Handicapping the Kitsap Prosecutor's Race

For the first time since his initial election, when he challenged and beat incumbent C. Danny Clem 20 years ago, Kitsap County Prosecutor Russ Hauge has drawn opposition. But it isn't just one opponent, it's three — including one from his own party.

In the primary election to be held in August, the top two vote getters will face each other in November. The big question is whether or not Hauge will survive the primary. In a poll on the Kitsap Sun, he ran dead last — well behind the other three. Hauge seems to have drawn the ire of the community over what has amounted to a taxpayer funded, personal vendetta against Marcus Carter and the Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club (KRRC) — that has gone on for over 15 years. According to a Public Records Request we filed, Hauge has spent nearly a half million of our tax dollars losing this well-publicized case in court to Carter — who acted as his own attorney — four different times.

In the meantime, because he isn't going to win this case in court, Hauge has unleashed the county's Department of Community Development (DCD) against the KRRC, trying to basically shut the club down using land use rules. A source inside DCD has told us a controversial new ordinance currently under consideration that would all but shut down the club's operation, is being driven by Hauge's office — not the commissioners. We are currently preparing a Public Records Request to see if that's true or not. Apparently, the fact the ordinance would wreak havoc on local businesses, homeowners, and home sellers countywide — giving county code enforcers the authority to come on to your property at will, uninvited, is considered collateral damage in Hauge's fight to prevail in this vendetta. 

But back to handicapping the race...

Hauge is a Democrat, and his opponents are Republican Tina Robinson, a public defender; Democrat Bob Scales, former City Councilman and Mayor of Bainbridge Island, and Independent Bruce Danielson. All three are practicing attorneys. 

Bruce Danielson: Danielson challenged Hauge four years ago and came close to unseating him, garnering 47 percent of the vote. I don't see him getting anywhere near that total this go around, as in my view, a lot of people didn't vote "for" Danielson, but voted "against" Hauge. While the sheer number of Democrats on Bainbridge Island made the difference for Hauge, this time, voters countywide have more choices. 

I'm not sure Danielson, who leans heavily conservative, will survive the primary. A lot of his support last time came from Republicans, who didn't have a candidate four years ago, but who will support Robinson — their party's candidate, this time. 

Tina Robinson: Robinson is a smart lady, who prior to becoming an attorney was a business manager with Group Health, and had a successful career there. Her Achilles heal is that while she is a competent defense attorney, with the experience to run the business end of the Prosecutors Office, she admittedly has zero experience in the civil arena — which includes land use — a blood sport in Kitsap County. She said in an endorsement interview I was part of, that she believed the office has experienced, competent civil attorneys, and she would rely on their expertise. The problem with that is it leaves the inmates running the asylum. 

The Republicans smell blood in the water and will make a strong financial push to support Robinson. She's already raised more money that Hauge, and could wind up in the Top Two. But in the end, her lack of civil experience could make the difference between winning and losing.

Bob Scales: Scales is, in my view, far and away the most qualified candidate, and should be a no brainer best choice for voters. He has significantly more actual courtroom experience than almost all of the other candidates combined — especially Hauge, who has almost none, save losing to Carter and losing the case of the police dog that was shot and killed. He also brings the requisite administrative experience from King County and Seattle, as well as having served on the Bainbridge island City Council, where he was selected by the Council to serve a term as Mayor.

The Bainbridge Island Democrat isn't as well known here as he is in Seattle, where he's spent his career practicing law for King County and the City of Seattle. Whenever there have been thorny issues to deal with — such as the Department of Justice's (DOJ) probe of the Seattle Police Department — Scales has been the "go to guy" to get to the bottom of things and solve the problems, because he knows how to get things done.

The problem Scales has is his own party's Precinct Committee Officers (PCOs) who have closed ranks behind their incumbent, Hauge — in spite of his pathetic record. This is the same group of crybabies that publicly whined in the Kitsap Sun like spoiled children when County Commissioners Charlotte Garrido and Rob Gelder had the integrity to select the most qualified candidate — Linda  Streissguth — to replace Josh Brown over their preferred choice, Leslie Daugs. The fact Daugs has zero administrative, budgeting, financial, or personnel management experience didn't matter to them. It was all about Daugs openly admitted ultra-liberal politics — not her qualifications. What's wrong with this picture?

But if Hauge is eliminated in the primary — which is a very real possibility — the party will unite to support Scales just as it has Streissguth in her battle to hold on to the Commissioner's seat against formidable Republican challenger Ed Wolfe.

Conclusion: The election will come down to Scales vs. Robinson. There is just too much anti-Hauge sentiment in this county over the issues with Carter and the KRRC. Republicans will push hard for Robinson, but in the end, with Hauge out, the Bainbridge Island Democrats will cinch it for Scales — which will be a good thing for Kitsap County.

How Much Money Will Hauge's Vendetta Ultimately Cost Us?

If you follow local news, it shouldn't come as a shock to you that Kitsap County Prosecutor Russ Hauge has spent most of the entire time he's been in office trying to put Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club (KRRC) Executive Director Marcus Carter in jail. After losing in court — three times, with Carter acting as his own attorney — on some bogus trumped up charges that Carter modified a rifle to become an illegal, fully automatic weapon, Hauge enlisted the Kitsap County Department of Community Development (DCD) to help him shut down KRRC by using the land use code. 

You know DCD — that's the same County department that threatened a Southworth home owner with having to tear down the tree house he built for his kids because it wasn't an allowed use under the zoning code, didn't meet the building code, and was constructed without a building permit.

The latest episode in this sad saga revolves around the county convening a 5-member committee made up of Carter, and four gun range opponents — including one of the Commissioner's favorite partisan lapdogs — a loudmouth blowhard who is a self-styled "expert" on any and all things — just pick a subject and ask him. Their job was to propose a countywide gun range ordinance that in the end proved to be nothing more than your basic predetermined outcome from the get go. Carter was the only one to vote against sending it to the commissioners for adoption. 

This entire thing is nothing but an absolute farce. It's gone on for about 15 years now, and is simply a personal vendetta against Marcus Carter that Prosecutor Russ Hauge is financing with OUR tax dollars — so far over a half a million of them. Personally, I resent my tax dollars being wasted this way when we have so many other, more important needs that money could be used for.

It's time for this to come to an end. The County Commissioners have the power to call a halt to this vendetta, however, I don't see that happening. I personally asked Commissioner Linda Striessguth in a recent endorsement interview if she would be willing to stand up to Hauge on this, and she talked all around it, and never answered what was a very direct question. In my book, such a non-answer IS an answer, and apparently the answer is, NO, she won't.

If this ultimately ends up in the Supreme Court — which is a very real possibility — it will be us, the taxpayers of Kitsap County, who foot the bill. Also, if Mr. Carter takes the County to court after winning, it will also be us who get to pay his legal costs and most likely millions in damages, all because one elected official has severely abused the power of government to further his own personal vendetta, while the County Commissioners — who control his budget — refuse to stop him.

Enough...

BTW, how many of you are aware that CK Safe and Quiet is NOT a non-profit citizens group, but a for profit L.L.C.? Inquiring minds are curious why...

Bubba goes to the Waffle House: So what?

After his victory at The Masters in Augusta, Georgia, pro golfer Bubba Watson understandably celebrated with his family, The fact he chose the Waffle House to do it, seems to have raised the hackles of a self-appointed, elitist, nanny-state guardian of nutrition by the name of Katherine Tallamage. Tallamage, who as you can see from her picture, appears to be borderline anorexic, is perhaps best known for cozying up to Michelle Obama in support of her questionable school lunch menu program. Personally, I think Tallamadge looks like she could use a visit or two the Waffle House herself.

Watson tweeted pictures of his Waffle House visit that went viral, and apparently that caught the attention of Tallamage, who immediately swung into action condemning his choice of eating establishments — as if it's any of her business — saying it sets a bad example for the rest of the country. Exactly who was it that appointed her our National Food Nazi anyway?

For our readers who have never had the pleasure of a Waffle House visit and meal, it can as much of an entertainment experience — especially at 2 a.m. — as it is a culinary delight. The food is cheap. The last time I ate there — steak and eggs was about seven and half bucks, and you can get up to four eggs, and add cheese to them if you want. Of course the steak is only about a quarter inch thick, but what do you expect for seven and a half bucks? The hash browns are the best in America, and you can get them any way you want them. My personal favorite is — "Smothered" (with onions), "Covered" (with cheese), "Chunked" (with hickory-smoked ham), and "Peppered" (with jalapenos). I'm not real big on having them "Diced" (with tomatoes) or "Topped" (with Chili). But lot of folks are, or they wouldn't offer them that way. 

Primarily located in the South, I think the western-most Waffle House is off I-10 in Phoenix, and it's a few hundred miles between there and nearest other one. They only play two kinds of music — country and western — and they don't accept credit cards. But it's the people who make a visit to the Waffle House as much fun as it can be. It is a true slice of American culture — at all levels — as Watson proved.

Eating at a Waffle House — or anywhere else for that matter — is a personal choice, and at this point, we're still allowed to make those kind of  choices — at least until ObamaCare prohibits them. But it was Tallamadge's rant, based upon her apparent powers of mental telepathy, that got the attention of right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh. According to published reports, Tallamadge stated on one of Neil Cavuto's Fox programs that she just knows that Watson's. "a complete phony about what he really eats."

Limbaugh accurately described Tallamadge's career success as, "...based on pestering people over what they eat." Apparently she also thinks of herself as a Washington D.C. insider, using a picture of Michelle Obama on her Web site to promote the Obama administration's dubious, heavy-handed obesity battle.

Now I don't particularly like Rush Limbaugh and don't listen to his show — or any right-wing talk radio for that matter. For the most part, I think Rush is a pompous, blowhard, ass. But he's spot on in this case. You can see for yourself what he had to say about Tallamadge and this whole incident by clicking here.

The bottom line is, what business is it of anyone — much less some self-appointed elitist busybody like Katherine Tallmadge — where anyone else eats, or what they eat? Do America a favor Katherine. Mind your own business.

Time to draw a line in the sand...

It’s no secret to any non Kool-Aid drinking person actually paying attention to the world around them, that the Obama administration’s corrupt practices have led to a systematic dismantling of the protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Now that I have your attention, of course I realize that sounds blatantly partisan — like an alarmist Fox News rant, with a cup of Tea Party flavoring mixed in. However, if you’ve read George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, you know it isn’t.

The novel, originally published in 1949, is set in the superstate of Oceania, in a world perpetually at war, and where highly intrusive government surveillance of its citizens is omnipresent. Can you say NSA?

Public mind control is dictated by a political system known as “Big Brother.” It enforces the government’s invented language, “Newspeak” — or in our case, political correctness — both of which basically take away the right of free speech. In 1984, it’s all controlled by a privileged class of governmental elitists that prosecute all independent thinking and individualism as “thought crimes.” Sound familiar?

Nowhere is the scary comparison between 1984 and what is currently happening in America more evident than the recent announcement the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be sending people to “investigate” television and radio newsrooms across America. Under the guise of something called the “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” the agency plans to send “researchers” to grill reporters, editors and station owners about the news philosophy of their stations, and openly demand to know exactly who decides which stories are covered.

Quite frankly, that’s none of the government’s damn business! That’s what the First Amendment is all about.

How long before this administration invades newspaper city rooms — which have become primarily Internet-based? How long before they use the government’s control over Internet access to regulate independent, web-based news content? And finally, overrun that last bastion of independent thought, bloggers?

MSNBC and the rest of the Lamestream Media — except for Fox — has become little more than the press office of the Obama administration. So they’ve not resisted this heavy-handed government initiative to control what news we get to see and hear. I have to wonder, why not?

However, the Radio Television Digital News Association has stood up to fight back, condemning the administration’s actions as, “ill-conceived,” and having the potential to, “...chill every journalist and every station which prides itself on journalistic independence.”

American University professor John Watson noted, “Whenever I hear of the government going into a newsroom to do something other than deliver coffee, I become frightened. Because the government should not, as a general rule, be any part of journalism.”

And former FCC commissioner Robert McDowell questioned, “How much government coercion might there be with all of this? Is the government trying to ultimately dictate speech and dictate how journalists are supposed to do their jobs?”

This certainly appears to be the first step in that direction.

The very last thing we need is the government involved in deciding news content. This Big Brother-ish effort by the FCC is little more than a Trojan horse meant to integrate federal officials into the newsroom — where they don’t belong.

And before all you Kool-Aid drinkers get your shorts in a wad, ask yourselves, what kind of outrage would you be expressing if this kind of government intrusion was proposed under the Bush administration?

Inslee's hypocritical Death Penalty Move

“I don’t question their guilt or the gravity of their crimes. They get no mercy from me,” stated Washington State Governor Jay Inslee when he announced that he would suspend all executions for prisoners on Death Row during the balance of his term in Olympia.

Well, that’s an all too obvious lie. Suspending all executions is merciful — although not to the families and loved ones of the victims who wait for justice. Whether the Death Row inmates deserve Inslee's mercy or not is a totally different question. But his action is merciful nonetheless — in spite of his denial.

I’m not altogether convinced the death penalty is a deterrent to murder, but do believe it should be preserved — although used sparingly. IMHO, there are just some people who are sociopathic predators, and some who simply commit crimes so heinous they deserve nothing less than death — Charles Manson for example, whom the taxpayers of California have supported for decades longer than he was a free man. Gary Ridgeway, AKA the Green River Killer, and Jonathon Lee Gentry, who killed 12-year old Cassie Holden by bludgeoning her with a rock in 1988, fall into that same category as well. 

And what was the reason Ted Bundy openly admitted committing his crimes in Florida was his only mistake? Florida is a Death Penalty state that actually executes those who run out of legal appeals — as Bundy found out.

Gentry has been on Death Row for 27 years now. Meanwhile, Inslee said, “It costs the state more to carry out a death sentence than to lodge a person in prison for life.” Personally, I’d like to see the numbers that prove it has cost the taxpayers less to house, feed, and fund more than a quarter century of his ongoing legal appeals, compared to the cost of filling a syringe and sticking it into this convicted murderer’s arm.

If that’s Inslee’s idea of cost-effective government, Washington has significantly larger problems than the question of the death penalty.

Get Ready To Be Taxed For Every Mile You Drive

Road usage charge options and tolling being discussed at Washington State Transportation Commission hearings Dec. 10 and 11

Transportation revenue options are a focus of the Washington State Transportation Commission’s meeting next week in Olympia. The commission is completing an evaluation of the business case for ways to replace the gas tax with a road usage charge system (Read: Vehicle Miles Driven TAX). What this means is you will be charged to drive on roads you've already bought and paid for.

 Commissioners also will hear a SR 520 tolling update and discuss the future Interstate 405 express toll lanes.

The meeting will start at 9 a.m. each day, Tuesday and Wednesday, Dec. 10 and 11, at the Transportation Building, 310 Maple Park Ave. SE, on the Capitol Campus in Olympia. The meeting is open to the public and persons wishing to speak to the commission may do so during the public comment period scheduled at the end of each day.

Tuesday’s agenda begins with a continuation of discussions regarding the I-405 express toll lanes rates and policies. The project is currently under construction between Bellevue and Lynnwood and is expected to open in 2015. It is the first phase of a planned 40-mile-long express toll lane system that will ultimately run from Lynnwood to Renton on I-405 and connect to the existing State Route 167 HOT lanes. Local officials representing the I-405 and SR 167 corridor presented their recommendations to the commission in November. 

The commission will host a public input process in early 2014 as they work towards setting the toll rates and policies for the express toll lanes by spring 2014. Unless you want to pay to drive on the roads you already own, make it a point to attend these hearings and make your voice heard.

Tuesday afternoon, staff from the Oregon Department of Transportation will brief the commission on the passage and implementation of Oregon’s new road usage charge legislation. Following this, the commission will consider recommendations developed by a broad-based steering committee for the next steps of Washington’s Road Usage Charge Assessment which has been in progress for over a year. The legislatively directed assessment has looked at the feasibility and the business case for a possible road usage charge system in Washington State that could replace the gas tax in the future. The commission will submit its final report and recommendations to the Legislature in January 2014. 

On Wednesday, Washington State Department of Transportation staff will brief the commission regarding tolling operations, including financial, traffic and revenue updates for the SR 520 Bridge and Tacoma Narrows Bridge. The commission also will receive a briefing on the Results Washington program and WSDOT’s implementation of Lean management.

For more information about the commission and complete meeting agendas, visit: http://www.wstc.wa.gov/

Local Republicans shoot themselves in the foot... again

I’ve written many times over the years in the Business Journal that it’s my belief there isn’t a way for the Kitsap County Republican Party to shoot itself in the foot that it hasn’t thought of, but that I have great confidence in its ability to invent new ones. And once again, they haven’t let me down. The most recent blunder came when the party mailed out a campaign piece in South Kitsap endorsing Democrats over its own Republican incumbents in the recent election. Yes, you read that correctly. 

You have to feel sorry for local party chair Chris Tibbs, who is being undermined by his own people — people’s whose personal agenda is more important than the good of the party, or in this case, the good of Port Orchard.

The first time I met Tibbs, he was running for county commissioner in Central Kitsap, and like many of the Republicans recruited to run for office here, I found him to be uninformed about basic issues any candidate seeking the commissioner’s seat should have known. Afterwards, the Republican Party elected him chair, and as I’ve gotten to know him, have come to realize he’s really not a bad guy at all. He also keenly understands what must happen for the party to succeed in drawing electable candidates into its fold — the main thing it’s failed miserably at for almost two decades under its former ultra conservative leadership. 

Tibbs understands the infighting between the conservative and moderate factions in the party has to stop or it will just be business as usual — no one running for anything who is close enough to the center to actually win a local election in a decidedly liberal county, and a party that’s been marginalized into near obscurity by its own actions. Tibbs has made it his goal to turn that around and is building on a number of small successes. However, situations like what happened in South Kitsap negate any progress he makes.

Although the election has been decided, there's an ongoing battle in Port Orchard for the hearts and minds of voters. There were two issues combined on the ballot — Proposition 1 — the change from a second-class city to a code city, and changing from the strong mayor form of government to a council/city manager form — plus four City Council seats up for grabs.

As Mayor, I brought both these issues forward, separately, in 2010. The Council passed the code city change — it doesn’t require a vote of the people — but later rescinded it, caving in to political pressure brought about by a bogus petition worded to scare low-information voters into signing, and would have cost the city about $30,000 to have on the ballot. That petition was engineered by one of the very same people behind the Republican mailer endorsing Democrats — Gil Michael, who is also referred to by many as Mayor Tim Matthes’ puppetmaster.

A second-class city must have a planning commission of three to 12 members. A code city must have a planning agency — which can be a planning department, a person, staff or body, rather than a planning commission. The Port Orchard Planning Commission is Michael’s base of power. Had Proposition 1 passed, his power base would have dissolved — which in my opinion would be a good thing for Port Orchard.

It’s no secret in Port Orchard that Michael would like to control City Hall — and to some extent already does. He hand-picks slates of candidates he can control every election. His choices this time — whose names appeared on that mailer — were Eric Gonnason and Bek Ashby. Fred Chang, who was unopposed, was already aligned with Michael and the mayor.

Since Michael is the Republican PCO for that area — and Chang the Democratic PCO for the same area — am I the only one who finds it unusual that incumbent Republican Jerry Childs was not endorsed, but his challenger, Gonnason, a newcomer surrounded by residence issues, was?

A source of the Business Journal met with Gonnason and confronted him with proof about his lack of residence, and some other issues before the election, Gonnason openly admitted he had been personally recruited by Matthes during a meeting in the Mayor's office to challenge Childs, and that Matthes made a call from the Mayor's office phone at City Hall to Michael, to introduce him. He further said the plan was for Gonnason to challenge Childs, Jeff Braden to challenge Rob Putuansuu, Ashby to win the open seat vacated by longtime council member Carloyn Powers, and for Chang to run unopposed. Combined with the mayor he already controls, Michael would own the four votes needed to control City Hall with an iron fist.

Somewhere they got their wires crossed because Gonnason and Braden both filed against Childs. Braden dropped out, but too late to avoid the city paying for a runoff election. The end result is that Michael now controls Ashby and Chang — and to some extent Putuansuu, who fears Michael because the plan was to run an opponent against him.

Oh yeah, Michael also opposed Proposition 1, for which the flyer recommended a “No” vote on as well. Since that would also eliminate his puppet mayor along with the Planning Commission, I can’t say I’m surprised. This is clearly a case of Michael's personal agenda trumping what’s best for not only the city, but the local Republican Party as well. Meanwhile, Chris Tibbs is one of the most frustrated people I know. Personally I think it’s time for state party chair Susan Hutchinson to step in and clean up this mess. The question is, will she?

Reefer Madness... AKA The State's Pot Bureaucracy

Watching the state birth an entire bureaucracy for dealing with legalized marijuana has been a little like watching a late-season Mariners game — you know it’s going to be a meaningless comedy of errors. There’s no chance of making the playoffs, because the game is being played primarily with rookies and guys who started the season in the minors, along with a few end-of-their-career veterans.

I recently attended a meeting, where the speaker was Clallam County District Court Judge Rick Porter, discussing the state’s impending (it’s not yet legal) legalization, proposed enforcement, taxation, and marketing of reefer. The judge was a pretty entertaining speaker, and made a lot of his more serious points using humor.

However, the one point he made that really isn’t too funny when you think about it, yet elicited the biggest chuckle from the audience because no one was at all surprised, was this: By the time the state taxes pot at the grower level, the processor lever, and again at the retail level, the cost will be just about twice the current illegal street price. This was supposed to be a gold mine for the state, and it’s spending millions of our tax dollars creating the bureaucracy to oversee it. Personally, I believe those supposed business geniuses down there in Olympia could figure out how to lose money selling whiskey in a whorehouse.

Hauge's vendetta — $338,000 and climbing

Kitsap County Prosecutor Russ Hague recently filed yet another lawsuit against embattled Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club (KRRC) Executive Director Marcus Carter. This is a civil suit against Carter personally, not against the KRRC. 

Carter has beaten Hauge in court three different times, without the benefit of a lawyer. When Hauge couldn’t win that way, he resorted to using the land-use code to try and shut down KRRC — which is still in litigation. Now this. Am I the only one who believes that Hauge is using our tax dollars to finance what amounts to a personal vendetta against Carter?

We filed a public records request asking just how much of our money Hauge has spent pursuing this personal vendetta. The total had exceeded $338,000! That’s prior to the land-use action — which went to Superior Count and is on appeal — and the most recent civil suit. At this point, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if it’s topped a half a million dollars.

This is unconscionable! There are so many other, more pressing needs that money should have been spent on — more deputies on the street; the meth problem; helping the homeless; supporting food banks; recreation for kids. The list goes on.

If you believe it’s time the taxpayers stopped financing Hauge’s personal vendetta and for the county commissioners to rein him in, call your commissioner today — 360-337-7146.

Enough is enough

An Open Letter To Mayor Tim Matthes...

If you live in the City of Port Orchard, by now you may have received a copy of the Mayor's Report on the Bethel Corridor. What appears below is a copy of an email I have sent to him about the contents. It is SO fraught with inaccuracies and either ignorant misinformation, or intentional lies — I'm not sure which, but either way, the citizens aren't being told the truth.

Dear Mayor Matthes,

As you are probably more well aware than almost anyone, since leaving office, I have refrained from publicly commenting on your administration, or what passes for leadership and/or management at City Hall. However, I read your report to the citizens on the Bethel Corridor with great interest, and feel that I can no longer quietly sit by as the citizens of our City are deluged with what appears on the surface to be intentional misinformation. Therefore, I would like to point out some general inaccuracies in the report, and offer some unsolicited insight on moving forward.

You state in the report that, "When discussions were happening regarding the Bethel Corridor annexation, it was touted that the annexation would bring in a lot of revenue. What was never discussed was the costs to provide service and what the impact would be to the City."

This is patently untrue. It was actually publicly discussed at great length at several Finance Committee meetings, at several City Council meetings, and in public hearings. For you to tell the citizens of our City that such a significant cost was "never discussed" is little more than either a blatant lie — or the words of someone completely uninformed about the entire annexation process for Bethel, and how the City went about it.

The fact the City would incur costs for Bethel several months prior to any revenue being generated, was not only known by the Finance Committee and City Council, but planned for financially as well. As Mayor, you should be aware of that, and if you aren't, perhaps you should sit down with the City Treasurer and have him explain the process that was agreed upon and where the funding came from to you.

Also known, anticipated, and planned for were the increased costs for law enforcement, and the two additional officers that would need to be hired and outfitted. Former Police Chief Al Townsend found grant money to cover part of that cost for, if memory services me correctly, a three-year period, on a diminishing schedule. The balance of the cost was to be paid from the anticipated $1.3 million in additional sales and property tax revenue generated by the annexation. It was also anticipated that the Court would see an increased workload, and that cost was budgeted for as well.

Other items you should be aware of include the fact that to reduce the cost of right-of-way acquisition, former Development Director James Weaver authored a plan that would require developers to cede the necessary right-of-way to the City as a condition of being granted a permit to develop, as well as either installing or reimbursing the City for any necessary public works infrastructure such as water and sewer lines to service their projects.

You are correct in stating that the planned revenue generated by the annexation that the City had anticipated holding in reserve, isn't nearly enough to construct the project in any kind of timely fashion. However, I'm surprised to learn that you didn't know that was never the plan either. What was planned, was to use that as match money for state and federal transportation grants, where it could be leveraged on either a dollar-for-dollar or one dollar for every two in grant money. A dollar-for-dollar match effectively cuts the cost of the project in half, and a two for one match by 2/3. The City also has the bonding capacity to offset any shortfall in match money, with debt service coming from future revenues already being generated from the Bethel Corridor.

Has the City begun pursuing any such state or federal money yet? If not, I would suggest you get busy, as these processes take an extraordinary amount of time. There are annual funding cycles, and these are the only times during which grant applications are considered. If you miss one, it's another year before you can apply. I would also suggest you engage the City's lobbyist — if the City in fact still has a lobbyist — in pursuing this money, as it is available, but awarded on a highly competitive basis.

As I found, the lobbyist we used did an excellent job of securing money for the DeKalb Pier restoration — finding $700,000 in state Capital Budget money for a cost to the City of only $25,000, as well as the money they found for the Pedestrian Pathway, and other projects you've recently cut ribbons on as if they were your own ideas. Although you were adamantly opposed to the City hiring that — or any other lobbyist — in retrospect, you have to admit, they provided an excellent Return on Investment. That same firm also provides lobbying services at the federal level, and there are other similar resources available to you. I'd be happy to point you in the right direction should you care to ask. Also, perhaps you should establish relationships with our elected state representatives, as they tell me, the City has been MIA in Olympia since you've taken over. Perhaps you should reach out to our new Congressman as well.

It's truly a shame you refused to take the time to meet with me during the transitional period for more that the 12 minutes we did. As you're aware, we only met then because Mr. Jacoby insisted upon it. Had you done so, I would have gladly passed all this information — and much more — on to you. During that meeting, as you may recall, you asked me only 2 questions — both concerning the establishment of a Parks Commission. Finally, considering all the documented inaccuracies in this report, I would strongly suggest you rescind it, and re-issue a corrected report that states the actual facts, so the citizens of our City have accurate information. It will go a long way towards re-establishing some level of credibility.

LFC