Memo to the Commissioners: The county blows it with a time limit.

.

My off the cuff is that this is a bad idea.

.

We’re told:

.

“The breaking point has been that, week after week, the same few people show up to talk about the same issues (illegal immigration, the Columbia River Crossing and a proposed sports complex in Hazel Dell are contentious topics of late).”

.

“At Tuesday’s meeting, the open public comment portion, where people talk about anything they want, ran more than 45 minutes, with one regular speaker going on for nearly 20 minutes before Commissioner Steve Stuart, who, as chairman, runs the meetings, told him to wind it up.”

.

Isn’t this part of your job? Isn’t this the price we pay for democracy?

.

Just on the surface, it would seem to me that the commissioners should have 45 minutes to spare, even if they’ve heard it repeatedly? Do the commissioners work for us? Or do we work for them?

.

What if you owned a business and, as part of that business, brought in an employee, once a week, to talk about the goals of the business, every week, and they turned out to be the same goals?

.

What if you could only fire that employee once every four years? What if he was ignoring you every time you talked to him about the goals for the business?

.

You, the owner, PAY this guy. Just like WE pay the salaries of these commissioners. Does the employee have the right to look at you and say, "Gee, sorry, even though I work for you and you pay me, I have the right to decide what, and for how long, you're going to talk to me, because I'm sick of hearing it and my time is worth more then yours?"

.

Is this about the precious time of the commissioners? Or the geometrically more precious time of the people you would govern?

.

The people are not here for your convenience. Not everyone is as articulate as “3 minute” Boldt. In this day and age, people need a government that will go out of their way to listen to them about SOMETHING, unlike Boldt and Stuart, who don’t want to hear what people have to say.

.

Listening is your job. No matter how repetitive, boring or ridiculous. Instead of blowing off the concerns of the people, perhaps the commissioners ought to address those concerns and act.

.

If the commissioners would ACT on "illegal immigration, the Columbia River Crossing and a proposed sports complex in Hazel Dell (that) are contentious topics of late," then there's a very good chance they wouldn't be hearing about them every week.

.

So here's my suggestion to the commissioners: instead of limiting the free speech of those you might govern, look into a mirror and ask yourselves: what can we do to act to address those concerns?

.

Because all too frequently, it seems to me that you don't care. And this rule serves to re-enforce that.

.

This was the wrong thing to do, and the wrong time to do it.

.

LISTEN to us. ACT for us. But don't ignore us, and please don't take any other steps to show your contempt for us.

.

Formula to solve Clark County's revenue problem.

.
These are tough times for government. Not nearly as tough as they are for the governed, but tough times, nonetheless.

So, how do we get the local budget under control? How do we get those leading us understand that tax increases are not the way?

I've long advocated that those government employees that have budgetary input should be allowed to personally keep 10% of any monies they save.

Unfortunately, bureaucrats are not promoted or awarded bonuses for walking into their boss's office and telling them, "Boss, you know what? My budget is too big, and I've got too many people."

What's the incentive for them to reduce the size of their empire?

You want budget cuts? Then have the people using the equipment, offices, cars and so forth make the recommendations.

We're not getting the recommendations now because there's precisely zero incentive to provide them. So make an incentive. And make it substantial.

Each recommendation has to be reviewed for viability, of course, otherwise the budget would resemble a collapsing star, it would shrink so fast.

An additional step will be to cut the pay and benefits of all county employees.

Those cuts might get less drastic if some of the county's 11 labor bargaining units, eight of which are now negotiating with the county, agree to wage freezes or benefit cuts next year.

There's really noting TO negotiate, except for the size of the pay CUTS.

Yes, that sucks for them. But does unemployment suck even more? Is a reduced pay check with county benefits preferable to NO paycheck with ZERO benefits?

It would be to me. And like it or hate it, this is hardly a worker's market, with Clark County having the highest unemployment in the state.

Here's a clue: we're in a horrific recession. Things are bad enough for the people paying the bills; there can be no way for this county to make it worse. And to Commissioner Stuart, already indebted to David Barnett for buying him his office, you're coming up for reelection in 2010. As a new-bridge/loot rail maniac and a corrupt commissioner elected entirely because of the check your boss sent in for you, you're going to have it tough enough as it is. Don't make your re-election impossible by jacking up our taxes in the midst of a recession.

In short, a little of that American ingenuity and sacrifice that our president is calling for; sacrifice on EVERYONE'S part, including those in government, is called for.

So, allow the budget writers to cut and keep some of their cuts as an incentive while cutting the pay and benefits of everyone still employed by the county... or laying off enough employees to make up the shortfall.

This situation is NOT an "emergency." It is, instead, a reflection of the economy that surrounds us all. And if Commissioner Boldt "has to do what we say," then don't ignore us by raising our taxes without asking.

You can't have it both ways, Mr. Boldt.
.

Sometimes, judges mystify me.

.
I admit it, I have a degree in government/political science. Much of what I learned was based on how concepts are SUPPOSED to be implemented when it comes to governing. Some of it was political philosophy, or how some believe that their perspective is the one that should be followed.

So, when I open up a newspaper and see a headline that says "Judge says tax increase should have been considered to balance county's budget," I have to ask myself: "What kind of a moron would say such a thing... and why would a newspaper report it?

Judges have a certain amount of power under our governmental system. They certainly interpret the laws they're asked to, well, judge. But in this instance, this judge's take on what the county "should" have done is just his opinion, no more worthy of consideration than, say, Joe Sixpack's complaints that taxes are too high.

How the Cowlitz County Commissioners resolved their budget shortfall is really none of this judge's business; much like how this judge were to rule in, say, a given murder trial on the admissibility of a weapon is none of the commissioner's business.

That the commissioners made this decision is not subject to Judge Jim Warme's review or approval. If the Judge would like to enter into the business of government, then he should feel free to engage in running for the position of county commissioner like anyone else.

As long as the actions of the commissioners concerning policies, budgets and personnel are LEGAL, then the judges should exercise their judicial discretion and keep quiet. Were the commissioners, or any commissioner, to publicly criticize a judge's decisions in areas that do not apply to them, these same judges would flip out and loose their minds.

This should apply particularly to judges who should be setting the example for ALL government employees by accepting pay cuts as they do their part to help out in this time of recession.

This judge feels himself to be above all that.

While I do not live in Cowlitz County, I certainly hope that when the time comes to re-elect this guy, I certainly hope that the people of that county remember this judicial arrogance and toss him onto the ash-heap of local political history.

Judge says tax increase should have been considered to balance county's budget

Sunday, April 26, 2009 8:34 AM PDT

By Barbara LaBoe

Printable version E-mail this article 40 comment(s)

Another Superior Court Judge is questioning how Cowlitz County commissioners resolved a $4.5 million budget shortfall, saying taxpayers should have been asked to raise taxes instead of making county employees bear the brunt.

A commissioner replied that Judge Jim Warme’s suggestions are unrealistic and uninformed.

Warme said late last week that he didn’t think the commissioners' 10-percent, across-the-board cuts were appropriate or fair. Instead, he said interest-bearing warrants should have been issued in the short term, and voters should have been asked to help as well.

“This is government,” Warme said. “It’s supposed to be government paid for by the people. If everyone increased their tax burden, sales tax or property tax by 5 percent, then the problem is passed around by everyone and not borne by the people working at the county.”

Warme said he understands raising taxes might not be popular right now but said cutting county salaries and programs isn’t “fair or very courageous or appropriate.”

More:

.

Well Done, County Commissioners: Several issues moved to next year.

.
I had heard that, based on yesterdays story, County’s new rule gives nod to unions; the unions had managed to squeak in under the wire to hose the taxpayers once again.

But then what to my wandering eyes appears THIS morning?

An article entitled "County commissioners opt to let next board decide how to move on several issues"

Intrigued, I looked it over... and buried in the article was the observation that forced apprenticeship programs (which have no more place in this day and age than "prevailing wage" rules) were among those issues punted into oblivion... that is, pushed into next year.

There is, I would venture to say, no chance this union pay-off bill will ever see another sun rise.

While our own Vancouver Firefighters Union show they're understanding of the economic realities confronting us, other unions at the state and national levels have shown a new definition for "clueless."

Arrogance is usually a problem in the political arena. Jim Moeller, who epitomizes the trait, is the exception to the rule, but his re-elections go to another issue involving the sheepfulness of the people of the 49th District. Erstwhile megacasino developer David Barnett has spent $200,000 in his efforts to buy 2 local politicians as he continues in his efforts to ram a harmful, unwanted, massive casino down our throats here in Clark County using threats and intimidation against all wise enough to oppose his efforts. These two epitomize the type of arrogance that so many with the aura of entitlement... such as these state employ unions... bring to the table.

This is not the time for entitlement. This is not the time to put a cherry on top of sweetheart deals that used to be the order of the day. The unions must realize what's happening here... and they must act accordingly.

They can be a part of the problem, as so many have positioned themselves to become; or they can become part of the solution, as the Vancouver Fire Department has proven themselves to be.

County commissioners opt to let next board decide how to move on several issues
Tuesday, December 30 10:54 p.m.
BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

For Clark County’s outgoing board of commissioners, this looked like finals week. On their final day of service, they were scheduled to hand a favor to organized labor, hike fees for builders and landowners, and throw down a legal gauntlet to state government.

But in the end, the departing trio decided to give themselves an extension on all of it. The decisions will push all these issues into next year — and into the arms of next year’s more conservative board.

Storm runoff

* The plan: Defy a state order to tighten storm-runoff standards for new construction.* What it would mean: A likely string of lawsuits against the county.

* For it: Developers. They say the new state order is impractical and would add thousands of dollars to the cost of a new house.

* Skeptical: Environmentalists. Last month, the county’s clean water commission advised commissioners not to do this.

* The bottom line: Developers might have a point. But how much money does the county want to spend to prove it?

Labor standards

* The plan: Require apprentice workers on county projects costing more than $1 million.

* What it would mean: Want to do business with the county? Create an apprenticeship program.

More:

The Columbian nails it: In our view Nov. 25: Casino MOU is Folly

.
Let's be clear, here: there is precisely one reason why the current commissioners would even consider slamming together yet another iteration of the MOU with the Barnett/Mohegan/Cowlitz Mob, and that reason is Tom Mielke.

David Barnett has spent $200,000 of his hard earned(?) dollars corrupting our local government. Steve Stuart is a wholly-owned tribal subsidiary; Betty Sue Morris has had a mysterious drive that occasionally seemed to exceed even Barnett's to get this thing built; ignoring the wide array of government, civic and local groups protesting the imposition of this economic black hole on the people of this county in favor of people that do not, and never have, lived in Clark County.

With Mielke taking Betty Sue's seat, the likelihood of any agreement getting signed grows weaker by the second... so if an agreement is going to be signed, it has to be before the end of December.

So, one wonders: when Stuart sniveled yesterday that “They’re going to twist whatever we do to suit their own needs,” was he talking about everyone wise enough to oppose his desire to ram this thing through before Mielke gets in? Or just the Columbian?

No need to be bitter, Mr. Stuart. Like Pam Brokaw, we already know what you are. At this point, we don't even need to discuss the matter of price.



In our view Nov. 25: Casino MOU is Folly
County’s disdain for Cowlitz proposal is clear; no need to impart any other message

Tuesday, November 25 2:00 a.m.

Here’s an unusual answer to one of life’s most crucial questions: “No, I won’t marry you, but let’s sit down and discuss the prenuptial agreement.” That’s essentially what Clark County commissioners are telling promoters of the Cowlitz tribal casino that’s proposed for a site on Interstate 5 near La Center.

On April 7 all three commissioners signed a resolution declaring “our opposition to the development of a major commercial gaming facility in the unincorporated area of Clark County.” That sounds pretty much like a “No!” to us, certainly negative enough to send casino lobbyists courting some other prospective bride.

And yet, as The Columbian’s Jeffrey Mize reported Monday, the commissioners are back in the dating game, talking once again with tribal officials about a memorandum of understanding. “I can tell you that we are getting closer to getting things back to the public, which we had promised originally,” County Commissioner Steve Stuart said.

The resurrection of MOU negotiations is both hypocritical and ill-timed. The commissioners’ intent is clear: They want to cover all bases. If — heaven forbid — the mega-casino is ever approved by the federal government, the commissioners want a signed document that would enable them to extract mitigation efforts from the casino builders. But the commissioners already have all the document they need: that April resolution. The bride-not-to-be told her suitor how little she likes him, and how much she fears that he will lower the quality of life in her community. End of discussion.

More:
.