Day 4 and counting

You may have noticed the addition to the title of this blog. It's been my opinion for quite some time that Doug, Phil, Keith Locke and Charles Grant need to find new hobbies. They don't deserve the City Councilor moniker, much less the title of Commissioner of anything.

When this recall began I wavered as to whether or not to file against all four of them. Full recall statements were researched and written for all of them, but I finally decided to focus on the two who were most harmful and that the demise of the other two would come naturally by election.

I know I want Doug & Phil recalled, and I know who I would like to see win the seats now occupied by Keith and (sometimes) Charles: Steve Blanchard and Pat Martyn.

I'd really like to work with people who didn't think they were above the rest of the citizens of St. Helens. Keith and Charles have bad track records for abuse of City rules, specifically regarding events sponsored by the St. Helens Foundation (NOT an arm of the City, even if they would have you believe so).

They seem quite capable of thinking up event ideas and getting beautiful posters made, but more often than not, they completely disregard the City's requirements for holding the events. Requirements that I'm required to hold any and all other people to: reserving space, filing a completed application, paying fees, getting emergency response signatures, obtaining liquor licenses, notifying businesses affected by street closures and filing a street closure application, and, lastly, obtaining proof of insurance that protects the City against liability for the event.

This is not an exaggeration. They seem completely unable to do these simple things required of anyone who holds an event on City property; they behave as if it is their RIGHT to disregard the rules. I can start the paperwork for them, remind them, remind them, and remind them, and still find myself 24 hours out without being able to issue a permit. It doesn't stop them, however. The events go on as planned. Just not with City approval.

This might not seem like such a big deal, but not only does it leave the City and others liable, it is also indicative of the way they approach their work. I've heard Keith say, "Let the City pay for it," or "The City can pay for it." They take things like this before City Council and four-to-one agree that Keith can just disregard the rules . . . because? Well, because, I suppose, he is a city councilman. (Doesn't anyone besides me wonder at the ethics of two City Councilmen who also run the St. Helens Foundation, and come before the Council to solicit funding for the Foundation??)

I've seen Charles late to meetings, skip meetings to which he is assigned, miss meetings specifically scheduled around him, bring his three-year-old daughter to meetings, and openly and frequently admit that he hasn't read the materials provided to him prior to the Council work sessions and meetings, and isn't prepared to discuss a topic or vote on it. Exactly why did we elect this man?

Sadly, the latter does not just apply to Charles. Doug Morten is currently on a rip about the Parks Commission minutes. Until a couple of months ago, I took and transcribed those minutes, then submitted a draft to the commission to review and approve, before sending them along to the full council to accept. Month after month the minutes were approved as submitted, with a minor correction now and then.

Doug sat in those meetings. He got the minutes in advance just as the commissioners did. I don't think he ever read them, though, because now as they've made their way to the City Council to accept (not approve, that's the job of the Parks Commission), he's suddenly unwilling to let the Council accept them as written and approved. They apparently don't please him. He feels he's been misrepresented. I have to assume he didn't read any of them prior to the Parks Commission meetings where they were approved, and, assume, as well, that he hasn't bothered to read any of the Parks minutes for the nearly two years I've been taking them and he's been assigned to that commission.(Does he read minutes of any of the commissions if he doesn't read those of the commission upon which he sits?)

Now, after he's discovered that I'm part of this vast conspiracy of people organized to take over the City of St. Helens, now he finds the minutes unacceptable? How convenient.

I understand he intends to bring them up at the next Parks meeting (tomorrow) and, I guess, ask the Parks Commission to reopen discussion on them, change them to his liking and resubmit them.

Please. Doug, if you don't read them (and you're the Parks Commissioner) what makes you think anyone else does? I wouldn't expect that Charles does, or Keith, so why does it matter. Or, is this one of those situations that is causing you grievous harm, destroying your career, ravaging your reputation, and cause for a defamation/libel suit?

I don't think election day or recall petition filing day can come soon enough. Because, I've had enough. Hope the rest of you have, as well.