Despite the rhetoric, I continue to believe that public service can be an honorable calling.  I also continue to believe that – particularly today – there are more and more opportunities to serve:  from jury duty to running a community blog, from helping at the food bank to volunteering in the classroom.  Our society rests upon the engagement of its citizens.

So, I will continue my work to improve the quality and respectfulness of our civic dialog and of good government.  That means continuing the “Civic Engagement” pr0gram at Edmonds Community College, now it its 7th year.  That means hosting TEDxEdmonds next spring, focused on civic literacy.  And, it means teaching next year at the Creative Retirement Institute.

Most importantly, now that I’ll be leaving the Council, I’ll have another 20-30 hours a week to spend with my family.  Maybe now my kids will stop playing “City Council” and start playing “house” or something else most 5 and 3 year olds get to do!

It has been an honor to serve in elected office these past 4 years.  It is a tough time in government – at any level – these days.  In a republican democracy like ours, we should all be rooting for our elected officials.  Their success will be ours, as will their failure.

Letter to the editor: A commitment to transparency — period

Editor:

I am for transparency in government — period.

On October 18, 2011, the Edmonds City Council decided to take no action to move forward with an investigation of the Haines Wharf cost overruns. On November 1, 2011, the Edmonds City Council declined to grant DJ Wilson’s request for a public hearing to air the circumstances that led to his censuring minutes later.

I believe that the citizens of Edmonds were shortchanged in both decisions. Whether or not an investigation of the Haines Wharf cost overruns would lead to ultimate legal action against former officials, and whether or not Council Member Wilson’s actions regarding the subsequently withdrawn settlement with a City employee would be deemed profoundly inappropriate, Edmonds citizens have a right to know the thinking that went into these Council decisions. Once again, I believe that responsible governing starts with TRANSPARENCY and, within legal limits, our City government should be moving toward an Open Government process.

In the interest of transparency, I would have supported an investigation into the Haines Wharf cost overruns, and I would have supported a public hearing as requested by DJ Wilson prior to a decision on censuring. I am for transparency in government — period.

Joan Bloom
Edmonds

By introducing a motion of censure, at 11:00 pm, and without having put the item on the agenda for public notice, they put bad politics over good government.  With the election one week away, the motion came from a co-chair of my opponent’s campaign. It was made up of facts that were inaccurate or facts that were irrelevant.

But the facts here did not matter.  This action was about politics alone.

I have done nothing wrong.

I acted at the repeated request of the mayor, and with the direct and clear authorization of the city attorney.

The very first thing I did when I heard about a motion of censure was to request a public hearing from Council President Strom Peterson.  I wanted all of Edmonds to see what was happening in executive session.  I was denied.

I requested the support of legal counsel.  I was denied.

Through my attorney, paid for by my personal funds, I requested a public hearing again yesterday.  Again, I was denied.  Council President Peterson has at his discretion the ability to schedule a hearing, but he chose not to.  The law is clear on this matter (42.30.110(1)(f)) – I have the right to a public hearing.  For political reasons, that right was denied.

I have made every effort to inform the Council of my actions.  They responded with “no thank you.”  In fact, in executive session, they asked me to leave the room rather than present the facts.  When I asked Council President Peterson if he would like to read my full testimony regarding Kim Cole’s separation, he said “I don’t need to do that.”

City government is not a social club.  By denying me my right to a public hearing, adopting a resolution they know to be factually inaccurate, and by holding illegal executive sessions on the matter, this Council and its members commit at least 4 crimes for misconduct of public officers.

In the interest of the public and of full disclosure, and as a public officer of the City of Edmonds, I have no choice but to forward this matter to the prosecutor for investigation.

This is a distraction from the important work we have before us in Edmonds – like solving our budget crisis, fully funding public safety, and keeping our streets safe.  The list goes on and on.  We have important work to do that can have a real, positive influence in the lives of our community.  Instead, this results only in embarrassment.

We deserve better than the behavior and actions of this Council.

 Only Councilmember with the honor; first since Peggy Pritchard Olson

Edmonds:  The Association of Washington Cities (AWC) awarded Edmonds Councilman DJ Wilson the Certificate of Municipal Leadership honor this week.  The distinction is a result of Wilson having advocated on behalf of the City of Edmonds at AWC events, conferences, and legislative efforts in Olympia.

“Achievement of this certificate demonstrates essential knowledge and skills to be an effective municipal leader,” says Nancy McLaughlin, AWC President and Councilmember in the City of Spokane.

A key requirement of the award is the completion of over 30 hours of training credits.  Councilman Wilson participated in courses ranging from municipal budgeting strategies to utilizing social media to engage citizens; from terrorist response preparedness to case studies in economic development.

“I’m honored with this distinction from the Association of Washington Cities,” said Councilman Wilson.  “It’s nice to be recognized for some of the hard work Council members do when the cameras are not on.”

Wilson is the only member of the current City Council to have earned this award, and the first member to have done so since 2007 when Council member Peggy Pritchard Olson earned the certificate.  Wilson served on the Nominating Committee for AWC Board elections in 2011, a position awarded to members who have earned the respect of their peers from other cities.

Founded in 1933, the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) is a private, non-profit, non-partisan corporation that represents Washington’s cities and towns before the state legislature, the state executive branch and with regulatory agencies.

# # #

Over the last 4 years, I have tried to focus on getting results for the people of Edmonds.  From Lake Ballinger to economic development, from engaging churches on homeless shelters to re-shaping the way we provide services, what counts for me is what works.

I am a pragmatic progressive on our Council.  It’s the kind of thing you know about me if you know that I have had a payroll of up to 25 employees, that I’m a former political science teacher, or that I have two busy children at home.  Politics today is about balancing one’s vision for the community with the reality of the economic climate today.

That approach to policy making has worked well for Edmonds – at least according to some people.  Which kinds of people, you ask?  I’d say those that value solutions over sound bites, regardless of party.

Like US Rep. Jay Inslee, Democratic candidate for governor, and Rep. Mike Hope, Republican candidate for Snohomish County Executive.  Both are supporting me this year.

Or, environmentalists like the Washington Conservation Voters – along with builders like the Affordable Housing Council.

Labor groups like SEIU 775NW or the Edmonds Police Officers Association – along with business groups like the Washington Realtors.

I am very proud of the broad base of support I’ve received this year in my campaign for re-election.  It’s been an honor to serve in elected office, an honor to be endorsed by these groups, and it’d be an honor to have your vote this November.

Digging through some old clippings, I came across this interesting tidbit.  It’s what my opponent had to say about me 4 years ago.  I’ve trimmed off the last part for length here, but included a scanned copy of the original for your review.

“Voting for the ‘how to’ candidates”

Letter to the Editor from Joan Bloom.
Printed in the Edmonds Beacon, Oct. 25, 2007

“In the coming election, I’m going to vote for the four candidates who I feel are “how” people – candidates who don’t necessarily think they have the answers but, at least , have thoughtful questions and an open mind, candidates who can consider that, because change is constant, we may need lots of low-scale plans (that can easily be modified if they are not viable) rather than The Plan That Saves Edmonds Forever.

In my participation with the Waterfront Group (WG33), I have found DJ Wilson to be exceptionally committed to holding out for a superior plan for the Edmonds waterfront – he was the only member who refused to vote for any of the four plans (as I wish that I did), because all were uninspired and mediocre.  In talking with DJ, I know that he is ready to continue with the planning process as long as necessary to do what’s best for Edmonds.  I am certain the DJ Wilson will bring that attitude to every issue that comes before the City Council.

And he will do that with considerable intelligence, knowledge, experience and perseverance, while remaining a pleasant man with whom to work….”

And, while I looked a mess, I have a special thank you Mr. Wilie Wellington in Meadowdale.  The good man took pity on my running from one garage eve to another, and gave me an umbrella and a hat to wear while in the storm.

So, during the last 2 hours of yesterday, I tromped around in a Poulsbo RV hat and a Tulalip Casino umbrella.

Beggars can’t be choosers.

Thanks, Wilie!

As the only council member with young children, I’m likely the only council member that has visited this park – and certainly the only one that’s been here over and over!  My kids really like it here.

However, a few years ago and prior to my time in office, the Council was clear – this park is not worth over $2 million.  Bids came in for construction over $2 million, and the city rejected them all as too expensive.

When a bid came in at $1.6 million – on the third solicitation – the Council accepted that bid as an appropriate cost.

In 2009 and 2010, however, the former mayor signed a series of change orders amounting to $725,000 – in excess of the $1.6 million authorized by Council – without ever getting permission from Council to do that.  In fact, when I and other Council members started asking questions about finances related to this matter, our questions were largely dismissed.

We didn’t know the full scope of this matter at the time, and frankly, it’s taken the new mayor and this Council a full year to get our hands around what this all really means for Edmonds.

So here is the bottom line.

1.  The Council’s primary authority is as appropriator.  Council controls the purse strings. The legislative branch of government was was disregarded by the administration here.  The total cost is now well over $2 million, and with a pending claim for “equitable adjustments” by the contractor, that amount will likely exceed $3 million.

2.  Council’s role as oversight authority rests upon getting responsive, accurate information from the administration.  City staff have now apologized for a total breakdown in communication on this matter, though the former mayor and all directors responsible for the lack of any reporting to Council have since left the city.  It is not a coincidence, however, that staff brought this to Council on the first meeting immediately following the departure of the former mayor.

3.  After reviewing all of the materials, facts, city policies, and state law, the Edmonds City Attorney has concluded the law was repeatedly broken.

4.  While this change order was not brought to Council, the former mayor repeatedly brought other smaller change orders to Council for approval.  There was a clear understanding by the administration that state law and Edmonds policy required the Council consent.

Also important is the context within which we have received this information.  It is election time, of course.  And, while I don’t think it is the role of the Council – or mayor – to play either judge or jury on this matter, I think it is particularly a bad idea during election season.

As a result of the comments provided by staff, and the legal opinion delivered by our City Attorney, I believe it is imperative that this matter be forwarded to either the Office of the Attorney General or to the King County Prosecuting Attorney.  (Given the former mayor’s current role as Deputy County Executive at Snohomish County, I don’t believe the Office of the Snohomish County Prosecutor would be an appropriate investigator here.)

I believe we must take this matter out of the hands of the City of Edmonds, and let an impartial investigator determine the facts of the matter here for everyone’s benefit.

———————————————-

This levy is bad policy.  It doesn’t solve the short-term financial problems at the City.  Nor does it address long-term structural problems.  Moreover, if this passes, the City Council will still be forced to consider layoffs as early as 2012.

Here are the facts.

1. This doesn’t solve the short-term problem.  Current projections show we need $1.75 million in revenue per year just to maintain basic city services over the next 5 years.  This levy is only $1 million over three years.  That means layoffs will still be needed in the years ahead.

2. This doesn’t solve the long-term problem.  The City’s economic forecast shows revenues growing at an average rate of 1.3% over the next four years. It shows expenditures growing between 2.3 and 3.2% annually over the same period. This is a broken model. As long as your expenditures grow at a larger percentage than your revenues, the shortfall will continue to grow over time.

3. As worded, this levy does nothing to shore up public safety funding.  In the last 3 years alone, the City has cut 2 uniformed police officers, the crime prevention unit, the school resource officer, and the DARE program.  If this levy passes, none of those cuts are restored.  In fact, more will be on the horizon.

Councilmembers Wilson, Plunkett, and Petso all oppose this levy – a diverse base of opposition that demonstrates the depth of concern on the matter. 

Please oppose this levy. Tell the City Council they must do better.