LETTER: Rose Clark Responds to Nov. 19 City Council Adjournment


Print This Post  Email This Post

[EDITOR’S NOTE: The following letter is included as public record in the packet for Monday night’s Burien City Council meeting:]

November 19th Burien City Council Meeting
by Deputy Mayor Rose Clark

The people of Burien rightly have questions about why I terminated the Burien Council Meeting abruptly on November 19th, 2012. I will answer here, but want to put the evening and our normal process into context.

Since 1993 it has never been the practice of Council to vote on extremely important issues, like a change in Burien City government, without research, without discussion at prior meetings, and certainly not with absent members totally in the dark about the issue. Shooting from the hip types of legislation serves no one well.

In addition it has been a long established practice among Burien Council Members to defer taking action on items that the absent members have an interest in. Discussion of items championed by an absent member has also been delayed until the member’s return. This is simple courtesy. Of course if the item was time sensitive, or an emergency, action would be taken.

Since 1993, the beginning of the City of Burien, these has been the practices during the terms of twenty four different individual Council Members, guided by six individual Mayors, working with three permanent and three temporary individual City Managers. We have always protected the right of all Council Members to be involved in a discussion before it is put into the form of a motion for adoption. I have always been very proud of the fact that all of these people working together, working through their differences, with the ebb and flow of majority and minority status, have steadily moved this city ahead with the Vision and the future as their north stat. But through it all we have respected the right of each to be included in the conversation.

Council Member Block, like other Council Members historically, received this courtesy during his recent absence for surgery as well as vacations in the past. Every Council Member has been granted this courtesy and respect until the Aug. 6th, 2012 meeting when Council Member Block put an motion on the floor in my absence. Research would have shown him that that motion, to take Annexation off the ballot, would have needed to be made and passed at least one month earlier in order to allow the process to work through the King County Council, the only body with authority over the ballot.

On Nov. 19th, 2012 two members, Mayor Bennett and Council Member McGilton, were absent. It is true that they were away on personal business. There is not one Burien Council Member ever who has had perfect attendance. As human beings they have a right to personal time, to surgery time, and sometimes to traveling on behalf of the City. Every elected official in the country and beyond faces the need to balance public service with their personal lives.

On the 19th the meeting was going well until we reached the point on the agenda where we talk about City Business. At this point on the agenda normally there is no action to take. It is the time at which our City Manager routinely updates Council and the community of recent developments of note. That would be followed by the individual Council Members summarizing meetings or events he/she had attended.

But Council Member Block interrupted with his first motion to rescind our PAA on North Highline. The annexation issue was dealt with at the ballot box and that is different from the issue of the PAA. Refusing to acknowledge the lack of respect to two absent Council Members, he pressed on in spite of the fact that during his absences he had received that respect.

This was not an emergency issue nor one of time constraints. In fact it can t be done by one simple motion because it involves changing both the Burien Comp Plan as well as the King County Comp Plan. It is not the annexation issue that is codified in these documents, it is the PAA which allows Burien a seat at the table in future discussions concerning the future of this area. The complicated process would be long and could not be handled by a simple motion by one Council Member. A little research on the part of Council Member Block would have shown him that.

This motion was seconded by Council Member Krakowiak in spite of the fact that she, in the interests of transparency, always insists that we refrain from placing a motion on the floor and vote on it at the same meeting. Council Member Edgar was the third Member who voted for this motion.

So without research they voted to withdraw from the PAA as I previously described. At home I am sure the residents thought the motion passed but further action will be needed due to the complexities of the issue.

Council Member Block’s second motion was to place the idea of Burien having an elected mayor on the April ballot. This is a significant change to the City s Charter and has considerable budget implications. Council Member Block had mentioned this item at one previous meeting. Because we have been consumed by budget discussions the Council has not placed the elected mayor item on the agenda for discussion which would be our normal protocol.

Placing a change in our form of government on the agenda would set the table for discussion so that the residents could hear and understand the complexities and budget implications of changing our form of government. After reasoning together and with public input we would be better able to make a wise decision. A decision on a ballot measure would be the end result.

I myself have questions about it, but since it was not on the agenda I knew staff would not be prepared to help us understand the matter. Then there was the issue of two absent Council Members who would have zero input into a discussion to transform Burien s mode of government. I tried very hard to reason with Council Member Block hoping he would table the motion until a future date when all Members would be present. Rather than allow rash action, totally out of order and sequence, I chose to recess the meeting.

I am aware that this is the first time in the history of Burien that any presiding officer has recessed in this manner. Recessing, with a motion on the floor, necessarily means the issue of an elected mayor would be discussed in the future before action is taken.

Council Member Block has inferred that he had a third motion that would cause us to hire two additional police officers. What a surprise since during the budget discussions he wanted to eliminate the School Resource Officer position historically posted to Highline High School. A little research would have shown him that the SRO position has been instrumental in resolving issues and public safety costs at the Burien Library, Transit Oriented Development, Bartells and Burger King as well as the Town Square Condo units. But on a whim he wanted to reduce this position but now he wants to add two positions. And this would be done after the budget for the next two years was adopted only a couple of weeks ago.

If this indeed was his third motion for the evening, he would have been adding in excess of a quarter of a million dollars for new officers to our just adopted budget without discussion by full Council. There is a financial costs to placing an initiative on the ballot. I think that is at least $30,000. Then there would be the undetermined costs of changing our form of government. Clearly it was inappropriate to add these expenditures outside the budget process which just ended a couple of weeks ago not to mention without having the full Council present.

I will also give these comments to our City Clerk for inclusion in the Dec. 3rd packet so that all residents may have the opportunity to understand my reasons for recessing the Nov. 19th meeting.

Thank you for listening. Now we will move to tonight’s published agenda, which staff has been preparing for over a month.

- Rose Clark
Deputy Mayor

[Have an opinion or concern you’d like to share with our 70,000+ monthly Readers? Please send us your Letter to the Editor via email. Include your full name, and, pending our review, we’ll most likely publish it.]

Print This Post  Email This Post

Comments

56 Responses to “LETTER: Rose Clark Responds to Nov. 19 City Council Adjournment”
  1. Wheels says:

    Ms. Clark, regardless of whether or not you agree with Mr. Block’s actions, was it ethical for you to end the meeting abruptly, unilaterally, and walk out of the room?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Joe Wills says:

    No Rose you are way out of line, regardless of whether or not you agree with Mr. Block’s actions, was it ethical for you to end the meeting abruptly, unilaterally, and walk out of the room. I say NO, this shows that you are one sided and don’t care about the citizens of Burien, You were elected to help us, not hinder us. So you’re walking out showed you do not care. So please step down. Let someone who really wants to make a positive difference be part of our city council. This isn’t the good ole boys club, what you do up there affects people’s lives. You are obviously not connected with us, the citizens of Burien, when was the last time you walked into Burien business and asked: How can I help? SO please do us a favor and step down and make way for Bob, Lucy and Jack. WE want people who really care, and don’t have a personal agenda.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • JJ Greive says:

      So should anyone without working with the entire council be able to make such a radical change to our city? Personally I think it is the lowest form of politics to try and sneak such an important chance the the city’s government in a meeting without any discussion, or research. Look forward to to the day when the council will work together instead of showing no respect to the full council. The citizens of Burien deserve better, and I am happy to say I will be actively working unseat any member that won’t work together.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • SD says:

        In response to JJ’s question —“So should anyone without working with the entire council be able to make such a radical change to our city?” — if the power to decide such a radical change is given to the citizens of Burien to decide, then my answer is yes. I think the citizens’ collective opinion should trump the Council members’ opinion.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • John Poitras says:

        Just like you worked to make the annexation of white center a reality huh JJ?

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Marie R says:

    Ms. Clark, after watching the video of the meeting, I believe that you had no choice but to end the meeting as you did. Not only was Mr. Block not following protocol, he was acting like a school yard bully trying to pull a fast one while the teacher wasn’t looking.

    I personally don’t appreciate his seemingly underhanded (and possibly unethical or deceitful) antics. He came off looking like a fool while you had the integrity to do what was right. It was you who stood up for the citizens of Burien, not Mr. Block.

    Believe me, Burien will be watching the next Council meeting. Expect a full house Monday.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      Marie it was Rose that violated Protocol not Jack.. Jack in fact was within his rights to make a motion. Rose was NOT standing up for the residents..She was so concerned that the residents might actually get a say in reducing her power on the council that she broke the rules ,ended the meeting improperly and left in a huff.. Thats the reality. I suggest you research this matter and I think you will find that you are in error.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Ghost of Maplewild says:

    I thought I heard somewhere that Joey Martinez wrote this for Rose Clark. Is this true?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Ghost of Maplewild says:

    Mayor Bennet was absent again from the December 3rd meeting. But the “MAJORITY” of the council had no problem on voting on the Manager vs Mayor form of government.

    “Then there was the issue of two absent Council Members who would have zero input into a discussion to transform Buriens mode of government. I tried very hard to reason with Council Member Block hoping he would table the motion until a future date when all Members would be present.”

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • TcB says:

      You obviously just stepped out of the future from your time machine, or else you would look like a fool wouldn’t you?

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • ATKMH says:

        What a wonderful way to put that. I know I saw the Mayor on TV December 3rd. Don’t know where everyone else was.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Ralph Nichols says:

    What? This comment re Mayor Bennett’s absence, etc., is so far removed from reality that it requires correction and clarification – and underscores Jim Clingan’s prior comment.

    Number one, since today is only Dec. 1, Bennett obviously was not absent from the Dec. 3 council meeting, at least not yet.

    Number two, there was no “majority” vote at the Nov. 26 meeting (from which Bennett was absent). The Nov. 19 motion for Burien to adopt a strong mayor form of government automatically topped old business on the Nov. 26 meeting after the earlier meeting was recessed before a vote was taken – as required by rules of parliamentary procedure.

    Because there was no action by its supporters to withdraw the motion for a strong mayor on Nov. 26, the vote on this motion proceeded. The vote was 3-3 (note: no majority) and a tie vote defeats a motion.

    A final note: all council members of any city are granted a certain number of absences each year for medical reasons, vacations, and family matters and personal business – without which far fewer citizens would be able to serve. A recent case in point is the extended absence of Councilman Jack Block Jr. after he had surgery earlier this year – during which time council members deferred action on certain matters of importance until he returned.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Ghost of Maplewild says:

      Sorry. I do stand corrected. My error, I meant to say Nov. 26th. My apologies.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. SD says:

    It’s unfortunate how this has all played out. Given the Council’s recent conduct, I’d prefer the Council not represent my interest on matters of significant importance, such as changing the form of government. The citizen’s have the capacity to reason through the pros/cons to come to a wise decision at the ballot box. The opportunity for the citizen’s to decide should not be snuffed out by Council. In the scheme of things, $30K to place this initiative on the ballot seems like money well spent – especially when it comes to repairing damaged public relations. I wish the Council would have allowed the citizens of Burien a vote on whether it was wise to pursue annexation. Had they, it might have avoided a lot of anguish within our community and provided clarity on whether the Council truly represented the majority of the citizen’s opinion or not.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Debi Wagner says:

      Very well said SD. Placing the change of government on the ballot does the same thing, provide the council with direction from the electorate. Rose says study the issue, discuss it together? There is nothing together about this council, it is always 4 to 3. This issue has been put on the back burner before by the majority of the council. Discuss together is another way to say kill it by the majority on the council who dont want to hear from the citizens. The manager can stall it indefinitely while we wait for funds to “study” the issue to become available. Then we get a biased study from a compromised source which says it is a bad idea…oh yeah…wait.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • SD says:

        Debi, thank you for expounding on my comment. I share your concern.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Shari says:

        So are our two choices *really* either a biased study from a compromised source or a vote based on guesses and conjecture? That’s pretty bleak. I understand the earnest desire to let “the people of Burien” have a say in this and I also understand the desire to base a vote on a set of objective facts (from which I as a voter can and will extrapolate to any number of my own subjective conclusions). So…could we maybe use the Blog as a tool here to get objective information that the people of Burien say matters to them in terms of helping them decide? For example, maybe the Blog could be used to collect people’s top *objective* questions about the idea of a new form of government. After some period, Scott and his team could go through the submissions and pick the top 10 most frequently asked *objective* questions. Those Top 10 questions could be given over to a *volunteer* group of people from the community (with a cross section of people) to research and come back with answers to. I see a million ways this could be problematic (somebody submits their favorite questions 100 times to skew the data; the objectivity of Scott’s team is questioned; the objectivity and/or intelligence of the volunteer community team is questioned) so I suppose this isn’t helpful. But I’m too tired to backspace now… maybe there’s something here to work with?

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • John Poitras says:

          The way I see it is that the current city government is obviously dysfunctional. So why not try the alternative?

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Shari says:

            John, I’m not sure what the alternative is exactly (an elected vs. appointed mayor?) or what the ramifications would be…so would like to hear more about what specifically is being proposed and what would change if it took effect (council policy and procedure, budget, decision making/decision rights, org structures/staffing, etc) and it would be nice to have some benchmarks from other comparable cities who switched. It seems like a very big change to ask voters to weigh in on without giving a run down of what exactly would change. Also hard for me to tell if it’s this form of government that “isn’t working” or the people involved, or the economy, or the current political climate, or some combination of all of that (and I’m not sure it isn’t working…vs. isn’t working as well as it could be).I might have slept too much in civics and poli sci courses over the years, but I honestly don’t know much about each of these (and Burien is the first place I’ve lived that didn’t have an elected mayor, so I have no personal experience).

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Shari says:

            and this quote comes to mind. first encountered it 20 years ago. a favorite.
            “There is certain relief in change, even though it be from bad to worse! As I have often found in traveling in a stagecoach, that it is often a comfort to shift one’s position, and be bruised in a new place.”–Washington Irving

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. John Poitras says:

    The council is supposed to defer to the wishes of the residents.. However the majority on this council often proceed with what they personally think best fits in with their personal agendas and ignore the wishes of the majority of the residents.. This has been a pattern for Rose Clark and the other members of the majority who pushed for the annexation of white center without formerly asking the residents via an advisory vote how they felt.. I guess it was obvious to them how the majority of the residents felt when Gordon Shaw (Mr Annexation himself) and one of Rose Clarks buddies on the council was blown away in the election last year despite all the effort time and money spent supporting him by Rose, Joan and Jerry. This was a crystal clear indication that the vast majority of the residents of Burien did NOT want annexation. So why hold an advisory vote when they knew the outcome would just show they were not acting in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the residents of Burien (or Area Y as it turns out either).

    If Rose was so concerned about spending taxpayer revenue then perhaps she should not be such a hypocrite and demand an accounting of how much money was wasted on the cities ill conceived attempt at annexation. However in this case the lack of transparency fits in with her agenda.. I guess that figures, since she was one of the funders of the pro-annexation PAC along with fellow pro-annexationists on the council Jerry and Joan and if it becomes known how much $$ was actually wasted on this it will make it more difficult for those in the majority up for election to get re-elected next November.

    Jacks proposal was for an ADVISORY vote by the residents who, I guess , like me is fed up with the lack of oversight and accountability the council should have been providing over the actions of the city manager instead of almost always deferring to him without question.. A kind of “buck stops nowhere” type of government that Rose Joan and Jerry seem quite content with.

    No DISCUSSION is required unless they are blind deaf and dumb. Let the residents VOTE on it, it is not legally binding and the council can still act as they please regardless of the result.. But since this is an election year it would be politically more difficult for them to get re-elected if they blatantly ignore that vote. Better for them to just not have one or table it for a discussion that never ends in a resolution.
    They should be well aware that many residents think that Mike Martin been mismanaging our city.. I don’t have time to list all the examples in the past and they have been blogged about here an number times but currently a blatant case in point is he is actually suggesting putting high density apartments in our Town Square ignoring the comprehensive plan which was to maintain open space, quality shopping or other retail development which will benefit the entire city not just the land developer.

    Instead this rubber stamp majority on the council to which Rose belongs continue to praise him for what a great job he is doing continue to renew his contract and increase his benefits.
    Rose seems to not want to address the fact that she violated protocol and ended a meeting by breaking the rules. Her excuses ring hollow in my ears.. Again she is apparently unable to comprehend that her job on the council is to represent the residents.
    Her personal likes, dislikes and sensitivities are for the large part irrelevant to a government that serves the people of Burien, not just those in her clique.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Fred says:

    As usual Rose Clark has recalled the history of Burien incorrectly. I believe that she was the Council person who claimed that the Growth Management Board made a ruling about Burien in a case that never even happened. Both she and Joan Mc. based their vote and decision on a case that never exisited according to the State of Washington. The city staff failed to correct their wrong assumptions during the Council meeting.

    Again she claims that the Council has always respected each other since 1993 and only allowed a vote with that in mind. Clearly she has forgotten the years 1998 and 1999 in the City of Burien, That was when a Council member slipped in a item to be voted on at 11pm that destroyed the new Comprehensive Plan that had just be adopted and forced it to be re-opened. That Councilperson was Steven Lamphier and the Highline Times ran a big story on it. The Council also put in place a so called emergency to be declared in the City of Burien that didn’t allow appeals by citizens to the Growth Manangement Board about the Council’s behavior. Again this should never have been allowed and the Growth Management Board didn’t recognize it. The behavior by the Council disregarded citizen input and at least 300 citizens showed up in protest repeated times about the Council’s dark of night action. It was at that point in time that Rose and Joan took their shows on the road to be on the Council promising to always listen to the citizens, if they were elected to office. They sat on people’s front porches making false promises that they would always respect citizen opinion.

    Flash forward to 2010, Joan Mc. goes to a meeting with mayors of cities in Washington and says that she and the city don’t care what the citizens of Burien want in their city art work, they get what she, the Council and the staff decide to give them. Remember Michael who on this blog just a few weeks that he was resigning from the Burien Arts Commission because citizens on that board got no say in what was wanted for art work in the city. His example was the mural project where the city staff picked the artist and then falsely told the Highline Times that the artist had been selected by the Arts Commissioners.

    Flash forward to Nov. 2012, again Rose and Joan MC. refuse to let citizens have a voice in the kind of govt. Burien will have. The cost of changing the form of govt. is no more that 3 of those contracts for $25,000 that Rose and Joan Mc. allow Mike Martin to write with no oversight by the Council every month. Both of them know this and flat out pretend that they don’t know this. The budget is not the real concern with them.The subject of form of govt. has come up before and they are well aware of the approxiamte real costs. They have blocked it because they are power greedy and don’t want to lose their control. The difference in the current form of govt. and what many citizens want is that there are 3 sources that check and balance power with an elected mayor like in our federal govt. The city manager control form of govt. has only one body in control. There are no checks and balances to the Council’s power and this is what Rose. Joan Mc and Jerry love. A crumbie city manager who caters to their personal wills and wishes can be kept in power for years before the citizens can change the players and get him out. Mike Martin has openly said that he doesn’t care what the citizens say; he only cares to please the Council. That screws the citizens pretty darn good. And so much for Mayor Bennett who went to foreign lands to give democracy and voices to those peoples overseas but is willing to deny Burien citizens the right to decide on the form of govt. they want. 81% of the cities in the State of Washington have an elected mayor and have checks and balances in their city govt.

    Then there is Jerry R.who openly stated he can’t stand to heard citizen comments but then openly read one citizen’s comments from the podium stage last week because he wanted to get in good plugs for his buddy, Martin. Jerry clearly knows there are at least 3 ad hoc committees that some of the Councilmembers and citizens don’t know about. He serves on at least 2 of these committtes but then last week claimed there was only one ad hoc committee that he knew of. He wants no rules for these committees. So much for transparent govt. in Burien. It was like when Mike Martin’s office tired to keep citzens from knowing where the Visioning Committee was meeting because he didn’t want any citizens to show up to the meeting. This is the problem when you have only on branch of govt. in control of a city. There are no checks and balances to keep the players honest and responsive to the citizens and best interests of the City.

    I won’t go on in this blog about the many numerous meetings some Council members have been allow to miss and the work of the Council has been darn near brought to a stand still. Remember Gordon’s lengthy vacations for months on end and year after year. Joan Mc. claimed to have only missed this one meeting at this last meeting when in fact she missed from July 18. 2011 to Sept. 12, 2011. She was sick but if she was too sick to come to meetings, why was she well enough to go to the opening of the new parking garage on August 30,2011, cut the ribbon and have her picture taken with all of the big wigs from King County? Check out the Highline Times news article on the garage opening with Joan Mc and Julia and Dow’s picture and Joan Mc. holding the big heavy cutting scissors. Burien has not done any real work on improving or advancing the core part of the city since 2008. Shame on the Council but it is a good example of why Burien’s form of govt. needs a change.

    Pish posh to Rose’s weak excuses for why she terminated the Nov. 19, 2012 meeting. It was really about maintaining her personal power as a Council member. Those of us who have lived through the many boring, lengthy letters written over the many years and read at Council meetings by Rose understand her driving motives well.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • PanderBear Jack says:

      Good portions of what Fred said were repeated last night by Councilmember Krakowiak as her own at last nights council meeting. Either they’ve reached the same conclusion or they are the same person.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Marie R says:

    After reading all of these heart-felt comments, I’m getting the impression a large number of Burien citizens would like to vote out the entire council and start fresh!

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Hotrodgal says:

      Yes! Lets do vote out the entire council and start fresh!

      I think the current council/CM system could work if we had a more open, public minded group of council members. I am not sure how comfortable I am about turning over the reins to one single person in a mayor/council system.
      Given a council with less vested interests, pet projects in our community and more transparency, I think we can succeed with our current system.

      I DO AGREE that our residents should have the ability to vote on our form of government though having the council “study” it might not be the most telling story to the citizens. We have seen in the past how studies and results can be skewed when presented to the public by city officials.
      If anything, it should be studied by an outside entity however, payment for such a study and finding an unbiased reviewer is at the whim of our present city council. In a perfect world…

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. TcB says:

    Once again, 3 or 4 people have built a propaganda spin in a blog and convinced themselves that this represents the “will of the people” when in reality most residents aren’t following this little drama. But good luck on your new project. Really.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      TCB

      I see you are quite content with expressing your view of the will of the people. Are you saying that your comments have no spin? Lol
      Seems to me you saying that is was just a small group of lake people that were against annexation.. Kind of got that wrong I guess? Lol

      Its seems like you are saying that dysfunctional government is ok with you?
      Like the buck stops nowhere type we have now?
      You were one of the pro-annexation proponents.. I suppose you also are in favor of high density housing in town square too?
      I hope Debi does run she would make a great council member..

      Why don’t you run against her TCB then we will really find out what the “will of the people is” ?

      I don’t see you at any city council meetings or contributing anything to the blog except opposing just about anyone who speaks out against the current majority on the council.

      I am not trying to pick a fight with you TCB but it seems to me that the picture you are painting has your particular slant all over it.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • TcB says:

        John Let me give you the response in pieces so it helps you understand better.

        ” see you are quite content with expressing your view of the will of the people. Are you saying that your comments have no spin? Lol”

        – No, I express my view and I do not pretend to know the will of the people, unlike you. I don’t attempt to include “spin’ but I do have my own opinion, which you might confuse as “spin”.

        “Seems to me you saying that is was just a small group of lake people that were against annexation.. Kind of got that wrong I guess? Lol”

        – I don’t remember saying that it was just a small group of lake people against annexation, but I do believe that the majority inside Burien against annexation was from the west side.

        ‘Its seems like you are saying that dysfunctional government is ok with you?
        Like the buck stops nowhere type we have now?”

        – I don’t like dysfunctional government, I like good government. Dysfunctional government does things like, oh I don’t know, wait for majority members to be absent before undertaking major revisions.

        “You were one of the pro-annexation proponents.. I suppose you also are in favor of high density housing in town square too?”

        – I support Condo only development in Town Square, and if a condo development can’t be built now I support tearing out the asphalt and making a simple park.

        “I hope Debi does run she would make a great council member..’

        – I hope she runs too. But she won’t, and neither will you.

        “Why don’t you run against her TCB then we will really find out what the “will of the people is?”

        – Because I don’t want to run, but neither do I keep saying I know what the “will of the people is” like you do.

        ” don’t see you at any city council meetings or contributing anything to the blog except opposing just about anyone who speaks out against the current majority on the council.’

        – Because I don’t want you to know who I am because I believe you are a physically dangerous individual.

        ‘I am not trying to pick a fight with you TCB but it seems to me that the picture you are painting has your particular slant all over it.”

        – After insulting, denigrating, and putting words in my mouth, you have the audacity to tell me you’re not trying to pick a fight. I see.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Debi Wagner says:

          TcB: The accusation about John Poitras being a physically dangerous individual is an outright lie. Whether you believe it or not it is slanderous and any chance you are leaving this impression in the minds of citizens needs to be immediately corrected and rectified. You are using this completely false and egregious accusation as an excuse to justify your own cowardly anonymity. Why don’t you come clean and admit the real reason is you don’t want people to know you are a Burien politician and are afraid if people knew where the sniping was coming from you would never hold another office.

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • PanderBear Jack says:

            Debi, why do you attack and try to discredit those using aliases when they don’t agree with your anti-city rhetoric yet never say a word to those using alias when they match with your anti-city lies?

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • TcB says:

            Lol! Paranoia will destroy ya! I am not a Burien politician, but thanks for the humor. I love how I said I thought he was dangerous, me, myself thought this. You then freaked out and labeled me a liar, false, egregious, cowardly, and I don’t know what else. Lady, you need help.

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • TcB says:

            Look at that, I screwed up the lyrics, it’s actually “Paranoia, the Destroyer”. For this of offence I am truly sorry. Maxima Mea Culpa.

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • John Poitras says:

          I will respond to your slanders with reason rather than the lunacy which seems to be your modus operandi..

          Again if you are so interested in the government of our city then show up at a council meeting and prove it.

          TcB says:
          December 4, 2012 at 6:47 am

          John Let me give you the response in pieces so it helps you understand better.

          ” see you are quite content with expressing your view of the will of the people. Are you saying that your comments have no spin? Lol”

          – No, I express my view and I do not pretend to know the will of the people, unlike you. I don’t attempt to include “spin’ but I do have my own opinion, which you might confuse as “spin”.

          >>>Your VIEW in your apparent lack of self awareness IS your SPIN.. SPIN it anyway you like thats the Reality! The only one confused here is apparently you.

          “Seems to me you saying that is was just a small group of lake people that were against annexation.. Kind of got that wrong I guess? Lol”

          – I don’t remember saying that it was just a small group of lake people against annexation, but I do believe that the majority inside Burien against annexation was from the west side.

          >>>I see it much differently because it was the 2/3 majority inside area Y that agreed with the vast majority of Burien residents who were against annexation proven out by the lack of support that sitting powerful council member who epitomized pro-annexation was blown away in the election of 2011 by Bob Edgar who was firmly against annexation.

          ‘Its seems like you are saying that dysfunctional government is ok with you?
          Like the buck stops nowhere type we have now?”

          – I don’t like dysfunctional government, I like good government. Dysfunctional government does things like, oh I don’t know, wait for majority members to be absent before undertaking major revisions.

          >>>You are SPINNING it again Tcb and taking liberty with reality. The motion was to allow an ADVISORY VOTE by the PEOPLE to see whether they wanted to change to a mayoral style of government or not.. You are confused. There was NO MAJOR REVISION under consideration by the council, it was just about allowing the people to express their will.

          “You were one of the pro-annexation proponents.. I suppose you also are in favor of high density housing in town square too?”

          – I support Condo only development in Town Square, and if a condo development can’t be built now I support tearing out the asphalt and making a simple park.

          >>>I am against building ANY more housing in the town square property.. A town square in my mind does not mean either Condos OR Apartments.. Apparently you are non aware of the vision of the comprehensive plan which spells this out. You need to do more research if you want your spin to have any relevance.

          “I hope Debi does run she would make a great council member..’

          – I hope she runs too. But she won’t, and neither will you.

          >>>So now you are speaking for me and for Debi.. There is a name for that and it has to do with that arrogant imaginary picture you have of yourself.

          “Why don’t you run against her TCB then we will really find out what the “will of the people is?”

          – Because I don’t want to run, but neither do I keep saying I know what the “will of the people is” like you do.

          >>>Oh but you do Tcb you do.. You see there is something happening here Tcb but you don’t know what it is.

          ” don’t see you at any city council meetings or contributing anything to the blog except opposing just about anyone who speaks out against the current majority on the council.’

          – Because I don’t want you to know who I am because I believe you are a physically dangerous individual.

          >>>I think its more likely that someone that hides his identity and snipes from the shadows is more likely to be hiding not only his identity but perhaps a delusional mental illness. That person is much more likely to be not only be a danger to others but a danger to himself.. Its called projection Tcb and you fit the profile.

          ‘I am not trying to pick a fight with you TCB but it seems to me that the picture you are painting has your particular slant all over it.”

          – After insulting, denigrating, and putting words in my mouth, you have the audacity to tell me you’re not trying to pick a fight. I see.

          >>>>Right back at you Tcb..

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • TcB says:

            Apart from all the other stuff you said, which I kind of gleaned over, I saw something and I thought “wait, you’re against ANY development of the town square property?”
            You’re crazier than I thought.

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ATKMH says:

          Good one TcB.

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Eaton B. Verz says:

            Careful TcB!! Remember your computer calls ATKMH a threat!! Probably John Poitras!!

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Debi Wagner says:

    3 or 4 people? Really TcB? This blog did a poll and the results were 74% in favor of an elected mayor as opposed to what we now have. Hundreds of people voted. Sounds similar to the results of the annexation vote. A propoganda spin? The will of the people is in the democratic process, like it or not, people get to vote. Deputy Mayor Clark has managed to unilaterally decide for all of us that we will not get to vote. I also take this opportunity once again to remind JJ and TcB that you are on the wrong side. There are council members who work together, and are trying to represent the people. They are not in your clique and you and Joey and Jim and Gordon and Greg just can’t stand it can you?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • TcB says:

      I don’t know those people you mentioned, so they aren’t in my clique. This isn’t high school and you’re not vying to be the prom queen girl. This is about a serious change, and I don’t appreciate slimy moves when government is not in full strength. One thing is for sure, one of us will be proved wrong at the ballot I don’t know which one because I don’t speak ” for the people” like you do. Why don’t YOU run?. And that’s all I’m going to say about that

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Ivan Weiss says:

      Hey, Debi, the elections are in November, not every time you get your knickers in a twist.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • elizabeth2 says:

        Mr. Weiss – you leave me the impression of a rude and loud mouthed person when you post here.

        What I do not get on this particular entry of yours is why you think that comment is appropriate. Debi has a right to state the facts as she sees them.

        You do not even live anywhere near Burien so what the heck are you doing trolling this site, anyway. I would like to suggest that perhaps you should keep your unkind and inappropriate opinions to yourself or share them with your neighbors where you DO live and leave Burien alone!

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Ivan Weiss says:

          I will comment here as I see fit. It’s not my concern if that makes you uncomfortable. My comments are no less “appropriate” — whatever that means and whoever is to decide — than anyone else’s here are. I’m not calling anybody “Joey Moretaxes” or anything like that, am I now?

          She’s telling us that a self-selecting poll on a blog represents the will of the people, and that the City Council should act on it immediately? That’s what you’re defending? That is about as ignorant as it gets, and it needs the light of ridicule shined on it. I’m happy to oblige.

          Many people who read this blog are aware that I served for four years as chairman of the 34th District Democrats, and that it was my responsibility to know Burien politics. The entire City Council knows who I am, and whether they agree with my positions or not, they understand — and appreciate on that level — that I was the first chairman of the 34th who paid any attention to Burien at all.

          So ‘m not going anywhere any time soon. Try to have a nice day anyway.

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. By Stander says:

    In reading all the different comments above I have noticed one thing that has me confused.. Why is it that all the anti government people as it stands now think that they represent the will of most of the people of Burien. There are many problems and policies that must be addressed in changing your city government. And I am sure that MS Clark would be one of the first to say that after all the issues and problems of the change have been addressed that the people should have the final say. All you arm chair experts just mouth off and do not seem to care about trying to build a better city if you can. You just assume that your way is right and that”s the end of it. Well think about it if the city government were to change to an elected mayor are you sure your choice would win. After all just because changes are being made does not insure that your choice would win. There are a large number of people in Burien that have noted that your council has done a pretty good job in running your city for the past few years.Unfortunately research noted that a great deal of these voters did not vote in the last election. Therefore if there is more people voting are you sure that your person would win. If not then what are you going to bitch about?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      By Stander:

      Your spin of calling the process of democracy anti-government is puzzling.
      Do you live in Burien? Yes or No will suffice.
      Rose Clark by the way has never said let the people have the final say in fact she is a rubber stamp for her cronies on the council that are determined to not let the people have their views known. This has been shown time and time again over the years.
      The issue under discussion is another example of that.. Jack wants transparency and to know the will of the voters.. Rose does not as evidenced by her strong opposition to his attempt to allow the voters to weigh in . She went as far as violating protocol and leaving the meeting in a huff without adjourning it.
      The subject of who would win election as mayor has never been brought up as far as I know except by you and frankly the question is irrelevant. Let the voters decide.. Thats the point.. The fact that Rose and her cronies would rather make that decision themselves without the input of the residents is quite clear to any reasonable on looker or by stander.
      oh and btw anyone that pays any attention to the goings on of our city council can only come to the conclusion we have dysfunctional government.. The last meeting of December 3rd was a perfect example .. This bizarre scenario was much more akin to a gathering of lunatics at a mental asylum rather than a serious city government proceeding.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. John Poitras says:

    Putting words in my mouth again Tcb? Do you have a problem with comprehension Tcb? Apparently, because nowhere did I say I was against ANY development of the town square property.. I am just against any housing development.. It should be something that will draw people to the area like a mine kent commons.. a movie theater a museum.. a myraid of things … even a park.. just not more housing.

    Again ready the comprehensive plan and the vision for town square instead of reacting with off the cuff remarks that have little relationship to reality.

    Oh and calling me crazy is another example of that thing I told you about that you do.. Its called projection.. Call your mental health professional and ask them to explain it too you.. in fact maybe they can help you with it.

    TcB says:
    December 4, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Apart from all the other stuff you said, which I kind of gleaned over, I saw something and I thought “wait, you’re against ANY development of the town square property?”
    You’re crazier than I thought.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • TcB says:

      John, lets just agree that we will never agree on anything. I think you’re a bully. You think I’m crazy, a bully, and that I spit on your new red pumps ( but when
      I step back and look, they DO look fabulous!) so maybe I avoid you and you try really really hard to avoid me. Try. Ooh I knew you couldn’t….

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. John Poitras says:

    Typo correction.. Like a mini-kent commons..

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. TcB says:

    In case anyone is wondering, we already have part of a mini kent commons in our Burien community center, part of the old Library, and part that is yet to be built, where Burien little theatre is now. The condo/commercial development should go ahead as envisioned rather than apt/no commercial.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      I think we need a town center with total public access.. Private property in town square is not what the comprehensive plan envisioned and I don’t think we should sell off any part of our time square to private interests which will obviously limit the public access that one would normally expect from anything in the town square location.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. By Stander says:

    1st of all John you confuse your thinking because you feel that you speak for all the people of Burien. Most of you selfish people do!nt but think you do. . 2nd if the council is supposed to bend to the people who are the people. You hand full of Sunday quarter backs and bitcher’s? With your thinking the council would have to hold a city wide vote every time they do something that you don’t like or feel that you can do better. With that type of government you would never get anything done. But then that is what you are after, to sit still and go no place or improve anything. As to were I live. I don’t live in Burien nor in North Highline but do take an interest in Buriens government as it effects all their neighbors also. But with your selfish tunnel vision you don’t see anything but your wishes. That’s too bad because that sort of stuff is what kills communities and Nations. But if you get your way with everything then it will not be a problem as Burien will not survive or will become a second class town. Your council has been and is doing a great job in moving Burien forward and making it a great little town. But because you don’t want that it is wrong. Good Luck you will need it.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • TcB says:

      It’s because “some people” have Representative Democracy confused with Direct Democracy. In this country we have Representative Democracy with limited direct democracy, but not full on, Direct Democracy all the time. Can you imagine trying to get people to vote on everything all the time?

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      By Stander you don’t live here and obviously don’t vote in our city elections. .You can have all the interest you like but don’t pretend to know what is going on in Burien or with the performance of our city government.. You are very misinformed and out of touch with what is happening here. I live here and I do know very well what is happening. I suggest you mind your own garden first before messing with other peoples… Go to your own city council meetings and write to the blogs or papers where you live.
      Yes we will have a great little town once we enact some changes in our city government and the goal of stopping unnecessary unaffordable expansion via annexation has been achieved.
      You accuse me of tunnel vision.. but its better than being blind to reality which is what you obviously are. Why you want to butt into our business here is beyond me but don’t expect to get away with your myopic view of reality and try and pontificate it here as if you are in the know.> I have news for you .. You’re not!
      Oh and don’t worry about wishing me good luck because, frankly, I don’t need to be patronized.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0