Surely no one believed the Mayor would take the effort to change our form of government to Council-Manager lying down, but what has been surprising is the openness with which she and her supporters have undertaken to discredit and hinder those working to get the issue on the ballot. A full-blown, multi-pronged attack is already underway as the change of government effort is just getting warmed up.
We’ve learned on good authority that our City Attorney has been asked to look into the legality of the citizen petition circulating in the community, and many sources have reported that the official word being broadcast from City Hall is that the petition is deficient or even illegal. (We’ll leave it to our readers to ponder the ethics of this arguably political and personal use of the City Attorney’s time.) One specific basis apparently cited for the legal insufficiency of the current petition effort is a claim that the special election that would result from a successful petition drive can only occur in odd-numbered years. While we’re not elections law experts here at the PostScript, a look at the relevant RCWs leaves us dubious as to the validity of this argument.
Under RCW 35A.06.030, our City may choose to abandon its current plan of government, in our case a Mayor-Council plan, and adopt another plan such as the Council-Manager form of government proposed by a growing segment of our community. Under RCW 35A.02.025, once a verified petition containing the signatures of a number equal to at least 10% of the number of voters participating in the last general election is presented to the State Auditor, the City Council must pass a resolution accepting the results and the question “shall be referred to the voters for confirmation or rejection in the next general municipal election if one is to be held within one hundred and eighty days from the date of filing of the referendum petition, or at a special election to be called for that purpose.” There will be no general municipal elections this year, as it is an odd-numbered year, so this ballot issue would proceed through a “special election”. RCW 29A.04.330 (2) addresses the timing of “special” City elections and, unlike section (1), which applies to “general” elections, does not impose an odd-year only limitation. Thus it appears that the timing of the petition is entirely consistent with Washington law.
Another recent attempt to discredit the petition drive was entirely foreseeable, but nonetheless leaves us shaking our heads. A campaign is underway to spread the word that the change of government effort is nothing more than a power grab by the City Council. Something of an insult to the many citizens working this grassroots effort. In fact, it’s hard to imagine a more citizen-based initiative. The diversity of support is a story in itself, as prominent local conservatives and liberals are equally involved, as are property rights activists, greens, seniors, old timers and recent transplants. Not only have supporters from all these groups signed the petition, but they are currently participating in collecting signatures. We’re not going to name names here, but we welcome those willing to speak out to add their two cents in a comment following this post.
Perhaps most shocking has been the apparent involvement of at least one sitting Councilmember in this disinformation campaign. Multiple sources have reported that this Councilperson has personally stated on a number of occasions that the petition effort is invalid and that it is an attempt by some on Council to seize control of City Hall. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that this same Councilor has voted yea to every part of the Mayor’s agenda placed before him, going so far as to loudly advocate for Big Winslow projects even as the City’s Finance Director has all but declared a state of financial emergency. One has to wonder who exactly this Councilperson is representing because it certainly isn’t the average Bainbridge voter.
Silencing the Many
These attempts to manipulate, even derail, this community conversation and citizen action shouldn’t come as a surprise. Silencing dissent is a popular pastime on the Island, be it through City Hall propaganda or on the editorial page of the Mayor’s paper of record. Those who disagree with the agenda of the Mayor and special interests are “misinformed”, “fearful of change” and above all are, horror of horrors, “negative”.
Dissent by its very definition is negative. So what? It’s also an inevitable result of a free and educated society, an essential element of democracy and an honored American tradition. For too long, this community and the City Council have been held hostage by a warped interpretation of “civility.” Civility and dissent are not incongruent. In fact, they are entirely complementary. Civility without dissent is acquiescence, and dissent without civility is, well, pretty ugly.
So embrace your (civil) negativity Bainbridge. There’s a rocky road ahead, and not much money left to fix it. This is the time to evaluate all of our options and make some tough decisions, whether we are Councilpersons prioritizing spending or Citizens considering a change in our form of government. Sometimes taking a negative position is the most positive thing one can do.
(To post or read comments on this story click on 'COMMENTS' below)
10 comments:
The ground swell to replace Mayor K. with a City Manager is reminiscent of the recall of Gray Davis, California's 37th governor, who refused to do the people's business, running the State into the ground and near bankruptcy. It's time for our community to make the transition as well, before the Mayor and her clutch spend us into oblivion. If you have any doubts I encourage each of you to read the bogus survey recently sent out by the Administration which is an obvious attempt to skew the results in the same way as any agenda-drive political poll. I guarantee that Mayor K. will use this poll like a de facto initiative to justify her tax and spend agenda while pandering to those who are determined to stop growth at any cost.
Jeffrey Sneller
Oh, McCoy! Your story has a refreshing gust of truthfulness. Or as that sage Stephen Colbert likes to say “truthiness”.
I have to wonder at the use of our city attorney’s time (paid for with our money) to question the legality of a petition for change of government that’s still in process. For a mayor to use city resources (her city attorney) to determine or even defend the mayoral office feels wrong since it is self-serving. If the shoe was on the other foot, and city council was asking the city attorney to prepare a defense of the petition, wow, would the mayor come unglued over that one. But, that is not what’s happening. It’s the mayor’s own actions that demonstrate an abuse of power.
But, maybe abuse of power has been the problem all along. Island mayors have historically operated with agendas well outside of the greater public good. Sure, they present well in public and seem like generally nice people. But, as City Hall insiders know there’s been enough mayor-induced cronyism over the years to choke even a swamp ‘gator.
In fact the island is flush with fat political favors the likes of the mayor-initiated Winslow Tomorrow-Streetscape scheme, which proposes to use public money to benefit about 12 commercial property owners. Stay on it McCoy, we need you buddy!
I guess I’m one of the liberal backers of this petition drive. I’m also one of those who are afraid enough about retribution from the mayor’s regime that I’m not willing to use my name. I wouldn’t call myself a prominent local liberal, but I have been amazed to hear from many prominent citizens (who I’m sure will never publicly admit their support) that they want a Council-Manager system. Thanks for defending our work and creating this forum.
Yes, I am one of those “liberals” collecting signatures for “the petition.” Why? Because I’m no longer deluded that our Mayor-Council form of government has ever provided essential “checks & balances.” It’s all in the numbers for me, and Carl Neu, a national expert in performance of local governments, explained it well, noting how the problems of “corruption, collusion and cronyism” in Mayor-Council governments have driven the shift to the popular Council-Administrator “reform” option early in the 20th century.
Far from being a “power grab,” as one Council member described it, this is merely a necessary step for getting this issue on the ballot this November so the community discussion of all the pros and cons can begin. Curious that when all else fails, the Council gets the blame. Don’t believe it. Neu explains how the Council can feel “powerless since the mayor in the mayor-council model has control over the city staff” upon whom the Council depends for information to do its job. I’ve personally witnessed how little power Council has.
“Trust me” does not equate to good government. Attempts to silence dissenters is not good government. Let all voices be heard about what’s best for OUR island for the long-term. And check out bainbridgeislandinstitute.org for more details about the petition.
Obviously the council person you’re talking about is Barry Peters. Anyone can see he has mayoral aspirations. My guess is that John Waldo, another aspiring mayoral candidate, is the real architect behind these rumors.
Karl Rove is alive and well on BI.
Another petition passer here. I found that people in the community are hungry for information. Most of those I have approached won't sign blindly. They usually have concerns already about the city and want to know why a council manager system would be any better. I have yet to have a single person not sign after a thoughtful conversation. The issue really sells itself.
Time to not merely change to a city-manager form of government - but as well to call for an investigation by the WA State Attorney General with a firm commitment to reveal the entire truth, all the players and hold all legally accountable - i.e., "no immunity."
Having been a member of a couple of citizen advisory groups in recent years I would agree that the current system is dysfunctional. I'm not sure the structure is entirely to blame, I'd say the problem is primarily in the personalities.
That said, I will sign the petition as it appears that the existence of multiple fiefdoms is what gives rise to the internal struggle. Additionally and unfortunately, I honestly don't see what value this mayor brings to the table.
Wait a minute Owl. You said: "Owl said... "Karl Rove is alive and well on BI." This isn't fair to Mr. Rove. He may be you idol but . . . If you want a scoundrel, use Clinton's Sidney Bluementhal (Sid Vicious), Jimmy Carter or Hillary. Mr. Rove is the wrong party. This island is pure Democrat -- sad but true.
April 17, 2008 12:16 PM
Post a Comment