It's the old question of do you throw out the good in hopes of finding the perfect? Only, in this case, there's also the question of is the good actually any good at all.
I'm referring, of course, to the City's so-called "ethics code," which was the subject of much discussion and tinkering at this week's City Council meeting. Tinker, tinker, tinker - but is the code a stinker?
From my perspective, it seems like pretty much everyone would agree that there's a need for some sort of official ethics code, to address legitimate issues when they are raised. But the question is, will the existing code, the one with Bill Bloor's fingerprints all over it, ever be able to really serve that purpose?
Is it flawed but fixable, like a majority of the Council members said (and voted)? Or, is it like dissenting voice Lee Whetham says, flawed from it's very inception in an ultimately fatal way?
Looking at the behavior of the current Council members, and the chaos the ethics code has enabled, do you think it's been effective? Do you favor changes to it? Or do you think that the City needs to scrap it and redo it completely - say with a new City Council after the next election?
This second ethics panel is all about protecting the city personnel and they showed it from day one. The judge on the panel thinks he's in a court room and tosses out "double jeopardy" just to confuse those not reading too closely. Double jeopardy only comes into play in CRIMINAL proceedings and it is up to the accused to bring up the defense. Why is an ethics committee member running defense of the accused? That would be like a judge telling a defendant how to answer questions on direct examination. Also, the judge has admitted he is making these decisions unilaterally without consultation with the other two members of his panel. This alone should disqualify him from hearing any more ethics complaints. We have to admit Bill Bloor, city attorney drafted this to fail or at least to be toothless. The only thing that can be accomplished with an ethics charge is a bit of embarrassment. It becomes clear--none of these miscreants are embarassable. As soon as any of the favored council members are charged the PDN begins rehabilitating their reputation (such as it is). Notice how now Gotlieb will ask Cherie Kidd's opinion on everything that happens in the city. She was so "golly-gee-how great it is" to learn Edna Petersen is now on the board of the downtown association. Hey Gotlieb, there is a pot-hole down on Front Street, see what Kidd thinks of that. Oh, it's overcast today, see what Kidd thinks of today's weather patterns.
ReplyDeleteYes, Cherie Kidd is in campaign mode, already. She is making the rounds, and, as you point out correctly, is being helped by Paul Gottlieb and the PDN.
DeleteI was about to say something lame like, "The people of this town have to decide..." but remembered most people in this town (or most towns) just don't care.
Most people in American society just are not involved. They just go about their daily business being happy consumers.
I drove by both Walmart and the newly opened McDonalds yesterday (on my way to visit a friend), and the parking lots of both were very busy. Far more people at McDonalds than at Gastropub, or ever are at Gastropub at any time. Far more people at Walmart, than at ANY store in Port Angeles.
Get a clue, PADA. Get a clue Port Angeles. Trump Nation doesn't need or want any of your high minded "culture". We want cheap. And, cheap rhetoric, to make us feel good with our cheap fast food.
Ethics? Who cares?
"none of these miscreants are embarassable."
DeleteThat about sums it all up. These Boards and the Council are all ignorant and proud of it. Why desire to do anything correct when you can F up everything you touch? Bloor is there just to make damn sure everything is F'd up.
6:06, per the ethics code, one member of each board is selected for judicial experience. Maybe that's just for window dressing? Maybe he just has to have those skills, not use them for anything?
DeleteAlso, the concept of double jeopardy has been in law for centuries, not just in the 5th Amendment. Lawyers and judges know that stuff. Even Google knows it.
While Lee is factually correct about the ethics code having been put in place specifically to try and "get" Max, the fact remains that Lee himself was placed in the election to run against Max, in yet another effort to "get" him. So, yes, Lee is factually correct, but also displaying a lot of chutzpah in playing it like he wasn't part of the whole effort to drive Max out. He is just one more council member with no shame at all, it seems.
ReplyDeleteThe good ol' boy network used a fake "ethics" complaint to try and discredit Max...Which caused the city to jump and adopt a jury rigged (in the most literal sense) ethics code...Which has since been used (unsuccessfully) to try and get some of the good ol' boy cronies...And which is now being knocked by one of the good ol' boys who tried to push Max out in the first place.
DeleteHey, Port Angeles...Circular firing squad much? Even a scorecard won't help you keep track of all the lunatic players in this cesspool. It's just sick to its core.
And there we have our town, or what's left of it.
Sidebar - there was an article in yesterday's PDN about the perjury charge being referred to the State now. It wasn't in the online version. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist but I can't help but feel that was intentional. First they disable the comments, then they just refrain from putting anything important at all on the online version. Is it to stifle knowledge? Stifle comments? Or just try to get people to actually subscribe?
ReplyDeleteOh, but actually it was in the online version. http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20160518/news/305189985/
DeleteActually Whetham ran against Peter Ripley for an open seat on the council. I think Max was already BOI by the time of that election. Please check your references. I'm not sure but am pretty sure.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean by BOI, but Whetham signed up to run for the seat Max was elected to, well before Max announced he wasn't running for reelection. In other words, yes, Whetham signed up to run (so far as he knew) against Mania. Yes, and Peter was in the mix, too, of course. (He may get in there yet!)
DeleteBOI = Back on Interstate
DeleteBacking Out of Idiocy?
DeleteBloor complaining about how the law is flawed, when he wrote it, is rich. He can't write. Period. His contract are all flawed. Everything he does reeks of incompetence.
ReplyDeleteThe council meeting Gase (the man who can't figure out the difference between "refuge" and "refuse" and uses the two words interchangeably) didn't want to step away from the speaker phone so that the rest of the council could discuss replacing the homophobic, racist, and brain addled (but who always gets his letters published in the PDN) ethics committee member with another (he can't do it, suddenly, too much hate to spew).
Gase was being every bit the whiny little prick that he is, was crowing about how HE wasn't under any ethics complaint, "I'm the only one" he repeated many time. What a putz.
However, just because he had been cut loose by Cherie's buddy Williams, it had never been discussed by the council. Turns out the information had never been given to them, because the staff decided (which probably included Bloor) to wait until the outcome of the Ethics #2.
Round and round they went. Bloor, unlike his usual, spouting of bullshit, hesitated. He conferred with the city manager. Finally, they asked for a 10 minute recess, so they could "research" the law. So, a 10 minute break.
They decide that Gase should recuse himself from this debate. They explain it to Gase, and since he clearly was NOT paying attention at the outset, didn't realize it was about replacing an ethics member on complaint #2 (which the audience understood....it was explained minutes before). So, Gase was all "oh, oh oh, I didn't understand." And, allowed himself to be put on mute. (He was attending via telephone....)
So, nearly 30 minutes of bullshit, because Gase can't pay attention to the meeting.
I think in addition to the ethics rules, the council should decide to do away with "phone in" representation. Clearly, it is a waste of time, for everyone.
And, Gase, if you read this -- stop being so stupid. Yes, report this to the police, I called you names. You ARE a PUTZ.
So I'm not the only one who thinks he's a PUTZ?
DeleteI pity his children, being raised with someone like that as an example.
DeleteI'm sure there are a majority of people who believe him a PUTZ would also describe him, thus: douche, doink, dolt, nimrod, mimbo, numpty, dingus, himbo, stoopid window licker.
DeleteWhile the remainder believe him to be a finger-licking fidiot chowder-head, buffoon.
And, these are the "NICE" terms. Every town needs an idiot... we have him.
(Gase, are you gonna call the cops now? Butt-hurt, much?)
Hey now! At least a douche has some use and purpose in life, unlike, well, you know...
DeleteIf at first you don't succeed....just continue to suck.
ReplyDeleteUm, maybe other cities might have already successfully implemented a code of ethics? You think?
ReplyDeleteWhy in the hell does NO ONE AT THIS DUMB-ASS CITY ever want to know how others are doing something right?
For that matter, why in the hell do people here even cast one vote for these morons? With the possible exception of recently saving the fishing derby, I fail to see any benefits whatsoever bestowed by them unto their electors.
These are not rhetorical questions. When citizens have no spine, they bend over easier.
This just in: Edna Petersen has now expanded her 28% discount to local residents instead of just tourists but, for one day only. You may remember she went about the city urging downtown merchants to offer discounts to tourists only. This is a slap in the face to the local residents who support the merchants year round. Will the last downtown shopper please turn out the lights as you head out to Walmart. Thanks Edna for running folks away from the downtown sector.
ReplyDeleteLeaving town this afternoon, around 5, the parking lot for McDonalds was packed, with a line -up at the drive through. Only a small fraction at the new Sports Bar, or any of the other food places I drove past.
DeleteAnd yes, Walmart parking lot very full.
I drove through Sequim around mid day yesterday. Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Costco were all packed and traffic was busy and slow along Washington Street from River Road down tot he far east end of Sequim.
DeleteI'm betting downtown PA was - empty.
As Gertrude Stein said: There is no there, there.
DeleteI wouldn't buy Edna's crap if it were 100% off.
Deletespecial council meeting on this upcoming Tuesday (24th?) to discuss "council procedures" (and ethics code). They can't stop messing with it now that someone's titty got caught in the wringer.
ReplyDeleteThe code itself is fine.
ReplyDeleteIt's the Ethics Board members that need to be reformed.
If they would just do the job assigned and review the facts without interference by Bloor, we could move through this process.
But like any investigation here (as in other places), those involved just can't seem to proceed without an ulterior objective. When you sacrifice yourself with that, the end in mind justifies any means to get there.
Why is that?
Why can't an official just follow the law regardless of where it leads?
Why can't they just be decent and honest about it?
The Code is just fine.