So it sounds like a majority of the members of the City Council support the school bond and levy, and were willing to state so publically.
And yet, as a body, the City Council was unwilling to even consider formally endorsing said school bond and levy.
Huh?
The new sign outside City Hall.
Let me say all that again to see if it makes any more sense. A majority of Council members said they support the school bond and levy, and plan to vote for them. But they wouldn't even discuss the possibility of endorsing them as a governing body.
Nope. That still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
Sounds like most people speaking were also in favor of these things. We all know the school is in bad shape and then some. And now we all know where the City Council (collectively) stands on this. So why this little yes-no dance?
Half Hollow: Now with 50% more - or is it less? - hollow!
It surely couldn't be the fearsome threat posed by the few people who spoke against the bond and levy. Dick Pilling is a well-known kook who opposes everything, and offered up a "solution" that the City Council has no control over. Shelley Taylor is another well-known kook who opposes everything, and offered up the unsafe and out of date courthouse as an example of how the quality of a building doesn't matter to those using it. (Never mind, Shelley, that both the school and the courthouse are accidents - or shootings - waiting to happen. Oh, and never mind that, since 1914, there's been a lot of, you know - MONEY - poured into maintaining the courthouse.) These are the same know-nothing idiots who, as already stated, oppose everything.
So why this ridiculous posturing? Why this public twisting in the wind? I know this Council is bozo-heavy, and that their actions frequently make little sense. And I'm not even advocating for the ballot measures - but the Council members did. Sort of. Kinda. They took one step. Why so hesitant to take another? Are they just so afraid to show actual leadership on anything? What goes on here?
It is curious. Under state law, the only persons in government who can advocate for or against any ballot issue are individual, elected officials or the sitting, legislative body, after majority support during a public vote. It is the first time in my recollection (over the last 40 + years) that a local legislative body has NOT voted to support a local, school issue.
ReplyDeleteSequim City Council refused to endorse the Sequim School District's bond proposal last April. The school district and the campaign are not asking for their endorsement this time.
DeleteI think it speaks to the fact - FACT - that even the brain-dead members of the city council know they are presiding over a sinking ship. While it goes down, they seem ever more desperate to not offend anyone, anywhere, at any time, even it that means strange contortions like this one will be enacted in public. If you can't be smart, be oh so nice. "It's another great day in Port Angeles!"
DeleteUnless you're a student.
One thing not mentioned a lot--and should be--is the School Levy for maintenance is not used for maintenance. They let the schools run down and then say look how bad the school buildings are. Secondly, this clown car we call a school board it a bunch of nincompoops, with the accent on "poops." They seem more interested in parking their buddies in good jobs than educating the kids. Further they use their not-so-limited resources to settle personal vendettas instead of seeking what is best for schools. Finally, what is going on at the Skills Center? Seems state inspectors are coming in this week with the possible intention of shutting down the building as their new right wing nut site director, Templeton has not performed her duties insofar as keeping reports up to date and ensuring the proper use of monies.
ReplyDeleteYou sure use the word "seems" a lot, like you don't know anything for sure but are just speculating based on what you can see. Try finding out for sure before making baseless conjectures that could actually hurt someone. What kind of state inspectors are you talking about? Under what authority can the "shut the building down?" What exact duties has the director failed at? Or do you just have a "personal vendetta" to settle?
DeleteThe original language and intent of M&O Levies had little to do with "maintenance" of the buildings, the money was designed for the Maintenance OF Operations. The great, great majority of those levy monies, state-wide, are spent on Teachers and Para Educators who are not at all funded by current basic education funding (computer science, music, art, advanced math and science, and special education). The Mcleary decision should correct that issue, when they expand the definition of "basic education". If you look at the information from OSPI, you will actually see that the PA School District has consistently spent a much larger % of their total budget on building maintenance than average, and much more than cities and counties do out of their budgets. That issue is a completely false arguement!
DeleteMaintenance and operations levies are not solely for maintenance of the buildings, they are for maintenance of the educational program as well. Maintenance and operations levies are used for costs not covered by state funding, like property and liability insurance, utilities, custodial services, staffing determined essential by the board that are not covered by state funding (for example, PA has a terrific elementary strings program, think that's funded by the state? Think again). You really need to take the time to learn about how school funding actually operates before you make a critical statement. Ask questions first, then critique from an informed basis.
Delete"Seems" you're right.
DeleteViewing the council's action (or inaction) here, I'd say it was their commentary on their own lack of appeal to the public, a vote of no confidence in the school administration, or both.
ReplyDeleteWell, the question you ask, why the council won't take an official vote, I think is pretty easy. They want it both ways. They want to appear to be supportive, but not really. So, they have the best chance of (they think) angering the least number of people so when election time comes this fall, they can be re-elected.
ReplyDeleteLet's remember that they voted to add another $25 million to the residents' tax bill at that same meeting, with that sewer project. With the school levy, AND the sewer project millions, that is a LOT of millions to lay on the residents to pay in one meeting.
Leadership? Balancing the options with needs? Not here.
No Kidding, Digilio must go...
DeleteHunh? Why worry about the couple hundred thousand McEntire is throwing to his buddies, when the residents are facing another $120 million in tax increases?
ReplyDeleteIsn't all this money just going to the general fund to keep the city afloat? And $98million for, what, a thousand students is a LOT OF MONEY. I can't afford another $400-800 a year on my already bloated taxes. Sure, if they'd actually value my house at the market rate, instead of some pie-in-the-sky amount that has no basis in reality, but no. I can barely afford my yearly taxes, as it is, much less add another grand on it -- along with the ever rising utility rates. I'm freezing, in the dark, and poor, too.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. I cannot afford this crazy idea.
Did you vote last city election?
DeleteYes. Voted in every election. Why?
DeleteI see that GAY PORT ANGELES made it onto the front page of the PDN today.
ReplyDeleteHomophobes in Port Angeles? I'm shocked, just shocked!
DeleteDOH! Made me look. Joke is on me.
DeleteLesbians still count as GAY SEX PORT ANGELES. At least the lesbians around here are more likely to be out, as opposed to the closet-case menfolk.
DeleteNo, sweetie, "gay" is a term that refers to a male homosexual person (i.e. boys and boys). It means hot Port Angeles GAY (man-to-man) sex, and that's it. Doesn't mean homosexual women. Lesbian's are lesbian (i.e. girls and girls). Now, both are HOMOSEXUAL, but both are not "gay".
ReplyDeleteIt's like saying Apples are Oranges, because both of them are FRUIT. Okay? So, get the terms straight, so you won't be accused of being a homophobe, basher or ignorant. Got it?
Lets review:
Gay is gender specific, it means homosexual MEN.
Lesbian is gender specific, it means homosexual WOMEN.
That's why it's the LGBT movement is called that (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans-sexual).
Not to blow off the top of your head, but lets further clarify: Transgender people may be straight, lesbian, gay, or bisexual. It all depends on how THE INDIVIDUAL identifies.
vive la différence!!
So I see that the supposedly GAY SEX-friendly Democrats in PORT ANGELES have announced (via Port O Call) that they are going to be "reorganizing" themselves, with new rules and guidelines proposed. They include links to several things, but NOT to the proposed changes themselves. Which does make it seem like they're trying to obscure something...I smell a rat...
ReplyDeleteYou're invited to attend the reorganization meeting. Course you couldn't hide behind your keyboard then hunh? Maybe you should get out more.
DeleteAfter all the dirty dealings done by the Steve Tharinger/Matthew Randazzo/Jack Slowriver crowd, they could use some housecleaning.
DeleteTrouble is, after all the dirty dealings, it's hard to have any faith in this local branch of the Democratic Party, Tharinger is still in office. Randazzo was rewarded for his hitman work by being given a cushy state job. So what has really changed?
Well, other than that we now have THREE Republican County Commissioners - thanks to the abovementioned Democrats, who helped keep Mike Chapman in there.
Anon 9:18 AM...I think the point is that, on one hand they say they're proposing changes, but, on the other hand, they don't seem to want to make it easy (like posting it online) for people to know what those proposed changes might be. Telling people to "come to the meeting," without telling anything about the content of that meeting is, at best, poor PR, and at worst, deceptive.
DeleteOne of the last changes that I know of that the Democrats here passed, allowed them to endorse candidates that aren't Democrats. That was during the last Chapman race. We all know how that turned out, and now we have to live with those results.
Trust is at an all-time low, okay? Please understand that, if nothing else.
talk is not action. We must keep repeating this. This town is very well versed in saying one thing, doing another.
DeleteRoger Fight sent out the invitation to this meeting. Roger Fight is a clueless, spineless...person who hardly inspires confidence in the outcome.
DeleteAnonymous 8:49 PM...Are you including the local Democratic Party in your assessment? They too seem well versed in being duplicitous, unfortunately. I wish we had more/better third party choices locally.
DeleteAs we face another $120 million in taxes, to be added to the already high tax burden the local population of 18,000, I wonder if there are any limits to how much in taxes we are expected to pay?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure the new school buildings will be very nice (even though no specific designs even exists yet. They'll get to actual particulars once they pass the levy). Of course our children deserve the very best education we can provide for them. I'm sure Cutler's Turd Tank was refurbished in a way we would all be proud of. That million dollar walking bridge they built at the Tank o Crap is a beauty. Those artificial beaches built downtown next to the log yards will become the West Coast Coney Island Nathan envisions.
But at some point, there are limits to everything. Sure, we all would love to see that Rolls parked out front, but most of us know we don't have the money for it. So, we don't go and buy it. Unlike City Hall.
Have we forgotten the City's finance guy who told us only a few months ago that the City had reached it's taxing limits? I guess it is different when the voters approve a tax levy, as opposed to the City imposed tax increases.
Priorities.
Gateway: $15 Million
ReplyDeleteHarborWorks: $5 million
Pocket Beaches downtown $1 million
Rain Gardens west side $1 million
CSO project: $50 million
Business Incubation Project: $8 million
New PUD Building: $30 million
Carlsborg Sewer Project $50 million
Bluff Stabilization: $15 million
These are the projects already completed or on the books to be completed.
Divide this by the number of jobs in the county and we're in a heap of cutler.
Don't forget to add the $100 million for the school levy. Same small group of people have to pay for that, too.
DeleteAnd, how many actual tax payers ARE there in Port Angeles? Out of the 18,000 residents, there are around 7,000 residences. How many are kids? How many are on unemployment or welfare?
You forgot $20 million for OMC's new building.
DeleteThe bluff stabilization will cost way more than $15 million. I wouldn't be surprised if the CSO/Turd Tank fiasco also exceeded $50 million.
DeleteThere is a basic premise in engineering: The more complex the design, the more likely it is to have problems. Keeping the rain OUT of the sewer was the simply solution to CSO. But, can't pay lots of cronies doing that, so we have the residents committed to hundreds of thousands of dollars every year in basic operating costs to have millions of gallons of otherwise good ole rainwater treated full-on as sewage. Smart, that staff down at Port Angeles city hall.
DeleteAnd, remember the first millions spent at the landfill, also a Cutler project, failed only a couple years after completion, resulting in the need to spend millions more on the do-over.
Gotta love those smart guys down at Public Works.
And, have you seen what these smart guys have come up with, with the "rain garden" project? That sticks out into the streets, an accident just waiting to happen. THAT is just down the street from where the CURRENT Public Works head now lives!
Yes, and that is why we get no new high school, no civic field repairs, and nothing else. JUST SAY NO to bonds. Sorry, folks, we're hocked up to our eyeballs, and the city is insolvent. We need to quit robbing peter to pay paul, and that is what the grant chasing is all about.
ReplyDeleteWe need a city council that can feel our pain. COPA is the biggest influence on spending in the area. They cannot say no to these outlandish proposals that "staff" put in front of them. Three seats are up for grabs this November, Kidd, Bruch and Danny boy. With 2 or 3 progressive voices we can put a stop to this madness. If Sissi is going to run again she needs to let folks know lest they come after her seat too. Everyone register to vote now so we can make a stand against more and more financial burden placed on a dwindling number of taxpayers. Never, in recent history, has the voice of the people been more necessary and vital to the continued health of our economy.
ReplyDeleteIf Sissi is going to run for anything, I've heard it's for the EXIT. Friends tell me that she plans to join Max in getting the hell out of here when she's through.
Delete