Friday, January 1, 2016

NO! Really? I'm Shocked - Shocked I Tell You! - AKA File Under: DUH! - AKA - The Further Adventures of the Fluoride Four

It's a New Year! Hurrah! But the PDN is still the same old behind-the-curve, day late and a dollar short purveyor of the stale, obvious truth. Hence today's headline:

Fluoride may play a role in Port Angeles mayor selection.

No! What a total surprise! Well, other than the fact that that's an obvious fact - one we already raised and discussed here.

I'll leave it to you to match the members of
the Frightful Four to the members of
the Fluoride Four.

Anyway, two of the Fluoride Four, Brad Collins and Pat Downie, have said they want to be mayor. Though she had earlier (disingenuously) said she supported Downie for the post, now Sissi Bruch has stated that she also will put herself forward for the position, as a fluoride-free alternative.

They've attacked...

Now, I hate to start the New Year off on a negative note, but...Have you seen Brad Collins lately? He's a burger or two away from a major coronary event. Which is to say his physical health is not so good - which means it's a good match for his ethical health. Pat Downie is also known to be in very ill health. I have heard comments from multiple sources, wondering if either of these gentlemen will be able to even finish their terms. In other words, fit and dynamic leaders they are not. They are more of the same fat, stale, stuck, old and out of touch status quo crew.

Sissi, naïve though she may be, is not all of that. And she does listen. And she does seem to want to do things out of a spirit of public service, rather than ego gratification.

They've returned...

All of which is to say, is there even really a choice here? Of course not. The only question is: Will the Fluoride Four end up voting as a block? I think that seems likely - BUT - if enough people wrote letters to the editor, sent emails to their friends urging them to do so, and showed up for public comment demanding a fluoride-free mayor...Well then, maybe, just maybe, you could shame one of the Fluoride Four into voting for someone from outside their tired little clique. Maybe, just maybe, you could push the Port Angeles City Council into starting off the New Year with a new(er) face, and a fresher, more modern approach to all things governance.

Maybe. But it won't happen without pressure being applied. So let the pressing begin. Squeeze 'em hard, and don't let up until they cry "Sissi!"

But will you be defeated by the Fluoride Four yet again?


  1. Given that the position of Mayor is a weak, first among equals job - and there's still the Staff pushing their agenda from behind - Sissi will be a bright, cheery, chipper figurehead.

    Granted, she'll be a better figurehead and might gently apply the brakes now and then to the machinations of the Staff and the other dolts on the Council, but don't expect miracles.

  2. I found the clip in the PDN article stating the fluoride issue had "divided the town" particularly irritating. No, the vote was clearly NOT in favor of adding known harmful chemicals to the public water supply.

    What created the outrage was the crazy notion that people who didn't bother to participate in the vote should still be counted in the decision!

    If not turning in your ballot is going to be counted in any arbitrary way the authorities want, then why bother voting at all? Where is "democracy" in this?

    The actions of the "Fluoride Four" are flat out un-American.

    Let's remember that these City Council members had previously held hours long public hearings, and for months heard opponents speak at every meeting. These council members were well aware the public was very concerned about this topic. They debated, discussed proposed, withdrew and finally agreed to the special election specifically to hear from (a pre-selected) their constituents.

    The proponents spent the Big Bucks, repeatedly mailing out colorful, glossy notifications to all area residents urging they vote to support the continued fluoridation.

    It isn't as if nobody really cared about the outcome, and the council was lead to believe they could do what ever they wanted.

    From now on out, via every media available, Port Angeles will be depicted as the place where your vote doesn't matter, and the water has been intentionally poisoned with chemicals. Coffee stands? Delis? Soups? Restaurants? Nothing "organic" in Port Angeles, as adding fluoride is against FDA rules.

    These Four have unleashed a war. Only they can stop it, and that is to vacate the seats they hold on the Port Angeles City Council. They each, by their deliberate Un-American actions, have demonstrated they do not respect the people of Port Angeles.

    So yes. It won't happen without pressure being applied. So let the pressing begin. Squeeze 'em hard, and don't let up until the Four resign in disgrace.

  3. Definitely Sissi should be Mayor. Turn out at the City Council Meeting and ask for this! Write letters to the editor! Send emails to all council members! Stand on street corners and in front of city hall holding "Sissi for Mayor" signs!
    Let's all get behind Sissi for Mayor!

  4. The moldy mattress at the Holiday Lodge is still there and it's been joined by a shipping pallet. Progress!

    1. I'm sensing an exciting new palletress hybridization industry that will provide, let's see, 300 jobs within, uh, five years for Port Angeles. Yes, really. Absolutely. I will send my bill for consulting ($45,000) to the Port immediately, if not sooner!

  5. Opening soon: Mattress Removal Service (MRS)
    slogan: "yall call we haul"
    (pallets extra)

  6. Rally for Recall tomorrow, Saturday the second of January at 314 W. First St. Big Yellow "Oddfellows Building" across from the PDN.
    Park and enter around back.


  7. I went back and read all the PDN reporting on the advisory survey, and this popped out: Rosand said that the cost would be $10,667 based on a 1/3 return rate.

    So, the city was expecting a 33% return rate, and it received 43%?

    (Which means,the advisory ballot cost MORE than expected and had a greater return than expected.)

    So, how is it that Ms. Kidd came up with what could best be described as "crazy-cat-lady logic" regarding the returns, when the result exceeded what was anticipated?

    (And, even with new math, it was 57% who didn't return the survey, as 100-43=57, not 59%, which was Kidd's number. Oh well, might as well discount a few more constituents, right Cherie?.)

    To quote Ms. Kidd (transcribed from the city recording):

    "… Our advisory poll we sent out approximately 9800 ballots, I was hoping for a more robust return, 59% didn’t return them, so they it…when, on the city council if I, when we have a vote if I don’t speak to the vote that is counted as a “yes” vote. So, when 59% did not return, so that 59% didn’t voice that they had a problem with the fluoride. 24% did vote “no”. But when we discussed the advisory vote, discussed the options and what we had, I served the city of Port Angeles, I’m on the city council, obviously, but the constituents are the people of Port Angeles, and we did send 1500 ballots to PUD customers, and they have commissions, and I don’t actually, they aren’t actually my constituents, although, but they, we have heard them, that they don’t care for fluoride, and I appreciate that, but under advisement. But my responsibility is the city of Port Angeles and the People of Port Angeles, the advisory vote came out with 24% against fluoride and 1500 PUD, that 76% didn’t vote no on the fluoride issue..."

    Seems to me the key words are: "we....discussed the options and what we had" meant that little minds were trying to figure out a way to rationalize going against the ballot.

    In an article in the PDN (same one quoted previously) Dr. Locke said that an opinion poll is statistically more accurate than an advisory vote, and cited that as why the city of Portland (in the opinion poll) were for fluoride, but on the ballot (with less return than ours) voted against fluoride.

    So, opinion polls, are better than advisory ballots because people say one thing, and vote another? Really? (At least Portland had the ethical superiority to adhere to the results of a solid "vote".)

    Without much extrapolation one can see that decision was already in, the problem was how to explain it. Perfect, let Ms. Kidd do it. (She must have pulled out the short straw). Clearly she is nervous, she lacked her normal speech pattern, in that she stuttered her way through...stammering and stumbling on the big, awkward words that had been put into her mouth.

    Yet, she claimed to be a representative of our city. (Several times, if you listen to her entire rambling rantings.) Liars always repeat a phrase to make them sound more honest. Ever notice that?

    All that came to mind is a quip attributed the late, notorious, colorful (1940's era)California lobbyist Artie Samish "no doubt he's a puppet, wonder who's hand is up his backside moving his mouth?"

    1. Cherie's inability to speak in a coherent way is a side-effect of her being unable to think in a deep or coherent way. SHE IS AN EMBARRASSMENT. Every time she opens her mouth, she sounds exactly like the idiot she is.

      So, Port Angeles, why do YOU keep electing her???

    2. Ethically, the council should have followed the will of populace - but their loophole was that it was "non binding" and an "advisory" survey. Strictly speaking, it wasn't even a "vote".

      While the idea of a recall is a good one, unfortunately, given the way the recall laws are written, I believe a judge will dismiss the recall suit as the fluoride issue was "non binding" and "advisory" and we all knew that going in.

      Once again we've fallen victim to the Charlie Brown having the football pulled away by Lucy scenario which seems so typical here in PA.

    3. @ Anon 10:36

      You're assuming the actions, including the recall petitions, will be "legal". This is now past playing by their rules. The Council members them selves set the ground rules by making up the crazy rationale that people who did not cast ballots count more than those who played by the rules, and voted.

      This isn't about fluoride anymore.

    4. Ethically is the key word of the day. Since when (historically) has our city council ever been ethical?
      That is the problem.

    5. "You're assuming the actions, including the recall petitions, will be "legal". This is now past playing by their rules. The Council members them selves set the ground rules by making up the crazy rationale that people who did not cast ballots count more than those who played by the rules, and voted.

      This isn't about fluoride anymore."

      Nicely summed up, nicely stated, and completely true. It isn't about fluoride, it's about trust. It isn't about an "advisory" vote, it's about trust and accountability.

  8. Just got back from the farmer's market and Country Aire. Counted about 30 people on the sidewalks downtown on a freezing cold Saturday morning. But oh no, downtown PA is always EMPTY!

    1. So, are you saying 30 people is a lot, or not very many? Are you being sarcastic, or not? Unclear statement.

    2. They were all headed to the "Recall the Fluoride Four" rally!

    3. on a freezing cold day....what would be an appropriate number?

    4. I went grocery shopping in Sequim on Saturday and it was twice as busy in the grocery stores compared to normal Saturday traffic so I chalk the appearance of anyone on the streets of PA to the same effect which is people just restocking their cupboards after having wiped them out over the holidays and Saturday was the first regular day after a holiday.

  9. It was nice to see all the people that showed up for the first "Recall the Fluoride Four" meeting. It was a fantastic turn out, with people from all different viewpoints present.

    As one political veteran said "This is an amazing turn-out. These Council members really need to be concerned. I've never seen anything like this in Port Angeles".

    All agreed. No more "Nicey nice". The actions around town will keep escalating until they step down.

  10. In reading over the comments about the recall effort that is just starting, it is clear people are really fed up with the way things are going in Port Angeles.

    Cherie Kidd, Pat Downie, Brad Collins and Dan Gase twisting the blatantly clear voice of the people into some never-before-heard of reasoning so that they could keep doing what the people clearly do not want? These council members are doing outrageous things, to defy the desires of the community they say they want to represent. Represent, not dictate to.

    This last council meeting ended up with the chambers being cleared by the police because there were so many citizens outraged by what the council, specifically Kidd, Gase, Collins and Downie, did. Did the PDN report this? I didn't see that reported, but was told recently by someone who was at that last council meeting. If true, this is a new low for the Peninsula Daily News.

    As said by the poster above, "This isn't about fluoride anymore". The oh-too-comfortable "Fluoride Four" council members showed us all they think they can literally ignore the residents of Port Angeles, and do whatever crazy things they want.

    People are really pissed off. This latest is just the latest in a long string of crazy things that have resulted in the high taxes and high utility bills we have to pay for their crazy decisions. Yes. Crazy, crazy, crazy!

    Time for a Change in Port Angeles. I'm going to do what ever I can to help.

    1. Come to the city council meetings (this coming Tuesday..meetings are at 6pm on the first and third Tuesdays of every month). After, we can all head over to Bar Hop (on Railroad) and get to know each other, and continue to organize.
      Please, come -- we really need to unite, and return to a citizen represented democracy.

  11. Port Angeles is a hopeless case. I say that after being here for over six years. The article in the PDN today says the market for houses here is picking up (though still lagging behind other places in WA). I'll find out for myself if that's true this spring, when I put mine on the market. I'm done. This is a place without hope.

  12. From all the chatter I've seen and heard about those 4 council members today, they should just do everyone a favor, and resign at the next meeting.

    If they really do care about Port Angeles, they should recognize the damage they have done to their own ability to have the title "Member of the Port Angeles City Council".

    A LOT of people from across the political spectrum are gearing up. This affront to democracy has lit the fuse.

    1. There have been a LOT of affronts here. We'll just see.

    2. @Anon 4:14

      CK posts a youtube of the last city council meeting where the latest affront on democracy, and affront on our sense of common decency was wrought by Cherie and crew.

      Here it is, again:

      As CK points out, the madness starts around 1:55 hours. Fast forward to that point, watch it, and then join us at this Tuesday's city council meeting to kick off the "Resign, now" campaign.


    You need to watch this if you haven't already, people. The fluoride madness starts right around an hour and fifty-five minutes into it, with Cherie Kidd - World Class Idiot - babbling on and on and on and jumping right to making a motion, without hearing what her fellow Council members have to say.

    And did I mention that Cherie Kidd is AN IDIOT?

    1. CK, quit demeaning idiots, morons and imbeciles.

      She's more daft with that special kind of hysterical, elderly/demented "crazy-cat-lady-logic" kind of way that defies comprehension.

    2. Yes, I agree that Cherie would likely be shunned by those attending an Idiot's Convention.

  14. Do YOU consider Cherie Kidd to be a success? Do you consider her qualified to speak to the subject of being a success? Because Cherie obviously believes that about herself, despite all evidence to the contrary:

    Amazing! Such total cluelessness coupled with such an ego!

  15. She puts the SUCK in Success....wasn't that her slogan?

  16. Yes, and she doesn't even have a UBI (state business license) for her Success Seminars. I can find NO WHERE that she is listed on any of the national motivational speakers bureaus. No one has ever heard of her.

    And, her "successful" business she brags (repeatedly) about running -- is just in her husband's name as the sole owner. The UBI doesn't have her name anywhere.

    She claims to be on boards but its not reflected on their websites. And, the Olympic Medical Foundation has been racked with whistleblowers and caked in mud (our past mayor Karen Rogers has had her fat fingers into that!) and there are FIFTY board members (???)

    Cherie claims to have worked for Fortune 500 companies, and has (verbally) implied she was in a managerial position (which isn't true, she was clerical).

    So, about half of what is on her bio or said is misleading or fabricated.

    Way to GO Port Angeles. Four more years? How sad.