Friday, March 11, 2016

Stopped Clock Cherie, the Tone-Deaf Harpy

Is it being over the top to say that the Port Angeles City Council often makes foolish, shortsighted and/or less than fully informed decisions?

Within that decision-making process, is it safe to say that Cherie Kidd is often mush-mouthed, ill-informed and/or generally discombobulated by the whole thinking thing?

"Can you believe it, Bill? These little people won't
sit down and shut up and let me serve them!"

And yet! Like a stopped clock, every so often, Cherie does manage to be correct. Just like her mental match, Peter Ripley, every once in a while, Cherie hits the target, albeit accidentally.

Which brings us to Cherie's reaction to Marolee Smith's revised and clarified ethics complaint against Cherie:

Kidd said Thursday that she had not read the newest version of Smith's complaint but is confident the ethics board will "very quickly" dismiss it.

"I absolutely disagree with all of her assumptions to begin with," Kidd said. "I give no credibility to her allegations."

Such steel-pantied confidence in the face of so much public unrest! From what source does this inner strength spring? Is it the confidence that comes from knowing that the whole ethics board set-up is just that - a set-up, a farce, a fake - intended to shield the dysfunctional status quo? Or could such seeming confidence come from a much purer, much simpler source - which is to say, Cherie's simple little mind?

That seems HIGHLY LIKELY to me. After all, having a dismissive attitude about a complaint from a member of the public that centers around your dismissive attitude towards members of the public seems like a misstep, PR-wise. It's incredibly tone-deaf, to say the least, but does neatly (if unintentionally) encapsulate the problem Cherie has created for herself. So much so that it really makes me wonder about Cherie's competence as a "professional" "motivational" "speaker" - or any one of those words, frankly.

You might want to listen to the lady, Cherie...


  1. I'm not trying to be too clever here, but....Is it really ethical for someone who is the subject of an ethics complaint to be talking to the media about it? Seems to me the best and only appropriate comment would be to say "no comment."

  2. She can't help herself, get her talking and there is no telling what will come out of her mouth. There is no clutch between thinking a babbling.

    1. I think there is no "thinking" between the clutch and the babbling.

  3. Crabby grandpa Pat Downie will probably be even more put out when it's his turn.

    Darn these ungrateful kids anyway!

  4. Letter to the Editor/Publisher

    Terry Ward, Publisher
    Leah Leach, Editor
    Peninsula Daily News

    Hi Terry & Leah:

    The way I read it your reporter, Mr. Gottleib's reputation for harassing older females under the guise of seeking comment has preceded him with regard to Marolee Smith. My guess is she is refusing to talk to him because she has heard how he accused and abused Dr. Eloise Kailin and Edna Willadsen.

    Also, he keeps using fluoride over and over in his stories ostensibly about ethics violations of city council members. He is perpetually casting all the upheaval at city council as caused by fluoride opponents fighting fluoride.

    A plain language reading of Smith's complaint mentions nothing about fluoride but Gottlieb seems intent upon marginalizing anyone who would take issue with council behaviors.

    (you may have read a thread on a local blog I sent you suggesting Mr. Gottlieb gets special treatment from various government entities in exchange for short-changing your readers in his reportage)

    When you discovered how much he left out of his story on the night of acting mayor, Cherie Kidd's meltdown, you temporarily relieved him of the city council beat. Now, it appears, he is back with a vengeance. Mr. Gottlieb has lost any credibility as an objective reporter (at least on this subject) by virtue of his minimalist reportage and abuse of two elderly women over the phone.

    His interviews are coming very close to "Telephone Harassment."

    I do hope you will attempt to steer your paper back toward objective reporting and deal with the two "sides" evenly.

    Dale Wilson

    1. Hey Dale...Let us know if your letter makes it through the Gottlieb Gauntlet...

  5. Of course the PDN made it about flouride again. Yes there is a flouride issue at hand, but the complaints are about issues far beyond that. There is no public trust in the City Council at this point and they should be embarrassed to show their faces.

  6. Yep, Cherie has summarized the problem facing her, and without a hint of irony. She is such a moron.

  7. This is exactly what the "business as usual" powers that be folks do around here: pretend anything they don't want to hear doesn't exist.

    of COURSE Cherie is going to say the complaint has no merits, even though she hasn't even read it. That is how these folks have run things for years. Make decisions without bothering to consider the facts brought forward.

    And, it is so perfectly consistent with the issue that started this latest round of turmoil in town, Cherie Kidd's gavel banging attempts to silence public input.

    Cherie had had enough of the public by the time she showed up at that meeting. She and the others had a plan they had discussed before the city council meeting even started. The official looking, but totally contrived proclamations on City Letterhead prohibiting the public from bringing signs into the chambers were all over the walls before tthe public arrived. The decisions that Cherie would run the meeting was made in advance. As the video shows, Cherie Kidd was baiting the public into shouting back at her, so that she could perform her predetermined and contrived act of victim-hood.

    The City has operated this way for years now. Although some of the names have changed, the mindset and memberships have been consistent. These people thread their ways through the various civic groups, committees and organizations that maintain the staus quo in this town.

    Look around.

    See what making decisions without bothering to understand the issues gets you? Empty streets. Failing businesses. A population that decreases as it's members leave to find a reasonable and decent community elsewhere.

    But, they remain defiant. Proud of what they have wrought.

  8. Or, instead of "no comment", an apology:

    "I'm sorry that I have offended anyone enough to file an ethic's complaint. It is unsettling, but, I welcome the ethics complaint, because we can all do a better job. I believe fully in the ethics code that I HELPED to pass. The intent was to make a better, more responsive government for all. I believe the ethics board will do it's duty. I accept whatever decision they come to."

    That is HOW someone with a brain and some class would handle it. Contrition is the mark of a strong character, not a weak one.

    What Cherie is showing with her comments is how very, very classless and clueless she is.

    To admit fault, especially from a politician, rather than encourages one’s critics silences them.

    What can one say -- ever, in any situation -- when anger is met with: ”You are right, and I’m truly, deeply sorry?”

    It’s a gesture of self-humbling, a willingness to be less powerful and give the other space for grievance. Moments of genuine apology are blessed moments.

    Of course, if anyone were to SAY this and try to reason with Cherie all she would hear would be "blah blah blah bla-blab, blah blah blah".

    The way she paints it she is too stupid to read, too arrogant to care, and too shallow to understand.

    Way to go, old girl!

    1. "That is HOW someone with a brain and some class would handle it. Contrition is the mark of a strong character, not a weak one."


  9. What is the deal with Bloor?

    "They don't have to use Roberts Rules". But, it's in the Rules of Procedure for the council. The council seems to have ALWAYS used them, and referred to them.

    The Open Meetings Act (WA STATE) says that small governments must use some parliamentary system of rules, so if not Roberts, what? Sure, they don't HAVE TO USE that system, but they must use some system, and any system they use will still not allow a simple "we're adjourned" in the middle of a speaker who has the floor.

    Oh, I know, Bloor is saying that we can adopt no manual at all. I KNOW, the Council can draft their own 100% customized rules (written and proposed by him).

    That's it!

    Complete anarchy, except for whatever the Bloor bylaws specify plus whatever unique rules the Council decide to create for themselves.

    Nevermind, that it would take YEARS to develop such a set of rules -- how big would these rules be? 100, 200, 300, a 1000 pages, several volumes?

    That sure would be job security, wouldn't it Bloor?

    They have to use something, so why is babbling Bloor, the Bullfrog of Bullshit, saying "they don't have to use Roberts"?

    DUH, so, why don't you complete your thought there, old man.

    If they don't use Roberts, because Cherie doesn't follow them, then what can they use instead?

    1. he reality is simple. Yes, the City Council has operated EXCLUSIVELY with Roberts Rules of Order for decades. Any set of minutes verifies this.

      What Bloor is saying is: "We do what ever we want. We'll use Roberts Rules as convenient, and not if it suits our needs. It only becomes a problem when someone complains."

      Reminds me of "Constructive use".

    2. Council uses their own set of procedural rules.

      #7 says procedural decisions are to be made by the Chair, who "may refer" to Robert's Rules. That's all it says, and that's the only reference to Robert's.

    3. @Anon 7:54 Yes, that may be what it says on paper, but functionally, the Council operates exclusively by Roberts, and has for decades.

      This sounds a lot like a property owner who has been allowing people to use a trail through their property for years, and suddenly tries to fence them out. When the people complain, the property owner waves their title, saying there is no trail marked on it. Yes, but because the property owner has allowed the public to use the trail for years without obstruction, the courts rule in favor of the public.

      Of course, that isn't this city. They will tell you you anything that suits their goals.

      Want to make a list of those instances?

    4. Except MSRC (the group that trains our municipal governments in WA state) says we gotta use SOME parliamentary form, and we gotta follow the basics...which includes an adjournment to be first/second, asked if any pending business, etc., and NO one can do this when someone else has the floor.,-Meetings-and-Process/Parliamentary-Procedure.aspx

    5. Some places have Kangaroo Courts, we have a Kangaroo Council and advisory staff.

    6. Except that MRSC page actually says: "Although following parliamentary procedure is not required..." That means we don't gotta. It may lead to issues ... but we don't gotta. It's really hard to make a complaint stick, when it assumes rules council has never adopted.

    7. At Anon 8:23

      I think you're flat wrong in that interpretation.

      Let's think about the " ..usual and accustomed.. " language that grants First Nations folks access to lands.

      There are ll kinds of situations in society that become "the expected norm" because of the repeated use and created expectation.

      As we see, when the council suddenly, with out warning or justification, varies the procedures it has followed for decades, the public it serves react with concern.

      Let's turn this topic around, and ask "What justification did Cherie Kidd have to suddenly, without warning, and with City business still to be done, end the regularly scheduled City Council meeting?"

      Society expects it's government and laws to be predictable, clear and functional. If a council member or judge can do anything they feel like doing, at any time, we would have mayhem.

    8. One does not have to use Roberts Rues but an agency that has its act together should have passed a resolution at some point saying what rules they were adopting, or they should have had an attachment indicating what their rules are. Just having nothing and nobody having ever questioned it, is just another indicator of the apathy and incompetence.

    9. This is such a non issue.

      Who really thinks Cherie Kidd knew that Roberts Rules were not officially adopted? She has been on the City Council for years, and operated under Roberts Rules at every meeting.

      The issue at hand is not what the City's official policy is, after the fact. The issue is what Cherie Kidd did that night. Anyone can watch the video and clearly see what Cherie Kidd did that night. It is not only clear that Cherie Kidd made a dramatic departure from the way all city council meetings previously were conducted, but that she did it with absolute intention.

      From before the meeting even started, with her creating and posting unauthorized signs, it was clear she came to that public meeting with a list of ways she was going to try to silence the public. There is NO question she violated the City's Ethics Rules.

  10. Don't forget it all leads to a council showdown, and she has no vote. 3-3 draw? As CK often says: Place your bets! LOL

  11. I know that they say Zika, with its link to terrible birth defects and decreased intellectual capacity, has just made its first appearance on the Olympic Peninsula. But can we be sure that Cherie Kidd's parents weren't exposed to it way back when?

    1. Zac Garripoli is a crank and no one should take her seriously.

    2. Her? What's wrong with cranks, anyway?

  12. Love the photo accompanying this article. If I was Peach and she got that close to me--with that look on her face, I would start topping cotton. Notice the staid gentleman to Harpie's left? That is Harpie's hubby. A decent fellow. Imagine waking up next to that face every morning for the rest of your life. Imagine footing the bill for her wardrobe for the rest of your life. Imagine explaining to your friends when they ask, "What the hell is wrong with your wife?" for the rest of your life.

  13. Her wardrobe isn't all that expensive, but think of the MAKEUP bills!

    1. Let's keep the personal insults non-sexist, okay?

    2. Ummm, "Steel-pantied" is a bit sexist...

    3. Ah ha! A gotcha moment...Almost. I used that phrase because it's one that Cherie Kidd herself has used many, many, many times in the past when talking about taking on her big, grown-up duties as a Council member. It never fails to make one shudder with revulsion.

      But I will note the possibility of giving offense in the future.

    4. No wonder she's so grumpy in the winter...steel panties. I shudder to think. Sort of like a brass-assed monkey sitting on an iceberg.

  14. Seems this town needs a Wall of Shame. A tall one.

    At the Octopus would be nice, so all might see.

  15. More good news for Port Angeles!

    Despite the article in today's PDN proclaiming that Albertsons will buy back the Haggen store I've just heard directly from an employee, who had confirmation from a manager, that the store will instead be closing in 60-90 days.

    So your choices for groceries in PA are going to be Safeway, Safeway East, Country Aire and Walmart. And 65 people lose their jobs.

    1. With doses of Arsenic, Lead and Fluoride in each location.

    2. Sunny Farms for the win!

  16. Everyone bring your lovely yellow and black signs to the home show tomorrow and Sunday at the high school. Be ready to tell people why these four miscreants must step down now.

    1. Yes. The more people that show up at every event, the faster we get rid of these poor excuses for leadership.

  17. Using the argument that they "don't gotta " use Roberts Rules when it fact they always have is unethical.

  18. Ethical smethical, this is Port Angeles...