Tired of coworkers who lack integrity

I am proud to be a union member and proud to be an electrician by trade.  But when I am hired by an employer to do a job, I believe it is my duty to perform that job to the best of my ability.  It makes me sick to see anyone milking the system or doing “just enough to get by”.  That puts more pressure on the rest of us.

I am currently working on a very high pressure / many hours of overtime project at Seatac Airport.  We are working 7 days a week and each week I have worked over 60 hours.  The crew I am on has some very good wiremen and a few that well let me say are in it only for the money.  In fact, when one of them made a statement that he was there on overtime and that no one was there to direct him what to do.  I told him that he should just go home, but he would rather just sit around and collect the money.  The day prior, three of my coworkers were caught sitting around (on Double Time) for over 3 hours.  The one fact that they did not count on is that at the airport it is almost certain that someone will have it on video camera.  Sure enough TSA did.

I am all for making money and this is a job to make lots of money on.  Because of the time crunch they manned this job up (27 workers) and we have been working 7 days a week.  But if an employer cannot count on you having the integrity to at least give them an honest day’s work then I have little use for you.  There are plenty of good wiremen still in the hall that would jump at the opportunity to work the job that some people just want to milk.

My message for those workers who I am talking about is this.  I have no use for you or for your lack of integrity.  You give our union a bad name by your actions and you increase the workload on your brothers and sisters.  If that is the best you can do it is time you quit and found another line of work.  I do not want you on my job site, I do not want you in my union.

Putting public interest and trust first.

Over this past month, to examples that stress the importance of doing things right have come up.  Unfortunately in both examples, controversy has erupted because of the city’s insistence on others following the law and in one case their own procedures.

The first issue involves the Pacific Algona Community Services Non Profit Board.  This board was created in 2006 to work with both cities to improve services provide to both our seniors and our youth.  They formed under the laws of the State of Washington and the IRS as a 501 C3 nonprofit and created bylaws to govern their actions.  Over this past year certain issues have been brought to the attention of the city that created concern.  Among these issues were gifting $500 to a City of Pacific Employee (This gift was reported to have been returned after this was brought up), use of funds raised for programs to pay for the education of a board member’s family to write grants (at a cost above what it would cost otherwise) , not  conducting annual audits, not keeping records up to date (both issues required by their own bylaws) and then the two most recent issues, the President of the Board submitting a Change of Address to the Post Office (in violation of the bylaws) and moving the location of a meeting to prevent certain members of the community from attending (a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act).

The City of Pacific has no interest in micromanaging this organization nor interfering with its operations.  We do have the need however that it follow the laws and procedures it is legally required to follow.  When it is out of compliance with those laws we must take appropriate action.  Personally It is my hope that the board sees the issues that have caused concern and make the appropriate corrections.  If it does not then as Mayor it is my duty to protect the interest of the City and the integrity of the community services programs and sever our ties.

The second issue involves a local business, enforcement action by the city and actions of a few council members.  The City of Pacific has current enforcement action against a local business that is conducting certain activities that are outside of its current permitted use. (The reason I say current permitted use is because a conditional use permit is currently being processed by the City).  This business was warned a number of times against this activity, was cited by the city and found guilty of violations in a court of law.  This business still conducts some of this activity on a regular basis in continued violation.  The City has documented many of these instances and will forward them to the Court for determination. But this is not where my concerns were really raised.

Last weekend, the owner of this business met with or attempted to contact individual members of the City Council.  Some of those members of the City Council then attempted to make changes to an ordinance concerning land use that would benefit this owner. These changes would have changed allowed use in zoning and constitute a land use action.  Although these attempts failed, they may be a violation of the “Appearance of Fairness Doctrine” and constitute Ex Parte Communications, both violations of the law.

The city has no wish to harass any business or group.  We wish all of our businesses well and desire to see them be successful.  However, we must follow the laws and guidelines that govern our society.  To not follow that spirit is a violation of the trust to our citizens.  People can complain all they want, I will always put the public trust first.

neighborhood BBQ's

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of attending an impromptu neighborhood barbeque at Beaver Meadows.  One of the residents went door to door yesterday, invited the neighbors for a get to know each other event and then invited me to attend as well. Beaver Meadows is a sub division that is still under construction and contains Pacific’s newest residents.  I appreciated the invite (and the Brats) and enjoyed meeting these new citizens to our city.

One thing on the invite though that I need to comment on.  Mike, the resident who invited me included the following in his e-mail, “This was planned just as an opportunity for all of us to meet each other. No agenda, no ambush for you, but thought you might like the chance to press the flesh a little.”  I appreciated his candor, but I believe that any elected official who is afraid of meeting with his (or her) citizens probably should not be in office.  Although I will admit things do not always go the way I would like them to be, I have no problem standing behind decisions I have made or actions I have taken.

I would love to see more citizens have these little informal gatherings.  It is a great way to meet your neighbors and find issues that you might all have in common.  Inviting elected officials to them is also a great idea as it provides a bit more of a one on one opportunity for neighbors to voice concerns and for electeds to see firsthand the issues that citizens need addressed.

Why Adam Smith has earned my support

It is easy to sit in an office or sit back in Washington DC and tell people what they want to hear. But it is another thing to look a person in the eye, tell them that you understand their issue and that you will do everything you can to meet there concerns.  Adam Smith did that following the flood of 1001 homes and 15 businesses in the City of Pacific in January 2009.

Adam came to Pacific in person and walked the flooded area talking to its victims.  He dedicated staff members to work with the city and these victims to help them through the FEMA process and other needs.  But it did not stop there. 

Understanding that it will take years for mitigation projects to be finished he worked with the Corps of Engineers and others to secure temporary flood protection by means of a HESCO wall from our City Park to the County Line. He heard the fears of families and children that this flooding might happen again before more permanent fixes could be made.

So why do I support Adam Smith for reelection to Congress, because when it mattered most, Adam came to my city, listened to our citizens fears and needs and then found a way to get the job done.

A very tough budget year.

This is by far the most difficult budget I have had to produce yet.  Even with expenses cut down to bare bones, we still have additional cuts to make for the 2011 budget. This year’s revenue forecast is almost $400,000 less than 2010.  To balance the budget it will take a combination of reductions in hours for some staff members, furlough days and still a strong possibility of layoffs.  The problem is that these cuts will also impact efficiency.

Since taking office I have stressed conservative spending and sound financial practices in our city.  I understand in times like these, no one has the ability to absorb more taxation.  I have long believed the best way to increase revenues generated in our city is to attract new businesses and to help our existing businesses do better. These principles helped us pay of millions of dollars in debt and to build a reserve fund that has sustained us these past two years.  But those reserves are now to low to be of help.

I see positive signs our economy is turning around.  New businesses are looking to locate here; other businesses are tooling up preparing for new opportunities. Being in construction myself, I have seen many of these changes occurring over this past month as construction companies are again hiring and new permits are being issued.  I have little doubt that if we make it through this budget cycle we will see improvement over this next year.

Last July, many of Pacific’s residents participated in an online survey that helped the City insure our priorities were consistent with yours.  As much as possible we will use those priorities, while keeping an eye on what our city will need as we recover from this recession.  If we make a cut today that saves us a dollar, yet cost us $5 next year then we continue to slide backwards instead of progressing. 

I will be submitting my recommendations and my proposed budget on Monday October 18^th at the Pacific City Council meeting. It will not be pretty.  It will be painful. But it will represent what I see as the best options for the city to emerge stronger as our economy recovers.