As we struggle to evaluate what is going on in City Hall today it is useful to look at where the City has been and what roles the various players have played throughout the City’s brief history. The Bainbridge Review, in its endorsement of John Waldo for City council, extols the fact that Waldo’s list of supporters includes two former Councilpersons "whose very names recall a time when councils forged consensus and got things done”. In the following piece, written in response to former Council Member Norm Wooldridge’s recent attack on incumbent candidate Bill Knobloch, former Councilperson Debbie Vann gives her perspective on how things “got done” in the “good old days”.
Republished with permission of the author.
It is truly unfortunate that Mr. Wooldridge has now chosen to attack Bill Knobloch by twisting what really happened during the first year he was on the Council. I feel that the record needs to be set straight. It is true that during Bill’s first year on Council, things were being shaken up and people who were in charge, the previous Mayor and some previous Council members, had strong negative reactions. The “Good ole’ boy” machine was being challenged and they didn’t like it. Mr. Waldo, then reporter for the Bainbridge Island Review newspaper, actively supported them.
At that time, the City administration was in bad shape. The City had never passed a state audit and in fact, the auditor told us that they couldn’t even begin to audit the books, they were such a mess. The Planning Department was completely dysfunctional due to poor leadership. Everyone, the development community and the environmental community, had been calling for a change for several years. Some bills to be invoiced through the Planning Department had not been sent out for two years, totaling over $250,000 of potential city income.
Contracts were awarded with no Council oversight to “friends of the City”, a direct quote from the then City Administrator. There was no citizen input into the budget and in fact, Council had one meeting to review and rubber stamp the Mayor’s budget. The City Administrator was at war with the finance director and they had not spoken to each other for two years.
The Council itself rarely allowed any citizen involvement in the legislative process. Council members didn’t even have their own email addresses. Council members sat on the boards of non-profits and still voted for City funding for them, a clear ethical violation. They were stalled over public works projects like getting sidewalks and bike lanes on Ericksen and the South End Sewer. As new Councilmembers, we were told by Mr. Wooldridge that we should have no input into legislation until we had been there for a year. He reacted strongly to our changes that increased citizen involvement and increased Council involvement in the budget process.
It was unfortunate that the newly elected Mayor, Darlene Kordonowy, was getting poor advice from those in charge of the City, the previous Mayor and long-term Council members like Mr. Wooldridge. She was encouraged to oppose attempts from Bill, Debbie Vancil and myself when we began to expose the mess in City Hall. However, the Mayor was also very concerned over the failed audits and began to see for herself the serious problems within the City. In her second year and with our strong support, she began to clean house and we got a new City Administrator, Planning Director, Finance Director, and Telecommunications Director.
The Mayor and Council began to work collaboratively with each other. We established a system where the Directors and Council agreed on work loads and together set up a list of legislative priorities for the year. We put in place a new Council manual that detailed Council and Administrative responsibilities.
Those were tumultuous times, but out of that came a City that now passes the state audits with accolades from the auditors, a more efficient Planning Department and City Administration. During Bill’s first three years on Council numerous public works projects were completed, the public became actively involved with legislative issues and some great legislation was passed. One moment stands out for me. At the end of our first year, Bill brought in several large stacks of paper that held all of the legislation we had passed and plopped them down on the podium. We really got things done.
Today, Bill is not the problem with the City Council and the Mayor and in fact, he works quite well with the Mayor and staff. The people responsible, Council members Llewellyn, Scales and Tooloee, are the very people that were supported by the “Good ole’ boys”, including Mr. Wooldridge. Now, they want to put yet another one of their group on Council, John Waldo. I have seen enough of their impact on the City to know that the last thing we need on City Council is yet another voice for dissent, disruption, and poorly planned and thought out legislation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I have to say that I am continually confused when I read and hear about "legislation" with regards to city matters, and perhaps this is at the heart of the problem with our charter. I thought I lived in a place where my city council members listened to me, made policy and looked out for how things are going. Instead we have a body that is as powerless to make change as Congress is in dealing with President Bush. At least here on Bainbridge Island, can't we find a way to overcome the problem of an authoritarian executive?
Where was this piece originally published?
Diane, the piece was originally written for submission to the Bainbridge Islander and was submitted to the Islander yesterday. Out of deference to the order in which the items were received, we have used the word "republished."
In the good old days lots of good old things got done by the good old boys in the back room. Maybe the silverbacks and the Review haven't noticed, but those good old days are long gone. People are demanding to be part of the deals and the governing that affect our island and our pocketbooks. We aren't going to just let the "boys" take care of things for us.
Thanks Debbie for the "Inside Edition."
Here are some examples of legislation we passed in response to citizen requests; the 2003 Ordinance banning private docks in Blakely Harbor, the non- motorized plan,a new budget ordinance that requires citizen involvement, a lighting ordinance, a no-pesticide use ordinance for the City, a telecommunications ordinance that resulted in broadband being available to most of the Island, a towing ordinance. Bill established a citizen committee for the siting of the decant facility that moved it out of neighborhoods and put it at Vincent Road.
In response to neighborhood requests we had the Public works dept, (with much resistance) put no parking signs on Grow, speed limits on Miller, and supported Kallgren neighbors who did not want their road open to traffic.
The citizens on Ericksen did not want their road to look like Ferncliff 30' wide. In the first two months, we met and gave Public works its marching orders to put only one bike lane and sidewalk and keep the road narrow. We got the safety that was needed while preserving the neighborhood. Merrill Robison sued the City over this design-he lost. We collaborated with the S. End neighborhoods whose septic systems were failed and within three years the S. End neighborhoods had sewer. We got bike lanes and sidewalks on New Brooklin for the Sakai and Woodward student's safety. We completed the revisions on High School road. In response to a senior citizen group's request, pedestrian crossings were added to Madison and High School road.
Most of this legislation was the result of citizens coming to us and asking for it. In most cases, citizens were actively involved in the writing of the ordinances themselves. For example, the Washington State Toxicology group had been trying to get the no pesticide use policy done for two years and had been told by Public works that they would not write the ordinance. They came to me and Bill and I, on the public works committee demanded that it be done and with much resistance, it happened.
To be honest, we had a really good time doing all of this and met terrific people who simply wanted the City to do something for them.Also, my near 60 year old brain doesn't remember everything.
However, we did not get a bathroom in Water front park....much to my dismay and several other public works projects did not get done like Wing Point road, Manitou, etc. We were not perfect.
Hope this helps to clarify some of the original letter. Debbie Vann
Thanks to Debbie Vann for her unique perspective. Please keep this in mind when you vote:
Recently, each candidate was asked their opinion regarding responsible and/or sustainable growth in a Review spread. I can't recall the exact phrasing of the question.
John Waldo touting the Southwest and the desert areas as successful models for growth is asking us, in my opinion, as an island community, to engage in magical thinking. No place with limited water in a time of changing climate can survive development of increasing complexity and volume and not run out of water.
In days immediately after Waldo waxed expansively in the Review regarding his growth without respect for resources (to paraphrase "Look at the southwest! Its lack of water hasn't hindered development at all!"), the New York Times Magazine had an in-depth article on the possibility of "water refugees" from these overdeveloped areas that Mr. Waldo wishes to emulate. Water managers are concerned about the literal wipeout of states. As if to underscore the point, several days after that, one of these successfully overdeveloped areas went up in flames (again). Enough said.
Could you tell us about the $25K "communications" workshop that the Mayor has decided?
Was there a vote about it?
Was there a bid?
According to the review this is a 5 day workshop so about $5K per day, $600 per hour for the "consultant"?
That looks VERY (outrageously) expensive.
Post a Comment