THE PORT ANGELES GLOBE: 07/22/16

Friday, July 22, 2016

THE PORT ANGELES DIGEST: SO, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE NOW?

"City sends second class status to 2017 ballot, what difference does it make now? It would make a difference if it were done this year, but in 2017? Peoples opinion on the matter might be different, and some may even change their minds on the issue altogether. The city's version of: What difference does it make?"

Peter Ripley, Publisher.

The city decided to shuffle off the change of government proposal by Our Water Our Choice to 2017, The Mayor springs a surprise shot across the bow with a new binding advisory vote in the same year as the next general election for a new city council, in 2017. When all said and done, will it make any difference in regards to the vote for changing the city government? Most likely, since by then most who probably signed that petition was hoping to kick out the four council members who ignored the first citizen advisory poll ending fluoridation, and choose to continue the practice. Some like me who signed the petition were probably just wanting to lend support to end fluoridation, and hoping at least one of the four council members would change their vote, when that didn't happened, some I imagine were probably regretting even signing it, like me. That will probably happen now even more so, with the vote on the matter will be decided in the 2017 election to change the form of government.
Plus, if Downie's compromise of having yet another citizen advisory vote which this time will be binding, and placed on the November 2017 ballot holds water, will that also make the vote to change the minds of voters who would have voted for a change of government? After all the whole reason for the change of government was about flouride right? But wait! I then started hearing things like, "It's not just about fluoridation" What?! If it wasn't about just fluoridation, and wanting to give the council members an early retirement from public office, then what was changing the form of government all about? As you can see readers, two things that might solve the whole issue of fluoridation will probably make the "change of government" a moot point, because the citizens will probably vote in three new council members who are against continuing fluoride, and if Downie's new advisory vote gets in the 2017 election, these two items alone will make null and void the "Our Water, our Choice" Change of government vote.
Secondly, I have to ask, who's idea was it really to change the form of government of Port Angeles? Was it media driven? I have a hunch that might had something to do with it, and the Our Water Our Choice group was probably influenced, or at least encouraged in pursuing it. As I recall it was the Port O Call ran many stories favoring the notion of change of government, from a city manager run operation to a mayoral run operation.

Related stories:
Port Angeles City Council delays vote on changing form of city government---PDN

Quote from the article posted: "Downie, who had not put the proposal on the agenda, wants the council to discuss stopping fluoridation immediately and asking voters in a Nov. 7, 2017 advisory ballot if the city should continue the practice and make that vote binding on the City Council."

City and Town Forms of Government in Washington---PORT O CALL

Restructuring city government: How to---PORT O CALL

Unhappy with council vote on fluoride?---PORT O CALL

Petition to change city government passes two hurdles out of 3---PORT O CALL

Editorial Note: Now, the question is did the Port O Call in anyway influenced "Our Water, Our Choice" move to change the city form of governance? I'll probably never get an answer...
Finally, I thought it was odd for Kidd to badger Eloise Kailin of Sequim, who is president of Our Water, Our Choice!, saying in essence, along with council member Dan Gase that a resident of Sequim has no business in the governance of Port Angeles. Really, Cherie? Was it you, who often spoke the merits of fostering a good neighbor relationship with the folks of Sequim?
This little episode does not help in fostering good relations with our neighbors that's for sure. Both Gase, and Kidd were out of line on this point in badgering the only member of the group present at the meeting, which Council member Whetham asked that a member of the group would be present to answer question. There was no local members of the group in attendance.

In other local and regional headlines...

Post Mortem on Lange Saga by Scott Lange---Port O Call

Jefferson County commissioners award $905,000 bid for Undie Road project; works to start in early August----PDN

Passenger air service slips away again for Port of Port Angeles---PDN

Emergency zoning for rural Clallam County structures stalls

The Missing Link, PORT O CALL?

AG takes a pass on prosecution of Kidd---Port O Call

Editorial Note: As I said before I figured this would be the result, given the quality of the video clip which was submitted as evidence, which was difficult to see what was happening because the images were dark, and it was like trying to capture a video of big foot in the dark. I couldn't make out what was happening in the clip that had been shared. Oddly The Port O Call removed the link of that video clip from the article that they posted when this thing started in the headline: She Lied! By Dale Wilson
also under this headline in the Port O Call: New video seems to show Kidd lied under oath

Link missing of the video clip....why is that? Talk about withholding information.