For the months of April and May, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items. This blog is a representation of many voices in Edmonds and not a single voice.
Skipper’s Observations: The Council voted 5-2 to engage in a purchase and sale agreement of the Skipper’s property (as a potential park, or parking lot, or “gateway”, or museum, or visitor’s center, with no long-term construction, development, or maintenance funding on top of the $1.1M purchase price) on April 13, 2010, and allocated $100,000 toward required feasibility studies and real estate transactions.
The eventual change-of-heart by the Council on the Skipper’s property occurred after a vast majority of Edmonds residents made their opinions known to the Council. The Feckless Five (now Four following former Council Member Orvis’ resignation) recognized the citizens of Edmonds do not agree with reckless endangerment of the City’s limited funds. Specifically, members voting for spending $1.1M of the City’s money while concurrently stating “The City is still in financial crisis” (Council member Fraley-Monillas), and using a lack of funds as an excuse to vote against supporting the Police Foundation’s programs (Council member Plunkett) or vote against an environmental and energy plan projected to save the City and citizens money and create jobs (Council members Fraley-Monillas, Plunkett, and Buckshnis).
The following Council members made the following further misstatements, misrepresentations, or contradictions in the Council meetings:
· In the March 16, 2010, Council members Buckshnis and Plunkett amended a resolution of support of the final recommendations by the Economic Development Commission to remove any and all funding for the recommendations to be approved. The Economic Development Commission was established and approved by the City Council to gather information, meet with community members, City staff, and Council to redevelop city-wide recommendations to address the projected shortfall in the Edmonds City budget. Council member Buckshnis specifically stated that the City should develop a tourism plan and business marketing plan but stated she was not prepared to fund this effort. Council member Plunkett supported initiating these plans, as well, with no funding to do so, and he and Council member Fraley-Monillas both suggested that the City Council not “act” on any recommendations for economic development.
· On May 4, 2010, during a conversion regarding the potential levy, Council Member Wilson reminded the Council that the Finance Committee (Council members Plunkett and Buckshnis) were directed to bring the Council options for the City levy, with detailed analysis of the financial situation of the City. No presentation has been made by the Finance Committee and no action has been taken. Council member Plunkett stated that he and Council member Buckshnis would prefer to have a second levy group established. He did not state if the Finance Committee is unable or unwilling to prepare the information themselves. Council member Plunkett stated the levy committee would be put together in 2-3 weeks from the May 25, 2010 meeting, and guidance from the Finance Committee as to the operation of the group would be forthcoming in the same time period. To date, action has not occurred.
· Council members Plunkett and Buckshnis have also proposed a second Levy Committee in 2010 after the input from the 60+-volunteer 2009 Levy Commission was summarily ignored by the Council. Council member Buckshnis, who has stated she needs additional information to make a determination regarding a levy, was a member of the original Levy Commission and presented a recommendation to put a levy on the ballot. It is important (ironic) to note that the recommendation to appoint a second levy committee came immediately following a vote to not adopt the recommendations of another citizens’ commission (Compensation of Elected Officials).
· Council member Fraley-Monillas changed her vote on a program developed for the City of Edmonds by an organization called Climate Solutions. Her original yes vote (May 18, 2010) was made when all but one Council member were present at the meeting. In a follow-on meeting, where only four members were present, Council Members Fraley-Monillas claimed, in retrospect, and Council Member Buckshnis stated they did not have sufficient information or time to review the proposal. The item was on the agenda three times, with the first appearance on March 2, 2010.
· Council member Plunkett chastised Council President Bernheim and members Wilson and Buckshnis for meeting to discuss downtown visioning and not holding public discussions (April 6, 2010). However, this meeting was dictated by the Council and voted for by Council member Plunkett (but he declined to participate). Council member Plunkett then held another meeting (without notifying all Council members) and proposed the Pomegranate Center be engaged to hold a visionining process but did not offer any funding options but said he would return with a proposal to the Council. This proposal has not yet been presented and no action taken.
· Council Member Plunkett called a Council meeting that was potentially in violation of State law. Council President Bernheim made a motion, seconded by Council Member Plunkett, to direct himself (Bernheim) to present a final report to the Council regarding the violation by Council Member Plunkett and to act on the results of the meeting. This report has not yet taken place and no action has been taken in a Council meeting. The meeting was called a “visioning” exercise by Council Member Plunkett. In an item to be presented in a future report, when a vision for Edmonds was placed on the Council agenda by Council President Bernheim, Council Member Plunkett chose to leave the meeting early, without explanation, and not provide a vision for the City.
The City of Edmonds redirected tax payer dollars from City projects to pay for or be at risk to pay for the following:
· Council member Buckshnis, regularly pointing to supposed inconsistencies and incorrect information in City financial documents, completed her review of financial policies and documents with the substantial recommendations of better labeling, more information on the City’s website, and additional narratives written by staff. No information was found to be incorrect in the City’s financial documents, as indicated in the state audit. Audit reports and interviews were provided to all Council members. Following the audit, Council Member Buckshnis recommended yet another review of City financial documents since she did not choose to attend the audit out-brief presentation where the financial practices of the City were determined to be complete, professional, and within all necessary guidelines. Also, following all of these reviews, Mrs. Buckshnis stated she still did not have an “understanding of the City’s financial situation and assumptions,” but also that a levy would be necessary (April 6, 2010).
· On April 16, 2010, Council member Fraley-Monillas, in speaking regarding the purchase of the Skipper’s property, said that the Council did not need to know where the $1.1M would come from since they could later “develop a public-private partnership, bond, or whatever” and have the citizens pay for it. On May 4, 2010, Council member Fraley-Monillas stated the purchase of the Skipper’s property was “not part of the budget” and she “did not appreciate” it being brought up in conversation of the budget.
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
· Council members Buckshnis and Fraley-Monillas continued to invite citizens to join citizen meetings. On Council member Buckshnis’ blog page, she states that citizens with any views contrary to hers “need not” attend the meetings.
· In the May 25, 2010 Council meeting, former Council member Wambolt relayed a story of interaction with Council member Buckshnis and follow-on comments from Council member Fraley-Monillas. Council minutes include the following: “[Council member Buckshnis ] insulted him with a statement that it was no wonder he did not get past the primary and speculated he had a problem with intelligent women. He quoted from an email by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, ‘do not waste your time Diane with him, he still thinks he is on Council as evident by attending every event and meeting possible...you need to consider his age and his need to remain involved no matter if he is correct or not. Kind of sad’.”
· Editor’s Note: The following words have been used to characterize the Edmonds City Council in the last two months: “a joke”, “dysfunctional”, “idiots”, and “worse than Mountake Terrace at their worst”. This same Council is now tasked with appointing another Council member and a Mayor.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
March Accountability Report
IMPEACH THE FECKLESS EDMONDS 5!!!!
I was about to post a regular report for March, 2010, but the five members of the City Council have overstepped their positions. Pardon the strong sentiment of the following report:
IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE: THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL ACTS IN SECRET AND WASTES $1.1 MILLION!
The City Council that promised transparency in its operations has acted in secret to put the City into the financial red! Over the past three months, the Council held multiple behind-closed-doors executive sessions (February 16, March 9, March 16, March 23, April 6, and April 13) in regard to “real estate”.
The first Council meeting in April finally cast some light on these covert meetings, with a discussion of “hypothetical” purchases of property and development options along the railroad tracks, i.e., the Skipper’s property. The second Council meeting in April made the reason for this secrecy blindingly clear. Note: The second week of the month is designated as committee meeting night and typically the full Council does not meet, and thus citizens and media members would not expect a Council meeting. Why would the Council schedule a meeting on a second Tuesday if this property purchase was an above-board action?
The citizens of Edmonds learned on 4/9/10 that the Council had previously, in executive session, unanimously directed Council Members Buckshnis, Wilson, and Bernheim to meet privately and discuss development options for properties near the waterfront. However, Council Member Plunkett pretended not to remember this and accused these same Council Members of holding secret meetings to talk about development. Council member Plunkett then held his own private meeting with citizens regarding development on 4/9/10, and joined Council Members Bernheim, Orvis, Fraley-Monillas, and Buckshnis in a 5-2 vote to pay $1.1 million for the Skipper’s property (via phone vote) on 4/13/10.
In the 4/13/10 meeting, Council Member Buckshnis stated she was not concerned about the potential lack of funds in the City coffers to cover general operating expenditures (for things like parks, roads, safety, Police) because she does not trust the financial numbers coming from the City. However, she trusted the numbers enough to vote to spend 1.1 million of those dollars on a piece of property that has no plan.
The citizens of Edmonds should have been made aware of what the Council was contemplating such a purchase since these five Council members are putting the City into A DEFICIT. Citizens were not notified or even allowed to comment on the purchase before the vote. In fact, the Council agenda for March focused on the possibility of a levy on Edmonds citizens and budget cuts due to the coming financial shortfall. Note: THERE IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA ON TUESDAY, APRIL 20TH! SHOW UP AND MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! THE COUNCIL HAS VOTED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY BUT THE CITY CAN STILL PULL OUT!
Furthermore, the City Council appropriated $100,000 to study what might be able to be done with the property. This includes an appraisal (the Council agreed to pay $1.1 Million before it is known what the property was worth), environmental impact statements, and hiring consultants to prepare a plan for the options for the property. Again, the Council directed the Mayor to sign a $1.1 MILLION Purchase and Sale agreement for a piece of property that has no plan, no funding for development, no funding for maintenance, and that will drop in value in the next two years (commercial property values are expected to drop in 2011-12 as residential property did in 2008-09).
So what if the Council potentially pulls out of this purchase after paying $100,000 for consultants to provide a report stating that the property is vastly overvalued or the City discovers has no funding to develop or maintain the property, or the City determines that it has to pay for current operating expenses? What will the story be then? I would wager that Certain Council Members will champion their failed attempts to save our waterfront (this is railroad-front).
The last time the City Council wasted the citizen’s money on a small piece of property that they had no plan of funding for was for the postage-stamp-sized park by Old Milltown. The future park site still sits dormant due to a lack of City funding to develop or maintain it. A private charity is still trying to raise the money to develop and create a park on this property, years later.
The TRUTH IS OUT! Five members of the City Council have traded your City for their own self-aggrandizement. The five Council members who voted for this land purchase (Bernheim, Plunkett, Orvis, Buckshnis, and Fraley-Monillas) hid their intentions from the citizens of Edmonds.
Regular Report:
For the month of March, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items.
There is some good news. The Council passed a resolution to support and pursue recommendations made by a citizen’s Economic Development Commission. Of note, however, is that Council members Buckshnis and Plunkett removed the funding for an action by the city to pursue these economic development recommendations due to the City’s financial challenges.
The following Council members made the following misstatements, misrepresentations, or contradictions in the Council meetings:
• In the 3/23/10 meeting, Council member Plunkett refused to vote to fund $2,500 for the Police Department’s Night Out event because City’s budget situation was too dire. This is a national event that teaches safety and crime prevention to citizens and kids. Note: The Edmonds Police Officer did not endorse Mr. Plunkett in his last election.
• Council member Plunkett stated that he would not, under any circumstances, put a levy on the ballot for Edmonds citizens to decide if they wanted to raise their own taxes, both at the 3/16/10 Council meeting and in a letter to the Editor he wrote to be published in The Beacon. However, at the Transportation Benefit Meeting the week before, Council member Plunkett stated that he would vote for the people to decide if they want to raise their own taxes by placing a ballot to increase car tabs.
The City of Edmonds redirected tax payer dollars from City projects to pay for or be at risk to pay for the following:
• The March public Council meetings focused on planning budget cuts and levies to cover the City’s budget shortfall, but in private executive sessions, the Council pursued expensive land purchases.
• The Council voted to set-aside approximately $600,000 in a separate account for asset acquisition. The fund contains nearly all of the assets gained by the City from Fire District 1 in 2009 (that at the time was supported by Council Members Plunkett and Orvis in order to address the City’s fiscal shortfall).
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• Council member Orvis: Was found not guilty by a jury in his trial on criminal Child Abuse charges. Editor’s note: Council member Orvis’ trial is over and a verdict reached. Because of that, this will be the last mention of the issue by yours truly. The facts of this case were never disputed—Mr. Orvis admits to the physical details of the case and that he “flipped out” that afternoon when he physically handled his son. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011540967_orvis07m.html
I have reported the issue here because of the response to these charges in the media and local community. Mr. Orvis’ behavior was excused by one resident, for example, because his son was adopted. I ask myself how the community would respond if the charges were for the same actions but waged against a wife, for example, or a daughter. The City can move forward now, but I don’t fault the few that found the lack of commentary to be troubling.
I was about to post a regular report for March, 2010, but the five members of the City Council have overstepped their positions. Pardon the strong sentiment of the following report:
IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE: THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL ACTS IN SECRET AND WASTES $1.1 MILLION!
The City Council that promised transparency in its operations has acted in secret to put the City into the financial red! Over the past three months, the Council held multiple behind-closed-doors executive sessions (February 16, March 9, March 16, March 23, April 6, and April 13) in regard to “real estate”.
The first Council meeting in April finally cast some light on these covert meetings, with a discussion of “hypothetical” purchases of property and development options along the railroad tracks, i.e., the Skipper’s property. The second Council meeting in April made the reason for this secrecy blindingly clear. Note: The second week of the month is designated as committee meeting night and typically the full Council does not meet, and thus citizens and media members would not expect a Council meeting. Why would the Council schedule a meeting on a second Tuesday if this property purchase was an above-board action?
The citizens of Edmonds learned on 4/9/10 that the Council had previously, in executive session, unanimously directed Council Members Buckshnis, Wilson, and Bernheim to meet privately and discuss development options for properties near the waterfront. However, Council Member Plunkett pretended not to remember this and accused these same Council Members of holding secret meetings to talk about development. Council member Plunkett then held his own private meeting with citizens regarding development on 4/9/10, and joined Council Members Bernheim, Orvis, Fraley-Monillas, and Buckshnis in a 5-2 vote to pay $1.1 million for the Skipper’s property (via phone vote) on 4/13/10.
In the 4/13/10 meeting, Council Member Buckshnis stated she was not concerned about the potential lack of funds in the City coffers to cover general operating expenditures (for things like parks, roads, safety, Police) because she does not trust the financial numbers coming from the City. However, she trusted the numbers enough to vote to spend 1.1 million of those dollars on a piece of property that has no plan.
The citizens of Edmonds should have been made aware of what the Council was contemplating such a purchase since these five Council members are putting the City into A DEFICIT. Citizens were not notified or even allowed to comment on the purchase before the vote. In fact, the Council agenda for March focused on the possibility of a levy on Edmonds citizens and budget cuts due to the coming financial shortfall. Note: THERE IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA ON TUESDAY, APRIL 20TH! SHOW UP AND MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! THE COUNCIL HAS VOTED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY BUT THE CITY CAN STILL PULL OUT!
Furthermore, the City Council appropriated $100,000 to study what might be able to be done with the property. This includes an appraisal (the Council agreed to pay $1.1 Million before it is known what the property was worth), environmental impact statements, and hiring consultants to prepare a plan for the options for the property. Again, the Council directed the Mayor to sign a $1.1 MILLION Purchase and Sale agreement for a piece of property that has no plan, no funding for development, no funding for maintenance, and that will drop in value in the next two years (commercial property values are expected to drop in 2011-12 as residential property did in 2008-09).
So what if the Council potentially pulls out of this purchase after paying $100,000 for consultants to provide a report stating that the property is vastly overvalued or the City discovers has no funding to develop or maintain the property, or the City determines that it has to pay for current operating expenses? What will the story be then? I would wager that Certain Council Members will champion their failed attempts to save our waterfront (this is railroad-front).
The last time the City Council wasted the citizen’s money on a small piece of property that they had no plan of funding for was for the postage-stamp-sized park by Old Milltown. The future park site still sits dormant due to a lack of City funding to develop or maintain it. A private charity is still trying to raise the money to develop and create a park on this property, years later.
The TRUTH IS OUT! Five members of the City Council have traded your City for their own self-aggrandizement. The five Council members who voted for this land purchase (Bernheim, Plunkett, Orvis, Buckshnis, and Fraley-Monillas) hid their intentions from the citizens of Edmonds.
Regular Report:
For the month of March, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items.
There is some good news. The Council passed a resolution to support and pursue recommendations made by a citizen’s Economic Development Commission. Of note, however, is that Council members Buckshnis and Plunkett removed the funding for an action by the city to pursue these economic development recommendations due to the City’s financial challenges.
The following Council members made the following misstatements, misrepresentations, or contradictions in the Council meetings:
• In the 3/23/10 meeting, Council member Plunkett refused to vote to fund $2,500 for the Police Department’s Night Out event because City’s budget situation was too dire. This is a national event that teaches safety and crime prevention to citizens and kids. Note: The Edmonds Police Officer did not endorse Mr. Plunkett in his last election.
• Council member Plunkett stated that he would not, under any circumstances, put a levy on the ballot for Edmonds citizens to decide if they wanted to raise their own taxes, both at the 3/16/10 Council meeting and in a letter to the Editor he wrote to be published in The Beacon. However, at the Transportation Benefit Meeting the week before, Council member Plunkett stated that he would vote for the people to decide if they want to raise their own taxes by placing a ballot to increase car tabs.
The City of Edmonds redirected tax payer dollars from City projects to pay for or be at risk to pay for the following:
• The March public Council meetings focused on planning budget cuts and levies to cover the City’s budget shortfall, but in private executive sessions, the Council pursued expensive land purchases.
• The Council voted to set-aside approximately $600,000 in a separate account for asset acquisition. The fund contains nearly all of the assets gained by the City from Fire District 1 in 2009 (that at the time was supported by Council Members Plunkett and Orvis in order to address the City’s fiscal shortfall).
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• Council member Orvis: Was found not guilty by a jury in his trial on criminal Child Abuse charges. Editor’s note: Council member Orvis’ trial is over and a verdict reached. Because of that, this will be the last mention of the issue by yours truly. The facts of this case were never disputed—Mr. Orvis admits to the physical details of the case and that he “flipped out” that afternoon when he physically handled his son. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011540967_orvis07m.html
I have reported the issue here because of the response to these charges in the media and local community. Mr. Orvis’ behavior was excused by one resident, for example, because his son was adopted. I ask myself how the community would respond if the charges were for the same actions but waged against a wife, for example, or a daughter. The City can move forward now, but I don’t fault the few that found the lack of commentary to be troubling.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Council Action Alert
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Edmonds City Council
Resolution re: Citizens Economic Development Commission Recommended Items
MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! The Council may accomplish something in regard to economic development in Edmonds. Go to the Council meeting and make sure the Council does more than just talk.
Read the agenda on the City website to learn more:
http://agenda.ci.edmonds.wa.us/agenda_publish.cfm
Edmonds City Council
Resolution re: Citizens Economic Development Commission Recommended Items
MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! The Council may accomplish something in regard to economic development in Edmonds. Go to the Council meeting and make sure the Council does more than just talk.
Read the agenda on the City website to learn more:
http://agenda.ci.edmonds.wa.us/agenda_publish.cfm
Saturday, March 6, 2010
February Council Accountability Report
For the month of February, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items.
The following Council members made the following misstatements, misrepresentations, or contradictions in the Council meetings:
• Council members Plunkett and Buckshnis claimed that the City’s due diligence and related financial work regarding the Fire District 1 contract contained misrepresentations by the City. These claims have yet to be proven to have any merit. It is worth noting that Council member Plunkett voted in favor of the Fire District 1 contract.
• Council President Bernheim acknowledged in the meeting on February 3, 2010, that the ordinance amendment to Title 20 proposed without public hearing on January 5, 2010, was developed and passed “on the fly” and although he was “in favor in principle”, more needed to be done. Council member Buckshnis claimed that have’s would be treated more fairly than the have not’s by the Council and that appeals to the Council are better for citizens. Factually, however, the Council has heard a minimal number of appeals in the last four years and in every instance, the citizen lost.
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Buckshnis voted against naming a park after late Council member Peggy Pritchard Olson, a much beloved and respected member of the Edmonds community. Council member Plunkett asked if the Planning Board had discussed this name. It should be noted that Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett and Orvis have disregarded the recommendations of the Planning Board on a number of occasions, including most recently on the Planning Board recommendation for Hickman Park. Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Fraley-Monillas also disregarded the final wishes of Council member Peggy Pritchard Olson with regard to her replacement on the Council.
The City of Edmonds redirected tax payer dollars from City projects to pay for or be at risk to pay for the following:
• Council President Bernheim placed a neighbor-to-neighbor conflict on the agenda (Reidy-Thuesen) on February 23, 2010, providing a full hour for both parties to say anything they wanted. During the hearing on this issue, it was made clear that the Council actions could allow the city to be liable for significant financial damages.
• Council members met for a two-day “retreat”, which they were paid to attend. Minutes show what seems to be no goals, tasks, or actions developed on behalf of the citizens of Edmonds. The taxpayers paid for two days of meetings for which they received no representation.
• Council President Bernheim presented his “10-year plan”, including ideas like taking away parking spaces downtown, at the meetings on February 5-6. These concepts were not accompanied by any method for discussion, implementation, or funding. The only idea proposed was to turn the suggestions and proposals over to volunteer committees and to take no action as a Council.
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• EdmondsWatch has been notified by several citizens that the Council is not representing the City’s best interest, especially in regard to planning for the challenges facing the City this year. As a result of the minutes distributed from the annual “retreat”, citizens are asking for answers and want to know what the Council plans to do to keep this City from suffering more effects of the Recession, other than to talk a lot. EdmondsWatch invites input from citizens in regard to this matter.
• Council member Orvis: Still awaiting trial on criminal Child Abuse charges.
The following Council members made the following misstatements, misrepresentations, or contradictions in the Council meetings:
• Council members Plunkett and Buckshnis claimed that the City’s due diligence and related financial work regarding the Fire District 1 contract contained misrepresentations by the City. These claims have yet to be proven to have any merit. It is worth noting that Council member Plunkett voted in favor of the Fire District 1 contract.
• Council President Bernheim acknowledged in the meeting on February 3, 2010, that the ordinance amendment to Title 20 proposed without public hearing on January 5, 2010, was developed and passed “on the fly” and although he was “in favor in principle”, more needed to be done. Council member Buckshnis claimed that have’s would be treated more fairly than the have not’s by the Council and that appeals to the Council are better for citizens. Factually, however, the Council has heard a minimal number of appeals in the last four years and in every instance, the citizen lost.
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Buckshnis voted against naming a park after late Council member Peggy Pritchard Olson, a much beloved and respected member of the Edmonds community. Council member Plunkett asked if the Planning Board had discussed this name. It should be noted that Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett and Orvis have disregarded the recommendations of the Planning Board on a number of occasions, including most recently on the Planning Board recommendation for Hickman Park. Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Fraley-Monillas also disregarded the final wishes of Council member Peggy Pritchard Olson with regard to her replacement on the Council.
The City of Edmonds redirected tax payer dollars from City projects to pay for or be at risk to pay for the following:
• Council President Bernheim placed a neighbor-to-neighbor conflict on the agenda (Reidy-Thuesen) on February 23, 2010, providing a full hour for both parties to say anything they wanted. During the hearing on this issue, it was made clear that the Council actions could allow the city to be liable for significant financial damages.
• Council members met for a two-day “retreat”, which they were paid to attend. Minutes show what seems to be no goals, tasks, or actions developed on behalf of the citizens of Edmonds. The taxpayers paid for two days of meetings for which they received no representation.
• Council President Bernheim presented his “10-year plan”, including ideas like taking away parking spaces downtown, at the meetings on February 5-6. These concepts were not accompanied by any method for discussion, implementation, or funding. The only idea proposed was to turn the suggestions and proposals over to volunteer committees and to take no action as a Council.
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• EdmondsWatch has been notified by several citizens that the Council is not representing the City’s best interest, especially in regard to planning for the challenges facing the City this year. As a result of the minutes distributed from the annual “retreat”, citizens are asking for answers and want to know what the Council plans to do to keep this City from suffering more effects of the Recession, other than to talk a lot. EdmondsWatch invites input from citizens in regard to this matter.
• Council member Orvis: Still awaiting trial on criminal Child Abuse charges.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
January Council Accountability Report
Accountability Report
For the month of January, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items.
“Open and transparent government” has been named as a priority by this Council, but the contrary has been pursued by Council members:
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Fraley-Monillas considered and voted to approve an interim ordinance in regard to Title 20 in the Tuesday, January 5th meeting. The item was not on the agenda but rather added at 11:30 pm. Citizens were not notified of this and citizens were not permitted to comment on the ordinance.
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• Council member Orvis: Still awaiting trial on Child Abuse, criminal charges. He has received multiple continuances since the incident occurred in 2009. Council member Orvis has admitted to committing the abuse.
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, and Buckshnis were witnessed apparently violating a WA State law, the Open Meetings Act, by participating in what appeared to be an illegal quorum on Tuesday, January 19, 2010. Whether or not the act was illegal, the appearance of fairness is considered the litmus test, and no member of the “quorum” has taken responsibility or apologized.
For the month of January, 2010, the citizens of Edmonds should be made aware of the following items.
“Open and transparent government” has been named as a priority by this Council, but the contrary has been pursued by Council members:
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Orvis, and Fraley-Monillas considered and voted to approve an interim ordinance in regard to Title 20 in the Tuesday, January 5th meeting. The item was not on the agenda but rather added at 11:30 pm. Citizens were not notified of this and citizens were not permitted to comment on the ordinance.
In addition, the following City Council members engaged in behavior contrary to their mission and duty as Council members:
• Council member Orvis: Still awaiting trial on Child Abuse, criminal charges. He has received multiple continuances since the incident occurred in 2009. Council member Orvis has admitted to committing the abuse.
• Council President Bernheim and members Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, and Buckshnis were witnessed apparently violating a WA State law, the Open Meetings Act, by participating in what appeared to be an illegal quorum on Tuesday, January 19, 2010. Whether or not the act was illegal, the appearance of fairness is considered the litmus test, and no member of the “quorum” has taken responsibility or apologized.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
