CoBPAC: City of Bellingham Political Action Committee

Posted by wally at 7:14 pm Local Issue, Media Issue, Politics, State Issue No Responses »
Oct 142009

BootForget SarahPAC.  Forget Rural Neighbors PAC.  The City of Bellingham(COB), yes our City of Bellingham is the hottest new political action committee(PAC) north of Portland.

Sure the city may not have reported  expenditures nor filed any legal paperwork.  I wouldn’t expect them to either admit to being a PAC, nor fill out any paperwork.   But, for intents and purposes they appear to be a political action committee.

Their recent actions on two current state issues bear positive  witness to their PAC status.

The council unanimously, with Councilman Gene Knutson absent, approved a resolution opposing Eyman’s Initiative 1033′…,

Members also, in a 5-0 vote with Councilman Stan Snapp abstaining, passed a resolution urging voters to approve Referendum 71

Bellingham City Council opposes Eyman’s I-1033, backs ‘everything but marriage’ law

or,

The Bellingham City Council is now officially urging citizens to vote “no” on Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1033 to limit state, county and city revenue.

KGMI: Bellingham Council Publicly Opposes I-1033, Supports R-71

There should be no doubt in our mind that when any body urges voters to approve a referendum or urges voters to vote no on an initiative they are acting politically.   But does just urging others to vote one way or another qualify the COB as a real political action committee?

In our state there is volume after volume of code, so I was pretty happy that the PDC had on record this little one paragraph summary.

A political committee is any person (except a candidate or an individual dealing with his or her own resources) who expects to receive contributions or make expenditures to support or oppose a candidate or ballot measure. The disclosure law applies to most groups organized to influence an election. Political parties, political action committees (PACs), and one-issue groups that disband after a single election are all political committees.

That was definitely easier than reading volumes, and pretty clear that making “expenditures to support or oppose a candidate or ballot measure” qualifies as being a PAC.  We’ve already established that the City of Bellingham is acting in support or opposition to a couple of state ballot measures, but what about the expenditure part?

I know someone will want to argue that a city resolution is just a piece of paper and hardly qualifies as an expenditure, but  I’d argue back that city resources were expended on many levels that surround the resolution put forth by CoBPAC.   Check out this little thrown together list

  • People and businesses in the Bellingham pay money in taxes and fees
  • The city of Bellingham maintains a treasury
  • Salaried people are hired to do city business
  • Paid Council members spend time discussing potential resolutions
  • Press releases are issued and or interviews are done with radio and news.
  • Forums are held in public facilities
  • Forums are recorded for later repeated broadcasts
  • Paid City personnel process necessary paperwork

All that is part of the process involved in a city resolution.  Now again, someone will argue that it is only a little bitty portion of all of that and it doesn’t really amount to an expenditure.  I’ve read enough of the Herald political blog to know that if I were to have a PAC of my own, someone would be wondering who paid for the stapler on my desk, the desk, and the staple there in.  Anything and everything has a value when it comes to PAC’s and your opposition will always point the value out to you and/or the PDC.  Value matters.

In fact let’s say there was a WallyPAC and for sake of argument I was concerned with the outcome of I-1033.  At the time of this blog post I haven’t weighed in on this issue, not that it really matters because the rules apply the same regardless of position on any particular candidate or ballot measure.  But we at WallyPAC have laid out a plan very similar to the CobPAC.  Here’s our plan:

  • First we are going to hire a few people to go out and solicit funding from local people and businesses.  We, unlike the city, will merely ask rather than demand under penalty of law.
  • We’ll open a bank account to keep our WallyPAC funds
  • We retain an attorney.
  • Then we’ll hire a small part time staff to organize our meetings and meeting places, etc.
  • All of us on the board are gainfully employed, but feel our long hours should be at least somewhat compensated, so we take a small salary for our time spent meeting and discussing issues important to WallyPAC and those who have donated their money.
  • We expect to agree on a position on I-1033, but feel a focus group or public forum should be held to solidify our position, so we reserve a room at a public hall.
  • Next our staff organizes interviews and issues statements regarding WallyPAC position and our upcoming forum
  • We hold a brief public forum which is recorded for playback on BTV10
  • More payed staff time is spent processing papers, paying bills and for sure a stack of PDC paperwork.
  • We then issue our statement on I-1033 and make sure we are prominantly placed on the Heralds front page.

So what would it cost WallyPAC to compete with CoBPAC on an issue?    WallyPAC hasn’t funded an exploratory committee yet, so I’ll just have to throw a few numbers up against the screen and see what sticks.

  • Hire doorbellers for a day ~ $300
  • bank accounts shouldn’t cost
  • retain an attorney???? $500
  • small part time staff?  gotta’ be a few hundred there
  • collect a salary?  I’m humble so I’ll call it just another few hundred
  • rent a public room  – $150 to rent a room off the library, but I’m sure city hall is a bit more steep
  • a little more staff time for another hundred dollars or so
  • BTV10 videographer and a few paid spots?  I’d guess, but I don’t want to insult anyone.
  • well, buying space on front page of the Herald will be costly.  You see Wally’s emails aren’t even acknowledged by anyone at the Herald so I will assume that WallyPAC will have to pay dearly.

What the dollars add up to is not really the point.

My first point is that WallyPAC may have to pay more for a particular item, but the value is the same.  If someone gave WallyPAC a front page Herald spot, someone would be looking at the value of the spot, not what I did or didn’t pay.

The second point is that if WallyPAC mimicked  what the City of Bellingham and the Bellingham City Council just did regarding I-1033 and Ref-71, we would without any doubt, be designated a political action committee.  So why isn’t the City of Bellingham?

If even half people of Bellingham pooled their resources to act in support or opposition to a candidate or ballot measure they’d qualify as a political action committee.  Wait isn’t that what just happened?  The people of Bellingham voted in a council that is competing with individual voters on state issues.

So again, why isn’t the City of Bellingham a political action committee?

It is.

CoBPAC, undermining your vote on state issues since at least earlier this week or maybe last August during the Santuary City project.  Oh no that was undermining your federal vote.

CoBPAC doing what they want no matter whose vote they step on.

All hail Paul Harvey

Posted by wally at 9:31 am Media Issue 3 Responses »
Nov 152008

ode Hold on there; Paul Harvey didn’t get elected so why the hail?  Well why not?  He is the king; the king of looking for the rest of the story.  And darn it where would we be if we’d never heard that melodious phrase “and now here’s the rest of the story.”

When I pick up our paper, It would be helpful if there were  a little Paul Harvey running around the pages shouting out the rest of the story.  Thankfully there is no little gnome, as that would actually be scary, but neither is there, on many occasions,  the “rest of the story.”

Such was the case reading Local Iraq veterans discuss life after war in this mornings paper.  As the title indicates, the article covers a forum at WWU where Iraq veterans discuss life after war.

The veterans, English, Rick Lawson, Ash Woolson and Jared Gardner, discussed difficulties they face in receiving benefits from their service from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or, for some, overcoming post traumatic stress disorder.

Doris Kent, whose son, Jonathan Santos, died in Iraq, and Tiffany Schoessler, whose husband, Adam, is a veteran, discussed what is was like to go through life with a loved one serving in a combat zone.

Listening to those who have served is an invaluable experience and I almost feel it a duty for those of us who haven’t served in the military.  I’ve listened to many a relative’s story of WWII or Vietnam and only on occasion heard the troubling rest of the story.  I’d encourage people to listen intently to anyone who has or is serving; there always seems to be more to a story.

The story of this article is no different; there is a rest of the story.  And as the rest of the story unfolds, I should remind you that nothing past this point was available to the thousands of subscribers who only read the regular paper.

Sam Taylor had more of the story in a blog post which he describes as information coming from a group connected with the Whatcom Peace and Justice Center (WPJC).

Join a discussion with local veterans and those directly affected by the Iraq war, as they share stories of what it means to return after war time. The community is invited to an unbiased, depoliticized discussion around issues of what it means to be a returning soldier in the U.S., current V.A. treatment, and readjusting to civilian lives. This event is co-sponsored by Bellingham GI Sanctuary city, Social Issues Resource Center, Veterans Outreach Center, and Civil Controversy Series.

More towards the rest of the story, Sam has included the list of sponsors when he passed on the WPJC information for the event.  However, the real rest of the story lies deeper than just naming the sponsors.  The first sponsor is a likely candidate to look at for the rest of the story because, also in Sam’s blog post was information about a fundraiser for the group.

Join the Bellingham GI Sanctuary city campaign as we celebrate an evening to benefit war resisters in Bellingham. “The Desserter” is a gathering, party, dessert music show to support the campaign to make Bellingham a Sanctuary city for war resisters. Join us for an evening of celebration and conversation.

So the “unbiased, depoliticized discussion” the paper subscribers read about was actually sponsored by a group who wishes “to make Bellingham a Sanctuary city for war resisters” or as the WPJC referred to it in their newsletter, “support the campaign to make Bellingham a war resister friendly community.”

Here’s what the group says about themselves at GI Sanctuary City, Bellingham, WA.

The people of Bellingham are calling for an ordinance that will provide legal sanctuary for member s of the military who exercise their duty to object to an illegal war. To that end, we hope to have grassroots community effort to urge City Council to pass resolutions to not waste public funds on the arrest or detention of service members who are absent without leave.

Really?  The people of Bellingham are calling for this ordinance?  You’d think that’d be in the paper if it were the case.  So really, the supposedly innocuous “unbiased, depoliticized discussion” veils the rests of the story, which is the campaign by a few in Bellingham to see the city become a haven for AWOL soldiers.  And not just a place to gather covertly as it is right now, but they are asking Bellingham to ignore laws and not arrest or detain service members who are absent without leave.

Now you know the rest of the story, but what about the paper reading portion of the public?  Why did the Herald keep the rest of the story from them?   When will we hear the rest of the story?

What should you be doing III

Posted by wally at 10:51 am Local Issue, Media Issue No Responses »
Nov 022008

pk Obviously from the title there is a a What should you be doing post, a What should you be doing II, and here we have the third installment.  In the second post I alluded to public officials anonymously posting to the Herald site.  Here in number III is a bit more information about possibility of elected officials participating anonymously in the local online community.  Here we go.

One commentor by the name of SigX, has lots of Herald blog activity, 242 comments at last Google count and they occur at all hours of the day and all days of the week.  Someone might think that this is a retired person with endless amount of time on their hands.  But someone else with a small knowledge of the Internet and blogging might be led to think something entirely different.

sigx a sigx b sigx c

Someone with that behind the scenes knowledge would see this:

  • Someone identified as SigX registered a comment using a certain email address
  • That very same certain email address is used to publically register Steve Oliver as the administrative contact for a Ferndale business website domain.
  • And oddly enough someone identified as both SigX and Steve from Ferndale purchased a ceramic courthouse figure that I pictured in my post What should you be doing II.

If the general public had this information, they might believe that SigX is none other than Whatcom County Treasurer Steve Oliver.

However, if you believed that, you might be wondering why a person elected to a non-partisan position would be making obviously partisan comments such as these in the Herald Blogs?

sigx d

If you believed that SigX were in fact Steve Oliver, then what he calls ironic, I would call a sick partisan slap in the face as Steve Oliver was 1 of 4 local candidates who received the support of the Progressive Majority who was actually involved with busing people in to doorbell in Whatcom County.  You know, I think someone made little flyers about it and everyone got really upset, yet still the Herald never really looked into nor reported on the Progressive Majority.  Read more about that here and here.

And if you believe that SigX is our elected, and tax payer paid, Whatcom County Treasurer, you might also wonder why he is making some of those comments, or indeed any comments, during what appears to be business hours?

sigx f

Aren’t there Treasurer duties that need attending to?  If not, then as a taxpayer, I’d like to see our employee doing a McDonalds and sweeping the sidewalks before doing nothing, or worse, playing partisan politics while he’s on the taxpayers clock.

I’m pretty sure that there are ethics rules that govern use of public facilities, i.e. the treasurers office, light, heat, power, and computers.  Are there other rules being broken?  Will there be an ethics complaint filed?  How many other anonymously commenting public officials would pop up if similarly investigated; would we need for ethics complaint forms by the ream?

I don’t have it in for Steve Oliver, nor any other local elected officials; okay, well perhaps a few on the Bellingham City Council, but other than that, I don’t have it in for any elected officials.  For the most part I hear that Steve Oliver is a decent enough guy.  If I wanted to go after him, he might already have an ethics complaint on his desk.

Again, there is more to this situation than just breaking rules; its worse than that.  Public officials who act in secrecy are breaking public trust.  Normally we could rely on the media to investigate those public officials suspected of violating public trust, but in this case the Herald is part of the problem.

Let me back step a bit an applaud those officials such as Sam Crawford, Stan Snapp, Doug Erickson and others who do identify themselves online.

As I said, the Herald is part of the problem.  Not only doesn’t the Herald appear to investigate those who may be violating public trust online, but they operate probably the biggest local online forum where these people hangout and yet seem to have no interest in fixing this situation.  In fact it seems they prefer to see it linger.  Prior to this post I have offered two posts on the subject and numerous letters to the Herald.  Recently I’ve sent 2 letters to Julie Shirley at the Herald.

Portion of 10/6/08 letter

Objectivity and responsibility to the community are the point of this letter, so I won’t ramble on.  I believe that there is at least one elected official using the Herald blogs to further the positions of their party when they should be doing the job that tax payers have hired them to do.  Further, if I know this, then I would bet that Sam does also.  I respect that he protects their anonymity, as he has mine, but I think you need to get with him and draw a guideline that balances respect for anonymity with responsibility to the community, especially in paid positions.  I strongly believe that the Herald has a responsibility to investigate those who have violated public trust.

A simple rule might be to ask for those who are elected to identify themselves and their positions.  If they are unwilling then I believe they should not be allowed to participate and further if it can be found that they continue to participate anonymously, then I think this should be reported.

By the way, in taking this position I am also essentially outing myself because I’ve recently been elected as the Republican PCO for the xxxth.  I’ll be outing myself shortly for those who don’t know me already.

I realize this is a radical departure from the norm within the Herald blogs, but I think it is right and I hope you choose to lead.

Of course I didn’t “x” out the district and I did sign with my real name, but after 1 week with no response I sent this letter, again to Julie Shirley,

Portion of 10/13/08 email

Following up with my 10/6/08 email, I wonder if you have given any thought to the Herald’s responsibility to our community with regards to public officials anonymity?

Neither email received even an acknowledgement from Julie Shirley,  let alone any thoughtful consideration of the problem.   And from a couple of comments by Herald employees, I find the problem at the Herald to be an attitude problem, not a technical problem.

Here Julie Shirley is advising on getting past the registration with a gmail or yahoo account.

The two-step registration process ensures real people are registering for our site, not machines. We need a real email address for you so we can send you a note with a URL for you to click to complete your registration. If that’s what’s holding you back, you wouldn’t be the first to have a gmail or Yahoo account just for registering for sites.

Julie Shirley comment

And in this recent comment from Sam Taylor we find that he knows “nearly all” the commenters.

It’s utterly ridiculous to think I “investigate” the commenters on this site, but I know who many, many are, in fact nearly all, because they have contacted me privately to chat. I’ve also gone to coffee with several of the commenters and a few others have participated in a get-to-know-you event at a few Bellingham Bells games. And they were people from both sides of the political spectrum coming together for the common cause of local baseball.  Sam Taylor: Rumor has it …

So again, I find it to be an attitude problem with the Herald.  We expect the Herald to use the power of the press to help hold public officials accountable, yet that thought seems to be the furthest thing from their mind.  If they refuse to investigate unethical behavior of public officials while using the Herald blogs and forums, then why would we think that they will investigate any public official, or anyone for that matter, if it goes against the interests of the Herald?

And here I leave you with a few questions to ponder.  What will it take for the Herald to finally own up to their responsibilities?  And if they don’t see it is as their responsibility, then what will it take to get them to do it anyway?  Will it take involving them in one ethics complaint?  two? three?   We could do that, or they could just choose to take the lead as I have suggested they do.

I guess time will tell which direction things go.

Oops, AP? Bellingham Herald? Your bias is showing again

Posted by wally at 6:06 am Media Issue No Responses »
Oct 282008

deposed Is it media bias from Associated Press or from the Bellingham Herald who just recently endorsed Gov. Gregoire over Dino Rossi?   I’ll go with both.

Dino Rossi must give a deposition before election day, he is not being deposed from his position as a candidate for governor; if that is even possible.

Who, but a lawyer would even understand that this headline meant Dino Rossi was being asked to give a deposition?  And who but a severely biased media source, skilled with words and biased against Dino Rossi would even think to use this version of deposed?

Oh! Oh! pick me! pick me!  I know the answer.  Media that so much wants to write a grabby headline, that they don’t mind unscrupulously trashing Dino Rossi’s name in public to get that grabby headline.

So which answer is correct, biased or unscrupulous?

I know someone at the Herald reads this blog, so pass this along to your boss.  I bet there are a lot of people who would like to see a retraction printed tomorrow on the same page in the same font.  Not after the election, not in little print on some back page.  Big print tomorrow.  And how about an investigation to find the political leanings of the headline author?  possible

And just to show you what is possible; check the headline on the right that is attached to the very same AP article.  Informative and immanently less biased than what we see here in Bellingham.

This author will be voting for a capable man of integrity and great character; Dino Rossi.

Older Entries
© 2010 Wally Wonders Why Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha