These words get tossed around quite a bit lately, but what do they really mean? Does it mean that government should open the doors to everything they do? No. But it does mean that they shouldn't be afraid to let us know what they are doing. As a general rule if they are afraid to let the people know what they are doing then they should not be doing it.
There have been a few things that I have heard our local government officals say that make me a little worried about what is going on. Here is an example:
If you really want to stop government let people know what's going on.
While this was said in jest it is a symptom of a larger problem. All to often our elected officials feel that they know what is best for us and they are hesitant to allow us to have open access. At times it seems like the people are being treated like children who need to have things taken care of for them by the government (thus the term nanny state). This is a ridiculous position that will lead to elected officials seeking their own gain and catering to special interests. While this is blatently apparant on a national level with the current healthcare legislation and the rides on Air Force One, the special designations for hospitals in Pennsylvania, the Louisiana purchase and the Nebraska buy off, this is also a local issue.
Now it is true that Councilmember Cattin does not fly people around in his plane to get votes, there are some councilmembers who use their positions for political gain. Much of what the council does is designed to increase their political power and to gain favor with any number of special interests.
It is time for us to not only expect the council to be open about what they want to do and what their motives are but we expect them to be accountable to the people. They should be held to a higher standard and if they are uncomfortable with this standard then we have an obligation to make the appropriate changes. As the old saying goes: if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteYou state that "there are some councilmembers who use their positions for political gain." Care to cite specific cases? Also, what exactly is it that they do to "increase their political power and to gain favor with any number of special interests? Which "special interests"? Again, be specific and name names if you have proof. It's easy to make unsubstantiate statements, but can you back up what you state with hard facts?
As the old saying goes: put up or shut up.
JP
JP,
ReplyDeleteBefore I address you comment I am going to take two quotes from your recent postings:
"I will decline to name the Council member who is widely known (not just my opinion) to be marginalized by his/her colleagues for pushing an agenda based on his/her political ideology too hard."
"With the recent exception of Rob Millard (revealing himself as Thomas Paine) I have refrained from naming names in any of my past posts."
I admire your attempt but if you expect me to play along with you then you will play by my rules on my blog.
I can easily substantiate my points made in my posts. Perhaps we can make a deal. You answer the questions that have been posed to you and I will answer yours.
Fair enough?
Balls in your court. As the old saying goes: Put up or shut up.
I’m glad to see Thomas is still keeping us all on track. He’s right: the issue at hand is open and accountable government and whether or not our city officials are answering to the people who elected them. I’m afraid it looks like cover ups and hidden agendas run rampant on this city council. And anyone here who excuses this behavior is condoning a break-down of democracy. When we tolerate this at a local level, we can certainly expect it at higher levels of government. Someone said here that they can’t understand how the Economic Development Committee has morphed into a Sustainability Committee. It happened behind closed doors, minus any consensus from the public. What was the input from the business community? We, the public, did not even know this change was underfoot until it was implemented. So, before you know it, you will no longer have the right to “tread” on Mother Earth – stop mowing your lawns or plucking weeds and don’t even think about washing your car in the driveway.
ReplyDeletejp,
ReplyDeleteYou are a walking, talking, living double standard.
I like the questions you ask but the way you asked it calls you credibility into question. maybe you can find a better way to ask it.
Barry
Rob,
ReplyDeleteLet me quote from the responses you made to my post you are referring to: "JP, Thank you for the change in tenor of your posts." then later you wrote, "Just to be clear I appreciate that there were no personal attacks in your post." I also went on to make an effort to respond to both Don' and Barry's criticism of very the post you twice approved of.
So, why don't you be clear about what questions I'm expected to answer to to satisfy your "deal." At this point the only thing apparent about playing "by my rules on my blog" is they you entitle yourself to smear the integrity of the entire Council without providing any evidence to back it up.
JP
JP,
ReplyDeletethe part you did not quote came in the next sentence. "this is the only thing you should assume". I didn't say I agree with your posts or your points I was just happy you were not attacking people.
I have reviewed all the post for you and have compiled the list of questions that have been asked of you. Some include a sentence before the question to remind you of the context. They are:
"Care to elaborate on whom you believe is pushing their own agenda a little too hard in city council?"
"You want to make a stand to point out a council member but you don't want to call them out on it. Are you worried about getting a future endorsement?"
"Have you ever ran for office?"
"I suppose I am uncomfortable because you tout yourself as so in the know but you are afraid to answer any questions. Why?"
Well have fun. I look forward to your straight forward answers.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteThose are easy questions. My answers, in order, are: Councilmember Edwards...no...no.
Here are my questions for you:
Which individual councilmembers "use their positions for political gain"? What is the political gain to each? How does each use his or her position to do so?
What exactly is it that they do "to increase their political power and to gain favor with any number of special interests"? Which particular "special interests"? (I'm curious to see how long a list you will come up with to account for "any number".)
I imagine that your thinking readers will be interested to see how you choose to respond. I was not "afraid to answer (your) questions"; now, are you afraid to answer mine?
JP
As an elected official, I am baffled by the generalization that locally elected officials make decisions “increase their political power and to gain favor with any number of special interests.” I know you are referring to the City Council specifically but, there are other local elected officials who make many similar decisions that increase taxes and fees, pass policies and regulations and generally affect citizen’s lives and property by their decisions. They make those decisions with similar pressure from various sectors of the community. In many cases, the members of those sectors only appear before the elected legislative bodies to lobby when it affects them.
ReplyDeleteMany legislative bodies in the community hold their public meetings without members of the public present. I have always been baffled with that. That means one of two things, the public does not care about what that elected body does or they have confidence in their elected officials to properly represent their interest. Members of the elected body that I sit on generally have no opposition when they are up for re-election. That also says that the community respects what they are doing or are indifferent to the activities of the local agency. In the last election for City Council, Gary Gill, Gerard Cattin and Will Ibershof ran unopposed. It we are out to “increase [our] political power and gain favor with a number of special interests,” why did they not have opposition?
What were the special interests the Council was courting when, at a recent workshop, told a developer that they would have to comply with the developer standards and put in the required commercial space rather than the additional homes that they want to put in? What were the special interests that where being courted when they raised the park and transportation impact fees last year? How did the Council increase its political power when it decided the above? Their power is derived from the State through the State Constitution and Laws. As RCW 35A.11.050, Statement of purpose and policy states,
“The general grant of municipal power conferred by this chapter and this title on legislative bodies of non-charter code cities and charter code cities is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government consistent with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities. Specific mention of a particular municipal power or authority contained in this title or in the general law shall be construed as in addition and supplementary to or explanatory of the powers conferred in general terms by this chapter.”
With this restriction, how can the City Council members increase their individual or collective power?
Louis
JP,
ReplyDeleteYou missed the last question. Oh and thanks for changing positions on naming names.
Louis,
ReplyDeleteI think the reason people do not attend meetings as often is because they need to be better informed about what is happening in the community. A great example of this is the recent sustainability proposal. When the idea became public knowledge the public was excited to engage in the discussion. Thus the amount of public comment at the last council meeting.
I firmly believe that the reason these council members did not have challengers is the public was not properly informed. In fact Council member Cattin was quite surprised that he was not challenged in the last election.
The council increased their power over development by increasing the impact fees. They are now in a better position to decide who they want to allow to build in the city. For developments that they are in favor of they can lower the impact fees, as has been discussed with the new Duvall Village development. If there is a development they are not in favor of they will not discuss or offer these same reductions. Let's not fool ourselves, money is a gigantic motivator and the ability to change how much developers pay is a huge power.
The council members are able to increase their political power and influence in several ways. The committees they are assigned to, the committees they chair, the recommendations they make from their committees, the people they recommend and support for city appointments, the pressure they attempt to apply to the media, the lack of accountability to the citizens and so on.
As an elected official (in whatever capacity you have) you will have undoubtedly seen this type of behavior from other elected officials. While state law specifically lays out the limits to municipal government's power it seems to be silent on many of the opportunities that local officials have to use their position for personal or political gain. It is disappointing that this happens, but it is all to often the reality.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteTo put my following comments in better perspective, I am one of the elected representatives for an agency that is larger than the City of Duvall, includes the City of Duvall and the execution of its mission directly impacts every citizen’s life and property. I have also held elected office in another local agency that meets the same criteria as my current position. I know full well that if the comments that appear in this blog were directed towards the elected body of our agency, the staff would be very upset because they would feel that it is a reflection on them. I can only image what City staff thinks when you represent that their leaders are out for personal gain and power.
My agency communicates with the public by doing their job. The public knows their elected representatives are doing their job because the agency is doing its job. They do not need to get involved because of that fact. They are informed by the actions of the employees. Your “PROPS” post showed that you believe that the City staff is doing a good to outstanding job. So, why do we have to paint their leaders in a negative light? Are their actions so egregious that in reality the City is not carrying out its mission?
You are correct, when you say that council members increase their influence by the committees they are assigned to, etc. But, Rob, they also have influence when they are Mayor Pro Tem or have a personality that gains their fellow council members respect. But, this influence is limited to the council itself. They can influence the direction of the City, I will give you that but, that is all they can do. Is this bad? Are they more influential if they sit quietly and say nothing at the Council meeting? Are you not attempting, as the leader of this blog and a reporter, to influence the minds, ideas, concepts and philosophies of the citizens of Duvall? Your pseudonym and his fellow founders knew well that the ideas and how the message was communicated was what influenced the minds and actions of the common citizen. That is why the Declaration and Constitution are written the way they are. They are simple and elegant, while subject to numerous interpretations by any ideological persuasion. That is why we have the Amendments, the United State Code and the whole body of Supreme Court decisions.
Would it not be better to talk about what kind of community Duvall and the surrounding area should be? What is the level of service that should be provided, how and by whom? How can the governing know where they should stay out of people’s lives when we are only hearing the negative side of the conversation? Carolyn said it well; let’s take the conversation to the next level. Providing a safe environment is more than a police department. It is clean drinkable water, bodily and human waste removal, building regulations so that we don’t have construction like in Haiti or China, a good education system so that our children and grandchildren get an education to be competitive in the job market, etc. All these things cost money. How much are the citizens willing to pay for all of this? That is the most important question that local elected officials have to deal with. My challenge to you is how can you positively influence the conversation and generate the ideas necessary to answer those questions?
Louis
Louis,
ReplyDeleteI just call them as I see them. When I see the council act in a way that I see as a violation of the law (DMC) then yes it is egregious.
It is bad if the council uses their position for personal or political gain. I think they are more influential if they act with integrity, honesty, and openness. This is the way they get respect of the citizens.
I am attempting to get people to be informed and involved. I want to open their minds and get them to take a more active roll in what their government does.
As far as my philisophical position on the government, they should stay out of our lives as much as possible. They should provide the basics that we are unable to provide for ourselves, namely roads, police, fire etc, and leave the rest to the citizens. Ialreadt have parents and I do not need the government to be my nanny.
My goal is to bring out the information. As it was so clearly pointed out in the many personal attacks made on this blog, I do not live in the city and it is not possible for me to run for city council. It is their job (the city council) to answer the questions and to guide us in the right way. It is our job as citizens to let them know when they overstep their bounds and when they are infringing on our rights.
On a side note, the founding documents of our country especially the constitution are essentially a list of what the government can not do. This is the vital truth the founders understood and why they wrote them so plainly.
Thomas, still waiting for you to "put up" your answers to JP's questions. All that is being asked is that you be accountable for your accusations against our Council members. Julie B.
ReplyDeletejulie,
ReplyDeleteas soon as jp answers all the questions as agreed to then I will explain my reasons for saying what I did.
Jp,
ReplyDeleteI will post your comments when you actually answer the question posed to you on March 11th. It has been 8 days and you have yet to answer the question. Taking 8 days to answer a question and then only after being publicly called out at least 4 times shows that you are actually afraid to answer the questions. I particularly appreciate that you once again went for the personal attacks to make your point.
I await your explanation.
In the future any personal attacks can be sent to my email goneright.live.com
This blog has become silly. Rob, your double standard under "Thomas" was more careful, under your own name - egregious.
ReplyDeleteI am an educated and involved individual. This blog offends people's intelligence. I will no longer follow it and have lost the respect I had for you.
OK. I hope you are able to find what you are looking for.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this blog relies on a ridiculous double-standard to try to influence its followers. Who is this Rob guy? He can't even answer straight forward questions! Julie B.
ReplyDeleteJulie,
ReplyDeleteI will gladly spend some time talking and answering any questions you have about me and what I stand for. Please email me and I will answer any questions you have via email, phone or in person. Which ever you are most comfortable with.
My email is goneright@live.com
Thanks
Rob,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you inviting me to have a conversation "off line"? Isn't your blog for the express purpose of answering questions and exchanging ideas in a forum open to the view of all interested parties? Isn't that the point of any blog?
Your responses to Louis don't make much sense to me, and you refuse to support your accusations against our Council members with facts. Apparently you censor comments you don't like.
Why would I want to deal more directly with you? Julie B.
Julie,
ReplyDeleteI am sure that not everyone wants to know all about my personal life. What would you like to know about me?
Louis,
ReplyDeleteDon't assume I think you are doing a good job because I don't show up to your meetings. As a citizen, I'll tell you that the reason I don't show is because I don't know how you impact me. Start raising my taxes or limiting my freedom and I'll start showing up to your meetings.
Julie,
I don't know which councilmember thomas is refering to, but I'll give you my answer. Councilmember Walker is using her position for political gain. This sustainable development program Councilmember Walker is attempting to sneak through is entirely to win favor with the environmentalists. The citizens of Duvall are not depleting our natural resources, we don't need our freedom restricted just so Councilmember Walker can add "successful implementation of a sustainable development program in a rural area" to her resume. And will someone please explain to me what Councilmember Walker meant by "my new skills are available at a reasonable cost." She's not just using this for political gain, she wants to profit from it too.
And one last thing, JP, Councilmember Edwards isn't a far-right ideologue for wanting to keep taxes low. The rest of the councilmembers are far left ideologues for wanting to control the lives of citizens through their environmental policies.
Debbie
Such bantering is a waste of time. Can we have a discussion about making Duvall more service friendly, beautiful, green, and well suited for the diverse community living here? Let's ask ourselves "Are we functioning at the greatest good for the greatest number?" City Council is non-partisan, so please put politics aside and let's hold hands and step into the future together.
ReplyDeleteIn peace,
PC
PC,
ReplyDeleteUnitarianism?
fred
Debbie,
ReplyDeleteTwo years ago, the entity I represent went to the voters and asked for a $0.33 per thousand property tax increase. 67% of the voters who voted approved the increase. Where you one of the yes votes? If not, then see you at our next meeting on April 14th.
Rob
Let’s get back on topic; it is about accountability not name calling. Apparently humor is not understood by the media or the members of this blog because an elected official in the State of Washington is prohibited by the legislated code of ethics from personally profiting or benefiting from a contract with the agency they represent. Councilmember Walker knows that fact as it was one of the first things that she learned when she took office. That statement by Councilmember Walker was made in jest and to see what your actions would be since you were at the meeting where that statement was made. Please lighten up folks. Life is too short to take everything so seriously. Every elected official is not out for power and control of the people. Many want to make sure that the agency they represent does what the MAJORITY of the people want within the confines of what they are willing to pay for the services they request from the government. If you are not in the majority, then you need to get there by influencing those who disagree with you like our founding fathers did – with workable ideas and according to Thomas Paine, “Common Sense.” Like I said in an earlier post, there are many citizens who want services from the government, deciding which ones to provide and determining what the citizens are willing to pay is the primary role of the local elected official. You can get what you want by convincing the majority of the people to inform the elected officials of their concerns in specific terms, not through criticism, ridicule or misrepresentation. The majority elected the representatives, and for the period of their terms, that is who we have to work with.
Accountability is also a two way street. All of us who post on this blog are accountable for our words. There is nothing wrong with having a civil discussion of the issues instead of trying to prove who is right and who is wrong. Everyone has a right to their opinion whether we agree with them or not. There is nothing wrong with disagreement, what is wrong is the concept that one’s ideas are better than another’s and if someone does not share those ideas their comments are not worthy of consideration. One also has to be careful to not “ass u me” something as I pointed out in the above paragraph, especially about violations of law because it can become embarrassing when the facts are revealed.
Louis
Louis,
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right that when the facts are revealed it can be very embarrassing. Were you aware that Council member Walker has bid for city funded jobs before? There was a contract for work at the Doughertry House and a citizens was bidding on it and Council member Walker was as well. When this citizen made a formal complaint to the city pointing out the conflict of interest Council member Walker pulled her bid and dropped out of the process.
Perhaps now you can see the reason why many people questioned her so seriously about her "joke." In a letter to the River Current News she stated that it would be illegal for her to do get a contract from the city. Yet this is exactly what she tried to do.
So Louis this is one of the reasons I do not automatically trust the council members.
As you pointed out we were both at the meeting and it was obvious that there are agendas and political positioning going on. If you recall even the city attorney pointed this out.
In my opinion her comments were not a joke. Listen to the tape again and you will hear the exchange. She went from her services being available at a "reasonable cost" to "nearly free" to weeks later saying they would be free because it would be illegal for her to bid for city jobs. I would have thought it more of a joke had she not had a past of doing the exact thing she claimed is illegal.
Right on, Julie! Great comments!
ReplyDeleteOne thing, however, the council HAS been raising taxes for awhile now...for example, did you notice an increase in garbage fees? Edwards voted not to raise the fee, by the way. Good common sense. And some sustainability is a good thing - of course we should be conscious of the environment. But taking it as far as Walker wants is extreme.
It is time for people to attend council meetings. Taxes ARE being raised and any time government wants to take more of our hard-earned money, you can bet they have a reason, AKA an agenda. It is not always just "keeping up with inflation."
Some people seem bent on short-circuiting an honest discussion of the issues and track records of council members. From some of their comments above we can all hope that they have finally decided to take their mindless mischief elsewhere.
Does anyone remember the issue at hand? Open and accountable government. Let's get back to a constructive discussion.
Louis,
ReplyDeleteYou must be an elected official of the fire dept (which leads me to believe that your name is not Louis). Congratulations you are a member of one of the few public entities worthy of increasing taxes. Yes, I do think the fire district is doing a good job but I credit Chief Lambert for that. I will also vote "yes" on a police levy too (thank you Chief Merryman). However, the rest of the city needs to do a better job of proving value, and sneaking through a sustainability program is NOT the way to do it.
Thomas, is a sustainability discussion on the agenda for the next meeting? If so, my neighbors and I will be there.
Debbie
Anonymous, what about an accountable blog?
ReplyDeleteDebbie,
ReplyDeleteIt is not currently on the agenda but as we saw with last council meeting the agenda can be changed as the meeting is underway. Please show up anyway and see what happens.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteI wasn't inquiring about your "personal life." I just wanted to read your answers to JP's legitimate questions, as you agreed to do. You chose instead to duck your commitment. Julie B.
Julie,
ReplyDeleteOne major example is listed in a comment I made this morning to Louis. If you would like more info let me know.
To the 'Anonymous' who asked about an accountable blog. That's a fair question to ask, and I'd like to make a point or two related to that topic if I may.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there are generally different levels of accountability that apply to different entities. We expect public companies to abide by the relevant accountability laws such as Sarbanes-Oxley, Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (GAAP), HIPPA, COPPA, and so on as they pertain to that business or industry. The same standards are not applied equally to privately held businesses. I believe that part of the reasoning behind this is related to the scope of influence or impact that a breach of these laws can have to publicly traded companies.
I think that something similar applies to our elected leaders and to those of us who post here. Our leaders have the power to make decisions which can have long reaching consequences for the entire community. The blog of one person, no matter whether the author is eloquent or inarticulate, well-reasoned or not, cannot have the same scope of impact as our community leadership.
For that reason I think that while I'd like to see some more details from Robert / Thomas about some of his concerns, I'm going to hold our leadership more accountable for their decisions than I do Robert for his blog.
In trying to decide wether or not I like this blog can anyone tell me what Thomas has said that is a lie?
ReplyDeleteThomas/Rob,
ReplyDeleteSince you have not worked with council and I have, let me pass on some facts for you to consider.
1. Elizabeth Walker did not bid for a contract with the Dougherty Farm. She submitted a proposal with no funding attached and was willing to volunteer as indicated in her proposal. This was a volunteer effort NOT a paid contract.
2. The Garbage rate is not a tax it is a rate increase for service. Being a contract, if council had delayed and not worked on a solution, then the citizens would have had no contract, which would have lead to no service. This is not a good common sense solution in my opinion.
3. The Economic Development Committee is still the Economic Development Committee, there has not been any morphing or changing of that committee.
4. The sustainability discussion is NOT a pitch for environmentalism. In fact Council Member Walker made many points of clarification on the reporting of her sustainability presentation. Those who had a conversation with her and heard her points then understood and even later apologized for their misunderstanding.
5. We have been using sustainable practices in this city before it became a discussion point. For example, the Main street project and the recycling of the road to use as fill. This saved our city money, which I think is good common sense.
6. If you did not attend the meeting and you are concerned about sustainability, then request the minuets from the meeting and there you will see a accurate report on sustainability. And for an even clearer understanding come to the City Council meeting and speak to your council. If you stay for the whole meeting you can speak to them individually and have them answer your questions.
I will state again, we have an excellent group of people serving our city. They are talented, committed and care deeply for our community. I know this for a fact, I work with them and I am giving you the facts, not assumptions or interpretations.
I appreciate your opinion on this.
ReplyDeleteTo answer a few of your points. The garbage rate increase was a de facto tax. At the city council meeting the council was told by Waste Management that they did not care how much the city raised the rate because if they increased the administration fee the city charges then Waste Management would simply pass it on to the customers as a rate increase. It was obvious to all in attendance that the people paying for this would be the citizens in Duvall not Waste Management. The council passed on the cost to the citizens indirectly and now can convieniently blame a rate increase while not claiming responsibility for any part of it. This is blatently dishonest for them to do this. I encourage you to get the audio recording of this and listen for youreself.
As far as sustainability, I am glad the city saved money by reusing some of the road fill. This makes good economic sense. I do not like the idea that all legislation should be run through the sustainability filter as council member Walker suggested and put out in a written presentation to the council. I have been to or listened to all her presentations on the subject and I even went to the meeting where she pulled it from the agenda. I have also been the beneficiary of several emails where she contradicted her statments in those meetings. I have heard more about the sustainability plan than most in the community I am well informed on the issue.
We do have a good group of individuals working on the city council. I am just concerned that they are no longer acting in our best interest on many occasions.
Rob,
ReplyDeleteThe sentence above where you state, "We do have a good group of individuals working on the city council" is in direct CONTRADICTION to your statements in the heading post (in the long, third paragraph under 'Open and Accountable'), as was pointed out days ago by both Louis and JP. Why the sudden softening of your position now, after you defended your initial accusations through many back-and-forth comments? Julie B.
I suppose I just wanted to point out that good people can do bad things. But just because they are good doesn't mean that we should not call them out when they do bad things.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the contradiction, I don't see it. Can you point out the part you are talking about?
I would also like to know how Thomas has 'lied?'
ReplyDeleteWhy don't the people who call Thomas untruthful give some 'facts' or 'evidence?' When they can't find something they start slinging mud.
Thomas is providing a forum where a lot of people who don't agree with them are finding a voice...and getting the truth. Thanks, Thomas!
By the way, can someone ask ‘Louis’ to keep it to 15,000 words or less?
I'd have to agree. I haven't seen any evidence that Thomas / Rob has lied to anyone. He's asked some questions that others have found uncomfortable, and pointed out some things that weren't done legally but were relatively minor infractions of the laws. There are some readers who disagree strongly with Thomas / Rob and there are some strong supporters and several more in between.
ReplyDeleteThere have been a lot of assumptions from some readers about what role, if any, Rob's religious views play in his efforts in local politics, and there are some who seem to believe that his responses to those questions were untruthful in some way.