Sooner or later however, most everything in local politics either goes by me or through me. That, of course, is the nature of information... right place at the right time.We will likely never know the true reasons for McCauley's dismissal; because the "reasons" my moronic relation has told us so far are bogus on their face.
The county bureaucracy is a disaster. The insanity of the charter scam made it much, much worse, due to the elimination of elected officials as those who could hold staff directly accountable for their failures.
The hissy fit the leftists threw and the RINOs supported has turned the model T Ford that was county staff into a train wreck that rivaled AmTrak's effort in Dupont.
Think in terms of pushing a string.
If you look around... closely... what do you see?
The leadership of the staff is... well... missing. The council is moving at the speed of set concrete in replacing these positions... and there's more to it than merely McCauley. They remain vacant... and that incompetence begins and ends primarily with my brother-in-law, one Marc Boldt.
The local bureaucracy is a version of the deep state government. Union and civil service protected... there's no incentive to actually perform well, period.
So they don't.
Among the worst aspects of the county clog are the turn arounds for permitting.
They're not just bad... they're legendary, reaching new heights of awful.
I've been told by a former high... who I trust completely... that the number one reason McCauley was axed was based on his inability to push that particular string.
The reason wasn't floated in the media, because the county did not want to draw attention to their ongoing, abysmal train wreck of an administration; particularly in the midst of massive, expensive delays in developments caused by the staff themselves.
SOMEbody had to take the fall. And in this case, I'm told, that somebody happened to be McCauley.
Right or wrong, given the abysmal nature of permitting that McCauley inherited, it's not surprising that he was unable to improve these outcomes. Given the BIA's staunch backing of my fringe-left brother-in-law, its also not surprising that they were demanding their pound of flesh. Given the built-in protections of these positions and the complete lack of incentive to turn these permits around... efforts to replace McCauley will likely be as popular as the abortive efforts to replace the superintendent of Portland Public Schools... and that, was a nightmare.
Boldt's babble on this issue was typical of something approaching his extemporaneous remarks on any such subject, as I also wrote earlier:
The article that was sent to me where my brother-in-law made the mistake of "discussing" the firing of former county manager Mark McCauley quotes Boldt extensively as a case in point.Marc appears to be, well, fibbing.
And Marc expresses a great many words which, at least to me, say absolutely nothing.
According to the article, there was no misconduct on McCauley's part. It's not that I've heard there was, so I can grant him that. But all of these many words of Boldt's attempting to explain it, essentially, say a great deal of... nothing. As a result, that pall will likely hang around McCauley regardless.
So, we can eliminate misconduct as a cause of his dismissal.
We can eliminate incompetence as the cause.
And we're left with "leadership," or the lack thereof.
The confusing aspect of this is that Boldt, who couldn't "lead" his way out of a wet paper bag, is attempting to justify this decision by claiming that somehow, McCauley's leadership didn't cut it.
And it wouldn't be the first time.