Telling the truth about one of the worst, most corrupt places on Earth, and providing more information than the Peninsula Daily News could ever hope to.
Plan B:Boycott Dan Gase Realty. Tell anyone who will listen that Gase is more interested in selling homes to the medical mafia than he is in obeying the will of the people. Take down his signs when you see them up. Prank call him, send him all over the county to show a home and of course no one is there to see it. Waste his time like he wasted our time and money throughout this entire comedy.Laugh out loud every time you see Cherie Kidd at a county event. She thinks she is going to be the next county commissioner. Feel sorry for Pat Downey, he just can't help it. Brad Collins is the one who deserves the most contempt. He signed the warrant that brought us fluoride in the first place. All we have to do is dump Gase, Collins, Downey or Kidd in a recall election. Heck, dump all 4 of them, this would show the way to a better life post this "father knows best" city council. How about it fans, recall all four for failure to obey the will of the people.
Excellent idea! Right-wingers like Gase always talk big about respecting "the will of the people," but when it comes down to making decisions like this, they show their true colors.
Since the No More Fluoride votes from citizens that live within the City Limits are actually just a minority of ALL the people the Port Angeles City Council is elected to represent how about this,Plan C:To those that hoped fluoride would be discontinued - GET A LIFE!
RECALL Gase, and Kidd, and Collins. Lets get rid of the bad actors, and then get rid of that bum of a city attorney, who told Gase and Kidd what to say. Collins should have brought up the fact that he was part of the decision at the city level (as a city employee) to put fluoride in the water. He should have brought it up and let the council decide if he should recuse himself from the vote. Our city council made it clear that there are members who do not take the oath they take when entering office seriously. They are supposed to uphold the will of the people and follow the constitution. RECALL THEM!!
Recall them all. Whether you think fluoride is an issue or not, doesn't matter now. Whether you are a conservative or a leftie, we all should be appalled that these four council members have such disregard for democracy. Posters should go up at every public place possible, naming Cherie Kidd, Dan Gase, Pat Downie and Brad Collins for what they are. And, people that make it their job to replace posters as needed. Veterans groups should stand vigils for the death of democracy. And, a legal escrow account needs to be set up ASAP, with the help of a lawyer, so that Port Angeles residents can put their utility bills in that account, and not paid to the city, until this issue is resolved. The People have to have recourse, because they sure are not getting it from their elected representatives. Let's get a committee together, and start connecting with every group that cares about the American way.
No I'm not surprised. How about the people who think Port Angeles is changing for the better? Does this look like "better"? Does this look anything like a representative government? You know, where you cast a ballot on an issue as your local representatives spend $10,000 on a special election, and your representatives, hearing the clear results, implement the wishes of the majority? Oh, that's right. We were lead down this path before. 10 years ago, the city council did pretty much the same thing. I'm not seeing any change in what the city council is doing. Just more of the same. And, the locals like it this way.
Nope. Not better, just more bitter. And, as pointed out elsewhere here, a disenfranchised populace is MUCH easier to control and manipulate.
Let's all thank Kidd, Gase, Collins and Downey. They are driving our town to it's grave. They have done more to kill it than save it.Representatives they are not. Who is their master?
No, the locals do not like it this way. Through the hard work of many, including CK, our town is changing for the better. The people are willing, but leadership is clearly stuck in the mud and almost hostile toward its citizenry. Time to clean house.
The headline here pretty much sums up the approach to governing here in Port Angeles. Waste money, waste time, ignore and/or alienate your constituents. Repeat as needed until the coffers are empty and the town is dead.
I had to go read the comments on yesterday's PDN article to find out what happened. Not surprisingly, the PDN has no reporting of it online this morning. I feel for those of you that are on PA city water, I really do. It's sad they can't just give you your own choice to add flouride to your water at home if YOU want it.
My plants,chickens and automobile all appreciate the fluoride. Their teeth are white and cavity free.I'm sure all of the fish in the harbor enjoy the benefits of the runoff too!
Yeah, I always wondered why no one makes more of an issue out of the runoff and other issues you raise...Fish need fluoride?
Please excuse my grammar. It was atrocious! Of course fish need fluoride, silly.
Reply Memo to PA Unearthed and the Stop Fluoride NumbSkull Minority from the Port Angeles Community MAJORITY: Fuck You Back!
Ummm, do you want to apply your "minority of voters" to of the rest of the elections? How much of a minority voted for, say, Dan Gase?
I think that the fuckee of the first part declines to accept the proposed fucker of the second part, and the fuckee insists that the fucker go fuck thy self. Got it?
8:57, Yeah, that made sense.
Mission accomplished. Now voters will be even more disillusioned with participating in local government, giving the good old boys more control.
When only one quarter of households feel strongly enough to say, "Change this," one shouldn't expect the status quo to change.
This logic has to apply to all votes, then. Right?
A smaller percent of people responded by VOTING, so if only 36% of all registered voters voted in the election to get Ms. Kidd(er) re-elected. 43% returned their surveys. So, can you do the math? 43% is bigger than 36%, right? Now explain that to Kidd. Unless we should all surmise that the 64% who did not vote in the general election were actually against Kidd (which is her logic).
Interesting, though, the surveys did not all go to households, or even all households. As I understand it, the surveys went to the people who pay water bills - a large portion of whom are commercial users or owners of multi-family properties. Many water drinkers live in apartments or rental properties where the landlord pays the water/sewer bills. I doubt whether landlords solicited opinions from all tenants before returning the surveys ---- if landlords bothered to return the surveys at all.Maybe somewhere on the city's web site there is a breakdown of water customers by billing classification (ex: single family residential; multi-family residential; commercial (ex: restaurants, businesses, medical offices,golf courses, schools))? This could provide a rough estimate of how many households had an opportunity to see and return a survey.Also: Could somebody please post or summarize a sample of the survey? I'm curious about whether the city separated the surveys and survey questions in a manner that would indicate the type of customer who was responding?
Cherie Kidd had a hard time getting elected in the first place. Everybody could see how much the poor little outcast wanted to be part of the big important group. After much trying, on her part, she was elected, just so she could say "Fu*k Y'all."
Using Cherie Kidd's crazy quilt "logic" and reading of non-results, then she actually lost her election, right? Can we thus expect her to step down come January? I don't think so, and Cherie don't think period. Thank you to the voters of Port Angeles for putting this crew of idiots in charge. Well, in charge of doing whatever staff directs them to do, that is.
Time for a recall election. Cherie Kidd made the motion to extend the fluoride contract for another ten years. Recall her first.Brad Collins needs to go, too. He should know better. What a disappointment.
Recall them all!
They asked, we spoke, they didn't listen. As has happened so many times before. Cynicism and distrust are the chief commodities produced here in Port Angeles.
When is Sissi going to finally get sick of being associated with these bozos and bail?
Maybe she can run against Cherie Kidd in the County Commissioner primary.
While reading up on the fluoride PF2 removal filter, I learned that green, black and red teas are high in fluoride. Too ironic considering many anti-f'ers may be tea drinkers.
Gosh, you just don't grasp the thread here. The issue was about the council listening to the people, and spending $10k on a survey, then ignoring the results. Try and keep up. Sorry, we can't wait for the slowest one to figure this out.
In 2014 general election, only 36% of eligible voters, bothered to vote. The other 64% didn't bother to vote. Given most of the votes were fairly close, that means most of the people that run the country at all levels, that were elected in 2014, got into their offices with only about 18% of voters votes. Locally, there are 11,389 city residents eligible to vote. In the last election, Cherie Kidd received 2,326 votes. Her opponent received 1,876. That means 4,202 out of 11,389 bothered to return ballots. According to Cherie Kidd, Pat Downie, Dan Gase and Brad Collins, those that didn't return ballots, the majority of ballots sent out, really did vote "positive". So, who do those 7,187 votes go to? Given what the council majority did last night, those 7,187 votes not cast, do actually count. So, Cherie, who do those 7,197 votes NOT returned in your election, get assigned to?
Is there ANYWHERE, in ANY democratic process, where those that do cast ballots are used as a valid reason for a public facilities decision by government? Anywhere? Anybody EVER heard of this before? A legally binding decision was based upon, and held as valid with the percentage of eligible voters that did not exercise their right to express their views as the deciding factor? AND, it was assumed those that chose not to return a ballot ALL expressed a unified view??? I know pot in legal now. Are we seeing the results of doped up thinking?
If the fluoride in the water has not lowered your IQ below the necessary comprehension level, read the December 2005 USDA Database of Fluoride Levels for Food and Beverages. Many foods voluntarily consumed contain much higher concentrations of fluoride than our water.
Then why add fluoride to the water at all?
I hardly think that a 600 vote majority constitutes a mandate. If you recall, it wasn't just the voters who weighed in - our local dental and medical community had something to say as well. In addition, there was a public hearing where anyone could come and voice their opinion. It simply wasn't an up and down vote based on a survey. I support the use of fluoride - but I didn't send in a survey. I suspect the vast majority of people who didn't send in surveys felt the same way. Most people are OK with fluoride and didn't feel compelled to respond - sorry - that is the likely answer. I can imagine someone or some business thinking about moving to Port Angeles and reading the news that the citizens want to a abolish fluoride - it might give them pause. They might think what will they abolish next . . . seat belts?? Looks kind of backward folks.
Then what was the point of spending around $11,000 on a special election, that was only about this one issue? Maybe you can find and post where the insert told people that after they expressed their opinion, it would all be thrown out if it didn't support a wacky view that really, it wasn't about what the voters say anyways, "that someone or some business thinking about moving to Port Angeles and reading the news that the citizens want to a abolish fluoride - it might give them pause. They might think what will they abolish next . . . seat belts?? Looks kind of backward folks." I know facts and reality in Port Angeles don't count for much, but I;ll remind people about this anyways. Since it was brought up by our brain trust here. Ummm, in the 10 years that the city has been fluoridating the water, our population has dropped. The once busy streets and sidewalks are empty most of the time. Ask any professional business, including doctors and they tell you they cannot convince anybody to move here. But on that topic, Anon 6:58 thinks giving people a choice about what chemicals are in their drinking water will drive potential businesses and residents away, but somehow doesn't think people seeing the elected officials outright disregarding their solicited votes would cause them any concerns? Really? What is in the water in this town? I can't believe that it is fluoride alone that is creating such stupid thinking and complacency.
If you didn't send in a survey, you have no right to voice your opinion NOW.
We could put lithium in the water (several prefectures in Japan did this to see if suicide rates were lowered, and it works!). WE could add anti-depressants. We could add Ritalin, and keep all the kids calm. Hell, we could add LSD (evidently micro-doses make every day a "happy day"). How far do you want to go with this b.s. And, for the record, in the 1950's doctors recommended smoking. Even in the Dr. Spock Baby Manual he recommended that for a woman breastfeeding, to have a beer and "light one up". Doctors recommended smoking for asthma (no lie) to relax the throat. And, my mother was told to smoke, to "calm down". So, yeah, I really do believe those doctors and dentists all saying the same damn thing. Remember when there were X-ray machines in all the shoe stores -- let little Timmy see how well his feet fit in those shoes. And, acne was treated with radiation (oops, sorry about the throat cancer in about 100% of those patients). Trust us, we're experts --- has done more damage to the American people than any other single profession. Get off it, dude. Wake up.
INTEGRITY LOSTCity Council rejects will of the peopleOpinion by: Edna WilladsenThose of you who did not attend the December 16, 2015 City Council meeting, you missed watching 4 of the city council members prostituting themselves in front of all.The good ole boy club was in ascendance last night, when 4 city council members said the advisory vote did not matter. Democracy does not matter. They seemed to take pride in their decision. They showed taxpayers’ decisions do not matter to them. The four council members gave up their integrity without a struggle just to remain members of the good ole boy club, tossing democracy out the window as they skipped down the forced fluoride trail.These are the same people who would not vote in support of a new school bond but told the rest of us that the we must pass the new high school bond, (knowing full well the people could not afford it). Out of the woodwork came the medical mafia telling us if we did not give them the new schoolno new doctors would move here. Last night we were told that if the Doctors and Dentist did not get to keep the fluoride we would not get any new doctors to move here. You have to wonder what’s next, perhaps they won’t come because there isn’t enoughsoft toilet paper to go around.Here again the doctors and dentists gave up their integrity, and we are left withdemocracy lost, and watching greed running rampant. When did the doctors and dentists think themselves above us and become so political?I long for the days when the Hippocratic oath meant something.Gase, Kidd, Collins and Downie knew from the start they would never honor the will of the people. You will never convince me otherwise. Folks, here is the thought for the day, to what ends will these four council members be willing to go to remain members of the good ole boys club? How much more is it going to cost us?It could prove to be expensive as they have demonstrated they have no integrity, no concern for the will of the people.
Here's a political theater idea, to drive a certain point home...Since Cherie Kidd obviously doesn't have any problem with disregarding the stated desires of her own constituents, up to and including said results garnered from an official City survey...I'd say disregard the results of the last election. Go to City Council meetings, and demand to know where Dan Bateham, Cherie's opponent, is. Ask why he isn't seated at the front of the room. Speak for the "silent majority" that Cherie wants to represent, and, after making it clear a majority of citizens did NOT vote for Cherie, keep beating the bush for Bateham. Make that brainless walking wig nervous and embarrassed. Then, look into broad definitions of "malfeasance" and think about a recall effort. It seems like wasting thousands of dollars on a sham advisory vote is pretty damned mal.
"Malfeasance is a comprehensive term used in both civil and Criminal Law to describe any act that is wrongful. It is not a distinct crime or tort, but may be used generally to describe any act that is criminal or that is wrongful and gives rise to, or somehow contributes to, the injury of another person."If we all agree that ten thousand dollars could do GOOD in our town, then isn't the WASTE of that much money on a sham "vote" inherently BAD or HARMFUL to our town? In other words, if public dollars are intentionally wasted, couldn't that be seen as a deliberate and premeditated form of malfeasance? I'm not a lawyer, but it certainly doesn't seem a stretch to me, especially given the totality of the "circumstances" surrounding the Port Angeles city council.
We'd better all start showing up at the council meetings and speaking up, repeatedly about this lack of democratic process.
CK, we are organizing a recall petition. go to facebook and find the two NEW groups: Recall Cherie Kidd https://www.facebook.com/Recall-Cherie-Kidd-1776123332615391/?hc_location=ufiPolitically Active Port Angeles https://www.facebook.com/groups/145898985776097/In the next few weeks (after the holidays) look for a petition to sign. We need 1500 signatures, which is less than the number of people who voiced their opposition to fluoride.
Go get 'em and good luck! Visit those pages, people. Spread the word.
If these people cannot be recalled for this, because of some law, I promise you that it will not end there. There are a LOT of people who are really upset with with these people have done in regards to democracy, and representing the public. Anyone coming to Port Angeles, thinking of moving here, or doing business in Port Angeles will be made well aware of the political climate they are coming to. Whether you are a business or just a citizen, expect to be screwed every way possible by the City, in Port Angeles. And, remember, your taxes will go up, again, to cover the costs of fluoridation, to add insult to injury. Literally.
From a context perspective - Seattle,Tacoma,Eastside Seattle all use Fluoride in their drinking water. I can't think of a more open, progressive and forward thinking group of cities than these. They're all fine with fluoride. Come on folks . . . really? doh.wa.gov
you failed to mention Portland. They rejected it.
This is a copy of my recent email to the city council:In the internet age no one lives in a vacuum anymore.Council decisions that go against the will of the people should have consequences.It appears that four of you have put the emphasis on the wrong syllable. Only you know your justification.Rather than saying 59% of the people had no problem with this decision is a misnomer.A better way to view it is that only 17.7% of those sent a survey voted to continue fluoridation.With Yelp, Angie’s List, Google Review, Manta, etc. every action, good or bad can be annotated.I can see in the near future local businesses receiving many negative reviews.An example of one might read:(rough draft)0 out of 5 stars.Reason:While a member of the city council (person X who owns or works for company X) chose to go against the will of the people and voted to fluoridate the city water supply. Only 17.7% of the people surveyed in Port Angeles responded that they wanted to have fluoride injected into their already pristine water supply. How (person X) justified voting against the will of the people is known only to them, but in my perspective it reeks of elitism, or disdain towards those who want clean water.For this reason I choose not to use their business and will instead use (company Y). If I this person chose not to put the interest of the people people first, how can I trust them to put my best interest as a customer when it comes to (storage, truck/trailer rental, listing real estate, etc).(End)A review like this is not slander, it is the truth. The vote occurred, this person voted this way, I feel this way. In light of that how can I personally trust them to treat me right?Once a review like this is published it will increase exponentially, the anti-fluoridation crowd can be quite animated, word will get out quickly.I use review services like Google and Yelp quite frequently to choose whom I will do business with. I can’t tell you how many times I have chosen not to go to a restaurant, hotel or mechanic based on these reviews. Usually after four of five negatives I figure that where there is smoke there is fire and will look elsewhere.Consider the amount of adults that live in the homes where no votes were cast. Perhaps their are 2 adults per house. Consider again how those who voted no are feeling today with word of this news. They are a vocal and motivated crowd.Now, if just one percent of those who voted “no” decided to write a review about those on the council who voted “yes” that is 84 negative reviews. What if 2 percent wrote reviews? 5%?These reviews are never removed from the internet.I usually shy away from a place which has 4 or so bad reviews… imagine what 50 bad reviews will do to a business.
in addition:And:Mr. Gase,The message I am hearing from the public at present is in contrast to what I discern to be a tortured justification of your decision to fluoridate the water supply.I have heard third and second hand from people who work (or have recently retired) in the local government and in the real estate field that they have heard you and another person saying that no matter how the survey came back that you were going to vote in favor of it.I have also heard from people, in passing, that stated they never received a survey. I myself almost threw it away unopened as it appeared to be junk mail.True, at this time these stories appear anecdotal, I will put no names to the people who have told me these things until I get permission to use their name so as not to cast dispersion upon their character in case they retract their story. Only you on the council know if this is true or not.Regardless, the justification you wrote in your reply still seems to be tortured and has an elitist flare to it.What your true motives are I don’t know. I have no factual basis yet, but I believe that you think that in order to attract outsiders/new business to our community that fluoridating the water is sign that we are not a backwater hick town, but forward thinkers who really care about kids. In this way you perceive that you may attract clients who may wish to purchase real estate.Again, this is my guess and only that, I would not claim it as fact until the person who told me about this grants me permission to use their names.Ironically I am a big proponent of using fluoride to keep kid’s teeth strong, just not in the form that you wish to push upon us.I believe that there are roughly 2300 kids currently in the age group (up to age 16) that are living in Port Angeles. If the standards here are consistent with the national average then perhaps 17% of these kids do not see a dentist regularly, that is only 400 kids.The Medical Products Laboratories in Philadelphia, PA sells a line of fluoridation products which caters to those who wish to take care of the kids in their community that are not seeing a dentist regularly for their fluoride treatments. The product line they sell costs no more than $1-$3 per kid, per year. This depends on the mix you choose to buy.For $400 a year all of the kids that don’t see a dentist can be covered.Don’t take my word for it, the state of Wisconsin Department of Health put out an oral health program that was updated in November, 2014 which outlines this very procedure. Just query Wisconsin, oral health, and program number P-00309 and you will have access to the same information.So you see, the information is out there. For some reason, rather than spending just $400 to take care of a vulnerable few, you decided to spend untold thousands and push your agenda through anyway.This is further information I, and so many others, can put into our Yelp and Google Reviews. Information which demonstrates your lack of pragmatism when in come to dollars and cents issues. Why would I or any perspective client seek professional Real Estate services from someone who easily burns through thousands of tax payer dollar with out looking an cheaper alternatives. How much more will you not care about me when I want to buy a new house?Well anyway, there in a nutshell you can understand why I am compelled to write my reviews and encourage those many others to do the same.And remember, no matter how you twist those stats, just 17.7% of those surveyed voted for fluoridation. In the justification you responded to me that means that 82.3% of those surveyed don’t want it.
So it really isn't about fluoridation, it's about politicians. And I thought it was all about health. Why depend on politician for your health or anything else? It's been too long since the greater good was at the top of anyone's list. Filter your water if you are vehement about it and carry on with your life.
No, it IS about fluoridation, but that is just a symptom. We have a real problem with our city council doing the wrong things, and not paying attention. We have had this problem for a long time. It's time people finally wake up and see that our representatives only represent a small, vocal, minority and special interest groups. For all the proclaiming that Cherie does about how she is so dedicated, her statement at one city council meeting said it all "The people of Port Angeles should be grateful for all that WE GIVE THEM". Let us eat cake? Thanks Marie (Cherie)Antoinette
Speaking of Port Angeles water and renewable contracts:The Industrial Water Supply Contract between the City of PA and Nippon expires in December, 2019. It is the third 30-year extension of a contract initially entered-into in 1929 between the city and the then-existing waterfront mills. There have been no price increases for industrial water since 1929. Nippon's contract entitles it to use up to 20 MILLION GALLONS of water a DAY for the flat rate of $15,500 a year.Perhaps the City Council members who voted in favor of renewing the fluoride contract could explain their position on whether the Nippon Industrial Water contract should be renewed under a continuation of its present terms?
Watch those (TRANSFERABLE) water rights, folks. When the mill goes down, those water rights will be a valuable commodity - THE valuable commodity. Nippon can sell those for a HUGE HUGE HUGE amount.
What I don't understand is why don't all the local dentists just give out free fluoride treatments? How many young people do you know who drink water regularly?
No kidding....maybe fluoride in soft drinks would be a better vehicle.
For the same reason local mechanics don't provide free oil changes.