Edmonds

Fired assistant (and Lynnwood Councilmember) sues Edmonds

2011-12-18T10:14:00.000-08:00

Herald Article with Claim for Damages & Summons and Complaint

While most local governments are cutting back, Mayor Earling...

2011-12-18T08:06:00.000-08:00

is lobbying for pay increases. At the December 13, 2011, City Council Finance Committee meeting, "Mayor Earling strongly supported implementing a 1.5% COLA for non-represented employees, viewing it as a matter of equity." Yes during the campaign for Mayor, Earling accused Mayor Cooper of unwise spending. Now unwise spending is a matter of "equity".

Mayor Earling is advocating spending tax dollars that are not available in the 2012 Budget. Where is the needed reform and transparency he promised in his campaign for Mayor?

Will I or Will I not get a meeting with and explanation from the City Finance Director?

2010-05-30T09:56:00.000-07:00

From: finis tupper

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 9:09 AM
To: adrienne monillas (adrienne.monillas@ci.edmonds.wa.us); 'Diane Buckshnis'; dj wilson (djwilson@ci.edmonds.wa.us); michael plunkett (michaelppp98@yahoo.com); steve Bernheim (council@stevebernheim.com); strom peterson (peterson@ci.edmonds.wa.us)

Subject: FW: Ogden Murphy Wallace Law PLLC 2009 Legal Costs

Although gambling isn’t allowed in Edmonds, thanks to Mr. Orvis – how about getting our Mayor to start a pool on whether I get a meeting with Mr. Hines.
______________________________________

From: finis tupper
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 8:59 AM
To: 'Hines Jr., Lorenzo'; 'Chase, Sandy'

Subject: RE: Ogden Murphy Wallace Law PLLC 2009 Legal Costs

Dear Mr. Hines:

Were you being disingenuous when you stated that “I’m always open to meeting with members of the community to provide clarifying information”?

If you are not aware, I am currently a member of the community.

My calendar is open June 6-10, 2010. At your convenience, please schedule a time for us to meet and discuss city finances.

Thank you.
Finis

PS Ms. Chase my email dated May 27 to Mr. Hines requested no public records only further clarification from him. But thanks for your email and concern to follow the law.
________________________________________

From: Chase, Sandy [mailto:Chase@ci.edmonds.wa.us]

Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:56 PM
To: finis tupper
Cc: Hines Jr., Lorenzo

Subject: Your Email to Lorenzo Hines / Void Checks

Hello Mr. Tupper,

I was requested to contact you regarding your email to Lorenzo Hines, Finance Director, dated Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 8:08 a.m. with the subject title “Void Checks.” I want to ensure that we provide any records that you are seeking.

Public records requests are limited to identifiable documents and I would like a clarification regarding what document(s) you are seeking. Under the Public Disclosure Act, public agencies are not required to prepare reports but to produce records in response to inquiries.

Thank you for your time,

Sandy Chase

City Clerk
City of Edmonds ~ City Clerk's Office
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.775.2525 Fax: 425.771.0266
chase@ci.edmonds.wa.us

From: finis tupper
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 8:08 AM
To: lorenzo hines (lorenzo.hines@ci.edmonds.wa.us)
Cc: adrienne monillas (adrienne.monillas@ci.edmonds.wa.us); steve Bernheim (council@stevebernheim.com); dave orvis (daveandmartha.orvis@gmail.com); 'Diane Buckshnis'; michael plunkett (michaelppp98@yahoo.com); strom peterson (peterson@ci.edmonds.wa.us); dj wilson (djwilson@ci.edmonds.wa.us); Gary Haakenson (haakenson@ci.edmonds.wa.us); scott snyder (ssnyder@omwlaw.com)

Subject: Void Checks

Dear Mr. Hines,

Thank you for your offer to meet with the public and explain the accounting information provided by your department. Recently, you provided two different reports accounting for the same check payments to Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC. The first report was a Vendor Master Report and the second report was Check History Listing Report.

I am perplexed by your claim that the Vendor Master Report contained duplicate entries "due to an isolated software issue that only affected that report." Please understand my skepticism that only this report would be impacted by some unexplained and "isolated software issue".

The "Vendor Master Report/Vendor Check History" Report lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674159 in the amount of $56,381.98. Under "Stat", it indicates "C", which I believe means the check Cleared the bank. The report also lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674162, instead of #674159, in the amount of $53,603.44. Under "Stat", it indicates "C", which again I believe means the check Cleared the bank.

Now, I will admit, this does seem very odd, but how is a citizen supposed to make heads or tails out of this? Does the City have the ability to issue manual checks with the same check number as a computer generated check? Can two different computer checks be issued with the same check number?

Please explain how two checks, each with the same check number show up as Cleared on the original report you provided. Please also explain what the "isolated software issue" that you refer to is and how it could have only affected the Vendor Master Report.

Complicating matters is the fact that the "Check History Listing" report you subsequently provided lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674159 for $28,483.76 and invoice # 674162 for $25,705.22 totaling to the amount of $54,188.98. Under "Status", it indicates "C", which I believe means the check Cleared the bank.

So now, I am up to 3 checks, all numbered check number 111583, that City reports appear to indicate have all cleared the bank for 3 different amounts. I am more confused than ever.

Further complicating this is the fact that the May 5, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes indicate:

APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #111328 THROUGH #111458 FOR APRIL 30, 2009 IN THE AMOUNT OF $271,087.18.

While reviewing these approved claim checks, I couldn't help but notice Check number 111413 in the amount of $53,603.44 related to invoice # 674159 and invoice # 674162. This really confuses me. Check Number 111413 is not on the "Check History Listing" provided, so I have no way of knowing whether or not this check cleared or was voided? There is a column on the "Check History Listing" for "Clear/Void Date", so a reasonable person would expect this check to be on the "Check History Listing" with a "Void" status and the Void Date indicated, assuming the check was in fact voided. You claim that Check 111413 was voided. As such, why was it not included on the "Check History Listing" with a "Void" status and the Void Date indicated? Note the April 30th check #111413 was approved by the City Council on May 5th 2009 and duplicated check issued on May 7, 2009 and approved on May 19th 2009 by the City Council. How do you report voided checks to the City Council so they are aware that a check they have approved was subsequently voided?

There is a similar confusing sequence of transactions in July, 2009. I won't go into all of the details of those transactions. Rather, I'll wait for your detailed explanation during our meeting to discuss all of the above.

Finally, please disclose whether or not the City owes any monies for legal services performed since January 1, 2007 through the current date and are unpaid and outstanding invoices. It is very important that the public have this information.

Thank you for your assistance with these matters.

Finis Tupper

From: Hines Jr., Lorenzo [mailto:lorenzo.hines@ci.edmonds.wa.us]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:18 AM

To: Monillas, Adrienne; Diane Buckshnis; dave orvis ; Wilson, DJ; michael plunkett ; steve Bernheim ; Peterson, Strom
Cc: scott snyder ; Haakenson, Gary; finis tupper; joan@edmondsforum.com

Subject: RE: Ogden Murphy Wallace Law PLLC 2009 Legal Costs

Good morning all,

I want to correct some of the information that was provided to you in the email below. The report that was initially attached to the email below represents the results of a public records request for all payments made to Ogden Murphy and Wallace for 2009 and the first 4 months of 2010. Checks 111413 and 113005 were not included in this report because these checks were voided, and as a result, these payments (check amounts) were never made to Ogden Murphy and Wallace.

As always, if you have questions about the format and content of city financial reports, I’m always open to meeting with you or members of the community to provide clarifying information.

Sincerely,

Lorenzo Hines

Lorenzo Hines Jr., CPA, MBA
Director
Finance and Information Services Department
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020

Phone: 425.771.0240
Fax: 425.771.0265
lorenzo.hines@ci.edmonds.wa.us

From: finis tupper
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 9:55 PM
To: Monillas, Adrienne; Diane Buckshnis; dave orvis ; Wilson, DJ; michael plunkett ; steve Bernheim ; Peterson, Strom
Cc: scott snyder ; Hines Jr., Lorenzo; Haakenson, Gary

Subject: Ogden Murphy Wallace Law PLLC 2009 Legal Costs

Dear City Council members:

The City Finance Department has provided an updated of OMW Checks 2009 report with $81,194.27 missing from the payments. Specifically two checks were not included in the report, 4/30 check 111413 in the amount of $53,603.44 and 7/16 check 113005 in the amount of $27,590.83 were not included in the report of city expenses. I’ve looked over the drafts and descriptions of the payments. It appears the city has paid these invoices for legal services twice.

At last weeks Council meeting Mr. Snyder provided incorrect legal advice most likely for purpose of hiding these double payments. Please look at your draft meeting minutes of the May 18th Meeting and the following paragraphs:

Agenda Item: 12. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST TO MAYOR OF CITY OF EDMONDS

BY EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION REGARDING LEGAL FEES PAID BY
THE CITY OF EDMONDS FROM JANUARY 1, 2009 THROUGH APRIL 28, 2010.

UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (3-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND PLUNKETT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETERSON AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.

Mayor Haakenson asked if he was required to abide by the motion. Mr. Snyder answered no, advising

RCW 35A.12.030 provides that the Mayor is charged with day-to-day administration of the City.

Here is the RCW Mr. Snyder referred to;
RCW 35A.12.030 Eligibility to hold elective office.

No person shall be eligible to hold elective office under the mayor-council plan unless the person is a registered voter of the city at the time of filing his or her declaration of candidacy and has been a resident of the city for a period of at least one year next preceding his or her election. Residence and voting within the limits of any territory which has been included in, annexed to, or consolidated with such city is construed to have been residence within the city. A mayor or councilmember shall hold within the city government no other public office or employment except as permitted under the provisions of chapter 42.23 RCW.

[2009 c 549 § 3006; 1979 ex.s. c 18 § 20; 1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.12.030.]

NOTES:
Severability -- 1979 ex.s. c 18: See note following RCW 35A.01.070.

I hope you understand this section has nothing to do with Mayor and Finance Department having some expressed governmental authority to stonewall the City Council requests for vital financial information needed to make policy decisions. It’s pretty clear Mr. Snyder was blowing smoke and pretending to have some legal expertise in this issue.

The City Council has the power to cancel the OMW contract at anytime. Section 3.3 Termination of Agreement. The attorney/client relationship is a personal one involving the ability of the parties to communicate and maintain credibility. Therefore, the City Council reserves in its sole legislative discretion the right to terminate this Agreement upon reasonable notice during the its term. Section 3.1 Term. The term of this agreement shall be for four (4) years commencing January 1, 2007 and ending on December 31, 2010. Council member Fraley Monillas stated her belief that the contract term was through 2011. She asked the Mayor to confirm her understanding of the term through 2011. The Mayor confirmed her belief that the contract was through 2011. Well guess what the contract expires on December 31, 2010. I just don’t understand why both Mayor Haakenson and Mr. Snyder wouldn’t know the term of this contract.

The City Council should be very concerned about inaccurate and untimely information provided by the Mayor, Scott Snyder and Lorenzo Hines. How can you operate with inaccurate and untimely legal and financial information?

Who's confused?

2010-05-28T08:31:00.000-07:00

My email to Lorenzo Hines, Finance Director - City of Edmonds

Dear Mr. Hines,

Thank you for your offer to meet with the public and explain the accounting information provided by your department. Recently, you provided two different reports accounting for the same check payments to Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC. The first report was a Vendor Master Report and the second report was Check History Listing Report.

I am perplexed by your claim that the Vendor Master Report contained duplicate entries "due to an isolated software issue that only affected that report." Please understand my skepticism that only this report would be impacted by some unexplained and "isolated software issue".

The "Vendor Master Report/Vendor Check History" Report lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674159 in the amount of $56,381.98. Under "Stat", it indicates "C", which I believe means the check Cleared the bank. The report also lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674162, instead of #674159, in the amount of $53,603.44. Under "Stat", it indicates "C", which again I believe means the check Cleared the bank.

Now, I will admit, this does seem very odd, but how is a citizen supposed to make heads or tails out of this? Does the City have the ability to issue manual checks with the same check number as a computer generated check? Can two different computer checks be issued with the same check number?

Please explain how two checks, each with the same check number show up as Cleared on the original report you provided. Please also explain what the "isolated software issue" that you refer to is and how it could have only affected the Vendor Master Report.

Complicating matters is the fact that the "Check History Listing" report you subsequently provided lists check number 111583, dated May 7, 2009, related to invoice # 674159 for $28,483.76 and invoice # 674162 for $25,705.22 totaling to the amount of $54,188.98. Under "Status", it indicates "C", which I believe means the check Cleared the bank.

So now, I am up to 3 checks, all numbered check number 111583, that City reports appear to indicate have all cleared the bank for 3 different amounts. I am more confused than ever.

Further complicating this is the fact that the May 5, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes indicate:

APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #111328 THROUGH #111458 FOR APRIL 30, 2009 IN THE AMOUNT OF $271,087.18.

While reviewing these approved claim checks, I couldn't help but notice Check number 111413 in the amount of $53,603.44 related to invoice # 674159 and invoice # 674162. This really confuses me. Check Number 111413 is not on the "Check History Listing" provided, so I have no way of knowing whether or not this check cleared or was voided? There is a column on the "Check History Listing" for "Clear/Void Date", so a reasonable person would expect this check to be on the "Check History Listing" with a "Void" status and the Void Date indicated, assuming the check was in fact voided. You claim that Check 111413 was voided. As such, why was it not included on the "Check History Listing" with a "Void" status and the Void Date indicated? Note the April 30th check #111413 was approved by the City Council on May 5th 2009 and duplicated check issued on May 7, 2009 and approved on May 19th 2009 by the City Council. How do you report voided checks to the City Council so they are aware that a check they have approved was subsequently voided?

There is a similar confusing sequence of transactions in July, 2009. I won't go into all of the details of those transactions. Rather, I'll wait for your detailed explanation during our meeting to discuss all of the above.

Finally, please disclose whether or not the City owes any monies for legal services performed since January 1, 2007 through the current date and are unpaid and outstanding invoices. It is very important that the public have this information.

Thank you for your assistance with these matters.
Finis Tupper

City Attorney payments

2010-05-27T08:43:00.000-07:00

The City of Edmonds Finance Department explains the duplicate payments to Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC. The Council approved payments were voided

How to Neutralize Dissenters

Make the whistleblowers, instead of their message, the issue: Discredit the dissent by attacking the dissenter's professional competence or virtually anything else that will work to cloud the issue.products and expanded co-op principles

-Courage Without Martyrdom: A Survival Guide for Whistleblowers,
by the Government Accountability Project

City Attorney legal expertise

2010-05-24T22:20:00.000-07:00

If you get a chance read the May 18, 2010 - City Council Meeting Minutes - Agenda 12 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST TO MAYOR OF CITY OF EDMONDS BY EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION REGARDING LEGAL FEES PAID BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS FROM JANUARY 1, 2009 THROUGH APRIL 28, 2010.

The Mayor doesn't want to provide the information to the City Council. The City Attorney states the Mayor doesn't have to provide financial information to City Council citing Ch. 35A.012.030 RCW Eligibility to hold elective office.

It appears that the City Attorney has received $81,194.27 in duplicate payments for same the invoice in 2009. Unbelievable.

Edmonds Comprehensive Plan - Changes!

2010-05-09T12:17:00.000-07:00

EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MEETING -
MAY 12, 2010
Update on Comprehensive Plan purpose, effect, and context amendments and Hearing Examiner comprehensive plan review requirements.
7PM

The purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to establish a long-range plan, looking into the future, addressing the needs and vision relating to land use, transportation, parks and open space, community facilities and economic development. The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan sets a foundation for decision-making from a broad and far-reaching policy standpoint for all governmental action even though the plan itself is not regulatory.

The most important power and duty granted to the City of Edmonds is the authority and responsibility to regulate land-use for the sole purpose of protecting and promoting public health, safety and general welfare of current and future citizens.

All private projects requiring city review and approval should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

All public projects should have Hearing Examiner review and advisory opinion. All public projects and street vacations must be consistent with and satisfy the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Having this requirement of a Hearing Examiner advisory opinion for all public projects, capital facilities projects and street vacations provides additional public participation and ensures the city council has another legal opinion ensuring consistency.

Planning Staff’s recommendation to the Planning Board to make changes to the Effect of Plan is inconsistent and contrary to the Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC) and Hearing Examiner duties. Specifically EMC 10.35(F) requires hearing examiner review, Vacations and Dedications, The hearing examiner will review the comprehensive plan and report on the same prior to any street vacation of dedication as provided in ECDC 15.05.020.

ECDC 15.05.020 was the Comprehensive Plan, Effect of Plan prior to the 1997 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan as a separate stand alone document. The Mayor and City Staff admit their failure to not act according to the mandatory requirement of a Hearing Examiner advisory opinion prior to Council decision-making in the adoption of the street vacations, capital facilities and property purchases. This failure is not a good enough reason to make changes to the current Comprehensive Plan. Saying long ago adopted procedure was forgotten and does not apply does not make it ripe for wholesale edit and elimination.

The Planning Board should not accept any change to the current Edmonds Comprehensive Plan that is inconsistent with the Edmonds Municipal Code. Action like this just makes the process less certain and more contentious for those of us who know the code and understand the meaning of the words.

Hearing Examiner - No Work - Great Pay - Continues!

2010-04-30T21:53:00.000-07:00

TOWEILL RICE TAYLOR STILL CASHING IN FOR NO WORK!

AGENDA

HEARING EXAMINER

Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex

250 5th Ave. North

MAY 20, 2010

3:00 P.M.

_______________________________________________________________________

THIS MEETING CANCELLED DUE TO A LACK OF ITEMS

No Work - Great Compensation $3,500 per month expense!

2010-04-21T06:29:00.000-07:00

CANCELLED

AGENDA

HEARING EXAMINER

Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex

250 5th Ave. North

MAY 6, 2010

3:00 P.M.

THIS MEETING CANCELLED DUE TO A LACK OF ITEMS

scoreboard update

Number of Hearings 15

Hearing Examiner Contract Expense $56,000.00 minus
City of Edmonds Revenue $20,017.00 =
Loss $35,98300

Skipper's Property

2010-04-17T16:25:00.000-07:00

APRIL 20TH - 7:00PM
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Agenda Item: 9
Public Comment on possible purchase of Skipper's Property 102 Main St.

Agenda Item: 10
Public Comment on Budget Cuts.

The City of Edmonds has no MONEY!

2010-04-16T09:47:00.000-07:00

City of Edmonds financial situation prevents purchase of the Skippers property on Main Street. DJ Wilson says, "We just don't have the money" - When in fact there is no way anyone can know because the City's financial reports are incomplete and tardy.

The Council as well as the Citizens are in the DARK. Show me the 1st Quarter 2010 and 4th Quarter 2009 Budget Reports. Tell us what financial figures, DJ Wilson, you base your assertion there is no money. The City’s check book has not been balanced. Those that have studied the City Financial Forecast spreadsheets have discovered errors. We have brought those errors to your attention only to be ignored.

The City of Edmonds Financial Forecast is a trumped up inaccurate spreadsheet of numbers designed for the sole purpose of floating a levy. You enjoy digging into the pocketbooks of the citizens. DJ Wilson has supported tax after tax. All the utility taxes were increased in 2008. DJ Wilson supported the Transportations Benefit District adding vehicle license taxes. This was done despite the fact the City received 1 Million dollars in Federal Stimulus money for road projects (in 2009). The Financial Forecast document is a fabricated set of numbers designed to make the City’s financial position appear to be beyond hope.

Another example of your fiscal irresponsibility took place in December of 2008. The Council voted to float a $4 Million Bond for the unnecessary Fiber Optic Network. Both the Citys' financial and legal advisors claimed the Fiber Optic Project would be a revenue “neutral”. From my review of the bi-weekly warrants and documents I have obtained via a couple of public record requests, the City is losing money. How much money has been spent on this project? What is the income and where are the savings? How much money has the City spent on legal expenses related to the Fiber Object Project and the related Bond? Give the citizens the bottom line figure.

DJ Wilson supported the Mayor’s March 13, 2009 autocratic decision to close Yost Pool, cut funding to the Senior Center and cancel the Dare Program. These actions appear to have been based on false numbers. You supported the poorly negotiated contract with Fire District What are your priorities Mr. Wilson?

Tall Buildings proposed on Edmonds Waterfront

2010-04-16T08:47:00.000-07:00

This morning the City of Edmonds published notice of SEPA Determination of Significance and Request for Comments for 190 Sunset Ave N. Public Comment Welcomed but most likely ignored!

Last Saturday April 10th, Mayor Haakenson posted a comment on the My Edmonds News - "Tall building “fever” strikes again in Edmonds!" Haakenson couldn't have been more on point, but instead of being factual he went on to say, "Let’s take some deep breaths folks and act on facts not rumors." Councilman DJ Wilson went on thanking the Mayor for this post and saying "There are no proposals on the table – in fact there is barely a process begun."

Your comments on the proposed rezone of ESC Associate property for a contract rezone from Community Business (BC) to General Commercial (CG and CG2), which would allow for the development of Sunset Landing, a mixed use, transit oriented development. Sunset Landing is two structures that include two levels of parking wrapped by commercial spaces which form a "podium" for residential structures above is needed and encourged. Each podium provides space for two residential structures above, the southern one with a total height of 60 feet and a northern one with a height of 75 feet.

Councilman DJ Wilson in his last campaign received and spent a $3,000.00 donation from ESC Associates.

Send your comments about this project to haakenson@ci.edmonds.wa.us or djwilson@ci.edmonds.wa.us

Okay Mayor - Where's is the 2009 4th Qtr Budget Report

2010-04-10T16:56:00.000-07:00

It's April 10th, 2010.

So far, the Mayor hasn't presented a 2009 4th Quarter Budget Report from the Finance Office to the citizens and Council.

The 2010 - 1st Quarter Budget Report is missing and not available too!

Why? Instead - On Tuesday, the Council Finance Committee will hear a General Fund Report from the Finance Director. The actual report isn't available to the public.

HEARING EXAMINER V. CITY OF EDMONDS

-SCOREBOARD UPDATE-

BOTH HEARING EXAMINER MEETINGS IN APRIL CANCELLED

- DUE TO A LACK OF ITEMS -

THAT MEANS THE CITY LOSES ANOTHER $3,500.00 AND PAYS FOR NOTHING.

Edmonds Dictionary

2010-04-07T21:14:00.000-07:00

College Professor and Edmonds City Councilman D.J. Wilson has a completely different dictionary than everyone else.

At the April 6, Council meeting Mr. Wilson proclaimed "Secret is different than Private". The following is from www.dictionary.com.

se·cret /ˈsikrɪt/ Show Spelled[see-krit]
–adjective
1.done, made, or conducted without the knowledge of others: secret negotiations.
2.kept from the knowledge of any but the initiated or privileged: a secret password.
3.faithful or cautious in keeping confidential matters confidential; close-mouthed; reticent.
4.designed or working to escape notice, knowledge, or observation: a secret drawer; the secret police.
5.secluded, sheltered, or withdrawn: a secret hiding place.
6.beyond ordinary human understanding; esoteric.
7.(of information, a document, etc.)
a.bearing the classification secret.
b.limited to persons authorized to use information documents, etc., so classified.
–noun
8.something that is or is kept secret, hidden, or concealed.
9.a mystery: the secrets of nature.
10.a reason or explanation not immediately or generally apparent.
11.a method, formula, plan, etc., known only to the initiated or the few: the secret of happiness; a trade secret.
12.a classification assigned to information, a document, etc., considered less vital to security than top-secret but more vital than confidential, and limiting its use to persons who have been cleared, as by various government agencies, as trustworthy to handle such material.Compare classification (def. 5).
13.(initial capital letter) Liturgy. a variable prayer in the Roman and other Latin liturgies, said inaudibly by the celebrant after the offertory and immediately before the preface.
—Idiom
14.in secret, unknown to others; in private; secretly: A resistance movement was already being organized in secret.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1350–1400; ME secrette < OF secret < L sēcrētus hidden, orig. ptp. of sēcernere to secern

—Related forms
se·cret·ly, adverb
se·cret·ness, noun
non·se·cret, adjective, noun
non·se·cret·ly, adverb
quasi-secret, adjective
qua·si-se·cret·ly, adverb
sem·i·se·cret, adjective
sem·i·se·cret·ly, adverb
su·per·se·cret, noun
ul·tra·se·cret, adjective
ul·tra·se·cret·ly, adverb
un·se·cret·ly, adverb

—Synonyms
1. clandestine, hidden, concealed, covert. 1, 2. private, confidential. 3. secretive. 6. occult, obscure, mysterious.

—Antonyms
1. open, manifest.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
pri·vate /ˈpraɪvɪt/ Show Spelled[prahy-vit]
–adjective
1.belonging to some particular person: private property.
2.pertaining to or affecting a particular person or a small group of persons; individual; personal: for your private satisfaction.
3.confined to or intended only for the persons immediately concerned; confidential: a private meeting.
4.personal and not publicly expressed: one's private feelings.
5.not holding public office or employment: private citizens.
6.not of an official or public character: private life.
7.removed from or out of public view or knowledge; secret: private papers.
8.not open or accessible to the general public: a private beach.
9.undertaken individually or personally: private research.
10.without the presence of others; alone.
11.solitary; secluded.
12.preferring privacy; retiring: a very private person.
13.intimate; most personal: private behavior.
14.of, having, or receiving special hospital facilities, privileges, and services, esp. a room of one's own and liberal visiting hours: a private room; a private patient.
15.of lowest military rank.
16.of, pertaining to, or coming from nongovernmental sources: private funding.
–noun
17.a soldier of one of the three lowest enlisted ranks.
18.privates. private parts.
—Idiom
19.in private, not publicly; secretly: The hearing will be conducted in private.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1350–1400; ME < L prīvātus private, lit., taken away (from public affairs), special use of ptp. of prīvāre to rob. See deprive, -ate1

—Related forms
pri·vate·ly, adverb
pri·vate·ness, noun
quasi-private, adjective
qua·si-pri·vate·ly, adverb
un·pri·vate, adjective
un·pri·vate·ly, adverb
un·pri·vate·ness, noun

—Synonyms
2. singular, particular, peculiar. 10. sequestered, retired.

—Antonyms
2. general, public.

If you need a dictionary Mr. Wilson, I have several copies and would more than happy to donate one to city.

Adopt an Edmonds Park

2010-04-02T06:06:00.000-07:00

City Council member Diane Buckshnis promotes a new citizen involvement program “Adopt a Park.”

With over 60 parks the City of Edmonds could use some elbow grease and volunteer effort. Councilmember Diane Buckshnis said, "In line with fulfilling our Comprehensive Plan for Community Health and Environmental Quality, I think it is time to start working on our environment at a grass-roots level by helping keep our parks clean."

"So why not continue to inspire, educate and engage our children and others on the importance of giving back to the environment and our City by adopting an area/park or street."

"Let's lead by example and be leaders. It's as easy as contact the City of Edmonds Parks and Recreation Department and asking for the forms. Get your neighbors involved and if you don't have a park close, just do a neighborhood clean-up day or contact any local organizations such as the Edmonds Backyard Habitat Group and ask them where you can help."

Only one volunteer needs to stepforward to begin the process.

Councilmember Diane Buckshnis presented the Adopt A Park Project at the March 23rd City Council meeting.

Edmonds Hearing Examiner - Scoreboard

2010-03-31T20:49:00.000-07:00

January 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue $1,155.00 fee)
February 2009 - 2 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $4,030.00 fees)
March 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,330.00 fee)
April 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,948.01 fee)
May 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
June 2009 - 3 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $4,624.00 fees)
July 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
August 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
September 2009 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $2,915.00 fees)
October 2009 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,605.00 fees)
November 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
December 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
January 2010 - 0 Hearings (No Work) = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue ZERO)
February 2010 - 1 Hearing 1 advisory report = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue $705.00 fee)
March 2010 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500.00 = (City revenue $1,705.00 fees)

Number of Hearings 15

Hearing Examiner Contract Expense $52,500.00 minus
City of Edmonds Revenue $20,017.00 =
-$32,482.99 Loss

The Edmonds taxpayers are losing!

The Mayor responds to my emails attaching Hearing Examiner contracts between Toweill Rice Taylor and other municipalities.

March 30, 2010

Dear Mr. Tupper,

Thank you for providing copies of other cities contracts for Hearing Examiner services. These will certainly assist us this year as our contract for services expires at the end of this year. Our current contract was negotiated in 2006 with a start date of January 1, 2007 and expiring 12-31-2010. The contracts that you have provided us were negotiated and effective in December of 2009 in two cases and February of 2009 in the other case. Our contract from 2006 was in line with the previous Hearing Examiner Ron McConnell's contract. I would expect our new contract to be more in line with the three contracts that you have forwarded to us. As always, thanks for your assistance. Mayor Gary Haakenson

Toweill Rice Taylor didn't start until March, 2007. The Mayor pays the new hearing examiner more than the old hearing examiner with more experience. What I love the most is, Mayor Haakenson's promise to fix the contract for 2011. Why not fix the contract now? Is the Mayor so busy promoting a new property tax levy that there isn't time for cost savings steps now?

City Hearing Examiner Contract - Another example of Government Waste

2010-03-29T21:14:00.000-07:00

Go figure, what information was provided to the Edmonds City Council prior to accepting and entering into a contract that costs the Edmonds Taxpayers four times the amount the very same firm charges the the City of Everett ($120.00 per hour, not to exceed $10,000 in a calendar year)?

On February 20, 2007 via the consent agenda the Edmonds City Council approved a contract for Hearing Examiner services with the law firm Toweill Rice Taylor.
This contract calls for a $3,500 per month compensation or $42,000 annual expense. Folks that's $126,000 expense over the 3 year contract compared to $30,000 expense for Everett over the same contract term. No wonder the City financial situation appears dire. In 2009 the Hearing Examiner conducted 11 hearings or $3,818 per hearing. Another way to evaluate the contract $42,000 divided by $120 per hour, 350 hours divided by 11 hearings - 31 hours per hearing and decision. It makes no sense.

The City of Edmonds sends Toweill Rice Taylor a check for $3,500 every month even if there hasn't been any hearings. That's right, the Edmonds taxpayers pay for no service performed. Last year the Mayor proposed closing Yost Pool, cutting funds to the Senior Center and cutting the flower program. The City of Edmonds continues to subsidize Fire District One to the tune of almost 2 Million Dollars per year. The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of Mayor Haakenson as demonstrated by this bad deal with Toweill Rice and Taylor.

The Council looks for budget cuts while there needs to be a comprehensive evaluation of all business decisions and contracts for services currently in force at the City of Edmonds.

Fire District One Contract

2010-03-28T15:12:00.000-07:00

Now that the City of Edmonds January 25, 2010 financial forecast completely discloses the myth of any savings for contracting with Fire District One for fire/emergency medical services, the city council should re-evaluate the proposal.

The questions are: Was the city administration's financial analysis of the proposal accurate? Is Fire District One providing fire/emergency services for the actual cost of service or is the fire district making a profit?

The Council has a fiduciary responsibility in light of the new financial numbers demonstrating "no savings" to answer these two questions.

Sounds like the City of Edmonds

2010-03-13T13:10:00.000-08:00

An Interesting Analogy with the recent FD1 sale and the financials.

Let’s all think we are shareholders in a company that has been around for over a century. We are a major manufacture of widgets in Edmonds and have many people employed in the various service levels of this popular and family friendly business.

The Board of Directors is thinking of issuing more bonds to gain money and spend hundreds of hours trying to convince shareholders. Instead the CEO and CFO in April get together with the unions and decide that regionalization and combining services of our beloved team to a larger corporation is the best way.

The Board of Directors becomes engaged and in October, the “latest” executive summary numbers and contract of services are provided with various scenarios of only selling service and/or buildings and with service.

The shareholders are also given a few months to review the details but the information is disjointed and some shareholders question both the executive summary numbers and/or the contract summary of services as they are based on averages rather than outlining actual positions and service levels.

During the process the current CFO decides to go to work for the larger corporation. An interim CFO is hired and is present while the shareholders have their meetings with the Board of Directors. Many complain about the quickness of this important transaction in addition to the numbers. Shareholders that complain are not given any specific answers other than the corporation “stand by their numbers”.

The Board of Directors approves the sale of the widget service team and the sale takes place the beginning of 2010.

In January, the new CFO (formerly interim) provides financial projection to the Board of Directors reflecting a significant “bottom” line loss of close to two million dollars. Additionally the sale of the services is half than what was anticipated.

The Audit Committee questions the CFO and CEO on these projections and basically the CFO states on more than one occasion that the “sales transaction” utilized the former CFO’s numbers. At no time during the Audit Committee meeting did the new (formerly interim) CFO takes responsibility of the largest transaction that ever affected this corporation. The CEO states the deal and outdated numbers have nothing to do with the sale of the services.

The stock plummets and shareholders leave in anger. Certain individuals face violating conflict of interest laws and misleading their shareholders. Furthermore, now the Board of Directors has to go back to the shareholders and try and regain trust to convince them to buy into the bonds.

So, the question becomes, (use your imagination and fill in the blanks as to the characters of this story) why are municipalities different?

5 MILLION DOLLARS SAVINGS

2010-02-20T05:43:00.000-08:00

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 - MAYOR'S FIRE DISTRICT 1 PRESENTATION

CITY OF EDMONDS FIRE DEPARTMENT

SLIDE #8 TOTAL COST = 9.6 MILLION DOLLARS

SLIDE #9 TOTAL REVENUE = 6 MILLION DOLLARS

SLIDE #10 GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY = 3.6 MILLION DOLLARS

FIRE DISTRICT 1 CONTRACT

SLIDE #11 FIRE DISTRICT CONTRACT 2010 = 6.2 MILLION DOLLARS

PLUS NON-DEPARTMENT COSTS $800,000

TOTAL COST = 7 MILLION DOLLARS

SLIDE #13 COMPARSION KEEP EDMONDS FIRE DEPARTMENT

GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY = 3.6 MILLION DOLLARS

CONTRACT WITH FIRE DISTRICT 1

GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY =2.8 MILLION DOLLARS

(THIS CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR SAVINGS IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $800,000 THE FIRST YEAR!)

SLIDE #14 THE FUTURE

IN 2015, FIVE YEARS LATER, THAT NUMBER ESCALATES TO OVER 1 MILLION. AND WILL CONTINUE TO RISE...

Where's the 5 million dollars savings - Mayor?

Where's the savings - Mayor?

2010-02-18T06:31:00.000-08:00

On January 1, 2010 - The Edmonds Fire Department was transferred to another public agency, Snohomish County Fire District No. 1. The Edmonds City Council based on Mayor's Haakenson statements has contracted with Fire District 1 for 20 years to provide Fire and Emergency Medical Services. The Edmonds City Council approved this business transaction based on false and misleading financial forecasts.

The Mayor in his 2009 "State of the City" address said the City's cost to provide fire and emergency medical services was 8 million dollars. For some unexplained reason, on September 15, 2009, the Mayor inflated this fire department cost figure to 9.6 Million (council meeting agenda powerpoint presentation). See the September 15, 2009 City Council Agenda. The Council and most everyone listening assumed that by contracting for service there would be a 3 Million dollar yearly savings.

On January 25, 2010, approximately three months later, Edmonds Finance Director Lorenzo Hines, Jr. presented a new forecast the City's current and future financial condition. There are no savings. The Fire/EMS expense just shifted from labor costs to the cost of services.

By January 1, 2013 the City of Edmonds will have only $231,251.00 beginning cash balance. If you see Mayor Haakenson at Starbucks or Tully's ask him what happened to the savings, because he never answers any of my questions.

Is it ever WISE to break the law?

2010-02-14T07:53:00.000-08:00

Mayor Gary Haakenson sends an email to City Councilman Michael Plunkett. Mayor Haakenson tells Councilman Plunkett that City Council President DJ Wilson is out to get him. Former Councilwoman Mauri Moore and Finis Tupper are investigating the issue. Mayor Haakenson's battle-cry to Plunkett "RALLY THREE VOTES", if Councilman Michael Plunkett thinks it is wise.

The Mayor can't vote on the meeting agenda or create the Council agenda, but objects to any Council discussion of the Street Vacation ordinance and (illegal) Temporary Construction Easement.

Here are a couple of emails between Councilman Michael Plunkett and Councilman Dave Orvis providing clear and cogent evidence of Plunkett's intent to "RALLY THREE VOTES" against hearing Item 9 on the November 2, 2009 City Council Meeting Agenda.

(Note: Plunkett has cut and pasted the Mayor's email into the body of his email without disclosing the information and request originated from Mayor Haakenson's email. Instead, Councilman Michael Plunkett says "someone" sent him this email today.)

From: michael plunkett michaelppp98@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
To: dave orvis daveandmartha.orvis@gmail.com

Subject: plunkett

The Hearing Examiner is set to hear the Reidy/Theusen case on November 4th. Scott Snyder and the Reidys attorney have been exchanging nasty emails. Finis Tupper has been asking questions of Wambolt. Maui Moore has made a bunch of public records requests bout the matter and she appears to working on Reidys behalf which is odd since she was financially supported by Theusen in the mayoral election two years ago.DJ met with Moore and Reidy last week. DJ has now scheduled an Exec session on the matter for next Tuesday against Mr. Snyders better judgment. He has also scheduled a full discussion agenda item after the exec session to talk about the Reidy/Theusen issue which is against Mr. Snyders advice. Scott basically says the he CP (Council President) can put whatever he wants on the agenda but advised DJ not to with Hearing Examiner case so close to conclusion which will resolve the City’s portion of the matter.

This came from someone today, interesting stuff: MP

I’ve asked Sandy to make the case to DJ to remove the agenda item and only add it after the exec session if the Council sees fit.If he persists and puts it on the agenda, you may want to rally three votes to remove it from the agenda on Tuesday night if you think it wise.Just trying to keep you in the loop as what he is doing. Why he is doing it is beyond me but if he’s working with Reidy... it must be to get at you somehow.

Additional. He told Sandy about 15 minutes ago that Scott OK’d the Agenda items. Scott just called me and said he OK’d the Exec Session but not the agenda item which no one has yet seen but DJ says it is all Mauri Moore material. Apparently he is trying to get a reconsideration vote on the original ordinance approving the alley vacation.

Orvis response to Plunkett from his blackberry 7 minutes later….

Why not remove it once get to it? Or simply delay it? That we don't look we're trying squash something. -Dave

Please explain your motion, Mr. Wambolt.

2010-02-12T20:39:00.000-08:00

Edmonds City Council Meeting Minutes November 2, 2009 -

At 6:30 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced that the City Council would be meeting in executive session to receive legal advice regarding pending or threatened litigation. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 30 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Haakenson, Councilmembers Orvis, Wambolt, Plunkett, Bernheim, Peterson. Olson and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Scott Snyder, Attorney Stephanie Croll, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. At 7:00 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced to the public that an additional 15 minutes would be needed in executive session. At 7:15 p.m., Mayor Haakenson again announced to the public that an additional 15 minutes would be needed in
executive session. The executive session concluded at 7:25 p.m.

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA, REMOVING ITEM 9 FROM THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

9. REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT RESERVED BY ORDINANCE NO. 3729. THE
EASEMENT INVOLVES THE VACATED RIGHT OF WAY OF A PLATTED BUT UNBUILT
PUBLIC ALLEY LYING BETWEEN THE 700 BLOCK OF 8TH AVE. N AND 9TH AVE. N AND
PARALLEL TO AND NORTH OF DALEY STREET. THE RESERVED CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENT IS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A DRIVEWAY AND RETAINING WALL ON
PROPERTY LYING NORTH OF THE ALLEY AND EAST OF 8TH AVE. N.
This item was removed from the agenda via motion under Agenda Item 1.

=============================================================================

Ron Wambolt has been publicly requesting the current city council explain the reason for voting on certain subjects - appointment of a council vacancy, interim ordinance to Chapter 20, approval of the Mayor's candidate for appointment to the Planning Board. He claims the Council is meeting in secret and making decisions outside an open public meeting.

Did the Mayor ask for your vote Ron to remove Agenda Item 9 at before the November 2, 2009 City Council Meeting? You didn't state your reason for removing this published and scheduled item. There were over 50 citizens that wanted to testify and provide public comment that evening.

The Mayor in his announcement of the Executive Session said no council action would be taken. But from the meeting minutes a reasonable person could assume there was a vote taken to remove agenda item 9 prior to the Council reconvening in the Council chambers.

MAYOR, YOU'RE RIGHT - IT’S ALL ABOUT APPEARANCES

2010-02-12T08:23:00.000-08:00

On the November 2, 2009, Edmonds City Council Agenda THERE was Item 9. AM-2579 – Review of construction easement reserved by Ordinance No. 3729. The easement involves the vacated right of way of a platted but unbuilt public alley lying between the reserved construction easement is for the installation of a driveway and retaining wall on property lying north of the alley and east of 8th Ave. N.

Backroom politics and interference - made the council remove this discussion outside of public view.

Mayor Gary Haakenson objected to Council review of this ordinance. By email from his personal email account, Mayor Haakenson violated the Open Public Meetings Act, Ch. 42.30 RCW

Here’s the verbatim email sent by Mayor Haakenson to Councilman Plunkett. For clarity I've added the information in parentheses ().
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gary haakenson ghaakenson@yahoo.com
Subject: Next Week
To: “michael plunkett” michaelppp98@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 3:47 PM

The Hearing Examiner is set to hear the Reidy/Theusen case on November 4th. Scott Snyder (City Attorney) and the Reidys attorney have been exchanging nasty emails. Finis Tupper (Community Activist) has been asking questions of Wambolt (Councilman). Maui Moore (former Councilwoman and Mayor candidate) has made a bunch of public records requests bout the matter and she appears to working on Reidys behalf which is odd since she was financially supported by Theusen in the mayoral election two years ago.

DJ (Council President) met with Moore and Reidy last week. DJ has now scheduled an Exec session on the matter for next Tuesday against Mr. Snyders better judgment. He has also scheduled a full discussion agenda item after the exec session to talk about the Reidy/Theusen issue which is against Mr. Snyders advice. Scott basically says the he CP (Council President) can put whatever he wants on the agenda but advised DJ not to with Hearing Examiner case so close to conclusion which will resolve the City’s portion of the matter.

I’ve asked Sandy (City Clerk) to make the case to DJ to remove the agenda item and only add it after the exec session if the Council sees fit.

If he persists and puts it on the agenda, you may want to rally three votes to remove it from the agenda on Tuesday night if you think it wise.

Just trying to keep you in the loop as what he is doing. Why he is doing it is beyond me but if he’s working with Reidy... it must be to get at you somehow.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All public agencies in Washington are required to conduct government business in open public meetings. The Mayor's request for Councilman Plunkett to rally "Three Votes" is illegal. The Mayor is correct that the Council President sets the City Council Agenda. Mayor Haakensons' interference in the agenda process is contrary to the separation of powers doctrine. Only certain subjects may be discussed in Executive Session outside of public view - real estate, complaints against a public officer or a legal matter. Council discussion about an ordinance vacating an unopened right of way would not be a subject appropriate for an Executive Session.

By all appearances, Mayor Haakenson, you violated the law!

Appeal 20090004

2010-02-01T07:22:00.000-08:00

In Re the Appeal of:

Kenneth & Vera Reidy
771 Daley St. • Edmonds WA 98020

Appeal No. AP20090004

Finis Tupper Declaration & Brief

COMES NOW, Finis Tupper testifying in support of the Kenneth & Vera Reidy Appeal and recommending the Hearing Examiner grant the appeal.
Introduction

Before the Hearing Examiner, the City of Edmonds and City Attorney request enforcement of Ordinance 3729, this Notice of Code Violation exceeds statutory authority of police power, absent both a rational basis and reasonable relationship to public necessity, public welfare, health and safety. In this code violation action, the City of Edmonds acts absent statutory authority, in bad faith, fraudulently, arbitrary and capriciously by defying Federal, State and Local laws. The City Attorney has acted arbitrary and capriciously by using the code enforcement violation process to run-over the appellant’s substantive and procedural due process rights, right to privacy and taking of his real property without compensation. Real Property is defined as, land and anything growing on, attached to, or erected on it, excluding anything that may be severed without injury to the land. Real property can be corporeal (soil and buildings) or incorporeal (easements). Black’s Law Dictionary Abridged 7th Ed. (2000).

The City’s “prima facie” case as briefed to the Hearing Examiner, is without merit and unproven. The City and the City Attorney’s arguments are based solely on a disputed boundary line. The setback violation cannot be determined until the true boundary line is set by the Snohomish Superior Court, Case Number: 09-2-03815-3. The Reidys’ have filed suit to determine the rightful boundary between the subject properties.

The City provides no evidence the Reidys extended the shed without a building permit after January 1, 1981. Ex. 9.2 pg. 2. The City vacated its interest in the unopened right of way, and along with a Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) that awaits required judicial decision as to the public use, public necessity and the amount of compensation for damage. RCW 8.12.050. The City’s corrective action required statement in the Notice of Code Violation (NOV), includes removal of the allowed concrete slab. ECDC 16.20.040(C). The NOV makes no mention of the stairs, arbitrarily allowing the stairs to remain in the TCE area while requiring the demolition and removal of other real property. In the ordinance, the area description covered by the TCE encompasses a smaller area than the actual shed structure. The City Attorney failed to describe the property area accurately, calling the 500 Block, the 700 Block and not including all of the Lots that the Shed is constructed upon.

No matter what the circumstances are, every citizens deserves honest and evenhanded treatment including the execution of the rule of law in their land use dealings with the City of Edmonds.

Federal, State and Local Laws

A code city such as Edmonds has the broadest powers available under the constitution unless otherwise defined by statute. RCW 35A. These powers, including the power to condemn, abate, trespass and damage private property, must be liberally construed in favor of the city only if all federal, state and local laws have been properly followed. RCW 8.12.030. In this case, many of the required laws have not been applied and followed to resolve the underlying controversy.

Under the fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article I, section 3, of the Washington State Constitution, a person cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Procedural due process requires at minimum notice and an opportunity to be heard. Silver Firs Town Homes Inc. v. Silver Lake Water Dist., 103 Wn. App. 411, 425, 12 P.3rd 1022 (2000).

Washington State Constitution article 1, section 16, Eminent Domain. Private property shall not be taken for private use, except of private ways of necessity, and drains, flumes, or ditches on or across the lands of others for agricultural, domestic or sanitary purposes. No private property shall be taken or damaged for public or private use without just compensation having been first made, or paid into court for the owner, and no right-of-way shall be appropriated to the use of any corporation other than municipal until full compensation therefor be first made in money, or ascertained and paid into court for the owner irrespective of any benefit from any improvement proposed by corporation, which compensation shall be ascertained by a jury, unless a jury be waived, as in other civil case in courts of record, in the manner prescribed by law.

City Attorney has on the table a settlement agreement between the City of Edmonds and Thuesen Custom Homes. On several occasions, the City Attorney has publicly asserted through this Court order and settlement Thuesen Custom Homes is granted the right to waste and trespass on the Reidy’s property.

After service of the original, unmentioned and premature March 25, 2009, Order to Correct, the City ignored Mr. Reidys’ requests for an administrative hearing. ECDC 20.110.040(A)(2)(g). Ex. A. Ordinance 3729 was not effective until March 27, 2009. Ex. 9.31.

The TCE established in Ordinance No. 3729 is an exercise of eminent domain. RCW 8. Upon passage of an eminent domain ordinance, the city is required to file a petition in Superior Court for a decree of public use, public necessity and a judicial determination of just compensation. City of Des Moines v. Hemenway, 73 Wn.2d 130, 138, 437 P.2d 171 (1968); RCW 8.12.060. The City of Edmonds though this code enforcement action may not assume this statutory authority. Absent a judicial decision, the Hearing Examiner lacks the same authority and police power to take the Reidys’ real property, the stairs, concrete slab and the tool shed.

The City administration of the Street Vacation, unopened right of way, between 8th Ave. N. & 9th Ave. N. and north of Daley St. is contrary to existing and long ago adopted city code.

On November 13, 2009, Finis Tupper reviewed the City file for the Alley Vacation of the unopened alley lying between the 700 (sic) (500) Block of 8th Ave. N. & 9th Ave. N. and parallel to and north of Daley Street in Edmonds, Washington. I discovered an incomplete file with missing required information including both a staff report and a hearing examiner advisory report showing compliance and consistency with Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.

Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC) 10.35 establishes the Hearing Examiner. Paragraph (F) Vacations and Dedications, states, the hearing examiner will review the comprehensive plan and report on the same prior to any street vacation or dedication as provided in ECDC 15.05.020. [Ord. 2381, 1983; Ord. 2215 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2169 § 2, 1980]

ECDC15.05 Comprehensive Plan, Adopted 1997, Repealed 15.05.020. (The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan became a separate document),

2008 Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, Effect of the Plan, states,
C. Street Vacations and Dedications.
The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment, or vacation of any street, and no dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the city council until the location, character, extent, and effect thereof shall have been considered by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the vacation and/or dedication. [Emphasis added]

ECDC 20.70.80 Street Vacations, Staff report preparation, (A) Contents …containing the following information., (3) An analysis of the requested vacation in relation to the provisions of this chapter and the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; … One can only assume, if the staff analysis had been done a hearing examiner report would have been triggered.

Edmonds Municipal Code and Edmonds Community Development Code require Comprehensive Plan compliance and consistency. The language is mandatory and implemented by both the Planning Department and Hearing Examiner providing the Council with advisory opinion and analysis.

Furthermore, the Reidy use is ruled illegal, when in fact, the structure is grandfathered and allowed non-conforming accessory building. ECDC 17.40.020(H). Substantive evidence is ignored and misinterpreted. The city has a 1962 building permit.

Prior to 1980 and the purchase of 711 Daley St., Finis Tupper many times explored the woods and wetlands just north of 771 Daley St. with his good friend Jeff McMurphy who lived at 755 Daley St. in the late 60’s and early 70’s. Finis Tupper remembers seeing the entire structure as far back as 1968. The entire existing building existed when the Richmond and Cox families owned the property and prior to Reidy ownership.

Many people in Edmonds have sheds in their backyards on the property line. The city has not vacated the portion of the unopened right of way 500 Block between 7th Ave N. and 8th Ave. N and North of Daley Street. On this block, there are many examples of side or rear yard setback violations unenforced by the City of Edmonds. See Ex. 9.4. A most blatant and nearby violation is the Open Bible Church on the corner of 7th and Daley St. with a garage building & chimney encroaching over the existing open alley creating a vehicle safety hazard. Another example is the new house, 761 Daley St. permitted to place fixed improvements that obstruct access to an unopened & dedicated public right of way. An additional classic example on Daley St. and the 700 Block is the City’s fish ladder formally with a gazebo type structure constructed on top and located in the open street blocking the public right of way. Quoting Mr. Snyder, “Municipalities have a duty to remove obstructions in the public ways and liability if they fail to do so.” Lund v. City of Seattle, 99 Wash. 300, 166 P. 820 (1918).

The City must be evenhanded and scrupulously just in all dealings with the public.

Conclusion

To summarize, the City of Edmonds police power is limited by the Eminent Domain statute that requires judicial review and determination of public use, public necessity and the value of private property damaged. Without a Superior Court order granting this power, the City decision to enforce the TCE is overreaching. The City Attorney has failed to petition the Snohomish County Superior Court for these judicial determinations as required by law. The city staff report to Council for Resolution 1178 and Ordinance 3729 failed to follow the Edmonds Municipal Code, the Edmonds Community Development Code and the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan all having ministerial requirements including a Staff and Hearing Examiner analysis of compliance and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan prior to Council adoption of any Street Vacation ordinance. The Hearing Examiner failed to provide the City Council an advisory opinion prior to their legislative decision regarding the Street Vacation. Hence, the Street Vacation Ordinance fails to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. In this matter, the City Attorney has acted most unscrupulously.

I, Finis Tupper, being of legal age, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 30th day of January, 2010 at Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington;
_________________
Finis Tupper
711 Daley St.
Edmonds WA 98020

Thank you.

2010-01-23T14:04:00.000-08:00

Really, I want to thank all of you that have called and emailed me offering your support and encouragement in my efforts to preserve Edmonds and trim the sails of the wayward ship, Edmonds City government. Since my blog post and last weeks Council Meeting, the response and support is overwhelming. If you left a voice mail message and I haven't returned your call, please accept my apology.

Keep the Dirt coming by calling (425) 778-9465 or emailing me finistupper@hotmail.com. Even though my Just Dirt file is filling up it's one of the necessary components to grow flowers.

I'm just amazed at the number who have stepped up to say the injustice must stop. Thanks for reading my blog and for your many kind thoughts and recommendations. The concern and kindness you have shown and displayed to me and my family is most appreciated. As always, I'm here to assist you too!

Finis

UNTRUTHFUL CITY ATTORNEY

2010-01-23T05:03:00.000-08:00

CLAIM: At January 19, City Council Meeting the City Attorney claimed the city refunds the Appeal Fee to a prevailing appellant.

TRUTH: The City of Edmonds does not always refund a successful appellant as the citizen claimed at the Council meeting AND SCOTT SNYDER REBUTTED.
In the following matter, the staff changed the type of hearing midstream by renaming an appeal to some unknown and uncodified type of hearing not found in the City Code and referred to as an Exception Hearing. Then the staff denies the Appellants request for refund of Appeal Fee saying only successful appeals to the City Council are refunded.

Here's the letter from Public Works Director Noel Miller to the Appellant denying refund of the Appeal Fee.
File number APL20090003. APL is an abbreviation of the word appeal. On the bottom of the page, below Mr. Miller's signature (JZL744973.DOC/00006.900000/). JZL stands for J. Zachary Lell an Attorney with Ogden, Murphy Wallace Law Firm.

https://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/1021200974312770.pdf
(click to read the letter.)

Here is the actual city file for APL20090003 with clear and convincing evidence THE STAFF MODIFIED the file name and purpose during the pendency of the matter.

https://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/923200916334274.pdf https://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/923200916334274.pdf (click to read and see the actual staff report and exhibits)

Page 1, Staff Report Title and Date Jorgensen Request for Exception to Allow Infiltration
APL20090003 September 22, 2009

Page 8, Appellant's appeal letter.

Page 55, Notice of Appeal and Hearing Examiner Hearing
APL20090003, September 16, 2009 (six days prior to preparing the Staff Report for the Hearing Examiner)

This is the most damning document.
Page 64 City of Edmonds - Planning Division Request for Comment Form routed to Noel Miller and Public Works.
Project Description: Appeal of Engineering Interpretation regarding infiltration - Edmonds Community Development Code 18.30
September 9, 2009
SIGNED BY NOEL MILLER - THE SAME PERSON THAT SIGNED ZACHARY LELL'S LETTER DENYING THE REFUND
OF THE APPEAL FEE.

In layman terms this type of transaction is referred as a BAIT AND SWITCH scheme. Tell the buyer, the car is equipped with six-cylinders when only 4 cylinders are under the hood. Enough said the City Staff and City Attorney failures are incredible.

AT NEXT WEEK'S COUNCIL MEETING WILL MY REPRESENTATIVES DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS UNETHICAL CITY ATTORNEY BEHAVIOR.

Good Stuff / If the City actually did it!

2010-01-22T08:19:00.000-08:00

Code Enforcement Frequently Asked Questions

How do I request code enforcement action or file a suspected violation complaint with the City?
In emergency situations involving activities which must be stopped immediately to prevent irreparable harm, please contact Development Services during office hours or the police (911). On evenings, weekends, and holidays dial 911.
Non-emergency complaints must be submitted in writing. The complaint must be signed and include the following:
The address and telephone number of the person making the complaint.
A clear description of the nature of the alleged violation.
Location of the alleged violation and name of the alleged violator (if known).
Any other pertinent information.
To initiate a non-emergency investigation a "Request for Code Enforcement Action" (RCE) form should be completed. The form is available on-line and at City Hall. It can also be emailed, mailed or faxed to you. Although the form is not required, the RCE form will help make sure information is not omitted that could delay the investigation. Email or letters are also acceptable.

Why can't someone just go there?
The City needs complete information in order to conduct a fair, responsible and impartial investigation.

I don't want my neighbor to know I filed a complaint. Can I remain anonymous?
Yes. Per RCW42.17.310(1)(e)* the complainant may indicate a request for non-disclosure of their name and identity. Please be advised, the vast majority of violations are resolved without the release of complaint information. However, if the City is required to use legal proceedings to resolve the violation, the written complaint and supplemental information may be disclosed as public information. Your name is required so the City can request further information as needed. (*This citation is wrong - the RCW was recodified in 2006 to 42.56.240(2))
Complaints regarding life, health, safety, and environmental concerns are always investigated, even if the complaint is made anonymously. However, without contact information, the depth of the investigation is limited.

What happens after I file my complaint/request? What do you do? How long does it take? Do you contact me afterwards?
The City investigates every written complaint received. Generally, an investigation begins within a week of receipt. The activity or alleged violation would need to be observed, confirmed or determined through subsequent research. Complaints are generally prioritized by receipt, however, complaints are also prioritized by significance in cases of health, safety and environment.
City, County and State records are examined. The various adopted codes are applied. If a violation exists, the property owner is contacted and informed of the violation. Compliance solutions are reviewed and scheduled. Penalty fees may be imposed.
The time to resolve a violation depends on the complexity of the situation. The property owner's competence, resources and level of cooperation are also time factors in achieving compliance. The person filing the complaint may be contacted at any stage of the investigation by request.

My landlord won't maintain the residence. My tenant won't keep up the premises.What will the City do?
The Landlord-Tenant Act (RCW 59.18) contains remedies and procedures to resolve most landlord-tenant issues. A summary of the Act is available at the Development Services office.
The Dispute Resolution Center of Snohomish and Island Counties offers mediation and conflict resolution services to assist landlords and tenants in resolving their disputes. The City requests that the solutions available through the Landlord-Tenant Act are followed precisely (in writing).
Life-safety issues are regulated by the City and health issues by the Snohomish County Health District.

I've been told I am in violation of the Edmonds Community Development Code, but I don't agree. What can I do?
To contest a written Notice of Civil Violation you may request an appeal before the Edmonds Hearing Examiner by filing a written notice of appeal with the Development Services Director within 10 days of the date the notice is placed in the mail, or seven days from the date the notice is posted conspicuously on the property or served personally on the person responsible for the violation. A fee is required.
Action taken by the hearing examiner constitutes a final decision and shall be appealable only to the Snohomish County Superior Court; provided that any petition for review shall be filed no later than 10 working days after the service of the written order of the hearing examiner.

I've been told I am in violation of the Edmonds Community Development Code but the same situation existed before we were annexed to Edmonds. Isn't my property grandfathered?
Buildings, structures and uses of property that were lawful under the laws of Snohomish County are recognized as nonconforming by the City of Edmonds. A legally initiated use is a use of property that was authorized by the County's zoning ordinance.
The best proof for a commercial use are business licenses issued by the county. The best proof for a building or structure is a building permit from the county. Copies of both of these types of records can be obtained from the county.
For older structures that were constructed at a date when the County did not maintain records sometimes can be established through physical dating of fixtures utilized--for example, some plumbing fixtures are dated. Consistent dual utility billings can be a way of establishing a duplex use if building permit records no longer exist.
Nonconforming uses, buildings and structures must be continuously maintained, cannot be revived once abandoned and cannot be expanded. See Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 17.40 for details.

My neighbors fence/tree branches/roots/rockery appears to be on/over/beyond our shared property line? What can the City do?
Private property line issues are a civil matter between the private parties. A privately obtained licensed survey may be needed to clearly establish the property line. The City would only step in when there was a safety issue or if adopted code violations were involved.

I'm concerned that my neighbor needs some kind of assistance or;I don't have the money/strength/ability to resolve my violation.Who should I call?
The Code Enforcement office can provide phone numbers for different types of assistance.

How can I get more information?
If you have questions involving the procedures and/or the types of code violations subject to City jurisdiction you may contact the code enforcement inspector in person at City Hall, by email or by telephone at the numbers provided on this brochure.
The Development Services Department provides many handouts and brochures to assist citizens with code enforcement, building, planning and engineering questions.

ENFORCEMENT REQUEST

2010-01-22T05:56:00.000-08:00

Edmonds is a great place to live, work and play. For over 30 years, my family has resided in downtown Edmonds. For many years I've been involved in City government and the administration of the Edmonds Community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. Last week, I was sadden to learn of John LaTourelle passing. John was the City Consultant that wrote the original Comprehensive Plan Chapter 15 of Edmonds Community Development Code. Of course, John had a lot of assistance from a truly dedicated group of citizens, who provided important input. Most of their work has endured and preserved the Edmonds quality of life. Edmonds "The Gem on Puget Sound" is a true statement.

The Edmonds' quality of life could be even better though, but for City Attorney W. Scott Snyder and the Ogden Murphy Wallace Law Firm butchering the city codes and Comprehensive Plan. Last weeks, Council meeting was a classic example of his poor work product and his dereliction of duty to the citizens and Council.

As a child, I played and visited a place know as "Queen City Farm". Presently this property is known as Cedar Hills Landfill and home of Cedar Grove Composting. Queen City Farm was a hog farm. Believe me when I say, I know hogwash, what the stuff looks and smells like. Hogwash is disgusting. At most City Council meetings, Scott Snyder under the guise of being a qualified attorney serves the citizens and City Council ample amount of Hogwash. Last week, two interim ordinances were passed by the Council based on Mr Snyder's bogus and flat out misrepresentations of fact. The purposes of these new laws are to cover up the poor job done in code amendments and administration of procedural application of the code.

On December 9th, 2009, I faxed a Code Enforcement Action Request to the City of Edmonds claiming state and local laws have been broken by certain City Officials. Several City Officials emailed me confessing to their violations of the law.

My request should have prompted an investigation by the Code Enforcement Officer. The City choose to ignore me. Not until I requested an appointment with Mr. Mike Thies Code Enforcement Officer extraordinaire, did I learn the City had hired outside law firm to investigation my request. The outside law firm advised me Mr. Thies was unqualified to investigate a Code Enforcement Action Request.

There was no investigation. There was no Code Enforcement. Yesterday, I received a letter stating the City doesn't take me seriously. While the letter didn't say so, I've been dismissed. Well the City may soon find out, just how dedicated and tenacious I can be. Unfortunately, it may cost the taxpayers. I've told the Mayor to stop the foolish behavior but my warnings have fallen on deaf ears.

Citizens of Edmonds unite; we need to preserve Edmonds by enforcing the laws and bringing quality development and additions to our community.

City of Edmonds - Standard Modis Operandi

2010-01-21T22:15:00.000-08:00

This morning I realized that I relied on the Code Section cited on City form. What a silly mistake. There is an old saying always verify any information you get. Especially when it's the work of Scott Snyder and Odgen Murphy Wallace. It's the old saying "you get what you pay for"

From: Thies, Mike [mailto:thies@ci.edmonds.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:16 AMTo: Finis TupperSubject: RE: Code Enforcement Form

I don’t recall exactly. Whenever it was brought to my attention that the particular code had been revised. I believe in early 2009.

-----Original Message-----From: Finis Tupper [mailto:finistupper@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:05 AMTo: Thies, MikeSubject: RE: Code Enforcement Form

When was it updated?

From: Thies, Mike [mailto:thies@ci.edmonds.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:54 AMTo: Finis TupperCc: Grant WeedSubject: RE: Code Enforcement Form

Apparently, you must have the old form. Please find the updated form attached.

-----Original Message-----From: Finis Tupper [mailto:finistupper@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:37 AMTo: Thies, MikeSubject: Code Enforcement Form

Dear Mr. Thies:

Your department’s form refers to RCW 42.17.310(1)(e), I’m unable to find this section and paragraph in current State law.

I would appreciate an explanation and the correct code citation for non-disclosure of a complainant identity to the violators.

Thanks.

Finis Tupper
711 Daley St.
Edmonds WA 98020
(425) 778-9465

WHERE'S THE MONEY - MAYOR?

www.edmonds-wa.blogspot.com

Who's mistake is it anyway?

2010-01-20T21:59:00.000-08:00

Claim: Comprehensive Plan is not self-executing. ECDC needs implementation language for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.

Truth: Effect of Plan section of the Comprehensive Plan clearly states the requirement for the Hearing Examiner advisory opinion of compliance prior to Council decision in 1.) Street Vacations and Dedications and 2.) Public Projects.

Furthermore, ECDC 20.70.080 Staff Report preparation (A) (3) states the staff shall conduct, “An analysis of the requested vacation in relation to the provisions of this chapter and the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan…”

Which document is it, The Comprehensive Plan or Edmonds Community Development Code that the staff fails to comprehend. The City Attorney advises the City Council the ECDC requires new language and legal services to straighten out the wordsmith quagmire of his own execution.

For many Years, Ogden Murphy Wallace Law Firm has represented the city. The City Attorney should know the code forwards and backwards because most of writing and changes are his work product. Nevertheless, The City Attorney presents a legal memo claiming need for his expertise and legal advice for immediate council action to fix his own errors. The City Council should request a refund or better yet make a claim on his professional liability insurance.

Your Story Please

2010-01-15T09:29:00.000-08:00

Have you never email the City and been ignored?

I would like to hear from you. Which city official ignored you and the circumstances. You may comment on the blog anonymously or email me.

Thanks.

Hiding under the covers!

2010-01-15T09:02:00.000-08:00

PLEASE READ THESE EMAILS IN REVERSE ORDER.

Mr. Tupper,
Your inquiries are being forwarded to Grant Weed for response.
Sincerely,
Mike Thies

-----Original Message-----From: Finis Tupper [mailto:finistupper@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:10 AMTo: Thies, MikeCc: Haakenson, Gary; 'Stephen A. Bernheim'; daveandmarthaorvis@gmail.com; Wilson, DJSubject: RE: Email Followup

Dear Mr. Thies:

Please be more specific. Are you denying me the opportunity to meet with you to discuss your actions prior to the matter being referred to Weed, Graafstra and Benson?

It is very clear to me you choose to ignore my email of January 8th requesting an appointment. What City Policy or Official Direction did you rely on to determine no need for response? Or do you make it a habit to ignore citizen requests?

Thank you,
Finis
From: Thies, Mike [mailto:thies@ci.edmonds.wa.us] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 7:43 AMTo: Finis TupperCc: Haakenson, Gary; Stephen A. Bernheim; daveandmarthaorvis@gmail.com; Wilson, DJSubject: RE: Email Followup

Mr. Tupper,
As previously noted, your inquiry has been forwarded to conflict council, Weed, Graafstra and Benson. Mr. Weed will be responding to any and all questions regarding your inquiry, including any questions regarding the status of the inquiry once it was faxed to City Hall.
Sincerely,
Mike Thies

-----Original Message-----From: Finis Tupper [mailto:finistupper@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 7:33 AMTo: Thies, MikeCc: Haakenson, Gary; 'Stephen A. Bernheim'; daveandmarthaorvis@gmail.com; Wilson, DJSubject: Email Followup

Dear Mr. Thies:

On January 8, I emailed you requesting an appointment to discuss my December 9, 2009 Code Enforcement fax. You have not responded.

Do you make it a habit of ignoring a citizen request or just certain citizens? I would appreciate a copy of your Department policy and criteria for determining whether you will respond or ignore a citizen’s request for code enforcement or a meeting to discuss an issue.

Thank you,

Finis Tupper
711 Daley St.
Edmonds WA 98020
(425) 778-9465

WHERE'S THE MONEY - MAYOR?
www.edmonds-wa.blogspot.com

Edmonds Code Enforcement, Mike Thies

2010-01-08T21:29:00.000-08:00

My email to the unqualified investigator of Code Violations. No response. But I will keep you all informed in the process.

Dear Mr. Thies:

At your convenience, please schedule an appointment time for us to discuss the efforts your office took to resolve my code enforcement request, faxed on December 9, 2009. My desire is for a better understanding of the actions you as the Code Enforcement Officer accomplished prior to the involvement of Attorney Grant Weed, Esq.

Please contact me to arrange for a mutually convenient appointment time.

Thank you.

Finis Tupper

Conflict Council (sic) Email

2010-01-07T20:11:00.000-08:00

Mr. Tupper,
As you know, our office has been requested to assist with review and response to your request for code enforcement action received by the City on December 9, 2009. Your request alleges that the City failed to follow the Growth Management Act and Edmonds Comprehensive Plan regulations when it purchased and developed certain property. Because the request appears to center on issues concerning State law (the GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan, legal review is necessary in order to respond. Review of this nature is generally outside of the expertise of a code enforcement officer. Because there is some history relating to this matter we will need some time to investigate, obtain relevant documents, and research the law. Following our review we will provide you with a written response to the complaint.
I do have one question for you. Is there a specific section of City code that you allege has been violated? If so, what section?
Sincerely,

Grant Weed
Weed, Graafstra & Benson
21 Ave. A
Snohomish, Wa. 98290
360-568-3119

Finally a Response from the City

2010-01-06T22:51:00.000-08:00

Mr. Tupper,
Your inquiry has been forwarded to conflict council, Weed, Graafstra and Benson. Mr. Weed will be responding once additional information is gathered.
Sincerely,
Mike Thies
(Edmonds Code Enforcement Officer)

28 Days - No response from Edmonds Code Enforcement

2010-01-05T08:38:00.000-08:00

Still waiting for a response from the Mike Thies, Edmonds Code Enforcement.

Day Five

2009-12-12T08:08:00.000-08:00

No response from the City of Edmonds Code Enforcement Official Mike Thies.

I think I'll send him an email on Monday to set-up an appointment to discuss my complaint.

Hearing Examiner Advisory Opinions

2009-12-11T07:38:00.000-08:00

I have asked the City of Edmonds for Hearing Examiner Reports for:

Ord. 3729 - Street Vacation between the 700 Block of 8th and 9th Aves. N. and North of Daley Street.
Council purchase of easement Old Milltown Courtyard
Council purchase of land from Edmonds School District - Old Woodway Elementary School
Council purcahse of land on Main Street, East of 9th Ave.

Edmonds Comprehensive Plan 2008

2009-12-11T07:35:00.000-08:00

Effect Of Plan
A. Private Projects. All private projects requiring city review and approval shall be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Public Projects. No street, park or other public way, ground, place, space, or public
building or structure, or utility [whether publicly or privately owned] shall be abandoned,
constructed or authorized until the Hearing Examiner has reviewed and reported to the
City Council on the location, extent and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The
Hearing Examiner's report shall be advisory only. Notice of the hearing by the Hearing
Examiner shall be given in the manner specified in each case by the City Council.
C. Street Vacations and Dedications. The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a
preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment, or vacation of any street,
and no dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the city
council until the location, character, extent, and effect thereof shall have been considered
by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing
Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the
vacation and/or dedication.

HEARING EXAMINER

2009-12-10T09:05:00.000-08:00

Chapter 10.35HEARING EXAMINER
Sections:
10.35.010 Office of hearing examiner.
10.35.010 Office of hearing examiner.
A. Appointment. There is created the office of the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner shall be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council for a term of four years. The first year of the term will be probationary during which year he or she will serve subject to the approval of the mayor. During the balance of the four-year term the hearing examiner may be removed only for good cause.
B. Temporary Appointment. The mayor shall appoint a temporary hearing examiner to serve whenever the hearing examiner informs the mayor that he or she cannot serve.
C. Conflict of Interest. The hearing examiner may hold no other position in the city government of Edmonds or be an employee of or contractor for any person under contract to the city of Edmonds. The hearing examiner shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 1.14 ECC, Public Official Disclosure.
D. Freedom from Improper Influence. No person shall interfere with the hearing examiner in the performance of his designated duties. The hearing examiner shall avoid prehearing contact with persons interested in a particular land use proposal, including the staff persons working on the same matter. If there is any prehearing contact, the hearing examiner shall disclose it on the record at the start of the hearing. The hearing examiner shall disqualify himself or herself if the prehearing contact would result in an unfair hearing, or an appearance of unfairness, and arrange for a temporary hearing examiner to hold the hearing.
E. Powers and Duties. The hearing examiner shall review land use applications and issues as specified in Chapter 20.100 ECDC and related matters.
F. Vacations and Dedications. The hearing examiner will review the comprehensive plan and report on the same prior to any street vacation or dedication as provided in ECDC 15.05.020.
G. Annual Review. Every year in September, the hearing examiner shall prepare and present an oral and written report to the city council outlining the actions of the hearing examiner during the preceding 12-month period. The purpose of such review is to enable the city council and the hearing examiner to coordinate city land use policy and philosophy. [Ord. 2381, 1983; Ord. 2215 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2169 § 2, 1980].

CITY OF EDMONDS VIOLATES THEIR OWN LAWS!

2009-12-09T21:30:00.000-08:00

Let's follow the code enforcement process.

(CLICK ON PICTURE)

ESC Associates Withdrawns Rezone Application

2009-10-21T08:37:00.000-07:00

(Click on title for complete letter)

Note: Letter date 10/19/2009 - Received by the City 10/20/2009 - I didn't see this letter until this morning.

The letter states "ESC Associates plans to refile the rezone application shortly". Building Heights is a current issue!

Stay tuned - Strom's pants could catch fire.

2009-10-20T07:58:00.000-07:00

Edmonds Beacon 10/15/2009

STROM PETERSON responds, (“What is truly spooky is the attempt to TRICK Edmonds citizens into becoming zombie voters by telling ghost stories. The TREAT is that Edmonds residents are too smart to fall for these tall tales.”)

STROM PETERSON blatantly ignores the truth. (His fear-mongering Press Release has been deleted.)

"Peterson agrees, saying, “Building heights is not the issue in downtown Edmonds.
Having vacant storefronts is the issue. Edmonds is known and treasured for its character,

and I have always expressed my commitment to maintaining Edmonds small-town charm.”

Building heights in the Downtown is a CURRENT ISSUE. Two examples: 523 Alder St and 190 Sunset Ave S. Click on the addresses for detailed information. First address is a 35ft tall single family residence. Second address is the Old Safeway/Antique Mall property, west of the Ferry loading lanes. In previous campaigns, Mr Peterson accepted thousands of dollars from Albert Dykes and ESC Associates, owner of this parcel and applicant for the rezone requesting a zoning change from a 25 ft building height limit to 75 ft building height limit. <- click here for a newspaper article.

Mr. Peterson's record favors changing our current Business Commerical District Zone. At every opportunity, Mr. Peterson advocated taller buildings for more $500,000 to $1 million Condos claiming Economic Development!

New Edmonds Website - Edmonds News

2009-10-19T22:27:00.000-07:00

Be sure to check it out - link on the left

Be Sure to Vote

2009-10-19T21:01:00.000-07:00

Edmonds City Council Position 2 - Diane Buckshnis - former bank regulator
(This one is a no brainer because she running against a Cheesemonger.)

Edmonds City Council Position 1 - Michael Plunkett
(Michael knows the issues having been around 30 years and sides with the citizens first.)

Edmonds City Council Position 3 - Lora Petso
(A lawyer with a degree in Economics, Lora is one smart cookie always protecting taxpayers wallet.)

You've got to see this!

2009-10-19T20:34:00.000-07:00

It's so refreshing.

Do you remember that Paul McCartney song "Let em in"?

Someones knockin at the door
Somebodys ringin the bell
Someones knockin at the door
Somebodys ringin the bell
Do me a favor,
Open the door and let em in
Sister suzie, brother john,
Martin luther, phil and don,
Brother michael, auntie gin,
Open the door and let em in.

http://www.orvisblog.blogspot.com/

I can't get the song out of my head!

Don't Bother Knock'en
DJ Wilson
Strom Peterson
Ron Wamblot
Peggy Olson

Welcome - Come on in!
Steve Bernheim
Michael Plunkett
Dave Orvis
(Candidates)
Diane Buckshnis
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas
Lora Petso

Hiding in the Basement
Priya Cloutier

Material Misstatement

2009-10-18T05:47:00.000-07:00

It doesn't take a CPA degree to realize the City of Edmonds is fiscally challenged. Even the Mayor, who is not a CPA, describes the current financial state as "cash strapped". The Mayor's 2009-2010 Budget presentation to the Council blamed Tim Eyman for the City's current financial predicament.

The Mayor's Fire District 1 Contract proposal presentation to the citizens and council contains a material misstatement of fact. Slide 11, Cost from a contract, Fire District One is offering a contract for 2010 that will cost $6.2 million. This figure is from Exhibit A, Fire District Cost Model which excludes the EMS Transport Fees estimated at $700,000 in the 2009 Budget. The Budget figure amount is based on 50% collectible of the billed rates plus mileage charge. My calculation using the 2007 Edmonds Fire Department Annual Statistics Report conservatively found the billed amount at $1.4 Million.

Material Misstatement

The cost to Edmonds taxpayers would be somewhere between $6.9 Million and $7.6 Million Dollars, not the $6.2 Million amount floated and proclaimed by the Mayor.

The Mayor blames this situation on Tim Eyman. When in fact mismanagement of two interlocal agreements providing Edmonds Fire Department Services to Fire District 1 and Woodway below the cost of service are squarely the root cause of the city's current fire department finance dilemma. In 2007, Snohomish County Fire District 1 collected almost $1 Million Dollars for Fire/EMS Service taxes from the Esperance area. City of Edmonds provided all fire/emergency medical services for $295,074. Woodway, one of the wealthiest communities in the nation paid Edmonds $168,772 for fire/emergency medical services. Guess who negotiated these two interlocal agreements? Answer: Gary Haakenson, not Tim Eyman!

Additionally, the disbanding of Medic 7 and the incorporating of those assets and personnel into the Edmonds Fire Department caused the Fire Departments costs to double over the past 7 years! From $4,349,434, 2002 Edmonds City Budget - Fire Department to $8,557,569, 2009 Edmonds City Budget - Fire Department Budget. Guess who negotiated the sale and transfer agreement? Answer: Mayor Gary Haakenson, not Tim Eyman!

The Fire District 1 swindle has been going on since 1995 and the Edmonds purchase of Fire Station 20. Both the Fire District 1 and Woodway interlocal agreements were re-negotiated by Mayor Gary Haakenson. Sorry to say, Edmonds has lost Millions! It's no wonder our Firefighters and Medics want to abandon the Mayor's sinking ship!

More Money More Better! LESS SERVICE? WHO CARES!

2009-10-14T21:24:00.000-07:00

This is DJ Wilson's mantra.

Last night, the Edmonds City Council met with Fire District 1 Commissioners to discuss the proposed Fire Service Contract and sale of the Edmonds Fire Department.

There were two issues that struck me in their discussion:

1.) The Edmonds City Council is not concerned about the Level of Service Fire District 1 will provide the Edmonds taxpayers.

2.) Edmonds City Council President DJ Wilson said the District has 27 Million in unrestricted and unreserved tax dollars, while the city has a 7 Million deficit.

On the Level of Service subject, State law requires all public providers of Fire and Emergency Services to set measurable performance standards and goals. RCW 35.103 and 52.33, City and Towns and Fire Districts. As I heard several councilmembers publicly state their lack of concern about the level of service the District would provide, I wondered If they knew about these required reports. I don't think so! The Mayor has provided very little information about the Fire District 1 operation for council evaluation. There has been a total lack of due diligence. Today I received a copy of the Fire District 1, 2008 RCW 52.33 Performance and Compliance Report. My conclusion, the Edmonds Fire Department provides a much higher standard of service and meets the goals more often than the Fire District.

On the issue of money, when I heard Fire District 1 had 27 Million in unrestricted and unreserved funds, only one thought came to my mind, the District is overcharging the Fire District taxpayers.

What do you think?

MAYOR'S SLUSH FUND REVEALED

2009-10-14T07:49:00.000-07:00

The following financial information was obtained from the city's website and financial reports:

Comparison of Ending & Beginning Cash Balances for the General Fund #001
2004-2009
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report/ Final Budget /Variance
2004 Ending $5,727,099 2005 Beginning $3,461,927 $2,265,172
2005 Ending $6,055,094 2006 Beginning $3,273,822 $2,781,272
2006 Ending $6,161,803 2007 Beginning $3,551,328 $2,610,475
2007 Ending $5,810,379 2008 Beginning $2,207,263 $3,603,116
2008 Ending $3,260,920 2009 Beginning $977,951 $2,282,969

The ending cash and cash equivalents is found in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Profit and Loss figure less the Emergency Reserve Fund $1,927,600.

YOST POOL - SENIOR CENTER - DARE - FLOWER PROGRAM

2009-10-14T07:43:00.000-07:00

PUBLISHED BECAUSE THE CITY REMOVED THIS PRESS RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE

On October 6th, The Edmonds Interim Financial Director announced the existence of a City Council Contingency Fund in the amount of $93,000. The money currently is hidden and comingled in the City's General Fund.

Funny thing - not one council member knew that this existed back in March when Mayor Haakenson announced these budget cuts.

Press Release
City of Edmonds
Mayor Gary Haakenson
March 13, 2009
For Immediate Release
To: Edmonds City Council
The Edmonds Beacon editor@edmondsbeacon.com
The Edmonds Enterprise edmonds@heraldnet.com
The Everett Herald newstips@heraldnet.com
Contact: Mayor Gary Haakenson425.771.0247

Mayor makes service cuts to city budget(Edmonds - WA) Mayor Gary Haakenson has announced the following service cuts to the City of Edmonds’ budget that will be implemented immediately.Since the approval of the 2009-10 budget in November of 2008, the City’s sales tax revenues have dropped dramatically. Consequently, we have adjusted our estimates for the balance of 2009 and all of 2010. With this reduction in revenues, our ending cash balance is in danger of dipping into negative territory, so we can’t wait until after the proposed November 2009 ballot measure to make service cuts. The cuts must begin immediately.This is the first of several budget cuts that will be implemented in the next 60 days. Unfortunately, there will be some positions eliminated and some layoffs in the days ahead. I will notify union leadership next week of the areas where cuts will be made.Cuts will be made to the Police Department, and this school year will be the last for the DARE program that has been a great asset to the youth of our community. We have notified the City of Mountlake Terrace that we will be terminating the animal control services contract we provide them, and it will not be renewed. We are also eliminating the balance of both the Crime Prevention Program and the Police Reserve Program.The Police Department and Fire Departments will not be participating in Edmonds Night Out this year from a monetary or personnel standpoint.Approximately $33, 000 has been eliminated from the Economic Development advertising budget.For many years the City has funded the South County Senior Center programs, and the $60,000 authorized for 2009 will be honored but will not be funded in 2010.Yost Pool will not open this year. No part-time employees will be hired to work at the pool. No seasonal help will be hired in the Parks Maintenance Department. Existing staff will do their best to keep up, but expect our parks to look less maintained than our citizens are used to, and garbage pickup and restroom cleaning will be more sporadic. Effective at once we will no longer pay for the flower program from the general fund. It will be paid for the balance of 2009 from a donation fund that has been in existence for some time. And the size of the program will be roughly cut in half.The Mayor also asked the City Council President to eliminate $25,000 from the Council contingency fund.“The focus of Edmonds city government in these troubled times will be to provide what is necessary to our citizens, not what might be nice to have,” said Mayor Haakenson.

Your ballot is coming!

2009-10-11T17:17:00.000-07:00

BOO!

With Halloween fast approaching, the word spooky comes to mind. These are genuinely spooky times.

Two frightening proposals are before the City of Edmonds, the sale of our Fire Department to Fire District 1 and a Contract Rezone to allow for 75 ft tall buildings on our waterfront. Prior to completing the public hearing process, Edmonds City Councilman Strom Peterson has publicly endorsed the sale of our fire department and the give away of $700,000 to $1.4 Million taxpayer dollars yearly to Fire District without contract credit. Despite his claims to the contrary, Strom Peterson favors taller buildings in the downtown, a well-documented fact in City Council and Planning Board Meeting Minutes.

Come November the citizens of Edmonds can put these scary thoughts behind us by electing Diane Buckshnis to the Edmonds City Council. Diane will bring financial experience to the Council. Unlike her opponent, Diane will not only listen to, but will welcome citizen comment and participation.

Please join her many supporters and me by voting for Diane Buckshnis - Edmonds City Council. Let us make this Primary winner the General Election winner!

My Simple Proposal

2009-10-08T06:03:00.000-07:00

From studying the City of Edmonds Budget and looking at surrounding City Fire Departments, it costs approximately 2 Million Dollars to operate a Fire Station.

Edmonds has 3 Fire Stations equaling 6 Million Dollars.

Fire Station 20 located in Esperance (outside City of Edmonds boundary limits) serves unincorporated county and the Town of Woodway. Increase fire service contracts to match the cost of providing fire and ems service to these two jurisdictions 1.6 Million or close Fire Station 20 for a 2 Million savings.

6 Million Less 1 Million Fire District interlocal agreement, less 600,000 for the Woodway Fire Service interlocal agreement.

Propose a 4.4 Million Contract with the Fire District 1. Keep our Fire Stations, Fire Equipment assets and the EMS Transport Fee tax revenue!

Revenue:

EMS Levy 3.9 Million

EMS Transport Fees 1 Million

Bond Revenue $270,000

Wow - Edmonds realizes a profit to use for the Fire Station maintenance and future upgrading Fire equipment.

Reasoning: Since 1995 and the purchase of Fire Station 20 from Fire District 1 Edmonds taxpayers have been swindled. The Fire District collects from the Esperance area approximately 1 Million dollars and paid Edmonds $295,000 for providing Fire and EMS services to Esperance. IT IS TIME TO TURN THE TABLE!

Fire Sale "Huge Discounts"

2009-09-28T05:46:00.000-07:00

Mayor Haakenson says the EMS Transport Fees (city's bill, if the paramedics take you to a hospital) go with the sale of the Fire Stations. Mayor's reasoning is that Mountlake Terrace didn't sell their Fire Station. Edmonds is selling 3 Fire Stations therefore the EMS transport fees go with stations.
Huh? What does this mean? Edmonds taxpayers will continue to pay for the purchase of these public assets for as long as the term of the contract. Currently Edmonds Property owners are paying a Public Safety Levy .12 per thousand property valuation, amounting to $840,000 per year to pay the bonds for fire station 17 and the public safety building. This tax will continue along with the EMS Transport Fees.

According to the September 1, 2009 Meeting Minutes, Fire District 1 is considering the option of floating bonds to be used for the 8 million dollar purchase and using Edmonds EMS Transport Fees to pay for the new public debt. This means Edmonds taxpayers will be paying this debt with our hard earned tax dollars, twice. First the Mayor has no intention to payoff the Bonds because of a punitive early payoff clause in the bond agreement. Secondly, using the Edmonds EMS Transport Fee for anything other than the actual EMS service would make the tax illegal.

The big questions is the worth of the EMS Transport Fees. New for 2009 the City budgeted revenue of $700,000 assuming 50% of the billed amount is noncollectable. Here are the 2008 figures calculated by myself using the 2008 Fire Department Annual Report.

BASIC LIFE SUPPORT NUMBER OF TRANSPORTS COST TOTAL $

1689 $475.00 = $802,275.00
ADVANCE LIFE SUPPORT NUMBER OF TRANSPORTS COST TOTAL $
597 $750.00 = $447,750.00

mileage charge

15.50 = $185,612.50

THE GRAND TOTAL $1,435,637.50

If the $700,000 budgeted amount is correct then Fire District 1 after the five year term of the contract will pay only 4.5 Million for the Fire Stations. What a incredible deal for the Fire District 1. If the First District collects 100% the final cost for the 3 Fire Stations will be 1 Million Dollars.

Ask the Mayor, where is the money? Tell Haakenson to go back to the bargaining table and bring back a credible proposal.

Is DJ Wilson giving out your email address?

2009-09-25T07:38:00.000-07:00

Last Friday, my email box was cluttered with a unsolicited spam message from Council Candidate Cloutier. Ms Cloutier used the very same email service that Councilman DJ Wilson uses to communicate Constant Contact, a permission-based email service, meaning "people who have asked to receive your message". I have never asked, nor do I desire to learn what is on Ms. Cloutier's simple mind. Here is Ms. Cloutier's evasive and unresponsive answers to my questions as to how she obtained my email address.

If you too received this unsolicited email without permission forward it along with a complaint and objection to abuse@constantcontact.com.

THE EMAILS

Ms. Tupper:
It is not that I being uncooperative, it is just that you are not getting the answer you want. I can only tell you what I know. I encourage you to make the contact with Mr. Nault. I hope that he can help you find an answer that will satisfy you.
Best of the Evening,
Priya

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Finis Tupper wrote:
Dear Mr. Cloutier:

Since you are being so uncooperative. On Monday, I will contact Robert Nault at Constant Contact about your spam abuse using their service.

I'm positive their investigation will provide me with the correct answers to my questions. Computers and servers are amazing at collecting and saving loads of data.

Yours truly,
Finis Tupper

----- Original Message -----
From: priya cloutier
To: Finis Tupper
Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: Priya Cloutier for City Council: Building momentum for the fall!
Ms. Tupper:
I can't be more specific because I do not know. E-mails were loaded in constant contact. We did not keep a record of where they came from. If I had more detail, I would tell you.

My secretary and my husband. I have already checked with both; neither have not kept records of where they got the addresses. I have told you everything I know. I wish I could be more helpful.
Todd, my husband, and I had a long discussion about the emails. He reminded me that every time one donates money to a campaign or cause, the email associated with that donation is kept on file my numerous organizations. Many of those organizations are happy to share that e-mail. Todd suggested that you create a dummy email to use when you are not sure who the email goes out to. That way, if something strange (like my campaign email) comes to you, you can trace who actually gave away your e-mail (or at least narrow it down). This is what Todd does.
At this point all I can do is to promise never to use your email again. I wish I could be more helpful. Stay dry and war.
Best Wishes,
Priya

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Finis Tupper wrote:

Okay, please be more specific as to how you obtained my private and personal email address. Was it VoteBuilder or one of your supporters. Better yet, provide me with a copy of the original document and the name of the person from which you received my email address.

Thanks
Finis Tupper

----- Original Message -----
From: priya cloutier
To: Finis Tupper
Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: Priya Cloutier for City Council: Building momentum for the fall!
Ms. Tupper:
The e-mail list was generated from list provided to me from various supporters and a database called VoteBuilder. DJ Wilson did not provide me with any e-mails. I am sorry to have bothered you and will assure that your name is taken off of my mailing list.
Warmest WIshes,
Priya Cloutier

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Finis Tupper wrote:

Tell DJ to take me off his list!

REELECT MICHAEL PLUNKETT EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL

Lucky Seven

2009-09-12T07:16:00.000-07:00

Edmonds Voters can't go wrong!

Latest News - The Snohomish County Elections conducted the manual recount of the City of Edmonds Council Position 3 race on Friday, September 11, 2009 at the Bethany Tabulation Center located at 1818 Pacific Avenue, Everett. Results have been released and will remain unofficial until certified by the Snohomish County Canvassing Board on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 at 11:00am. Follow this link for the unofficial results.

Thank you, Councilman Ron Wambolt for your four years of service to our community!

Edmonds Events - from Rich

2009-09-08T08:03:00.000-07:00

Well, the weather seems to be signaling that Autumn is approaching, but no need to fret ... there’s lots going on in Edmonds that might interest you. So here’s an update from your friendly, neighborhood, Precinct Committee Officer ... and Edmonds advocate.

· The Edmonds City Council Primary results are in... well, sort of...

Diane Buckshnis (http://www.dianebuckshnis.com/) won the primary for Edmonds City Council Position 2. And she received more votes than any city council candidate participating in the primary. That makes her one for one in Edmonds elections. Her opponent in the upcoming general election, Strom Peterson –the appointed incumbent–, is zero for three in Edmonds elections. No doubt a close general election is anticipated, but the results indicate Diane effectively communicated her issue-based, Community-focused message and that it is being well-received. As Diane says, “When elected, I intend to advocate for the ENTIRE Edmonds Community because, I believe, Community Interests Come First!”

Adrienne Fraley-Monillas won the primary for Edmonds City Council Position 3. Her opponent is yet to be decided because a mandatory recount is being scheduled due to the closeness of the vote. Lora Petso currently leads the incumbent, Ron Wambolt, by only three votes; only the top two vote getters move on to the General Election. Yep, every vote really does count! But as Adrienne says, “The primary results indicate the Edmonds community has signaled their desire for change.”

· Are you aware that the City of Edmonds is currently exploring a “sale” of the Edmonds Fire/EMS Services and assets to Snohomish County Fire District #1? The issue is a complicated one that has both advantages and concerns... too complicated to address here. But from my perspective, three questions need to be addressed: 1) What is best long-term fire/EMS service arrangement for our community, 2) What is the best long-term arrangement for our firefighters (IAFF District Union Local #1828 supports the contract for services arrangement), and then, 3) What is the appropriate value and financial terms for this contract. You may want to pay attention to the upcoming discussions closely, as these changes impact your public safety services. Interestingly, the current schedule for discussion and public hearings, outlined by Council President D.J. Wilson, leads to a likely vote on this option by October 27th; that would be PRIOR TO the upcoming City Council election.
ü It’s worth noting that the Edmonds Fire Department is one of the proudest and longest serving fire departments in Washington State. Founded on 1904, the Edmonds Fire Department has grown to be one of the most respected departments in Puget Sound. And regardless of the outcome of these considerations and negotiations, our Fire Department deserves our loyal support honoring their dedicated service for over 100 years. Have you thanked an Edmonds firefighter today?!

· Sustainable Edmonds and the Amphibian Center, Just Frogs –Toads too!, have teamed together to sponsor and host the September Snohomish County GreenDrinks (Wednesday, September 9) event in Edmonds (300 Admiral Way, Suite 104; under Arnie's restaurant, near the beach dock just south of the ferry terminal). If you wear green you will get 10% off of any purchase in the store.
Check out this article about the opening of the Amphibian Center, Just Frogs – Toads too!, on the Edmonds waterfront... www.heraldnet.com/article/20090803/NEWS01/708039924.

Food and beverages will be provided by The Cheesemonger, PCC, Gallaghers U-Brew it and others.
Be sure to bring your glass or mug so you can toast our planet "while we figure out ways to NOT toast the planet!”
Learn more about GreenDrinks here... www.greendrinks.org/.

· The Birders are coming, the birders are coming! The spotlight will be on birds once again at PUGET SOUND BIRD FEST in Edmonds, Friday through Sunday, September 11-13! This year’s festival will feature many of the same activities as in past years, as well as some new opportunities to learn about and observe birds at home in their habitats. Check out the Puget Sound Bird Fest web site for more details and a schedule of activities... http://www.pugetsoundbirdfest.com/.
ü And coinciding with Bird Fest, the nonprofit organization, Center for Creative and Humanitarian Endeavors, is hosting a special “Fly Away Home” movie night on Saturday, September 12 (7:00 PM) at the “Rose House” (555 Main Street, Edmonds). See the attached flyer for more info.

· The Rose House, Center for Creative and Humanitarian Endeavors, has also initiated a Community Challenge to find at least 300 generous individuals and businesses to step up and make a tax deductible recurring donation of at least $10 a month for one year to cover the expense of renting the house and opening its doors to the community. This will allow the volunteers, comprising the Center for Creative and Humanitarian Endeavors, to focus their energies on raising larger donation to, ultimately, purchase the home for use as a community enrichment center. See the attached Rose House Concept Paper and Community Challenge Press Release for more info.

· And if Classic Cars are your style... Mark your calendars for the Edmonds Classic Car Show, happening on Sunday, September 13! Enjoy this family show in downtown Edmonds. Both the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and Edmonds merchants and restaurants join in welcoming you to this event. If you have any questions, please call the Car Show at 425-275-0699 or email edmondscarshow@gmail.com.

· Get ready for the upcoming holiday season by attending an evening presentation entitled, "Tips and tricks for celebrating a Green Halloween (and beyond)," on Sept. 17th at 7:00 PM at the Edmonds PCC Natural Market located at 9803 Edmonds Way. Mother-daughter co-authors of the book, Celebrate Green! Creating Eco-Savvy Holidays, Celebrations and Traditions for the Whole Family and founders of http://www.greenhalloween.org/ and http://www.celebrategreen.net/ will offer fresh ideas on how to create holiday traditions that are sustainable and enriching. The event is hosted by Sustainable Edmonds. See the attached flyer for more info.

Yep, there’s always something happening in Edmonds!

Cheers,

Richard I. Senderoff, Ph.D.
Precinct Committee Officer (Elected): Edmonds 34
21st Legislative District, 1st Congressional District

Edmonds Economic Development Commission- Commissioner
Rose House, Center for Creative and Humanitarian Endeavors- Board Member
Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Habitat Community Certification Program- Steering Committee Member
Sustainable Edmonds- Member

There is no savings!

2009-09-08T07:43:00.000-07:00

The 2009-2010 Edmonds City Final Budget $7,9372.337.
Proposed Fire District One Contract $7,902,183.

savings $70,154

THE MAYOR IS GIVING AWAY THE EDMONDS EMS TRANSPORT FEE OVER $700,000

Extra Expense to Edmonds $629,846

Numbers never lie, rather liars figure!

2009-09-06T12:29:00.000-07:00

To the Edmonds Mayor, your presentation is an illogical analysis of the current and future revenue and expense compared to existing budget and the Fire District 1 proposal to provide fire and EMS services. Needless to say, the cost savings are an exaggeration. The Mayor and Interim Finance Director have manipulated the numbers to present a more favorable result to the council and public. THE PROBLEM WITH THE MAYOR’S PRESENTATION IS BOTH A PROJECTED REVENUE AND A PROJECTED EXPENSE ARE PROBLEMATIC!

The first discrepancy found in the Mayor’s presentation is the EMS transport fee to the tune of $700,000. This revenue figure appears in the Comparison of City Operated Fire Department -vs.- Contracting for Services and then the tax revenue magically disappears from the Fire and EMS Contract Services with Fire District 1 spreadsheet. Nowhere in the Mayor’s PowerPoint presentation does he reveal the EMS Transport Fee revenue disappears from the City’s revenue and does not appear in the Fire District 1 cost of service model.

The EMS Transport Fee is a new regulatory fee adopted by the City Council in November 2008, with an effective January 1, 2009. In December 2008, the council approved a one-year contract with a Poulsbo company to collect the EMS Transport Fee for a cost of $22.00 per Medical Incident Report. The fee includes Basic Life Support Emergency fee $475.00, Advance Life Support Level I $700.00, Advance Life Support Level II $800.00, plus mileage at a per loaded mile rate of $15.50.

Edmond's Fire District 1 Contract Offer language, paragraph 4.8, EMS Transport Fees, states, The District understands and acknowledges that the City presently charges fees for basic life support and advanced life support transports occurring with the City. Effective with the Commencement Date of this agreement, the District shall apply the District’s EMS transport policies and procedures and fee schedule to the City and jurisdictions served by the City. The District shall retain all collected fees, and bear all billing and collection costs.

Nowhere found in the Mayor’s presentation are the District’s policies, procedures and fees for District 1’s EMS Transport fee. Nor is the $700,000 worth of revenue subtracted from the District service contract or added to the expense of the agreement.

Even more interesting and to the point is the terms and conditions language for Transport Fees in the Mountlake Terrace/Fire District 1 Contract for Fire/EMS Services. Paragraph 4.5 Transport Fees, states, The parties understand and acknowledge that the City presently imposes a fee for basic life support and advanced life support transports occurring within the City. (hereinafter “Transport Fees) The City shall retain the authority to set the Transport Fees amount throughout the term of this Agreement. The District shall receive and collect all Transport Fees on behalf of the City and remit these amounts, less the costs of collection, according to the schedule in paragraph 4.1.1 herein. The District shall be responsible for, and agrees to prepare and provide in a timely fashion, all necessary documentation and/or reports and provide the same to the billing agency for Transport Fees. The District shall have no obligation to pursue collection of delinquent accounts. The parties shall mutually agree to the particular billing and/or collection agency to be contracted with and used by the District for City imposed Transport Fees.

The Mountlake Terrace contract provides revenue to pay for the Fire/EMS contract. Why is the Edmonds contract not similar? Also the Mountlake Terrace agreement protects the citizens of Mountlake Terrace from exorbitant District EMS Transport fees and excessive collection tactics.

More issues to come!

Letter to Council and Mayor

2009-05-31T16:29:00.000-07:00

May 31, 2009

Dear City Councilmembers:

On Tuesday, June 2, I will be unable to attend the council meeting and public hearing on the water rates and storm water rates and utility tax increases. Therefore, please accept this email as my public comments regarding the proposed rate and tax increase for the Edmonds water and storm water utilities.

While the increase in rates may be justifiable, the City’s notice and announcement of this public hearing was inadequate. The hearing notice failed to advise the public of two important things; how much of a proposed increase and why the action is necessary. Especially, since just six months ago, the utility taxes were increased. A reasonable person could assume another increase is unwarranted. Furthermore, in order to increase the rates and taxes the City must demonstrate to the ratepayers that the increases are required to recover increased costs of administrating, regulating and providing the service.

The staff agenda memo and exhibits do not provide substantiated evidence supporting the conclusion the higher rates and taxes are required of ratepayers. The staff must provide the council with revenue figures, maintenance and operational costs and projected capital improvements. While the exhibits provide a graphic demonstration, of possible future revenue, costs and projects, there are no hard numbers including itemized amounts including project descriptions. The staff needs to provide the council and public with a copy of the purported FCS 2008 rate study.

On the city’s website, I found the Capital Facilities Plan 2010-onward replacement of water main lines budgets dollar amount of $1,250,000 but the project description fails to show any proposed water main replacement projects and an estimated cost of 6 Million Dollars. I hope you will agree with me this is a huge discrepancy. In addition, from my searching of the city’s web site including council and planning board agendas, the City does not comply with GMA with respect to a yearly update of the Capital Facilities Plan. There have been no public hearings and city council adoption of a 2009-2010 Capital Facilities Plan. In February of 2008, former City Engineer Don Fiene presented to the city council and planning board the last and most current Capital Facilities Plan 2008.

After reading the 2002 Water Comprehensive Plan and council meeting minutes of June 18, 2002, there was one issue that stood out, the “lost and unaccounted for water” defined as water purchased but not sold to the ratepayers. Edmonds purchases water from the Alderwood Water District and the Seattle Public Utilities. The lost and unaccounted for water in 2000 was 17.3% or 625,846 gpd. Considering the fact the city has adopted a conservation rate structure, the council requested a leak detection survey. Has the city ever conducted a leak detection survey? What is the lost and unaccounted for water figures since 2000? It would seem to me an acceptable rate of lost would be more like 5%. It is a burden on the ratepayers and environmentally wasteful, if the city continues to purchase high levels of lost and unaccounted for water.

On June 18, 2002, the City Council reviewed and adopted the Edmonds Water Comprehensive Plan. According to Growth Management Act, the city has the duty to update this document every six years. GMA requires an updated Plan including public hearings. Once the staff updates the plan, the council will have a much better idea of the accomplishments since 2002 and the future needs of the combined utilities for the services provided for ratepayers.

Therefore, I respectfully request the council to table the proposed rate and tax increases, request staff to update the water plan, and capital facilities plan with proposed projects, prior to making any decision as to what the appropriate increases should be for 2009-2010.

Yours truly,

Finis Tupper

Edmonds Utility Taxes Recent History

2009-05-29T09:15:00.000-07:00

Ordinance 3709 Utility Tax increases passed 11/19/2008

Cable TV 5% consumer - 6% Business Tax
Sewer 10%
Water 10%
Strom Water 10%

Ordinance 3618 12/27/2007

Natural Gas 6% Consumer 6% Business Tax
Telephone 6%
Cable 6% Consumer 3% Business Tax
Water 6%
Storm Water 6%

Grateful Dead Song "Ship of Fools"

2009-05-28T22:51:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this song to Mayor (aka Captain) Haakenson and the Councilmembers that vote to raise the Water and Utility city tax.

Went to see the captain, strangest I could find, Laid my proposition down, laid it on the line.
I won't slave for beggar's pay, likewise gold and jewels, But I would slave to learn the way to sink your ship of fools.

Ship of fools on a cruel sea, ship of fools sail away from me.It was later than I thought when I first believed you, Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.

Saw your first ship sink and drown, from rockin' of the boat, And all that could not sink or swim was just left there to float. I won't leave you drifting down, but woh it makes me wild, With thirty years upon my head to have you call me child.

Ship of fools on a cruel sea, ship of fools sail away from me. It was later than I thought when I first believed you, Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.

The bottles stand as empty, as they were filled before. Time there was and plenty, but from that cup no more.Though I could not caution all, I still might warn a few: Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools.

Ship of fools on a cruel sea, ship of fools sail away from me. It was later than I thought, when I first believed you, Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.

It was later than I thought when I first believed you, Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.

Tax Increases

2009-05-28T22:33:00.000-07:00

Do you think this is an informative announcement?

Does it say, how much and why the tax increases are needed?

HEARING NOTICE
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED ON TUESDAY,
JUNE 2, 2009:
PUBLIC HEARING ON A UTILITY RATE AND WATER TAX INCREASE
The City Council meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers, Public Safety
Complex, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. At the time and place stated
above, all interested parties will be heard; however, there will be a time restriction for oral
comment. Written comments are welcomed prior to or at the Public Hearing.
If the item is continued to another date because it is not completed, or further information is
needed, the date of the continuation will be announced only at the meeting.
Additional information may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office: (425) 771-0245.
____________________________
Sandra S. Chase, CMC
Edmonds City Clerk
Posted: May 15, 2009
Published: May 17, 2009

A Terrific Candidate For Edmonds City Council!

2009-05-08T08:50:00.000-07:00

For more information:
Diane Buckshnis
425 672 5119
votediane@comcast.net

FORMER BANKER AND BANKING REGULATOR OPPOSES APPOINTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR POSITION #2

Diane Buckshnis, former banker and banking regulator, announced her candidacy for Edmonds City Council to a group of over 40 Edmonds residents, hosted by Brian and Betty Larman.

After the break-up of the Soviet Union, Buckshnis worked in Lithuania, with American and European consortiums and effectively assisted in rebuilding its regulatory and banking system. She also served as a federal bank regulator, including investigating and cleaning up the (Keating) Savings and Loan debacle. According to the Larmans’ “Diane’s past experience in financial management, budgeting and government operations makes her the right person, at the right time to serve our community.”

Buckshnis has a vision to build a stronger economic base for Edmonds. “I envision developing an economically viable waterfront and downtown area that brings tourism dollars to Edmonds.” She continues “Edmonds needs to be a destination town, blending our historical charm with the lovely flower baskets and old time street lamps with art and community events and all the other unique amenities that Edmonds has to offer.”

Buckshnis is opposed to taller buildings in Edmonds downtown, waterfront and retail districts that run counter to preserving and accenting our traditional atmosphere: thereby, potentially stifling economic development associated with local tourism. Her vision for the waterfront and downtown district will be one that represents the residential and business communities alike. She will ensure that our Building Codes are honored. “The downtown and waterfront districts need thoughtful development and I will work with businesses and the Port Commission on a variety of new commerce ideas.”

Buckshnis supports responsible downtown development that respects Edmonds’ traditionally open atmosphere, maintaining public views and pedestrian-friendly public gathering spaces. She supports a vibrant retail district and welcomes businesses such as Ace Hardware and PCC. “I also recognize that other Edmonds neighborhoods and business districts have distinct concerns that need attention from our City Government,” Buckshnis said. “I will work tirelessly to find synergies between our residential and business communities that attract more retail and tourism to enhance our economic base.”

Diane Buckshnis is deeply committed to the Edmonds Community. She was the “leader of the pack” in creating a non-profit corporation that stewards the dog park and has been instrumental in making it a huge success. Other volunteer groups that are currently working with our City to sustain the Edmonds community used this all-volunteer non-profit group, formed in 2005, as a template. Buckshnis has been a contributing member of Sustainable Edmonds and supports other environmental efforts such as the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Community Certification Project, local park clean-ups and the Halloween Howl held at the local dog park. Additionally, for the past four years she has been one of the Directors of the Edmonds Arts Festival and pioneered its first bottle recyling program three years ago. She is an active advocate of Yost Pool, the South County Senior Center, the Edmonds-South Snohomish Historical Society and the Edmonds Floretum Garden Club. She supports all Edmonds’ businesses and volunteers at the Fabric of Life downtown retail shop, and recently served on the Edmonds Citizen Levy Committee.

Buckshnis believes that reliable and accessible public health, sound regulations coupled with safety institutions are fundamental elements to every community. “I will strongly support our police, animal control, firefighters, paramedics and local public hospital because they are of prime importance to all of our citizens as well as sources of community pride.”

Dr. Richard Senderoff, a respected local activist who is also committed to realizing our community’s potential, has stated: “Diane can be trusted to represent the entire community, respecting and maintaining Edmonds’ traditions, with an eye towards a sustainable and fiscally responsible future.”

Diane Buckshnis and her husband Steve Tholl and their two dogs, Buddy and Buster, have made Edmonds their home for over eight years. Diane welcomes you to learn more about her views by visiting her website (www.dianebuckshnis.com) and joining her on June 7 for a “Rock the Vote Backyard Bash” benefit concert for her grass-roots campaign featuring Suzie and Ben Bradford from the Side Project. Visit www.thesideprojectmusic.

Most importantly, Buckshnis believes Community Interest Should Always Trump Special Interest!

Yost Pool

2009-04-22T16:57:00.000-07:00

Looks like the pool will open this summer! What an unbelievable funding raising effort done by the Save Yost Pool group. In such a short amount of time, the group raised over $54,000, half the amount needed to cover the cost of the pool operation. The Mayor has raised the user fees to cover the other half of operational expenses.

Now, let's work on the Senior Center budget cut for 2010. The South Snohomish County Senior Center provides much needed and valued service to our community. The measly $60,000 contribution from the City should not be taken away from this nonprofit organization.

Edmonds Events and Happenings

2009-04-12T18:40:00.000-07:00

From: Richard I. Senderoff, Ph.D. Precinct Committee Officer (Elected): Edmonds 34 21st Legislative District, 1st Congressional District

I hope you’re enjoying the Easter and Passover holidays!- I know... it’s raining... but that never stops us in Edmonds- does it? Still, there’s much happening that could have more significant consequences (than the rain) that I thought might interest you... So here’s some news you can use!

· Did you know Diane Buckshnis is running for City Council? Please check out her web site that provides an overview of her background, perspectives, and community involvement making her –in my opinion– an excellent candidate for Edmonds City Council... http://dianebuckshnis.com/default.aspx.

Don’t you think her banker and bank regulator experience, in particular, will allow her to make valuable contributions to Edmonds city government? If she could help clean up the S&L (Keating 5) debacle and, also, assist establishing the Lithuanian banking system during post-Soviet economic uncertainty, don’t you think she can provide needed oversight and prioritization to Edmond’s financial management?

Of course, her past and present community involvement –that helps shape her positions on issues– is also very significant.

· Join the pre-Earth Day Pioneer Walkway/Bikeway Clean Up (and Eat Up) on April 18th from 9:30 AM to 1:00 PM (see attached flyer)! Help clean up and dry out the path, linking Pioneer Way to Main Street and Pine Ridge Park. If possible... bring along clippers/loppers, shovels, leather/blackberry gloves, and a determined attitude.
ü To see what a bunch of motivated volunteers can accomplish, check out the Willow Creek Hatchery entrance where volunteers from the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Habitat, People for Puget Sound, Sustainable Edmonds, Sustainable Lynnwood, and others have cleared out invasive blackberry, etc. in preparation for the Backyard Wildlife Habitat Demo Garden. The site looks awesome and is nearly ready for planting! Kudos to all that have participated in this hard, but rewarding work. Check out the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Community Certification web site for more info about gardening for wildlife and upcoming events... http://edmondsbackyardwildlifehabitat.org/.

· Join the National Conversation on Climate Action hosted by the City of Edmonds and Sustainable Edmonds from 6 to 9 PM on Earth Day (April 22, 2009) at Edmonds City Hall (see attached Press Release). Speakers will be Chris Herman (Senior Energy-Efficiency Program Manager with PUD), Anindita Mitra (Sustainable Planning Advisor with Munucipal Research Service Center and Proprieter of CREA Associates).
Chris will speak on climate action at the household level.
Anindata will speak on climate action at the community level.

· Were you aware of recently approved changes to the Edmonds Community Development Code that, in effect, reduce City Council oversight and public transparency regarding Substantial Shoreline Development and Shoreline Variance permits (among others)? The Edmonds City Council will no longer be the highest decision maker for processing these permits and public hearings will not be held in front of Council. While City Council is required to follow the law in these quasi-judicial decisions (and is not afforded the opportunity to make things right regarding the permit under review), the reduced oversight and transparency may minimize opportunities for subsequent legislation that addresses issues with existing development regulations. And the onus will then be placed on individuals to file appeals to Superior Court. Feel free to review these links to Edmonds Beacon Letters to the Editor that provide some background, leading (in part) to an apparent decision to hold an additional public hearing (in May?) regarding these changes.

Regarding Revisions to Chapter 20 (March 26, 2009)... http://www.edmondsbeacon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1049:regarding-the-revisions-to-chapter-20-&catid=106:letters&Itemid=191
Land Use Issues Need Reexamination (March 26, 2009)... http://www.edmondsbeacon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1051:land-use-issues-need-reexamination&catid=106:letters&Itemid=191
Can’t We All Just Get Along? (March 26, 2009)... http://www.edmondsbeacon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1052:cant-we-all-just-get-along&catid=106:letters&Itemid=191
Can We Please Stick to the Facts (April 2, 2009)... http://www.edmondsbeacon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1105:can-we-please-stick-to-the-facts&catid=106:letters&Itemid=191
We Need More Transparency, Not Less (April 9, 2009)... http://www.edmondsbeacon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1173:we-need-more-transparency-not-less&catid=106:letters&Itemid=191

· It’s not too late to make a donation to help keep Yost Pool open this summer! Check out the Save Yost Pool web site for more information... http://www.saveyostpool.com/save-yost-pool-news.html.
And check out the KIRO story (and sound bite) here... http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=11&sid=154827

· I’m scheduled to provide an update on behalf of the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Habitat (EBWH) Community Certification Project at the April 28th Edmonds City Council Meeting. The update will include an overview of the EBWH mission, progress towards community certification, announcement of some (of many) upcoming events, and a proposal for Edmonds to pursue Tree City USA recognition by the Arbor Day Foundation. Your support for this noble effort is always appreciated.
ü Did you know that May 3-10 is Native Plant Appreciation Week?... Help celebrate and support Stevens Hospital –our PUBLIC hospital– on May 7 by attending the Annual Auxiliary Fundraiser/May Fair (9:00 AM – 4:30 PM). You’ll be able to buy Native Plants (sponsored by the Washington Native Plant Society & EBWH), with proceeds going towards the purchase of medical equipment for Stevens Hospital; many more vendors/exhibitors will also be available.

· As a member of the Edmonds Citizen’s Levy Review Committee, I can report that the process is progressing. Please contact me if you would like more details or have specific questions.

Sincerely... You’re friendly, neighborhood, Precinct Committee Officer,

Rich

Edmonds, Washington ...
A Great Place To Spend A Day
Or A Lifetime!

EMS Transport Fee

2009-04-12T15:42:00.000-07:00

The Everett Herald article "No more free ambulance rides" is not accurate.

The 1/1/2009 - 3/31/2009 Budget Report is available and shows no income for the EMS Transport Fee. Ordinance 3706, Emergency Medical Services Transport Fees passed on November 18, 2008 and became effective on January 1, 2009.

On December 16, 2008, the City Council authorized the Mayor to sign a contract with
Systems Design Northwest to bill for the EMS Transport Fee.

Why has the City not realized any of this income?

DJ Wilson's WIPE OUT

2009-04-06T09:06:00.001-07:00

Will Yost Pool open this summer?

NO, the Pool will not open according to Council President D.J. Wilson.

1. Council President Wilson told the Levy Committee the Mayor's Program Budget Cuts will not be considered or changed by the group of citizens.

2. At the March 24th, Council Meeting Council President Wilson introduced the Mayor and the Agenda Item on the Budget Cuts. In his introduction, Wilson clearly stated the decision was made and Yost Pool would not be opened this year.

3. Now on the King 5 Evening News, Council President Wilson has raised the bar for a citizens group made up of Pool users in their Herculean effort to raise private donations. The Mayor advised the pool group, the city would need $30,000. Wilson has notified a new extraordinary figure of $120,000 needed to open Yost Pool.

Council President Wilson is talking out of both sides of this mouth and at the same time thwarting the public initiative to keep Yost Pool open for our citizens. As citizens, we can be appreciative of the rest of the Edmonds City Council for not seconding Council President Wilson's motion of his Council Resolution supporting the Mayor's Program Cuts that forget the past and give up on the future of our fine community.

TRUST FUND

2009-04-04T16:35:00.000-07:00

In 2003, the Edmonds City Council created the Parks Trust Fund for the purpose of receiving tax deductible donations for the maintenance and continuation of the Flower Program, Beach Rangers and Yost Pool. The City Code states;

3.16.010 Parks trust fund.
The administrative services director is hereby authorized to create and number a new fund to be known as the parks trust fund for the purpose of receiving donations from the city's citizens for, or in aid of, the cost of operating, maintaining and improving the city's parks and other related beautification, aquatic, and environmental protection programs such as the city's flower program, the Beach Ranger program and the Yost Pool. This fund is created and shall be maintained to the end that such donations shall be fully tax deductible and in accordance with the laws of the United States and the regulations of the Internal Revenue Service. [Ord. 3466 § 1, 2003].

3.16.020 Administration of the fund.
The council shall endeavor to utilize the interest earned by the fund in accord with the donor's wishes for the flower beautification, aquatics, environmental protection and other parks related programs. The council shall use its best efforts not to invade the principal of the fund unless called upon by unforeseen budgetary needs. In the event that the principal of the fund shall be invaded, the council shall first attempt to utilize the principal for other similar programs such as programs for the arts, community beautification, parks acquisition or similar purposes. Ultimately, however, the council shall maintain its absolute legislative discretion to use all available funds in the best interest of its citizens in accordance with the council's powers and duties pursuant to state law. [Ord. 3466 § 1, 2003].

On March 13, 2009, without any council approval or guidance, Mayor Haakenson announced program budget cuts including the Flower Program and Yost Pool. The Mayor has publicly stated the Flower Program will be continued with the Park Trust Fund until the donations are depleted.

Is it in the Citizens best interest to let the Mayor raid this Trust to extend the flower program for one or two years?

Parks, Recreational Development, Public Spaces

2009-04-03T22:40:00.000-07:00

This article, "In Hard Times, Public Places are More Important Than Ever" (click on title for complete article) a common sense and historical approach to what government should be doing for it's citizens in "hard times". Look around Edmonds at some of the great public spaces developed and given to the City in past hard times. The Edmonds Center for Arts was built in the middle of the depression 1939 with Public Works Administration financial assistance. The Edmonds Historical Museum was a Carnegie donation in 1910 and another downtime in our national economy.

Now is the time for the City to provide recreational opportunties for the citizens not close them.

Was staff listening?

2009-03-26T09:35:00.000-07:00

Quote from the 2009-2010 Mayor's Budget message,

"As I look to the future, it is clear to me that we will not be able to operate with the number of employees that we have even today. We must become dependent on technology to lead us into the future. Computers don’t require cost of living increases or ever increasing health benefit packages. We need to allow for Edmonds residents to do all their business with the city online. Receive and pay their utility bills online, file building permits and pay for them online, obtain city licenses online as well as what we already do online with giving our citizens the ability to select and pay for recreation classes online and be able to do all their correspondence with city employees online. Our website is sorely lacking in customer service capabilities and it needs upgrading to facilitate becoming the interface between citizens and city employees. In order to make that happen in the future, I have added 3 positions to our IT department budget. The work that needs to happen to make us more dependent on the web can be accomplished with these additions."

Our Planning Department and the City Attorney have recommended changes to the ECDC prohibiting the public from filing of an appeal and making comment on a SEPA or Development Applications by either email or fax. This new requirement appears to be backward and contrary to the Mayor's Budget message. The staff reason for this language change is "to eliminate electronic malfunction argument for late comments".

The federal court system has gone to a completely electronic document filing system. Most State Courts are in the same process of going to a electronic document filing system. This is a very "green" initiative, saving trees, energy, and worker time. The question for your staff is, has the electronic malfunction argument ever been made and what kind of proof would be required to resolve such as issue and same with postmark. If an appeal or comment is lost in the mail for 22 years, like the following news item about a graduation announcement and invitation, who's fault is it?

In this article the postmaster takes credit for the "very unusual and very unfortunate" circumstance.

The invitation was in the mail - for 22 years
By Associated Press Monday, February 23, 2009 http://www.bostonherald.com/ West
LA GRANDE, Ore. - An Oregon woman finally received an invitation to her nephew’s high school graduation in New Jersey, but she may be a little late - it was in 1987.
Theresa Schlossarek of La Grande found the invitation last week in her mailbox. The envelope, which had been opened, was postmarked June 2, 1987, from Toms River, N.J., where her brother, Hermann Ilnseher, lives.
Ilnseher said the lack of response from his sister was noticed but dismissed. “We just thought that she lived so far away, she couldn’t come,” Ilnseher said. “She usually would send money, though, so we did joke about that later on, that maybe she could send some and add interest for the years passed.”
Peter Hass, spokesman for the U.S. Postal Service’s Portland district, called the delay “very unusual and very unfortunate.”
Hass said the envelope could have been stuck in machinery or misrouted and delivered to the wrong address. But he said no matter the age of the mail, “if it’s postmarked, we’re obliged to deliver it.”
Schlossarek’s nephew, Michael Ilnseher, now an assistant principal at an Atlanta-area high school, said he didn’t remember his aunt not receiving an invitation.
“I never realized something could be lost for 22 years like that,” he said.

Let's use all the "tools" in the 21st Century toolbox to communicate with each other. Using the internet and email is fast, efficient and most importantly green! In this instance, the Mayor was right. Maybe the City staff wasn't listening to or comprehending the Budget Message.

FORGET THE PAST & GIVE UP ON THE FUTURE

2009-03-22T09:49:00.000-07:00

This article "Crisis as Opportunity" (click on title for link) makes some very salient points about the current opportunity and how the crisis, if handled properly, can have a very positive outcome on the future of our community.

The very first paragraph, government is in trouble, less money for our youth and seniors. My oh My, the Mayor is not willing to even consider across the board budget cuts, nor look at the current budget for genuine waste and opportunities for savings.

Everyone including Youth and Seniors should accept reductions but not at a 100% level. Ask the Mayor, if the staff does all the work, why do we need you? Ask him to take a 100% pay cut. It's draconian to cut off the youth and seniors in community with a simple stroke of the pen, same with the Mayor's salary.

The sharp point and underlying message of the Mayor's Press Release is "Forget the Past and Give up on the Future." The Seniors who have long contributed to our community deserve all the support we can give. Our future is the youth of Edmonds, to give up on them is to sacrifice our City's future. It's a wreck.

EMAIL TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT

2009-03-21T17:42:00.000-07:00

Dear D.J.,

If you get a chance, I would appreciate your sharing the attached PowerPoint with the Citizens Committee.

This information provides evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the City of Edmonds has been providing Fire and Emergency Medical Services for less than the cost of service to the unincorporated Esperance and Fire District No. 1.

I'm hoping the group will truly look to Budget before focusing on just the taxpayer's pocketbook. The question I ask you; Is the newly created EMS Transport fee required for the subsidization of the two interlocal agreements with Esperance and Woodway? The council, mayor and staff have not done proper due diligence of the current and passed city financial decisions to start requesting more and new taxes from the citizens.

Fire District No. 1 collects tax revenue 1 million
City of Edmonds charges 300,000 for service.
City of Edmonds makes annual payment for Station No. 10 to Fire District No. 1 65,000.
City of Edmonds cost to provide Fire/EMS service to the Esperance area 900,000.

I just don't know how I can make the facts any clearer. This contract is a very bad deal for the City of Edmonds and it's residents. It's been a bad contract since the purchase of the Fire Station.

Harmful Esperance Interlocal Agreement

2009-03-21T17:33:00.001-07:00

ACCOUNTS WITH DISAPPEARING MONEY

2009-03-21T17:25:00.001-07:00

Too difficult a question for a straightforward answer.

2009-03-21T17:17:00.001-07:00

EDMONDS BUDGET CUTS

2009-03-21T13:42:00.000-07:00

Press Release
City of Edmonds
Mayor Gary Haakenson

March 13, 2009
For Immediate Release

To: Edmonds City Council
The Edmonds Beacon editor@edmondsbeacon.com
The Edmonds Enterprise edmonds@heraldnet.com
The Everett Herald newstips@heraldnet.com

Contact: Mayor Gary Haakenson
425.771.0247

Mayor makes service cuts to city budget

(Edmonds - WA) Mayor Gary Haakenson has announced the following service cuts to the City of Edmonds’ budget that will be implemented immediately.

Since the approval of the 2009-10 budget in November of 2008, the City’s sales tax revenues have dropped dramatically. Consequently, we have adjusted our estimates for the balance of 2009 and all of 2010. With this reduction in revenues, our ending cash balance is in danger of dipping into negative territory, so we can’t wait until after the proposed November 2009 ballot measure to make service cuts. The cuts must begin immediately.

This is the first of several budget cuts that will be implemented in the next 60 days. Unfortunately, there will be some positions eliminated and some layoffs in the days ahead. I will notify union leadership next week of the areas where cuts will be made.

Cuts will be made to the Police Department, and this school year will be the last for the DARE program that has been a great asset to the youth of our community. We have notified the City of Mountlake Terrace that we will be terminating the animal control services contract we provide them, and it will not be renewed. We are also eliminating the balance of both the Crime Prevention Program and the Police Reserve Program.

The Police Department and Fire Departments will not be participating in Edmonds Night Out this year from a monetary or personnel standpoint.

Approximately $33, 000 has been eliminated from the Economic Development advertising budget.

For many years the City has funded the South County Senior Center programs, and the $60,000 authorized for 2009 will be honored but will not be funded in 2010.

Yost Pool will not open this year. No part-time employees will be hired to work at the pool. No seasonal help will be hired in the Parks Maintenance Department. Existing staff will do their best to keep up, but expect our parks to look less maintained than our citizens are used to, and garbage pickup and restroom cleaning will be more sporadic. Effective at once we will no longer pay for the flower program from the general fund. It will be paid for the balance of 2009 from a donation fund that has been in existence for some time. And the size of the program will be roughly cut in half.

The Mayor also asked the City Council President to eliminate $25,000 from the Council contingency fund.

“The focus of Edmonds city government in these troubled times will be to provide what is necessary to our citizens, not what might be nice to have,” said Mayor Haakenson.

# # #

Welcome to Edmonds

2007-09-22T19:56:00.000-07:00

The purpose of this Board

is to provide

the

OPPORTUNITY

EXPLORE & LEARN MORE ABOUT

OPEN GOVERNMENT IN EDMONDS