Democratian aiding and abetting The Liar's rehabilitation... and breaking the law is OK when it agrees with their agenda.

.
As mentioned repeatedly on this blog, the paper will assist Tim "The Liar" Leavitt in his rehabilitation in the minds of the voters because he's now "right" on the issues.

The Liar, best known for his pre-ordained flipping on the lie that defined his campaign; namely, that he opposed tolls, will be given every opportunity to justify his betrayal by a newspaper that finds fellow bridgers/looters increasingly hard to come by.

Today's episode?

They discussed funding alternatives, knowing that federal gas tax revenues are not keeping pace with the need for investments.

Leavitt said Mica and Shuster brought up tolling, a controversial aspect of the Columbia River Crossing project.

“(They said) the reality is that tolling is a fact of life in many parts of the country and tolling is a fact of life (elsewhere) in the state of Washington,” Leavitt said. “Tolling is certainly one way to garner local public financing.”

So is armed robbery, as long as the profits are turned over to the state.

The reality is that cancer is a fact of life in many parts of the country, and domestic violence is a fact of life in the state of Washington. That those facts of life exist does nothing to recommend them as policy, or a goal, or something we need to do... particularly without a vote, which cowards like the bridgers/looters will never agree to, since they know the people oppose this steaming pile.

Now, had the show been on the other foot... had The Liar been elected on a platform of tolls only to change to one opposing tolls, do you believe the democratian would have allowed The Liar to have a quote? Do you believe that any such quote wouldn't have been complete with a reference to The Liar's campaign stance?

Of course it would. And while the democratian had a duty to mention that here as part of their rehab efforts... they want us to forget the True Leavitt... the Leavitt who sucked in voters by the thousands because of his all too temporary position on tolling.

Expect more of this kind of nonsense to come.

Apparently, it's A-OK for the commissioners to violate the state open meetings law when the cause suits the paper.

Legally problematic

The meeting did put them in violation of the state’s open public meeting laws because a quorum of county commissioners attended without public notice. There’s no penalty for violating the law, however.

Leave it to the democratian to get it wrong:

RCW 42.30.120

Violations — Personal liability — Penalty — Attorney fees and costs.

(1) Each member of the governing body who attends a meeting of such governing body where action is taken in violation of any provision of this chapter applicable to him, with knowledge of the fact that the meeting is in violation thereof, shall be subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty in the amount of one hundred dollars. The civil penalty shall be assessed by a judge of the superior court and an action to enforce this penalty may be brought by any person. A violation of this chapter does not constitute a crime and assessment of the civil penalty by a judge shall not give rise to any disability or legal disadvantage based on conviction of a criminal offense.

(2) Any person who prevails against a public agency in any action in the courts for a violation of this chapter shall be awarded all costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred in connection with such legal action. Pursuant to RCW 4.84.185, any public agency who prevails in any action in the courts for a violation of this chapter may be awarded reasonable expenses and attorney fees upon final judgment and written findings by the trial judge that the action was frivolous and advanced without reasonable cause.

[1985 c 69 § 1; 1973 c 66 § 3; 1971 ex.s. c 250 § 12.]

“Somebody asked me to a meeting and I wanted to go,” Stuart said. “And Marc was there also. I was glad to be invited.”

Stuart said he and Boldt talked about the regulatory environment that has increased costs and delays.

For example, the Salmon Creek interchange project was delayed almost a year because of federal stormwater guidelines that required the county not only to mitigate for the project, but also to plan for stormwater mitigation for potential development.

The county’s third commissioner, Tom Mielke, was invited to the 8 a.m. meeting but did not intend.

So, one of the three commissioners actually followed the law? Who'da thunk it?

I'd already heard that a complaint will be filed. Because Stuart and Boldt support the bridge replacement, light rail and tolling, we can be sure the paper won't care. After all, breaking the law in a good cause when that cause is their agenda is just fine with them.
.