thing I’m working on right now.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:48 PM
I should note that I’ve now talked to people that have both told me 3-2 votes have failed and 3-2 votes have passed.
But nobody has shown many any such votes. I messaged the council office for help, but I hate to burden them with looking into this.
This is bugging me so much I’m scanning minutes right now. They only go back to 2001, however.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:56 PM
Annnnd by the by, if anyone does have info they’d like to share … please e-mail it. I’d rather keep the competition guessing.
January 6th, 2010 at 8:56 PM
Confident in the county legal dept? No SuzieQ, I’m not that foolish. Quite the opposite. Though I am O.K., or was initially with Ward, I have no problem with feet being toasted to get it right. It’s an interesting move. And thanks for filling us/me in on the rumors too. I would not be disappointed if Kremen cut his own throat as well, but isn’t Dewey his brain?
January 6th, 2010 at 8:57 PM
I’ve found one with a 3-2 that failed “for lack of Council majority.”
Check it out here: http://whatcomcounty.us/council/2004/minutes/council/c0518.pdf
I’ll update this post with any more I find.
*UPDATES BELOW*
Here’s another:
http://whatcomcounty.us/council/2004/minutes/council/c0615.pdf
Actually here’s one I find interesting … a lack of quorum, because only three people were there. Yet, they decided to go into an executive session, which is … well … illegal, isn’t it?
And with this, I’m done for the evening … because at 2002, it turns into Word documents and, frankly, I’m just not going to open them all up at 9:12 p.m. at night when I could be sitting here, well, not working. Not that I’m not a total geek that will still be on this computer. But it’ll probably be on Facebook, my personal e-mail, bunches of newssites, some blackjack and bunches of mixed martial arts blog updates.
So for now, I end this research. However, I think so far I’ve shown that the council has, indeed, had failed motions on 3-2 votes. I find it very odd, but clearly the interpretation by Watts is exactly how the council has done business for years. And, while many have said Brenner is forgetful, I’ve found that, lately, every time I chat with her, her memory is still remarkably accurate. And in this case, too, that hold strue.
http://whatcomcounty.us/council/2004/minutes/council/07202.pdf
January 6th, 2010 at 9:01 PM
Go Go Sam Taylor, Intrepid Sleuth and Champion of the Truth!
January 6th, 2010 at 9:39 PM
Yes go ST!
J - I thought you’d know how skilled our ‘Answer Me’ dept is.
And a) sometimes the dots connect and b) yes he is. Not sure why they’d think this was a good move.
January 6th, 2010 at 9:58 PM
Keep the competition guessing?
Been around alot longer than you!
Wendy, you’re right on.
January 6th, 2010 at 10:01 PM
Look at section 2.22 of the Charter…
Emphasis added.
The legal meaning of the word ENTIRE: That which is whole.
The ‘entire council’ is a council which is whole.
A council with a vacancy may not meet the legal definition of ‘entire’.
When there is a vacancy, any four-vote standard is at least a two-thirds majority.
one vacancy. Six members must have four votes. (Two thirds)
two vacancies. Five members must have four votes. (more than two-thirds majority)
three vacancies. Four members must have four votes. (a three-fourths majority is not enough, unanimous consent is required.)
The language regarding filling vacancies makes no mention of a two thirds majority. It is unlikely that the intent of the statutes or the charter was to make it as difficult as possible to fill a vacancy, nor to make it as easy as possible to experience a deadlock.
A council that doesn’t meet the legal standard of ‘entirety’ should not be held to the standard of an ‘entire’ council at a time when it is attempting to make itself whole again.
The language regarding council vacancies refers to majority votes and does not explicitly require two-thirds votes to fill a vacancy.
I submit that is because the intent was to allow a council a reasonable chance to make itself whole.
January 6th, 2010 at 10:11 PM
Interesting, Apex.
I’ll repeat: if Kremen is certain that they’re right then there’s nothing to fear in asking for an AG opinion. That way we’ll all know for sure.
It’s easy, it’s free, it provides certainty.
Not doing so just amplifies the concern.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:11 AM
Let the games begin! Welcome to the apocalypse:
New County Council may revisit growth area update
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/102/story/1233217.html
January 7th, 2010 at 6:57 AM
The games began before Ward’s appointment. Crawford’s rather arrogant e-mail to council and staff is on Latte:
http://whatcomforum.blogspot.com/2010/01/sam-crawfords-proposal-to-council-and.html
January 7th, 2010 at 6:59 AM
It will be interesting to see if Crawford, Nelson, Knutzen and Kershner, who all ran campaigns promising fiscal responsiblity and transparency, will even bother to look at the taxpayer costs of Crawford’s proposal.
Let the wild spending begin!
January 7th, 2010 at 7:02 AM
Suzy Q,
But there is something to fear… the AG’s Office may not agree with Randy Watts legal opinion.
Pete will do everything within his power to quash this.
January 7th, 2010 at 7:17 AM
GK,
I know that you will never believe this - but the questions regarding Ward’s appointment have nothing to do with the McShanes.
The questions most of us are raising are about process, the appearance of a conflict of interest, a nomination that took place after the application submission deadline had passed, (Crawford and Nelson used Ward’s position as a sitting council member to claim exemption from the established application process), and a reliance on well-established case law regarding the appointment of a sitting elected official to office.
I think it would be safe to assume that the majority of the commenters on this thread are very aware that the new council or Pete, will appoint another conservative to replace Ward. No one expects that Dan McShane is in the running for this position.
But what do democrats and moderates have to lose? There isn’t a single nominee (on the conservative side) that will be more conservative than Ward Nelson!
It’s fairly obvious to casual observers that the fight over growth management and the protection of water resources, (including drinking water) will take place in court.
The new conservative council has very little respect for state and federal law. If nothing else, this will be a very entertaining (but horribly expensive) year!
The short lived era of “fiscal responsibility” ends on January 11th.
January 7th, 2010 at 8:04 AM
Suzie, my confidence is lacking in a general way. I know Randy personally and find him to be a good lawyer with a lot of integrity, one of only two in the office who come to mind in that regard. That said we all are wrong now and then.
Also I would never underestimate Kremen’s ego and he may just be going ahead without the strongest of opinions and just forcing those who oppose the decision to ante up.
This whole thing is looking more and more botched and suspicious all the time.
The real weak link in the Prosecutor’s office is the prosecutor himself. Why there has never been a real concerted effort to oust his less than intellectual derriere can only be explained by the fact that a lot of criminal and other lawyers make a pretty good living kicking prosecutorial keisters.
January 7th, 2010 at 8:09 AM
At what point does Kremen have to so overstep his authority or disrespect the public enough that there would be a serious look at recalling him? Why do Democrats embrace this empty suit? What has he ever done for the Democrats? I mean really!
January 7th, 2010 at 8:14 AM
Elisabeth,
I know that you will never believe this either, but other than an effort on my part to see an independent/moderate alternative, Dan McShane was next to the top of my short list.
However, it gave me no heartburn when Ward was selected. In fact, Barbara had mentioned it earlier and, though I didn’t think Ward wanted to stay on the council, it seemed, and still seems, alright.
Some have forgotten his leading effort to protect Squalicum Mtn and the lake during the Vineyard push. And though he is unduly influenced by his brother’s pals, he will listen to argument to conserve resources, like forests and lakes and maybe even groundwater, if shown the connections.
And I purposely choose the word “conserve.” I wish others would desist from referring to those who would thoughtlessly exploit our resources as “conservatives.” We have had this discussion before, and agreed that real conservatives take a much longer view.
If I were to characterize those of that political ilk, I would call them “regressives”, as opposed to the other extreme who think they are progressive. Somewhere in between let’s hope there are some moderate, independent, non-partisans who might objectively find the balance we must strike.
I actually think Ward could be pushed in that direction. And so I will not agree that there is nothing to lose, and all this posturing might not reward us with someone far more “regressive”.
But if you really think you need someone to prompt the AG for an opinion, I might know just the guy.
But be careful what you wish for!
January 7th, 2010 at 8:48 AM
Elisabeth - you really think there is no more conservative person that Councilman Nelson in the applicant pool? Have you seen all the applications I posted?
January 7th, 2010 at 8:55 AM
Sam I tried to open the memo but a message said Adobe could not read it because it had been damaged and/or then something about it being sent as part of an e-mail that makes it unsupported. Anyone else having this problem?
January 7th, 2010 at 9:03 AM
Hmm, Jurgen, it’s a word document, can you try opening it with that instead? In order to get it, right click on it and save it to your computer, first. Tell me if that works.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:03 AM
All’s I’s hear is a popping, sputtering and a coughing kinda likes when a machine runs out of gas!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
January 7th, 2010 at 9:05 AM
Also, I’m working from home today and my home laptop opens it just fine.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:18 AM
I am the farthest thing from a computer geek, which amuses my computer programming geek sons to no end. Try as the might they haven’t been able to teach Dad all that much. The new months old computer one of them had Dell build for me is supposedly as high tech and user friendly as they come, but I can still find numerous ways to frustrate myself. I’ll try what you said. I suppose it’s too hard to just put it up here, especially since I am the only one apparently having this problem. Can it be read by just going to another site at the county?
January 7th, 2010 at 9:23 AM
I think that Elisabeth is right, the McShane’s have nothing to do with this. This is very clearly about Ward Nelson and Sam Crawford violating both ethics and common sense by stonewalling other nominees and then Pete Kremen enabling them by appointing the one candidate who had committed ethical violations to make it to the top of the list.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Still something about it not being a supported file and/or sent as part of an e-mail that was not decoded correctly. I guess I’ll wait for the paperback. I think you have summarized good enough.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:34 AM
Jurgen - unfortunately this is the only format I have it in, which is how it was sent to me from the county executive’s office. There is no other place to see it, as they sent it to me via e-mail.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:37 AM
Hey Sam,
I’ve lived in this county as a child and most of my adult life. I have known Ward and his brothers for a very long time. I remember meeting his children when they were small. I have also met and worked with many of the other conservative candidates who applied fot the vacancy for almost two decades. As I have stated before. I like Ward and I like many of the other candidates. After all, I have worked with many conservatives during my adult life.
Yes. I stand by my statement. Ward’s political ideology and voting record is conservative, and he is no less conservative in my opinion than any of the other nominees. In fact, one or two may be more moderate.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:39 AM
There has been nothing unethical and thus illegal done here and every legal opinion down the line will support that.
If the tables was turned and Dan McShane was incumbent and this had played out in his favor, in the same way, not one of you would be complaining and every one of you know it, even if you won’t admit it!
Now of course you all would never expect any complaints from the other party nor the likes of me, if that was the case, would you, Naw!
I reckon that makes us all a bunch of hypocrites but isn’t that the nature of politics, you win you gloat, you lose you whine, you know something, I’s like gloating a lot better.
But the fact is after all the whinning, gloating, sore losering, the outcome would be the same, nothing unethical or illegal has transpired, really!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
January 7th, 2010 at 9:44 AM
Thanks for the addition, Elisabeth. You obviously have experience working with Ward and know his positions. I was just caught off guard, considering Kris Halterman from the Bellingham Tea Party applied for the position.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:46 AM
Well, AFY, if you are SO convinced that everything is legal and legit, why is Kremen refusing to get an official third party opinion? I’m sure we would all settle down if the AG would take a look at this. The REPUBLICAN AG, I might remind you. But Pete is refusing to even do that.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:57 AM
Hi Jurgen,
An anonymous commenter on Latte said an exploratory committee is being formed to take a look at a recall election. Not sure who they are looking at.
January 7th, 2010 at 10:01 AM
Would we all settle down Riley. I don’t know…
Interesting Elisabeth. Thanks for the info. Who else would it be?
January 7th, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Well RS me friend, methinks our elected officials should not be at the beck and call of any political party and it is good when the elected officials think that too, oh, on the recall, It is my belief (enough so to even wager on, always on the hunt for more beer money you know!) that the electorate will definitely agree with that: the goodness of the elected official not bowing to the political hacks that run political parties, that is!
Having been a part of a past recall (which made the ballot), I for one understand how they can be complete failures and when they failed how those who are a part of that failure get the reputation (I’s already had a bad reputation so I’s won’t impacted) they deserved out of it! I’s bet (another wager?) you won’t find ole Ken jumping on that band wagon, he has higher aspirations for sure!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
January 7th, 2010 at 10:44 AM
If it is filled, does Ward collect two pay checks for the overlap time?
If there is an emergency Council meeting Friday, does Ward vote twice?
If not, it appears then the position is still vacant and the County Executive has abandoned his duty. Looks like it is back to Seth Fleetwood as County Council chair to fix it ASAP.
January 7th, 2010 at 10:50 AM
Are you kidding? You MIGHT just know the guy?
I can appreciate your perceiving this as mere political theater.
However, if you know someone who has the ability and willingness to obtain an AGO on the matter, then by all means say so.
Mr, Kirsch, your decision to be coy about this seems cruel to me.
“Well, if you folks floundering out there in open water really want someone to throw you a life jacket, then I might know a guy who could do that.”
“Really? Well, that would be peachy keen. We would love to take time from our drowning to compose an engraved invitation to you so that you could properly RSVP us on the generous offer to assist us. However, our writing hand happens to be treading water, and our non-writing hand, in addition to being incapable of rendering proper cursive penmanship, is employed treading water also. We are sorry that our verbal cries of ‘help, help, we’re drowning, someone please help’ are not exactly according to Emily Post, or are even proper grammar. You would be a prince among men if you could interrupt your very busy schedule of passively watching us drown and go find this mysterious supplier of life jackets. Pretty please, with sugar on top, go find that guy.”
January 7th, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Not that I have any insight into the metric,
but how on Earth is one ‘more Conservative’ than another?
January 7th, 2010 at 11:06 AM
Hey, pretty funny stuff there. Am still laughing. Good luck.
January 7th, 2010 at 11:07 AM
Could it go back to the council or did they punt to the exec?
Could Kremen withdraw the appointment and stall enough waiting for an AG opinion to let the next council appoint?
Tim, are you saying Kremen has abandoned from a legal sense or is that a rhetorical statement?
I think it’s good you and others are holding feet to the flames.
January 7th, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Hey all, even if Pete has standing to request an AG opinion (doubtful) and even if someone with standing were to, do you actually think the opinion would be forthcoming before next November’s election?
January 7th, 2010 at 11:32 AM
AFY…
Normally, I’d be snarking it up with you and we would be putting on a show for the bloggers that they could tell their grandchildren about.
But I’m not up for that today.
My name is Shane Roth, and I swear on my mothers life that I would not be okay with this if Dan McShane or anyone else was doing this. And I would be complaining about this just as loudly.
When I was living in Las Vegas, the county commissioner I voted for (a Democrat) was one of four county commissioners who went to prison for political corruption. The corruption scandal affected Democrats and Republicans.
Bad ethics are a cancer. Once they enter a government body, no politician from any political party is safe.
January 7th, 2010 at 11:58 AM
Well Apexman my friend swearing on one’s mother life is a very serious proposition I’s hope she is as settle with that as you seem to be!
So there may be one non hyprocrite in town, my hats off to you, young man!
But for the record me friend, what this is, when those who cry foul when there is no foul, is to me just as dangerous as those who cry fire when there is no fire or cry wolf when there is no wolf, THERE IS NO ETHICS VIOLATION, and all the crying and sour grapes you can make or eat will not change that very fact! Therefore these unfounded accusations are doing harm when there truly is ethics being violated that will need addressing, what you are doing is a disservice to true justice, but it is within your rights as a citzen for sure IMHO!
Being irresponsible has long been a mainstay of politics and it don’t matter how many oaths one takes!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
January 7th, 2010 at 1:06 PM
Shane, I mean Apexnerd, that explains a little to me about you. Thanks for sharing. I’ve been to Vegas, I still go to Vegas, I have a financial interest in Vegas and I can tell you, Bellingham is not even remotely close to Vegas on any imaginable scale. ( Except they’re only two hours away on Allegiant, not counting the 4 hours of security.) Vegas has great restaurants. Vegas has great entertainment and venues. ;0 Vegas also has every seriously corrupt mf-ger, (short for manufacturer)and ethically challenged miscreant in the country at some point or other. Vegas is a microcosm of the U.S. and supported by the collective income of every trailer park in America, but especially below the Mason Dixon line. It is also the playground of the extremely rich and jaded. ;(
In all good humor and with all due respect, I’m going to make a diagnosis here and offer some unsolicited psychological analysis. You suffer a form of CivicPTSD if you participated in politics in Vegas. You’re also one brave manufacturer. I may be too cheery and naive seeming, but I think we are far from Vegas and a lot of people are going to be laying themselves in front of semis on I-5 before Vegas would be allowed to settle here. But here’s to your vigilance my friend, if I may call you that.
;)
January 7th, 2010 at 1:06 PM
I guess doubles don’t work.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:13 PM
I’ve been meaning to turn the smileys thing off, but every time I see someone get caught by it, including me, I laugh and keep it going.
January 7th, 2010 at 2:19 PM
See, now, THIS confirms that I made the right choice when I moved to Whatcom County.
People care here.
I mentioned the political scandal from Las Vegas, and I’m assured by Jurgen that Whatcom County is quite far from that.
But I bear with me for a moment on this.
Before the news broke on that scandal (Google ‘G Sting’ for details) Las Vegas citizens convinced themselves that Vegas wasn’t the “Sin City” that was portrayed in movies and television and the like.
It was considered an unfair and inaccurate exaggeration. I was one of those citizens who subscribed to this belief.
And the Las Vegas visitors authority that advertised Vegas nationally was trying to portray Vegas as family friendly and just another american city that is also a good vacation spot.
Las Vegas spent almost the entire time I lived there trying to shake the “Sin City” reputation. Over two decades.
Then news of the G-sting scandal broke.
After G-Sting, the las vegas visitors authority started a new ad campaign.
“What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”
Perhaps you’ve heard of it.
After G-Sting, any pretense to shaking off the “Sin City” reputation of Las Vegas was futile. So it was embraced.
Jurgen is correct. Vegas is a microcosm of America.
In the 24 years I lived in Vegas, I visited some very nice places. San Diego and San Jose in California. Phoenix, Arizona. Salt Lake City, Utah. Atlanta, Georgia. Denver, Colorado. Seattle, Washington. Just to name a few.
All of these places have something great about them, but no matter where I went I could never honestly say “I’d rather live here than in Las Vegas.”
Then I visited Whatcom County.
Whatcom County has slowly revealed to me that it possesses real political integrity that is hard to find anywhere else in the nation. Those of you who have lived here a long time may be able to take that for granted, but I can’t.
January 7th, 2010 at 2:36 PM
After having lived briefly in Chicago and San Francisco, I can attest that we are, indeed, very lucky to be living here in the Great Pacific Northwest.
In fact, the history of corruption in city and county governments elsewhere is so extensively documented that one is tempted to conclude that all governments exist to enforce the systematic exploitation of the people by the ruthless few who are differentially favored.
However, after having lived most of my life in Bellingham, such as assertion seems obviously overstated, even when thinking of certain construction contractors, gravel pit operators, and real estate developers.
January 7th, 2010 at 2:45 PM
Vegas is a fantasy playground, but that playground beyond the ever widening strip is peopled by a whole lot of workers who make up the bulk of the surrounding city and then of course those who feed off of them. To Many who live there the strip is just the distant skyline area you try to avoid at rush hour, except that they go to work there or in support of there. It’s like a big company town, well it is an industry town, and has a good rumor mill too. There as in all of America, it’s the big money calling the shots and the rest of the city and country are far too woven with them for my tastes, but same as it ever was….
I’ve got a house for sale if to want to go back there, but unfortunately you could do better than what I want. So I’m waiting for the turn around of the American dream.
I can honestly say there are few places though, that I would not rather live than Vegas–but I like jetting there for dinner and shows and people watching.
And to sit by the pond at the Wynne and watch the giant frog sing is one of life’s silly pleasures
January 7th, 2010 at 2:47 PM
Oh, that it were so. But when you’ve been here awhile you’ll learn restoring “real political integrity” remains a formidable task. Your reaction to my skepticism/cynicism, or what you describe as my viewing these matters more as “political theater”, will change.
I wish this was not the case, but after all the gaming of the planning process, decades long subdividing based on the over appropriation of both surface and groundwater, little sweetheart deals with developers, that great salary scam last year, etc etc. I’m sorry if I can’t join you in that swoon.
And by the way, on that AGO thing. I rolled that ball long before my poke at Elisabeth. If you must know, she and I talk. So remember, moderation in all things, even enthusiasm.
January 7th, 2010 at 2:49 PM
Upon further reflection, I should say that my last comment was inappropriate. It was wrong of me to cast aspersions on the basis on innuendo, rumors, or the appearance of inpropriety, without any solid evidence whatsoever. I request that my comment be stricken from the record.
January 7th, 2010 at 3:29 PM
Sorry Todd, but this is going over my head….which comment?
January 7th, 2010 at 3:34 PM
Sorry Todd, but this is going over my head….which comment?
Also, Greg, can you describe to me what you mean when you say a sweetheart deal? Maybe one you know of in great detail, names omitted of course, that is not of general rumor knowledge.
People toss sweetheart deal around a lot.
January 7th, 2010 at 4:15 PM
Jurgen,
But if I went into great detail, what good would omitting the names accomplish? Always thought a short history of all the land transactions on Squalicum Mtn, and zoning decisions, along with campaign contribution records, would be an interesting read for the public. That would be a start.
January 7th, 2010 at 6:08 PM
Jurgen,
It may not be that big of a deal, but my comment above could be construed as suggesting a corrupt relationship between local government and “certain construction contractors, gravel pit operators, and real estate developers,” which is unsubstantiated, being only based on hearsay. Therefore, I thought it inappropriate.
January 7th, 2010 at 6:54 PM
If I were compiling a list of most nearly corrupt in the county I would have to ad the same disclaimer, but my list would be topped by gravel operators. They are like rogue ranchers and cowboys. A good chunk of lower BC is built with/on Whatcom county gravel. They get nice condos and we get mosquito ponds and contaminated ground water. Some trade.
Greg, I think of a sweetheart deal as something more corrupt than what someone is willing to post in the public’s view. If you can’t do it without names and vague generic, innuendo way,well then, it was just a curio.
January 7th, 2010 at 7:23 PM
Hey, Greg,
Again, it’s not about personalities or pre-concieved political outcomes. Part of the problem of being politically active in Whatcom County is that you have to be on one side or the other!
Those in the middle are called windsocks or worse. They are not trusted, respected nor do they often choose to particpate in local party politics.
But they do have a vision of what they would like the future to look like for their children and their grandchildren.
At least I know that my great grandfather had hopes and dreams for my brothers and I. And, fortunately he took the time to share his appreciation for Whatcom County with us before he died.
I would like to “conserve” a part of our county’s rural history for my grandchildren. That is, if they are lucky enough to ever live here!
I would hope that conservatives and progressives alike share that dream. After all, all of us call this beautiful place home.
January 7th, 2010 at 7:48 PM
If being politically active in Whatcom County means being on one side or the other (and I think we both can agree on the characterization of the sides) well then, my dear, I guess that means no one can accuse me of being politically active.
January 8th, 2010 at 8:22 AM
“I would hope that conservatives and progressives alike share that dream. After all, all of us call this beautiful place home.”
Madam E, me too, but for some reason methinks people don’t listen to each other when they are trying to see who can yell the loudest!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
January 8th, 2010 at 8:50 AM
FYI - libertarians also share that dream.