That Noise You Hear Is Silence

When it comes to the daily working (and scheming) of Port Angeles, there are lots of things you don't expect to hear much about. I'm sure no one is too surprised to not hear a lot of talk or planning for the upcoming MILLION DOLLAR BALLOON PAYMENT due on the Niichel property. So far as I know, that MILLION DOLLAR BALLOON PAYMENT is still looming out there, with the City woefully unprepared for it. But, SHHH!, we don't really want to talk about that, think about that, or even acknowledge that, thank you very much.

Here's another fine mess you've gotten us into!



Then there are the things that you'd expect to hear about - but don't. Remember when Pixie Dust Bob Larsen of the "Composites Recycling Technology Center" promised a "series" of "big announcements"? As in, "Coming Soon!" more exciting news! That was over a month ago, and there has followed a total of, as I count it, one "big announcement." (One in a series! Collect them all!) Maybe the news that the State was reconsidering their grant funding put the brakes on the rest of the announcements, but...Gee, Bob, was your whole great idea, successful business model, commercial enterprise so dependent on grant funding that one little bump in the road would cause it to crash?

It kind of looks like maybe so. Which, uh, kind of makes us wonder if it really is such a great idea or successful business model or whatever else you peddled. Kind of sounds like Pen Ply all over again, frankly. That didn't end so well for anyone - except for local scumbag Grant Munro, that is.

Shhh! Quiet, please! People are trying

to watch a movie that's not being shown.



Then there's the Lincoln Theater, which finally sold - they say. This was another case where the entire arrangement seemed a little suspect, but the purported purchaser promised more information would be coming soon...And again, that was over a month ago, and I haven't heard any further word about plans, designs, management, or even the proper and certified closing of the sale.

On a related note, I also haven't heard anything about how Scott Nagel is swiftly and surely returning the money he (supposedly) raised in his (failed) effort to get people to buy the Lincoln for him.

So, anyone got any inside dope on these dopey endeavors? Sucker-bait schemes make a lot of noise in being born, but seem to like to die in silence. At the very least, let's ask a few more questions, shall we?

In the meantime, I'm going to sit back and wait for the next "big announcement" - like maybe a new airline to service Port Angeles that's "Coming Soon!"

DIY Airlines - Taking off soon!



JFFA Starts with a BANG!

Holy shit! A shootout on Highway 101! Just as the Memorial Day and JFFA weekend is starting. The perfect time for traffic to come to a dead stop on 101. Port Angeles really can't catch a break, can it?

Anyway, the comments on the Peninsula Daily News article about the shooting are many, and interesting. Someone who seems like they were on their way to town posted the link below, which paints a none-too-pretty picture of Port Angeles, crime-wise. Even visitors are getting in on the act...

http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/wa/port-angeles/crime/

Positively the Worst Person to Have Representing You

Oh...my...god.

First of all, thanks to the reader who tipped me off to this promo video for the NEW Cherie Kidd Show on PAPA TV - a venture that is, with this offering, already digging its own grave. (And digging it deep...PAPA, what were you thinking?!?)

All ego, no brain: Ladies and gentlemen, may I present

Miss Havisham...I mean, Cherie Kidd!



What is there to say? Cherie is a laughing stock. She is a totally incompetent politician, and a known liar. Even when she isn't lying, she constantly mangles facts, concepts and even simple words - all in that truly horrible screechy voice of hers. She's a batty, badly-facelifted old fruitcake, and a worse goodwill ambassador is hard to imagine.

Anyway, here's the video itself - viewer beware!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKiG99wf8A

One thing to look for is that lovely aerial view of Port Angeles at the one-minute mark...The one that is about one-third the log yard on the waterfront. And one question I have is this: Was soulless and sad Nathan West on the clock when he walked along the water with Cherie for this?

Gee, Losing Money is a SKILL???

Hot off the presses today from the State Auditor's office (there's a place that could use some good news) comes the results of an audit of Port Angeles School District No. 121. Or more correctly, the Findings of said audit - as in, Official Findings, which aren't good things to Find at all.

The following is part of one of the Findings from the audit:

Schedule of Audit Findings and Responses

The District did not have adequate controls over Skills Center contracts to ensure amounts due from participating governments were collected.

Background: Port Angeles School District No. 121 hosts the North Olympic Peninsula Skills Center for the purpose of training students of the District, four neighboring school districts and Peninsula College in certain vocational skills. The Skills Center is located in abuilding co-owned by the District and Peninsula College.

The District allocates the Skills Center net loss to all participating governments based on factors outlined in the Skills Center interlocal agreement. Net losses totaled $712,839 for fiscal years 2012 through 2015.

Description of Condition

Contracts - During our review of the Skills Center contracts, we found:
 
* The District did not properly allocate enrollment slots to participating governments or prepare and annual budget covering the proposed operation and financing in compliance with the Skills Center interlocal agreement.

* The District and College were operating under the terms of a 2003 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which included a third party that was no longer in operation.

* The District established the building as a condominium under the Condominium Act in 2004, but had not adhered to the terms of the condominium declaration, including establishment of an association, board and bylaws.

Allocation of Costs - Our review of the allocation of Skills Center net losses and building expenses found:

* Of the $712,839 total net loss for fiscal years 32012 through 2015, $61,314 had been allocated to the District, $283,111 had been billed to participating governments, and $368,414 had not been allocated. We were unable to determine the correct allocation of the net losses due to lack of enrollment slot allocation data.

* As of April 2016, the $283,111 billed to participating governments in 2014 had not been collected.

* The District under-billed the College for indirect costs...based on the designated square footage used to calculate direct costs...However, since the District did not periodically review or document the actual square footage used, we were unable to determine the amount under-billed.

* As of April 2016, the District had not billed the College for any costs incurred since July 1, 2015, although the MOU required expenses to be billed monthly.

Cause of Condition

The District did not monitor to ensure Skills Center contracts were current and being complied with.

The District did not establish and follow procedures to ensure compliance with the Condominium Act.

Staff members responsible for performing tasks outlined in the contracts were unaware of their responsibilities.

The District did not establish adequate procedures to ensure costs allocable to other governments were properly calculated, billed and collected timely.

District's Response

The district does not dispute the conclusions noted in the finding and will take action to mitigate the conditions noted in the finding.

The district intends to review best practices for skill center programs and work with the skill center advisory board to determine the best course of action with respect to the structure of programs offered.

*********

Whew! After all that, it's nice that "the district does not dispute the conclusions" of just how totally screwed up they are. And these people are supposed to be working, however marginally...in...education. Education. But it sure seems like they don't even know how to read, or do basic math.

So who is on this "skill center advisory board" anyway? They don't have it mentioned at all on their website. I found a listing that shows Lee Whetham is on it...But who else makes up this brain (mis)trust? And does anyone think that a big chunk of those $712,839 net losses weren't so much lost as they were...liberated along the way?

Vs.

Looking into the future, say, to the year 2030, which do you think will be the more influential and affluent town - Port Angeles or Sequim?

Looking at the here and now, in terms of image, infrastructure and semi-responsible elected officials, which do you think is better positioned to thrive in the future - Port Angeles or Sequim?

In other words, if you had to bet, and put your money down on Port Angeles vs. Sequim for the most prosperous and populated community of the future, which would you choose?

As for me, I'd sure like to have the contract when they decide to move the County Courthouse from Port Angeles to, well, you know...

It's something to think about, Port Angeles.

Why Wait for Them to Hand Over the Cash When You Can Just Put Your Hand in the Till?

Randy Johnson, former president of the wood products company Green Crow of Port Angeles, and current chairman of the board, registered to run for Mike Chapman's soon to be vacated County Commissioner seat Friday. Johnson, who is also the board president of the Clallam County Economic Development "Corporation," joins fellow Republicans Maggie Roth and Gabe Rygaard and Democratic rerun Ron Richards in the primary election for the four-year position.

Johnson, who has never held elective public office, was also one of the unsuccessful applicants for the recent Port of Port Angeles Commissioner vacancy.

When asked why he had chosen to run, Johnson said he would be a "business-oriented" candidate. Elaborating further, in reference to his current role as board president for the EDC, Johnson stated that he'd "like to cut out the middleman" in terms of the ongoing transfer of public funds to the private sector. "With me as Commissioner, I think we'll be able to achieve new levels of efficiency and, at least for me, economic growth."

Thank you to the Peninsula Daily News for providing the framework for this story. Their version has been augmented to reflect actual reality.

“I’ve got a problem with this ethics code in its entirety"

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?

Rich Millionaires! Thousands of 'Em! Yeah, That's the Ticket!

Even by the oh-so-low standards of Port Angeles ideas and Peninsula Daily News coverage, there was an article in today's PDN that literally made me laugh and snort out loud with disbelief. It's a small article headlined thusly:

Port Angeles planners consider comprehensive plan update

Sounds pretty boring, right? Kind of the same old, same old. But it's worth a read if you want a good laugh. Here are some highlights...

City Planning Commission members focused on the economic development aspects of a comprehensive plan update last week. Urban and regional planner Bill Grimes of Spokane, a consultant with Studio Cascade Inc., led the presentation.

So far, so good. You've got your disinterested local commission, and your expensive out of town consultant. Ready...Set...Go!

Grimes said the comprehensive plan should lay the groundwork over 20 years for accommodating an increase of 4,000 in the city's population, which was 19,038 in the 2010 Census.

WOW! Port Angeles must be doing something right if it's going to have 4,000 people moving there in the next twenty years. Right?

Well, maybe. If. Maybe. Let's look at the flow of the grow, shall we? In the 2000 Census, the population was 18,397. The rate of population growth between the 2000 and 2010 Censuses was 3.5%. The rate of growth since the 2010 Census? An anemic 1.1%. Now, that could get you to that higher number, but, given all the underlying and very public problems facing Port Angeles (debt, drug abuse, remoteness, debt, decaying infrastructure, poor schools, debt, expensive utility rates, debt, political corruption, debt, lack of quality of life, etc.) it seems overly hopeful to count on it.

Anyway, given that extremely low rate of population growth, what sort of people do you think are or should be moving to Port Angeles?

Planning Commissioner Elwyn Gee said Port Angeles should attract more wealthy people. "We need that fellow who makes a million dollars a year to support the economy."

Made millions on Wall Street and moved to Port Angeles, or...



Talk about a problem solver! Why didn't anyone else think of that before? Just "attract" wealthy people. Or, if that doesn't work, maybe go out and bag a few with the tranquilizer darts. Whatever.

Won a million in the lottery and blew through it in a year in Port Angeles.



Anything else for our reality-based comprehensive plan update discussion?

Ed Chadd told Commissioners the plan should address projected climate change impacts.

Sure, no problem, Ed. We can put some lip service language in about that. We've been real good about that - the lip service part, that is. Now, in the meantime, have you been down to our fake beach recently?

Pier Review: Is More Spending Really the Answer?

The punning options are too rich on this one, so let's just say we're going to pier into the future today. According to the Peninsula Daily News, "about fifteen" residents attended the "unveiling" of plans for the pier on Saturday. That doesn't seem to be a level of excitement that justifies the price tags being bandied about.

Simply put, the consultants hired to address this issue, Studio Cascade, have proposed three options, that could be summed up as small ("the light touch" for $2.3 million), medium ("Klallam Cove" at $3 million) and large ("Peabody Place" at $3.6 million). Insert standard speech here from Nathan West talking about how "the City will be aggressively seeking grant funding opportunities" for blah blah blah.

But, as always, even if Nathan is both lucky and somewhat correct, these projects will cost the City money. Where will that money come from?

I'm getting ahead of myself, though. That isn't the first question that needs to be asked. The first question should be: Does the City need to spend this money at all? Debt, debt, debt is weighing heavily on you, Port Angeles. Sure, one more wafer-thin slice of debt may seem inconsequential, but is it really necessary at all?

Is this another tourist-baiting project that is unlikely to succeed? Is this another diversion of time, energy and funds from actually needed infrastructure projects? Will any of these options measurably improve life for local residents who are footing the bill?

So many questions. Yet the current City Council is unlikely to even come close to hinting at maybe sort of kind of asking them. Damn the torpedoes, and full spend ahead!

Consultants! The City flounders, and the consultants fleece.



Meanwhile, on a very much related note...Let's all ponder for a moment how the City's lack of vision and willingness to lurch from one unnecessary project to another has been a bonanza for consultants like Studio Cascade. A significant chunk of that debt, debt, debt can be traced to consultants like these who have literally raked in millions over the last decade from the City's lack of vision or leadership.

How much quality of life has that spending bought you? How much of an economy has it nurtured? Has it been worth it? And is even MORE spending on these things really any answer at all to the problems that plague Port Angeles?