Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Another Fine Mess On Orcas

Imagine you are a couple living on Orcas. You file a complaint against a commercial property owner who you feel is in violation of the County Code. You sign forms promising your confidentiality.

Let's leave aside the merits of the complaint against the commercial property owner for the moment because that is quite a yarn unto its own. We hope to tell that story from the standpoint of the commercial property developer at some time in the not-too-distant future too.

Back to the couple who complained (and by the way, they were not the only complainants) ... shortly after filing their complaint, the couple themselves come under suspicion for code violations about their home. Armed with a Polaris photo and suspicions of potential violations suggested by the photo, a "third party" notifies CDPD of alleged violations on the couple's property. No one files a formal complaint but an "activity report" is completed by CDPD based on a conversation with the "third party." With this activity report as justification, a CDPD staffer (not a Code Enforcement Officer) begins an investigation of the couple, including a drive-by look-see of the couple's property from a public right-of-way. No buildings can be seen from the public-right-of-way, but nevertheless, the "case" is turned over to a Code Enforcement Officer.

Four days before Christmas in 2011, the couple is traveling for the holidays. Unbeknownst to them, they receive a notice at their home stating that CDPD suspects that they might have an illegal building on their property. They are given 14 days to respond, and it just so happens that the couple returns from their travels on the 14th day. They find that their front gate has been tagged with a notice of violation and a "Stop Work" order.

After a discussion with the Enforcement Officer, the couple is quickly shifted to dealing with Deputy Prosecutor Amy Vera. Also, the alleged code violation shape-shifts a bit too ... from having to do with an illegal building to having to do with something about a trailer as well.

While this is happening, the commercial property developer submits a public records request to the County for all public records related to his situation, including the names of complainants. The County notifies the couple that their names will be revealed to fulfill the public records request. The couple objects via their attorney, stating that they were assured of anonymity and have signed confidentiality agreements to that effect, but the County releases their names anyway.

Needless to say, by this point the couple is feeling rather picked on by the County and by CDPD especially. They ask their local Councilman for help, and complain about two CDPD staff in particular.  The Councilman relays the couple's concerns to Administrator Pete Rose.

Shortly after this, and despite having an attorney willing to accept service of court papers, the couple is served with notice at their home that the County intends to sue them for code violations. The couple's lawyer responds to the lawsuit notice and offers to CDPD that they come to the property to view the building/trailer in question in the hope of pursuing a resolution to the matter. Six months go by ... the County doesn't respond.

While giving the couple the silent treatment, the County (for some reason) decides to pursue a criminal case against the couple.  On October 16, 2012, the Sheriff and the CDPD Enforcement Officer appear before Judge Andrews to say that they have probable cause to search the couple's private property for evidence of  crimes. They get a warrant to enter the couple's property, and they proceed directly to the property with the intent to search it. When the County arrives at the property, they find a locked gate and no one home. So, the Sheriff calls the wife at her place of business and tells her to come to unlock the gate immediately, otherwise the Sheriff will cut the lock on the gate to gain entry to the property. The couple (together) rush home to find a County vehicle, a Sheriff's vehicle, two deputies, the CDPD Enforcement Officer, and the Deputy Building Inspector all waiting to enter their property. Of particular note to the couple is that the two CDPD employees present were the same employees that the couple had recently complained about to their Councilman.

A month later (November 2012), the couple are issued a summons to appear in District Court as they were being charged with four criminal misdemeanors  and threatened with possible fines of $5,000 plus and a year in jail.  And not once has the couple received a notice of correction, compliance plan, or even a phone call simply asking how the matter could be resolved more amicably.

And as far as we understand the situation, the entire matter involves an alleged owner-builder agricultural building of approximately 1,000 square feet and an associated trailer ... not visible from the road ... not hurting anyone ... a victimless "crime" if it is a crime at all.

If you want to find out more, or if you want to support this couple, then please attend their hearing on March 20 (Wednesday) at 1:45 pm at the Courthouse in Friday Harbor.

Is this really how we want our County to treat us ... or our neighbors? Do we really want to create laws (like the CAOs) that encourage this sort of thing? Also, think about this case when you read the proposed new enforcement ordinance.

66 comments:

  1. When sheds are outlawed, only outlaws will have sheds.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is a concept called the "regulated community." Note, I didn't just say the "regulator community." That is a different community, that would be the Machine's community serving for the greater good.

    No. The rest of us are the "regulated community." This is a formal term of art, with significant literature and practice.

    The idea is a simple one, and very, very old, just brought up to date.

    Let's say you have a law or set of rules, intentionally designed as ambiguous requiring ad-hoc interpretation to be applied. This immediately violates basic jurisprudence. In order to be a civil society of laws, laws must be clear otherwise they are unjust. Keep that in mind when learning more about the CAO, the code enforcement rules and what we are now beginning to see with "boots on the ground."

    Now, let's say your government just doesn't have the resources to enforce an arbitrary law uniformly. You want your "regulated community" to take you seriously, to worry that someday it might be them. Especially if they see their neighbor "taken away."

    Thus begins the program of seeking out "high profile" cases that will help to shape the behavior of the class of individuals who are defined as the "regulated community."

    This isn't rocket science folks. It is what the legal scholars and civil rights organizations always refer to as the "slippery slope." It seems sensible, innocuous, doesn't apply to you, if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.

    But when you combine local police power and bureaucracies with vague, poorly written laws to be applied with wide latitude for interpretation, you have a recipe for something quite dark.

    When you hear the Machine wax rhapsodic about community and the greater good, this is what they are talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow. The Machine is like Golum in the Rings ... grasping for power ...

    You can hear them ... "We wants it, we needs it. Must have the Precious!"

    The CAO is the Ring.

    ReplyDelete
  4. On the code enforcememt issue.

    Who writes this stuff? Someone in the Planning Department? What was wrong with the current version?
    Who said," Go re-write the enforcememt code. Give is more authority. Increase penalties. We must punish the people. We have massive code violations, and it must ne stopped."

    Who are these people. Name their names. It doesn't spontaneously appear in a Word document. A person with a name pushes the keys. Who are they?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Police officers with guns and criminal charges filed? For a land use violation? You have got to be kidding me.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rot at the top. That is all there is to it. Randy Gaylord is a joke. Sheriff Nou is a joke. There is not one adult among them who is able to say -- WTF? Are you serious. You want me to do WHAT? No, these people are little men who -- for the lack of a better term, are the machine's bitchez.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To be clear...the third party is the commercial developer who the couple had previously complained about.
    The disclosure of the couples identity took place three times during the investigation of the complaints.
    First disclosure was by the code enforcement officer,second by the director of CD&P and the third by the Prosecutors office.
    The same CD&P employees who had egg on their face resulting from the commercial development complaints have engaged, with the help of the prosecutors office in a retalitory manner towards this couple.
    Sending a message to you all..don't point out their questionable behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As the Mafia say: "Fish rot begins at the head."

    So a key question to all the candidates has to be: "How will treat our neighbors?"

    What we see here is an un-stated, secretive policy priority in action:

    Our resources are limited. Shall we press the full force of local police power on meth labs or on haplass citizens with storage sheds?

    Lovel you have betrayed your community. A special place in Hell is reserved for "Your Kind of People." Traitor.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Surely the couple misunderstood about confidentiality promises. A public record request contains the word PUBLIC for a reason. Many parties exposed on the TH perhaps thought otherwise as well.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reprinted from San Juan Islander

    The trouble with Anonymous by Rick Steinhardt


    To the editor,

    We have experience with anonymous blogs in these islands. To some they seem harmless enough. However gossip is like a virus, it goes from the source from person to person. Distortions can occur with repetition and these distortions naturally increase with distance from the source. Soon the original comment which may have been tongue in cheek turns into new "facts" which can be quite harmful.
    When one makes an anonymous commentary one is disclaiming any responsibility for the consequences, which is both cowardly and irresponsible. This is specially true in our society where it is easy for unstable personalities to obtain guns.

    Responsible editors do not print anonymous letters for very good reasons. If you know of someone putting out an anonymous blog, let them know they are being both cowardly and irresponsible.
    Together we can restore civil discourse and make real progress dealing with the important issues that face the San Juan Islands.

    Sincerely,

    Rick Steinhardt
    Deer Harbor

    ReplyDelete
  11. Someone in Deer Harbor is unclear on the concept of civil society and authentic civil discourse.

    Time for Sound Publishing to do their solemn moral duty and start reporting the news.

    We have experience in the islands of special interest groups working anonymously with government officials. We have experience with media failing to serve as the 4th Estate.

    If you know even one gossip monger in San Juan County ... the notion is shocking ... you must turn them in. Every single accountant, attorney, loan officer and therapist. Heaven's to Betsy. There is no real way to know. We must take precautions!

    Remember only the Friends can spread unverified false information in San Juan County.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't dare not agree, Mr. Stienhardt, because, you see, I have a new shed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oops , meant to say that I dare not agree, not that I "don't" dare not agree. Sorry about that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Records of the county pertaining to code enforcement complaints are public records except that the following records are exempt pursuant to..

    RCW 42.56.240 (2). Request for confidentiality..
    Information revealing the identity of persons who are witnesses to or victims of crime or who file complaints with investigation, law enforcement or penology agencies, other than the commission. If disclosure would endanger any persons life,physical safety,or property. If at the time a complaint is filed the complainant , victim, or witness indicates a desire for disclosure or nondisclosure, such desire SHALL govern.

    This appears on the request for code enforcement form.
    If you sign it and formally request nondisclosure the above RCW is in force.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Far be it that the code enforcement officer, the director of the CD&P, or the Prosecutors office follow RCW....

    ReplyDelete
  16. It says...

    "If disclosure would endanger any persons life,physical safety,or property."

    And I have a feeling that the only
    "danger" to the property would come via the very vehicle they are snitching to. So..I think in this situation there was no reason to avoid disclosing.

    ReplyDelete
  17. So it's OK to anonymously complain about a man's livelihood, but not about his residence. Glad we got that line established.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Where can I find the proposed new code enforcement document(s)?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Errol Speed's crime is tax fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ 10:21 a.m. -- If you have evidence to support your claims about someone's misdoing, please provide it. Didn't Mr. Steinhardt's exhortations mean anything to you? But seriously, no one here is talking about taxes--they are talking about facts supported by documents. Public ones. So if you have allegations, please provide them.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The County makes a very clear representation on its complaint forms (which most people MUST fill out, unless you get the ear of the County staffer and he files it for you) that you can request confidentiality. If you choose to proceed confidentially and the respondent demands the information, you have to agree to be identified or the complaint will be dropped. A choice. Confidentiality was promised here. It was violated three separate times, the last time possibly due to change in law, but the first two times seemingly out of spite.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Accidental, maliciousness or incompetence-it's the County at fault here.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @9:57 a.m. County enforcement pending revisions See http://www.sanjuanco.com/cdp/default.aspx?dept=CDP&listname=PlanningCommAgendas

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fascinating how our county regulations and policies have neighbors at each others' throats now.

    Who wins by that?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Seems we must all check in with our neighbors on just about anything we wish to do in order to avoid jail time.

    And this fellow Steinhardt worries about why people wish to remain anonymous??? Hey man, most of us I think, just want to be left alone and much of the venting going on in the TH is a God send for this County as frustration levels were at the boiling point.

    7:31 & 8:05 are spot on. Police power run a muck on a shed violation instead of busting meth labs?

    Is County government really this completely nuts?

    I'm sure the TH will provide more info, but why also do seemingly minor infractions get pushed up to the prosecutor's office?

    ReplyDelete
  27. In any and all Enforcement Actions
    A balancing test, or several must be undertaken to determine if the enforcement action is worthy of enforcement. An action that undertakes to undermine a family from there home (legally permitted or not) on their private property at no invasion of any others concern is not an appropriate action. And legally appropriate inaction is.

    ReplyDelete
  28. It's simple; Orcas Islanders are miffed at the San Juan Island Islanders for their "radical" first place standing in the incivility race.

    The only cure for incivility is more incivility. Come on Orcas! You can do it for the common good.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Your comments make these people look like innocent children caught with their fingers in the cookie jar. Reality is they built an ag building with a permit then made it into a house. The chain across the road (and ugly signs) were an attempt to keep the county off their property so their home wouldn't get busted or taxed. Worked for 6 years.
    This is merely the tip of the iceberg, as these people are some of the worst neighbors anyone could have. Just ask THEIR neighbors and many another islander.They love to fight.
    As to the battle with the commercial business: when the facts come out, you'll find that these same people started a legal battle involving every known county and state agency they could energize
    in an attempt to stop competition for their business; which sells very expensive garden tools imported from Vietnam and other known quality tool making countries.
    They're concern was a less expensive, better made hand tool from a family business in Idaho.
    These wonderful neighbors enlisted several other businesses and a lawyer in an attempt to stop the competition. End result: thrown out of court for lack of merit. Still in appeal last I heard.
    There has been alot of rumor and nasty talk about the battle you've referenced. I'd like you to review the transcripts of the various hearings and court docs. I think such a review will show malfeasance on the part of our county officials (big suprise!!). All the evidence you need is in the public arena.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Whether these people are guilty of harassment of others is another concern and does not make an appropriate cause to victimize them "in their home" good neighbors or not. Revenge is not an appropriate cause. Even when enacted on those who victimize us.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Is the TH able to come up with a copy of the search warrant?

    ReplyDelete
  32. @2:48... I am a neighbor and they are great neighbors.
    You reference a time when a chain was across the road..hmmm... that is a time when realators and a new distant neighbor were harrassing another neighbor who lived on our road to access his property. The realators and distant neighbor were trespassing on a private road. Not very neighborly.

    ReplyDelete
  33. no matter what you think of these people, the fact is it could be "you" in this situation especially with the upcoming CAO, the new areial mapping the county wants to do and the new enforcement policy.

    People will also have negative things to say about the commercial developer who knew what he could and could not do in his zoning, yet is crying victim.

    It truly goes back to the County /CD&P and their incompetence. The County/CD&P is at the center of all of it.

    ReplyDelete
  34. the commercial developer was victimized by the county as well as his commercial neighbors including these people. The County builds and supports the playing field that welcomes all of this nonsense. And listening to many responders here the game seems overly supported by many. tolerance is a virtue.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Does anyone think the County cannot afford to play these games anymore?

    I mean, think about the costs here! This minor scrap looks to have huge billable hours....staff people on boat & car trips, letters, map study, reading into the night... to the taxpaying public, which benefits not at all.

    We need an administration that quickly and efficiently resolves these situations. It should not and in many jurisdictions it almost never does rise to the level of everyone getting lawyer-ed up and a huge mess of he said she said.

    I would never vote for Lisa Byers, but maybe we could hire her to mitigate such situations. She would hand them her gibberish talk for an hour and eyes rolling with incomprehension they would all scream for settlement. Gets it done & cheap too.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You know, for me, I have a tendency to prioritize my concerns based on the perceived threat to my freedom and liberty. As much as I have been unhappy with recent councils and am concerned about the upcoming election, I am more concerned about the idea that it is ok for county staff to enter my neighbor's property with guns and police to investigate whether or not he has a building permit. Honestly, who gives a shit? Cops with guns? For a fucking building permit violation?

    I have heard 0utrage and righteous indignation here about Charles Dalton & Nick Jones situations. Charles Dalton's permit woes: has this ever been resolved/were criminal charges ever filed against Charles for his lying, cheating ways/were there fines or criminal proceedings? Nick Jones farm stand: he sold vegetables from an unpermitted building, surely he is in jail by now? What is different about these cases? Why does the county management see fit to get armed officers involved? How does permitting staff (a building inspector and the guy that enforces codes) suddenly get this kind of power over ordinary people in our island community?

    Talk about tearing apart the fabric of a community. Any perceived "incivility" associated with the current BS election pales in comparison to this pathetic abuse of power. Criminal proceedings for failing to get a building permit? Armed officers entering your private property to see if your shed is legal? Are your kidding me?

    Where is the outrage?

    ReplyDelete
  37. To 8:20
    Could you send that to the papers? That is so succinct!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Actually if 7:10 and 8:20 could get together to write to the papers I think their two points together are important and universal concerns that people will understand and respond to.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Let us hear about what we are allowed to do and stop making laws about what we are not allowed to do. Anyone who gets an idea and motived to create something here all they get from the county is no or we don't know. It is like the county is trying to dumb us down, and yet want more money for thier mindless none productivity. They can't move forward and prevent us from doing anything either, while they collect a paycheck.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I hope every candidate reads and thinks about 7:10 and 8:20 ENOUGH ALREADY!

    ReplyDelete
  41. A new advocate for islanders has appeared. Go to :

    WWW.Trustislanders.org

    Read their vision for a new County Council and support them if you agree.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sounds like our very own Travyon Martin. Sweet, innocent Trayvon. A victim's victim.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Wide of the mark with comparisons to Jones or Dalton. Try Vivien Burnet inserting herself in other people's business forgetting what's in her own backyard. I'd save the outrage until we find out more about the court case.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Here's another story on the court case/search:

    http://www.sanjuanislander.com/island-newshome/more/san-juan-county-prosecutor/5412-search-warrant-for-unpermitted-untaxed-residence-challenged-in-court-today

    ReplyDelete
  45. It's too bad that the TH chose this story to use an an example of anything meaningful.

    This story is less about the county, and more about bad ethics and bad behavior on the part of every party involved. The people who are player in this have built their own hell - both sides - and now they need to live with it.

    this supposedly innocent couple is just as guilty as the developer (who by the way, that is a strecth to call him). Yes, the county had a small role in this story, but at the root of this entire issue is 2 parties, both equally stupid and both asking for trouble.

    Sorry to say but if you ack like an ass - eventually you are gonna end up with shi*.

    ReplyDelete
  46. LIE #1 in the story

    "the couple was issued a summons as they were being charged"

    Court records indicate that a single individual has been charged, not the couple. I know the whole family line makes for a better story. As a previous poster mentioned, you are not entitled to your own facts.

    The list of lies will grow.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Everyone (okay, almost everyone) knows the couple (at least the man) in this case have pulled a lot of crap on a lot of people over the years. They are not heroes.

    They probably did build a home in a small building and are trying to get away with it. They may be guilty as sin. We will have to wait for the various decisions to come down.

    Nevertheless, take the least defensible person in our community, and ask yourself if you would like the County to treat them this way. Do we want to devote this much time and energy to what people do in the privacy of their own homes, even if it is un-permitted?

    Why does anyone care what they live in or how they live their life, as long as they are not bothering anyone else?

    ReplyDelete
  48. @11:16

    Can you provide a list of all the other laws we should ignore??

    So if you build a big enough fence, anything goes.??

    Hell, I'll support that.

    Can't wait. I have some nifty hobbies that I would like to explore. I

    ReplyDelete
  49. In reply to @11:16, yes, for me darn near anything goes. Why do we have a silly fence law? Who cares? Why do we have 99% of the planning laws that we have. Who cares?

    Brother, folks get so worked up over whether a sink or a bedroom is permitted. Who cares? When did planning come into existence anyway? We probably existed as a country for what -- 150 years -- without planning this and planning that.

    Planning is 99% (okay, I'll be conservative and say 90%) total bullshit. Most of it is control for control's sake with none of the hypothetical benefit to society. That's how it's sold to the public -- we need X and we need Y to make the community safe. B f'ing S.

    I am sick of planners. I am sick of stupid building requirements. I am sick of the people who think that planning and building requirements should be backed by uber-enforcement.

    Do what you want, and leave me alone in the process. Start a business. Nurture your family in a substandard home. Just get on with it and get CDPD, the PSP, and every other busy body out of here.

    ReplyDelete
  50. @11:19

    I'm guessing you were going to say that your hobbies included something like "building a lead smelter" or something. Of course, if you are Bob Gamble you try to regulate so that people "don't put a lead smelter in a buffer." I believe those are his words from a Planning Commission meeting.

    All these scare-tactic-based laws are just a bunch of baloney, especially because the people who run everything here get around them anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  51. @11:46

    Exactly right. If you can pass the SEPA requirements, the NPDES requirements, the air permitting, and the thousands of other laws already on the books, go ahead and build your lead smelter.

    The problem with the County's philosophy of planning is the mistaken belief that no other laws exist. We already have thousands of state and federal laws that apply to us even if there were nothing -- absolutely nothing-- in our county code.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Actually I was thinking of building a strip bar next to a school or day care.

    It's my damn land. I'll be damned if some Bullshit zoning ordinance is going to stop me. Hells bells people this is America. Land of the Free.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I think I'll build a 100' tall building right on my neighbor's property line - it's my land dammit! Too bad it ruins my neighbor's view of Mt. Constitution and is totally contrary to the County Code (ie the law). Wait - my neighbor is doing the same? What's the number for Code Enforcement? I want him in jail ASAP!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Cathy CommunitarianMarch 20, 2013 at 1:07 PM

    The COMMUNITY feels that any use of your land disturbs the COMMUNITY'S consensus of itself so the COMMUNITY feels you should be stopped from doing anything on your land.

    The COMMUNITY will be holding a design charette to decide what will happen on your land for COMMUNITY benefit. The COMMUNITY will would appreciate it if you just packed up and moved away, but before you go, can we please have all your money?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Looks like Planning & "Community Development" have succeeded in deflecting the blame (it is theirs) and getting folks to blame each other. Sure, the Craftsman Corner story is beyond disturbing. CDP failed in several different ways to do its job. They issued a permit. End of story. Then some people challenged the permit. It was too late. Law says permit was issued. Quibbling about use goes on. Small businessman is screwed. Small businessman goes to CDP with serial photo claiming building is home. He's never been to property; he isn't required to fill a complaint. CDP gets search warrant claiming they know what's going on; they don't. It goes on and on and you know what, it divides the community over and over again--why? Because CDP failed to do its job, got publicly humiliated (not that it matters--these people cannot be fired) and saw an opportunity for retaliation. Everybody happy now? What's the root cause of the division here? We have a history of nasty, vindictive individuals in power, and people are afraid even to tell their stories. I don't care if the couple you are talking about have an ag shed or a house shed; why not just tell them what they need for a permit, like you would for everybody else in the county. Then they can pay taxes. But no, the PA decides to prosecute them as criminals. Good work all round. Our taxpayer dollars at work. Seemed like the judge may have realized that something wasn't kosher here. We'll all find out.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Left out the most important part: no neighbor can see anything. Bogus claims about neighbors' rights being violated.

    ReplyDelete
  57. @10:36

    That is a damn fine summary of the situation. Well done and thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Poor Trayvon. Skittles and Iced tea.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Is it true Rene Beliveau,director of CD& P only has a green card? Isn't he the one given huge discretion and power to; interpret our codes and laws, and to enforce and pursue local citizens of our county?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Abuse of Process & Power

    Please pay particular attention to the elected county players in this scenario.

    Randy Gaylord the prosecuting attorney for our county knew that retalitory actions were afoot and still proceeded in concert with the CDP and the disgruntled citizen to bring criminal charges based on a building code issue, using aerial images and Assessor's records.

    Rob Nou, our newly elected county sheriff signed a declaration in support of an armed search warrant based solely on a declaration of Chris Laws, the enforcement officer of CDP, that only had as evidence google and Polaris aerial images (only a roof), Assessor's records and Mr Laws unsupported assumptions. Remember, this is civil issue, Bill Cummins, would never have allowed the Sheriff's department to engage in this type of activity that erodes the relationship between the Sheriff's department and the citizens of SJC . Is this where the extra tax revenue is being spent?

    And finally, Judge Andrews. The signing of this search warrant that contained huge omissions, few if any facts, and the refusal to remove himself from hearing the motion to dismiss or suppress, that would be evaluating his own actions in this case bring his neutrality and ethics as a judge into focus. Andrews was willing to go along with the mob rather than drill down deeper before an illegal search occurred with his consent.

    The question is do these three individuals represent we the people of San Juan County, and the community's welfare and well being ?

    Next time they are up for election I would request that you contemplate their present actions, and communicate that actions have consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  61. We can't let disgruntled citizens become the excuse for allowing government to become a weapon to destroy island businesses and island lives.

    What happened to Craftsman's Corner should not have happened (and shouldn't still be happening). What happened to the Speeds shouldn't have happened (at least not the WAY it happened).

    The Speeds and others should not have complained against Pearson, but that does not excuse what happened to the Speeds.

    I wish that both the Speeds and Pearson, along with their supporters and detractors, would focus on the way the government behaved in both situations, because their behavior was inexcusable.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The even bigger issue is the use of Polaris against its own citizens.
    Pay attention, Stan Matthews just presented to council to update the aerial photos at a pricetag of @ 140,000 which is not in the budget or a priority item for this council.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Its bad now and it will only get worse. The Citizens need to be at those planning commission hearings to beg the commission to do their part to protect the people from this misrepresentation. Administration of a building code was never intended, to puts people out of their homes, "to make them safer".

    ReplyDelete
  64. Where is our county council? "Right NOW"
    to admonish these actions
    Where are the Candidates? "Right NOW"
    to admonish these actions

    ReplyDelete
  65. @8:54
    Who has been put out of their home??

    I thought this was a shed??

    ReplyDelete
  66. Is that an attempt to make lite of this? Does any home no matter how primitive deserve less protection than yours?
    I don't think so, not in the real world

    ReplyDelete