Who can argue with that, right? 😀 Those were among the final words from Mayor Mahoney at our 7 July Meeting. He was responding to my final comments about the Council’s 6-1 decision to update our Rules Of Procedure in November based on a verbal proposal from Deputy Mayor Buxton.
That 1process seemed about the same as every other group process we’ve voted for during my tenure, including ARPA Spending, Budgets and the Council vote to update the City’s web site of 7 April. Which is to say, terrible.
They’re all intended to be terrible processes. And I’m tired, not only of their obstruction, but frankly of that portion of the public who seem to have become so uninformed, cynical, or so conflict-averse that any misconduct short of SPACE ALIENS seems just business as usual in Des Moines.
So, I want say this as clearly as I can:
The goal of the next update to our Rules Of Procedure is, specifically, to silence me. But far more importantly:
It is an attempt to make the bullying, unethical and corrupt behaviour of our Council, Mayor and City Manager ‘official’, and thus ‘normal’.
What’s the prob?
Obviously I cannot predict the future, but the process, and Mayor Mahoney’s comments make it pretty clear what the majority intends:
1:46:40 “I will also make a comment about the council rules. We need the rule changes. There are things like social media that need to be adjusted. There needs to be clarifications of the use of city email and whether you [JC Harris] have the authorization or designation to contact outside you know entities and governances and so forth without the designation of council. We also need some um guidelines if so if that happens what do we do as a Council. It it’s not been a secret in this council that we’ve had problems with that and they need to be addressed. Also the council rules aren’t relevant to today like i said mentioned before social media and a couple other things. This is a good process that needs to happen and what we’re doing here is going to be the is going to be the rules that will lead us into the future. The hard things are not easy and in this case this will not be an easy thing. It’ll be contentious. I tell everybody now most of the contentiousness will be in the November, December window, but it’s a necessary thing that needs to happen…”
This sounds to me like:
- Attempting to place limits on a Councilmember’s speech off the dais.
- Creating a formal email policy limiting the use of City email only to certain purposes of which the majority (or City Manager) approve.
- Creating a policy whereby Councilmembers must seek permission from the Council before speaking with any ‘entities and governances.’ Which I assume to mean both electeds as well as government agencies.
- Creating some enforcement mechanism if any of the above is ‘violated’.
The word ‘unconstitutional’ comes to mind.
And as an added bonus…
Worst of all, rule changes tend to be permanent. So this is not about me. Any future members of our Council will be hamstrung by this long after I’m gone. One of the great lies all governments tell is, “Hey, if it’s not perfect, we’ll fix it later.” I dunno who’s the bigger idiot: the politician who says that or the public that believes it. We’ve had a dozen updates to our Rules of Procedure over the past 25 years. We’ve never unwound any mistakes.
The fact that my colleagues are happy to spend public money on a personal vendetta that will make government worse is bad enough. And as an added bonus, we get to screw future CMs. Gosh, I wonder why more people don’t run? 😀
Turning good to bad…
Everything the majority objects to are not only legal and appropriate; they are things that every Councilmember should be encouraged to do.
It’s kinda like objecting to people who do their own research, work hard, and when they see something bad happening, they say something. Actually it’s not like that; it’s exactly that.
Nobody who has the public interest at heart should object to how I’ve been doing the job or support anyone who would support the ideas Mayor Mahoney mentions in his comments.
Examples…
Some of the issues the majority (and administration) object to are visible, like this blog and my posts on social media. But the far more important stuff they dislike you will not see unless you’re reading carefully every week.
- In 2019 I helped create a law to get homes with bad Port Packages fixed. There was immediate momentum to get it implemented and then COVID hit. But I keep talking with the Port, and the law’s sponsors Senator Keiser and Rep.Orwall. And yet, I got an email from the Mayor a couple of weeks ago saying that it was “an inappropriate use of City email” for me to write Port Commissioners on “reinsulation.” (I assume he meant sound insulation systems.)
- Frankly, the article I wrote last week on the Ferry Pilot (This Is Insane) was because I am the only curent CM who could write such an article. If it was embarrassing, it is only because the proposal is an embarrassment. The hell they put me through just to see the bills we pay is shameful.
- Two years ago, I began asking for a report on sales tax revenue by geographic area. I was told it was ‘impossible’. Actually, it is already done in several cities, including Poulsbo. In April, I asked the Mayor of Poulsbo how they do it so we could apply it here. Instead of being appreciative, Mahoney comes to the dais and tells an absolute whopper about how I ‘misrepresented the city’. At Tuesday’s Port of Seattle Commission Meeting, the Mayor will extol the benefits of expanding the Des Moines Creek Business Park. He can do this with a straight face because the City has no data to describe the economic impacts (plus or minus) of that area.
- There’s a Fourth Runway you also don’t know about called The Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) and SR-509 Stage 2. Last year, I could not get our Transportation Committee to schedule a briefing from WSDOT. So I simply asked their communications consultant to see their latest animation. Totally appropriate. At our June Transportation Committee Meeting, our COO, DPW, the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor discuss how they can obstruct me from further contact with WSDOT staff. CM Achziger says nothing.
That’s four of hundreds of examples. But that last one is truly remarkable:
The administration and fellow electeds are openly collaborating to prevent a councilmember from doing legitimate research.
This is misconduct so beyond the pale I’ve struggled to find similar examples anywhere. It may happen other places in private, but the fact that everyone here is so casual about this form of corruption is really next level. And remember: this is simply me asking legitimate questions about SR-509.
- The fact that my colleagues are willing to engage in such behaviour should not be tolerated. It’s bad ethics and it hinders your right to know.
- The fact that others stand by and do nothing should also not be tolerated. Council-Manager Government cannot function if the majority (and the administration) knows that no one will speak up.
You should want councilmembers who are intellectually curious; people who seek out better ways of doing things. You should want councilmembers who are appreciative of others expertise. And you should want councilmembers who are willing to have their ideas judged based on merit; who do not feel the need to silence and smear opposing points of view.
This is how democracy dies
I almost titled this article ‘this is how democracy dies’, because, well, because this is how democracy dies. 😀
It’s a long way to November and I don’t expect you to remember all this. But if you had any doubt before, now it is out in the open. This is your Council. It’s not individuals. It’s the entire culture.
The biggest failure of our government is that over the past 20 years it has been able to convince the public that how we do business here is normal. Other cities have their problems, but they do not work like this. The notion that ‘getting along’ or ‘civility’ is some indicator of good government is what has enabled this kind of ongoing corruption.
Why you should care…
If you volunteer or if you work with the City, you’re just interested in getting your short term project done. All this stuff I’m going on about is an abstraction. (Many of you refer to it as ‘the drama’–implying that all the tension on the council concerns a bunch of ‘drama queens’.)
This about ongoing corruption, implemented by the very nice city councilmembers you shake hands with at the Farmers Market every weekend.
It’s a ‘dampening field’ which prevents us from rising above a certain ceiling on any number of longstanding issues. It determines whether your children have healthy air to breathe; your streets are safe; your schools are good; restaurants thrive; programs for seniors and kids are on par with other cities; even the state of entrenched racism which never seems to go away.
I know seeing any tension on the dais is annoying for some of you, but I will keep pushing, because if we can fix this we can fix everything.
And for those who do get it, my question is this: How do we communicate this better to the rest of Des Moines? Many of your neighbours have exactly the same complaints and concerns as you do. How can we make this message clearer?
1I’m honestly not clear on the ‘process’. In fact, I made a motion asking Deputy Mayor Buxton to put down on one sheet of paper what she was proposing. Voted down 1-6. It seems that we will hire a consultant to interview each CM on their ideas. The Mayor will create an Ad Hoc Rules Committee to collate that information. Their output will be brought to a November meeting for a vote. I just want to point out that we’ve done dozens of Rules updates and this is the first time we’ve felt a need to hire a consultant to assist us in this process. In contrast, previous councilmembers (eg. Richard Kennedy) taught themselves to write formally correct draft ordinances.
Comments
Comments are closed.