December 31st is the deadline for removal of all streateries remaining in Port Townsend.
As year-end approaches for the expiration of the streatery temporary use permits — which despite public outcry, the City Council extended yet again last May — five rarely-used eyesores remain. Our last article focused on Alchemy’s ripped, moldy and potentially hazardous gutter tent next to Haller Fountain. This roundup will provide an update on that situation and take a look at the four other streateries which have continued to eliminate precious downtown parking during the peak holiday shopping season despite disuse and disgruntled neighbors.
The most visibly obtrusive and un-neighborly of those remaining four is The Old Whiskey Mill tent on Water Street, pictured at top and below. Not only does it front a portion of Kris Nelson’s restaurant (the windows at far right), it obscures Quimper Sound Records’ storefront (center portion of photo) as we have previously reported.
Quimper Sound owner James Schultz wrote the City Council last spring about the damage this unfair taking of his street frontage was causing his business. His letter was apparently ignored, with council extending the injury — blocking visibility to his business and removing the parking in front of his shop for Nelson’s profit for another eight months. His story is perhaps most instructive regarding the harm this experiment has caused, benefiting a few select restaurants to the detriment of other businesses.
In a comment to the Free Press on December 1st, Schultz once again described his frustration:
“As the Covid restrictions were brought down upon us by the state my business was shuttered leaving no foreseeable future. My neighbors as well felt the effects. We began to see the hope of being allowed to reopen by the state and this came with heavy restrictions. I was asked if I would allow the space in front of my shop on Water St to be part of a temporary tent structure to be used during the time these occupancy restrictions were in place. I gave up valuable street frontage to help because I was raised to believe we are all in this together. That time has passed. The occupancy restrictions were lifted. Then the vaccine mandate went into effect. I bit my tongue as the tent covered my storefront because I understood telling 30pct of potential customers and their parties to not come in is fiscally deadly to a service business. I pitched in to help. Our county finally removed that last restriction.
I read the tea leaves after meeting our City Manager at a public meeting. His only objective was to make streateries permanent. Appointed officials are like Gods and he will get his way so I asked that the council and his office make their rules that we build nice, fitting structures that only sit in front of the place served but noted I prefer no streateries. Well they could have done something and I would have spent a summer season in sight but they kicked the can down the road leaving the ugly tent in front of my shop. Frankly I am just disgusted by our City Council and our Manager. My business has suffered. The last few years has been horrid anyhow but getting calls from professional delivery drivers and customers saying they cannot find my storefront even with an address….”
Schultz’s comment is more than a tale of personal difficulty; it provides a glimpse into the bait and switch by the City, and the fast-track process engineered to achieve a predetermined outcome. Other business owners like Gail Boulter, a downtown merchant with multiple shops over a 40-year span, also described initially being assured by City Manager John Mauro that the streatery scheme would only be temporary — just to help restaurant owners out during the pandemic — only to learn after that emergency passed that a process to codify a permanent program was underway.
Mauro had called her, Boulter told council in an April public comment, when Covid restrictions first began affecting restaurants:
“[He] wanted our impression about how we felt about the streateries… I said we would be happy to do anything we can to help our restaurants. However, under no circumstances would any of us merchants downtown want to see this to be a permanent situation. He assured me at that time Oh, no no no, this is a temporary fix.”
The month before Boulter’s comment, one week after a survey designed to support the City’s intended outcome was released (a survey that was never publicized and most of the public never saw), Manager Mauro held an Open House about making streateries permanent — the public meeting Schultz references. We heard from numerous people who went to that Open House, ostensibly held to gather feedback from the business community and other members of the public about making the program long-term. The story from those in attendance was consistent. A couple of dozen business owners attended, gave overwhelmingly negative feedback, and were not listened to. “His only objective was to make streateries permanent,” as Schultz said of Mauro. This was not a good-faith gathering of input, it was a box to be checked fulfilling “public process” so that the City could say in its justifications for a permanent program, We held a Public Open House.
Over multiple City Council meetings that followed, Whiskey Mill owner and streateries beneficiary Kris Nelson was the only businessperson to speak or write in favor of the permanent program. In the face of widespread opposition to allowing streateries to remain any longer, the council nonetheless continued the temporary program — through the extension of Streatery Special Event Temporary Use permits — with the rationale that we needed extra outdoor dining over the summer for those still fearing Covid. Summer somehow stretched out to January.
A couple of new streateries sprang up following approval of that May extension — seating in the street outside the Silverwater Cafe on Taylor which took out their handicapped parking spot, and a new installation at PT Anchor on Water Street near City Hall. The Silverwater removed their outdoor tables after the summer season, while Anchor’s streatery is still in place.
All the photos in this article were taken over the months of November and December, most of them during the lunch hour. No diners were ever seen using any of the streateries over that span, yet restaurant owners like Nelson have continued to take up valuable parking to the detriment of the business community as a whole. It would appear that all are waiting until the last possible moment to give up their free street space, the year-end deadline.
The Old Whiskey Mill
Nelson claims she asked the City if she could shift her 48-foot tent so that it did not block Quimper Sound’s storefront, so that more of the tent was in front of her own restaurant, and she says that the City said no. Yet she chose to keep the nearly-always-empty visual blight in the street through this prime shopping season, knowing it was taking up valuable parking and hurting her neighbor. All except the snow shot are lunch hour photos taken during November/December:
Three More Unused Streateries
Tommyknockers:
Also on Water Street, Tommyknockers has maintained its long-standing installation of picnic tables and a picket fence, even though it has outdoor seating in the back of the restaurant. It replaced three of its four umbrellas with infrared heaters that put propane bottles at diners’ feet — and in the street.
Cellar Door:
Nearly two years ago, in February 2021, City Manager Mauro signed off on a no-fee agreement for the Cellar Door (off Tyler Street behind the Mount Baker Block building) of three city-owned public parking spaces to be used “during COVID-19 Restricted Dining.” While Mauro was assuring downtown merchants that this “temporary fix” would never be made permanent, the Cellar Door owner was led to believe their street use would be a permanent gift, and as a result invested in infrastructure work unlike the temporary tents and tables that other restaurants put in the streets. They graded the area and built high-walled structures. The end result created problems for delivery vehicles that frequent the alleyway, some near-accidents, and on at least one occasion led to an altercation that resulted in police intervention.
PT Anchor:
As described earlier, Anchor was the last restaurant to join in the streatery free-for-all, after the council extended the temporary use permit last May. As the newest and simplest streatery on the block, It is the freshest looking today. No tent, umbrellas, propane tanks or lighting, just a picket fence with wooden picnic tables in the gutter. Has this empty streatery across from City Hall also remained in place during the winter just because it can?
The Icing on the Bad-Neighbor Cake: Alchemy
Our November 30 article focused on the ugly mess in front of Alchemy just days before Main Street’s annual Christmas tree lighting at Haller Fountain. It described the upset among neighboring businesses and wondered why the City was allowing it to remain. The tent was not removed before the event, continued to deteriorate (shown below on Dec. 3), and is still in place.
I suggested that any coverage of Santa arriving at the fountain on December 4th would pretend the tent wasn’t there. As it turns out, the Peninsula Daily News did just that, cropping their photo to avoid the embarrassing tattered elephant in the room entirely. The Leader didn’t even cover the annual event. Here is what “JOY IN PT” actually looked like in our famously picturesque seaport on December 4th, as families awaited Santa’s arrival, and after the traditional community tree lighting:
Following the festivities, Alchemy added insult to injury by stringing the dilapidated picket fence surrounding the disgusting tent with multi-colored lights, drawing even more attention to it. It now consists of a moldy mess at one end, with the other half a rickety, stained skeletal frame.
Lipstick on a pig? Or a grotesque joke from Alchemy owner Adam Levin, further thumbing his nose at the outpouring of complaints?
In an email exchange with Public Works Director Steve King, I asked him why he had only sent inquiries to Levin about the state of the tent (inquiries which he previously told me had been ignored). Why was the City not taking action to remove this dangerous eyesore? Was it because the temporary use permit which had been extended — and then extended again — had no teeth for preventing this kind of abuse?
“Yes,” King replied. “All of the tents downtown were part of the special events temporary permit and not subject to the ordinance.”
The ordinance he refers to is one allowing for permanent streateries in the future, which prohibits the degradation we were all witnessing with the tents and tables in the streets. But even though council had already seen problems last winter with this program — using phrases like “ugly tents” and “unsightly weathering” — rather than adding safeguards, they simply extended the already problematic special events temporary permit for another eight months, preventing the City from removing messes like Alchemy’s tent.
Community Feedback
How has all this sat with the people of P.T.?
Following the publication of our November 30 article, a Free Press reader alerted us to a question posed to a large local Facebook group called Port Townsend Community. A member of the group asked “What do you think of this?” and gave a link to our article about the Alchemy tent.
Sixty-six comments followed, nearly all of them opposing the streateries.
“Ugh, I’d never eat in one of those filthy virus incubators.”
——————————
“Street dining needs removed imo. It’s unsanitary as shown, unsafe having people in the street. Additionally simply giving restaurants those boosts while taking away from other downtown businesses is ridiculous.”
——————————
“Take ’em all down, I say. They were necessary last year during COVID restrictions on indoor dining, but they are not now. They represent a free giveaway of public space to private businesses, and a reduction of precious downtown parking spaces.
I got a little chuckle about the opposition to taking them down from the owner of the Old Whiskey Mill. Last year in the winter, my wife and I dined in the tent outside that establishment a couple of times. Both times, it was a miserable experience, with cold winds and rain, and ineffective heaters connected to the indoors by extension cords strung across the sidewalk.”
Some pointed out the irony of the City’s recent demand that uptown’s popular, artistically-crafted tree sculpture called Raccoon Lodge be removed:
“And yet the raccoon lodge has to go, lmao… I just don’t get it.”
“So these are ok but the Raccoon lodge needs to go???”
The same week, a NextDoor poll asked “Who supports onstreet restaurant tents sacrificing parking spaces?”
The poll generated 35 comments, offering a broad range of views through its small sample. Some people wanted to see Port Townsend be “car free” — the primary rationale behind the streateries push by City Manager Mauro, Mayor David Faber and some of the council members. A few folks paranoid about respiratory viruses, still afraid of indoor dining, also supported the streateries.
But one comment stood out for the person who first alerted me to this poll. He sent me a screen shot of the response from Brent Shirley, former mayor of Port Townsend, who was at the City’s helm when Port Townsend Main Street first came into existence:
“Port Townsend Main Street Program was founded in 1985 by the Mayor & City Council and was the first in Washington State,” Shirley wrote.
“Our mission is to preserve, promote and enhance our historic business district. As Mayor at the time, I don’t believe what’s going on today meets these goals at all. We’ve spent millions of dollars over the last 40 years, rebuilding the docks on the waterfront & replaced a contaminated bulk oil plant with the Northwest Maritime Center. This was all accomplished by locals and I don’t believe City Hall is even aware of this or they wouldn’t trash it up by keeping shelters, on the streets in use for Covid19 that are passed their useful life, no longer in use and are, in my opinion, a blight.”
The fact that today’s city government is pushing this agenda and that Main Street simply looks the other way when a business in downtown’s historic district trashes its traditional community tree-lighting at Haller Fountain is testament to the truth of Shirley’s criticism.
What about future streateries?
Council’s deadline to remove the existing streateries by year’s end does not mean we’ve seen the last of them. The limit on further temporary extensions was simply a pause on developing a permanent program downtown until parking issues are addressed that have plagued downtown for decades.
Nearly all council members have expressed their enthusiasm for creating permanent streateries downtown once a new parking plan is in place. The quiet deal first offered to the Cellar Door exemplifies the widespread parking giveaway that they envision, replacing it with street dining. Faber is especially emphatic about his agenda to eliminate vehicular traffic and prioritize private use of public streets for business owners. He has called it “the storage of personal property on the street.”
In conjunction with extending the temporary use permit, council unanimously approved an ordinance (the one referenced by Public Works Director King) allowing a limited number of permanent streateries Uptown and in all other commercial districts except for downtown. The streateries displayed here that had temporary status have to come down by December 31st, but restaurants outside of downtown can apply for permanent ones at any time in the future.
The permanent streateries program operates on a lottery system. I asked Steve King to clarify how it works:
“The lottery system is based on preliminary screening to make sure the applicant knows what is required and then application. If there are more applications then allowed spaces in Uptown, then there is a drawing.”
Whether it’s because of resounding public sentiment opposed to this agenda or lessons learned over the last few years, to date no businesses have applied. There had been one streatery Uptown, outside the Seal Dog Coffee Bar on Lawrence Street (see “Uptown Streateries: A Reality Check“), and they removed their tables and fence after the summer season. They have not applied for a permanent streatery.
Applications are due by July 1st of each year. Since no one applied before last summer’s deadline, no new streateries will be possible until the next round. Time will tell if we will be subjected to this scheme again.
The good news is that the current blight on our historic Victorian streetscape must be cleared out before the new year. I asked King if there was any grace period for removal and if a streatery owner does not comply, what penalties and/or action(s) the City would take.
“We have notified all the streatery owners that their streateries will need to be removed by the end of day on 12/31. If the streateries aren’t removed, then the City will have the right to remove them.”
King’s answer only raises more questions.
Will the City’s “right to remove” translate to actual action and oversight, something we’ve not seen demonstrated to date? Alchemy’s owner has ignored concerns from its neighbors, the community at large and even the City. Will businesses who have shown blatant disregard for others now do the right thing? ARE there any penalties for restaurant owners who do not comply?
Removing a flimsy picket fence and a few picnic tables is one thing, but what will it take for the Cellar Door to restore three parking spaces by Dec. 31? If the City is forced to invoke its “right to remove” any streateries, who pays for that? Does the City — meaning the taxpayers — pick up the tab?
————————————
Streatery photos by Stephen Schumacher, Harvey Windle and Ana Wolpin.
————————————
UPDATE 1
A note from Harvey Windle just prior to publishing informs that the Old Whiskey Mill tent is in the process of being removed:
“The Whiskey Mill mess tent is in parts and taken down. The massive multi-ton concrete blocks bookend the parts. A crane truck would be needed to move those.”
There’s no arguing with Mother Nature. Snow prevails.
————————————
UPDATE 2: The Old Whiskey Mill Tent Comes Down
As noted above, there is still debris to be cleared off the street. The large concrete blocks (one of them visible inside the corner of the fence above) were a safety measure at either end of the tent to protect the structure and diners in the street from parking cars. Here they are, following the tent’s removal:
Why is the removal of these streateries such a big deal?
The real revelation comes in seeing the difference in the streetscape without that tent blocking the storefronts. Even with the slushy snow, with concrete blocks and other debris remaining in the street, the contrast between the visual blight we have been enduring and what we see now is startling. Compare the aesthetics of these two images:
The loss over the last two-plus years to our town’s special character has been significant — an aesthetic so important to PT’s identity that even paint on these buildings is restricted to colors approved by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Details like the arched entryway between Quimper Sound Records and The Old Whiskey Mill are what gives our downtown a rich ambience and celebrated appeal.
The grandeur of Port Townsend’s classic historic buildings is a legacy that secured our downtown and uptown commercial districts a place on the National Historic Register. The stunning Victorian architecture is what inspired the city to establish the first Main Street program in the country, as former mayor Brent Shirley describes above.
This special frontage is why commercial space downtown is so expensive. Stores like Quimper Sound pay a premium for the visual draw it offers. Well-designed window displays are critical for attracting shoppers into these establishments. Allowing restaurants to obscure other businesses’ prime frontage to boost their own profits is not only visually degrading to PT’s entire commercial district, the negative impact to the bottom line for the shops being blocked is incalculable.
Parking has not been restored yet and a bit of a mess remains. But Quimper Sound’s creative and inviting storefront is able see daylight again.
“After” photos taken by Stephen Schumacher on Dec. 22 (with snow and slush) and Dec. 25 (snow melted). By Christmas Day, Anchor’s streatery had also been removed.
Because we require comments under articles to be “on topic”, we found that readers who want to speak to other important issues, events and concerns that our small crew can’t cover don’t have a place for that. Last month we introduced this new feature to make a place for readers who want to bring up other topics, post news flashes, announce community events, or express concerns outside of the selected subjects we write about.
In the spirit of offering Letters to the Editor as a traditional platform for lively, wide-ranging conversations in the public square, we invite you to write about whatever is on your mind. Based on our trial run, we will be posting a new Off Topic! forum monthly. December’s will be a shorter month, but beginning January 2023, a fresh letters forum will be posted on the first of each month.
How this works:
Submit your letter in the white box below CommentGuidelines at the bottom of the page containing the muted prompt “Enter your comment here…”
Either provide your own title to the letter as a top line or we will title it for you.
To respond to someone else’s post, hit the REPLY button under that specific letter or comment you wish to respond to.
It’s like deja vu all over again.On Dec. 9, NYC’s health commissar advised that everyone (including 2-year-olds!) “should wear a mask at all times when in an indoor public setting.” Then our state’s public health leaders followed in lockstep.
As a weirdly-authoritarian Dec. 9 Seattle Timesfront-page story pontificates, “It’s time, Washingtonians: You should resume regularly wearing a mask indoors, if you haven’t already.”
That’s based on:
“new guidance from 12 county health officers and 25 hospital executives is fueled by the region and county’s surge in viral respiratory illnesses – mainly influenza and RSV” with “pediatric hospitals … overcapacity for months”, so they “recommend that everyone wear a high-quality, well-fitting mask when around others in indoor spaces to protect against both acquiring and spreading these infections to others.”
Likewise Jefferson/Clallam County Health Officer Allison Berry filled the front page of the Dec. 10 Peninsula Daily News, saying “our health care systems are not strong enough to handle all of … these viruses at the same time… It’s been worn down by two years of responding to COVID-19, we were short-staffed going into the winter season,” but “If we wore masks indoors, particularly around kids and around the elderly, that would make all the difference.”
Berry reveals she’s involved in “ongoing discussions about returning to mandatory masking” which is “possible”, but “what makes us consider mandates is when we see critical infrastructure fail. So when we see that people can’t access medical care when they need it… that’s when we begin to look at mandates.”
Questions Begged
Of course, this begs lots of questions. For instance: Why precisely are our heath care systems weak, worn-down, and short-staffed, especially after all the federal funding windfallspumped into them?
Could public health authorities possibly be to blame for monomaniacally focusing on a single virus while throttling care for all other conditions, driving people crazy by exaggerating its dangers while enforcing useless hygiene theatre, and preventing safe and effective early treatment options while pushing deadly and useless Remdesivir and mRNA jabs?
Could all the health workers forced to quit or retire to avoid jab mandates, or who were made sick by taking the jabs, or had their morale destroyed by hostile work environments, possibly have contributed to short-staffing?
When Berry says she might dictate mask mandates if “we see critical infrastructure fail” or if “people can’t access medical care”… how is that more logical than kicking your dog when you’re mad at your boss? Where’s the causal connection between gagging innocent bystanders and fixing infrastructure management failures?
This harkens back to Berry’s Sep. 2, 2021 fallacious and discriminatory restaurant/bar mandate, which targeted those unwilling to disclose their HIPAA-protected private medical records to eateries. Where was there ever any causal justification for this punitive mandate, especially given CDC admission that mRNA injections are “not effective at preventing transmission of the virus”?
Another question being begged: How dare NYC and other health officers blithely talk about reintroducing masking in schools and child care facilities for all kids two (!!) years old and up, with no concern about the psychological hell, impoverished learning, disrupted socialization, increased suicides, and physical harms they’d be cavalierly inflicting on children at minimal risk from these seasonal colds and flus?
Have these fools or knaves learned nothing from the destruction wreaked on kids these past few years — not by covid, but by their own lockdown measures? What’s being “advised” by these health authorities is literally child abuse.
But the main question being begged here is: Why face masks? Why trot out this singularly ineffective nostrum once again, as if it were an all-powerful savior, when it was never considered a panacea for respiratory viruses prior to 2020, and it has failed miserably to have any significant beneficial effect during the years it’s been pushed and mandated worldwide, as documented by numerous careful studies.
Stephen Petty is a Certified Industrial Hygenist and Certified Professional Engineer who has worked for 45 years in the field of health and safety, protecting workers and the public from toxins. He has been involved in over 400 legal cases of exposure control and PPE. In the powerful 15-minute expert testimony below, Petty summarizes the reality on masks’ effectiveness against viruses.
The current warmed-over propaganda campaign to force “high-quality” masks over everybody’s mouths and noses has long been rendered absurd.
And now, coincidental to the latest mask campaign, an extremely high-quality randomized controlled mask study was published on Nov. 29. This was big news that should have been reported in the papers and by health officers if they were worth their salt.
The Annals of Internal Medicine just published a randomized controlled trial comparing the ability of medical masks to prevent COVID infection to fit-tested N95s. Importantly, this trial was conducted on healthcare workers who would be most likely to use masks appropriately.
They examined 29 different health care facilities on multiple continents, from North America to Asia and Africa. The percentage of healthcare workers testing positive for COVID in each group was tracked to determine how effective or ineffective higher-quality masking was in preventing infection.
Unsurprisingly, the results confirmed that there is essentially zero difference between surgical [the common blue and green pleated “medical” masks made of nonwoven material] or N95 respirators when it comes to tests results.
The N95 masks provided statistically-insignificant 1% reduction in cases, while causing 3% increase in adverse events compared to surgical masks — that’s 13.6% gratuitous adverse events compared to wearing no mask at all!
The researchers also took pains to ensure that the control and treatment groups shared as many similarities as possible. The N95s in use were even specifically fit tested and approved respirators, far from the KN95s commonly used by the general public.
Everyone, in each health care facility, “for all activities,” was required to wear masks. They even tracked potential exposure points, whether at home, in the community or in hospital exposures.
Yet none of that mattered; there was no difference in outcomes between the medical and N95 level masks.
On top of being functionally useless, N95s were substantially more likely to result in adverse effects.
This becomes even more noteworthy since compliance with respirator masking was lower. While still extremely high, health care workers “always” wore N95s 80.7% of the time instead of 91.2% for medical masks.
This is one of the many issues the “experts” now pushing for (now disproven) “higher-quality” masking should address. Health care professionals who are trained to use N95s can’t always use them yet experience higher rates of adverse effects.
Imagine how much worse compliance would be among the general public, especially if 13% are suffering significant side effects.
Beyond statistics, just think about the physical facts: Sure, surgical masks can protect surgeons from blowing bacteria directly into an open wound. But viruses are more than an order of magnitude smaller than bacteria, so they CAN pass through surgical masks, and they DO easily pass around the sides and top of all kinds of masks when breathing out, as viruses follow the paths of least resistance, after which they enter the persistent viral soup of indoor atmospheres.
That’s why masks have never shown any significant viral protection for others in randomized controlled studies. Your mask does little or nothing to protect you, but most significantly there’s no way it can protect grandma or anybody else. And thus falls the entire pretext for mask mandates.
Wearing a diaper on your foot would be just as “effective” and a lot safer than wearing it on your face. Health authorities still pushing face diapers on kids (or anybody else) after years of lockdown failures are neither competent nor fit to keep their positions.
_______________________________
“Masking is a stupid, superstitious exercise that does nothing to stop virus infections, but that’s beside the point. Imagine, instead, that strapping these low-quality pseudomedical plastics to your face actually reduced your rate of respiratory infection. In this counterfactual scenario, it would follow that masks are at least partly responsible for the immunity deficit causing the unusually high rates of RSV and influenza infection…. Continuing to mask would merely prolong our immunological naiveté for another season, potentially leading to long-term dependence on this ridiculous, antisocial ritual. It’s a blessing that masks actually do nothing.”
— eugyppius (writing about a similar situation in Germany)
This case report was published by the peer-reviewed journal Vaccines on October 1, 2022 (Vaccines 2022, 10, 1651).
Dr. Mörz’s article provides compelling and sobering evidence of the potential of mRNA vaccines to cause serious harm to the brain and heart — namely, vasculitis, necrotizing encephalitis, and myocarditis. His article may prove to be one of the most pivotal articles to be published in the conventional medical literature during the COVID-19 pandemic—because of its potential to change attitudes about the safety of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19.
To summarize the Mörz article, to present its pathology images in a way that might be more understandable to the general public, and to underscore the importance and implications of the article, I have written a Summary and Commentary about Dr. Mörz’s article.
Here is a link to the long version of the Summary/Commentary.
Here is a link to a shorter version of the Summary/Commentary.
The shorter version of the Summary/Commentary is reprinted below.
—————————-
My email to Dr. Allison Berry, Dr. Tom Locke, and members of the Jefferson County Board of Health regarding the Mörz article:
On November 16, 2022, I sent the email below to Jefferson County’s Health Officer, Deputy Health Officer and members of the Board of Health (BOH), to alert them to the Mörz article and its significance. As you can see, I asked them to respond to several important questions. I requested that they respond within two weeks (by November 30).
It is now December 8, 2022. I have received no responses from Dr. Berry, Dr. Locke, or any members of the BOH. I have not heard a single word from any of them — not even a courteous, “Thank you for sharing this information. We will respond to it as soon as possible,” which would have taken less than 20 seconds to type.
The lack of response to this extremely important article is disappointing, to say the least. Perhaps, they are still engaged in the process of studying the article and carefully discussing it among themselves and, perhaps, with outside experts. But if that is the case, the professional and courteous thing to do would be to let me know that they are in the midst of that process.
Perhaps, the article is too complicated for them to understand, making it difficult for them to respond. But that is why I wrote the Summary/Commentary and wrote it in such a way that non-physicians could understand the article and its significance. Again, the professional and courteous thing to do would be to let me know that they are working on a response.
Perhaps, they think the article does not represent good science and simply represents misinformation/disinformation. But if that is the case, the professional and courteous thing to do is engage in scientific dialogue with me, during which they could explain their criticisms of the article and we could learn from each other.
Perhaps, they do not want to challenge their long-held COVID beliefs and understandings by considering new information. Perhaps it is too difficult, too uncomfortable (emotionally and psychologically) for them to consider a reversal in their thinking and recommendations. But such rigidity goes against fundamental principles of science and medicine.
Perhaps, they concluded that this vaccine-related complication (if it is, indeed, related to the vaccine) is probably “very rare” and, therefore, “it is best not to scare the public” by mentioning it—“lest it unnecessarily frighten people from becoming vaccinated.” Such a conclusion, however, is irresponsible in at least two ways. First, they do not know how rare or not rare this complication is, nor does anyone else, because this represents the only autopsy in which a definitive test for presence of vaccinal spike protein has been performed. Second, even if this complication proves to be extremely rare (which seems unlikely to me), health care workers have a moral and legal obligation to comply with a proper informed consent process, which includes mention of even extremely rare potential side effects. Frankly, I suspect that if more autopsies are done, and if they include testing for presence of vaccinal spike protein, it will become evident that versions of this complication are common—particularly if electron microscopy is performed on the tissues.
Perhaps, they simply do not care. Perhaps, there are other reasons for their silence.
Whatever the reasons are for their silence, it is sad and instructive that the individuals who are most responsible for caring about the health of Jefferson County citizens have remained silent about such a profoundly important article.
I am not sure what our next step should be. What would readers of the PTFP suggest?
—————————-
Dear Dr. Berry, Dr. Locke, and members of the BOH,
As a pediatrician/pediatric rheumatologist (formerly at Cleveland Clinic) and as a resident of Port Townsend during the first year of the pandemic, I have been deeply concerned about the wisdom and safety of the COVID mass vaccination campaign, both nationally and in Jefferson County—especially the campaign to vaccinate infants and toddlers with the mRNA vaccines.
Policies regarding the COVID pandemic should be based on a deep scientific understanding of the immunology, virology, vaccinology, evolutionary biology, and the glycosylation biology of the COVID situation. This includes a deep understanding of the immunopathology that is emerging among the COVID-vaccinated—particularly the neuro-immunopathology (which was my specialty at Cleveland Clinic).
I have attached an extremely important article, recently published (in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccines) by an excellent pathologist in Germany (Dr. Michael Mörz). It provides compelling and sobering evidence that spike protein produced by the mRNA vaccines can end up in the endothelial cell lining of capillaries in the brain and heart; that this is closely associated with CNS vasculitis, necrotizing encephalitis, and myocarditis; and that these vaccine-associated phenomena can be fatal.
I have attached the Mörz article for your review. I have also attached a Summary (for the General Public) and Commentary on the Mörz article that I have written to help non-physicians to more easily understand the Mörz article and its significance.
I have some questions for all of you:
What is your reaction to the Mörz article?
Do you think the COVID vaccine is responsible for the neuropathology and heart pathology documented by Dr. Mörz?
How worried are you about the possibility of vaccine-related neuro-immunopathology occurring in some who receive the COVID mRNA vaccine?
To what extent do you, as the COVID health experts in Jefferson County, feel obligated to call this article to the attention of the public in Jefferson County?
Should discussion of this article be part of the informed consent process?
Do you think the Mörz article should cause hesitancy about continuing the COVID vaccination campaign?
Is the Jefferson County Board of Health encouraging COVID vaccination of infants and children?
I would appreciate hearing back from you within 2 weeks (i.e. by Nov 30), if possible.
Finally, would you be interested in organizing a Town Hall meeting in PT to discuss this article—so that the public could learn about the article and its significance? I would be happy to be a guest speaker at such a meeting.
A Summary (for the General Public) and Commentary Regarding the Case Report Published by Dr. Michael Mörz:
Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19
By Rob Rennebohm, MD
November 10, 2022
Above is the title page of an article written by Dr. Michael Mörz, a pathologist in Dresden, Germany. Here is the link to the full article: (https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/10/10/1651). It is a case report of autopsy findings in a 76-year-old man who had died 3 weeks after receiving his third vaccination against COVID-19. This case report was published by the peer-reviewed journal Vaccines on October 1, 2022 (Vaccines 2022, 10, 1651).
Dr. Mörz’s article provides compelling and sobering evidence of the potential of mRNA vaccines to cause serious harm to the brain and heart—namely, vasculitis, necrotizing encephalitis, and myocarditis. His article may prove to be one of the most pivotal articles to be published in the formal conventional medical literature during the COVID-19 pandemic—because of its potential to change attitudes about the safety of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19.
To summarize the Mörz article, to present its pathology images in a way that might be more understandable to the general public, and to underscore the importance and implications of the article, I have written a Summary and Commentary about Dr. Mörz’s article.
The above image (from the Mörz article) shows a cross section of a capillary in the heart. It demonstrates the presence of an abundant amount of spike protein (the brown material to which the red arrow points) within endothelial cells, which are the cells that line the inner wall of the capillary. There is endothelial cell swelling, and there are a few mononuclear inflammatory cells within the wall of the capillary. The spike protein was demonstrated to be of vaccinal origin, not from SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The above image (also from the Mörz article) is a cross section through a capillary in the brain. It shows prominent signs of vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessel wall). The vessel is filled with hemolyzed blood, which is normal in autopsied cases. The many tiny blue cells that are present in the walls of the vessel (immediately surrounding the hemolyzed blood) include many lymphocytes (inflammatory cells). The presence of numerous lymphocytes in the wall of this vessel means that the vessel wall is inflamed—-i.e., the vessel is experiencing vasculitis.
The importance of the Mörz article:
Dr. Mörz has conclusively demonstrated the presence of an abundance of vaccinal spike protein in the endothelial lining of the walls of capillaries and arterioles in the brain and heart. He has also demonstrated significant inflammation within the walls of these same vessels. His interpretations of the findings are accurate and not overstated. He has appropriately suggested that these two findings are linked—that the inflammation in the vessel walls (vasculitis) was most likely triggered by the presence of vaccinal spike protein in those walls.
Dr. Mörz has also conclusively demonstrated diffuse and multifocal inflammation in the brain tissue (encephalitis) and in heart muscle (myocarditis). The encephalitis was necrotizing—i.e., associated with death (necrosis) of brain cells (neurons).
The two images shown above (along with the several other images presented in the Mörz article) support the following hypothesis: When the mRNA (that is embedded in the lipid nanoparticle of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine) is injected into the arm, the mRNA finds its way (via the blood stream) into distant cells—in this case endothelial cells that line the small blood vessels in the heart and brain. (The vaccine does not simply stay in the arm.) Once in the endothelial cell(s), the mRNA instructs the ribosomes in the cell to manufacture spike protein. The spike protein then migrates to the outer surface of the endothelial cell. The immune system then sees the spike protein (or fragments thereof) on the surface of the cell, recognizes it as foreign, and concludes that the endothelial cell has become infected. Accordingly, the immune system sends lymphocytes and other inflammatory cells into the walls of the vessel to attack the presumed infected endothelial cell(s). The vessel wall becomes inflamed (vasculitis) and, during this process, the endothelial cells become immunologically injured and may swell to varying degrees. Sometimes, abnormal intravascular coagulation (clotting within the vessel) may be triggered. In some instances spike protein finds its way through the blood vessel wall and penetrates into the brain (or heart) tissue, where the spike protein may trigger an inflammatory reaction in the brain (encephalitis) or heart (myocarditis).
People who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 (and those contemplating vaccination) deserve to know whether the Mörz report of probable vaccine-induced microvascular and parenchymal (tissue) injury in the brain and heart represent extremely rare phenomena or are more common than that. Vaccinees and the public at large deserve to know the prevalence of such phenomena, and they deserve to know the full spectrum of such findings. If such phenomena are more than rare, our hope would be that the abnormalities are usually only minimal, not as dramatic as in the case reported. We would also hope that the abnormalities might be reversible, possibly amenable to treatment—particularly if patients are warned to not receive any further COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.
Scientific understanding of potential serious side effects of the mRNA vaccines—including knowledge of the prevalence, spectrum, and pathogenesis of such complications, and potential treatment options for them—would improve if more autopsies were performed in situations like that of the case reported by Mörz.
Physicians, nurses, hospitals, medical centers, health departments, the CDC, NIH, FDA, WHO, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the pharmaceutical industry, government leaders, and media outlets that have assured the Public that the COVID-19 vaccines are “very safe” owe it to the Public to thoroughly, openly, honestly, publicly, and prominently discuss Dr. Mörz’s article and its implications. To date, there has been no mention of this article by the CDC, NIH, FDA, WHO, AAP, Pfizer, Moderna, government leaders, the mainstream media, or the medical experts who routinely inform the Public. On the contrary, instead of halting the mass vaccination campaign (which is the scientifically and morally correct thing to do), the promoters of the COVID mass vaccination campaign are currently re-doubling their efforts to greatly increase vaccination rates—spending billions of dollars to maximize vaccination against COVID-19, even among infants and toddlers.
To those people who have been encouraged, pressured, even mandated to receive COVID vaccination—physicians and scientists owe a massive top priority collaborative effort to thoroughly study the pathogenesis (the causative chain of events that lead to disease) and potential treatment of vaccine-induced endotheliopathy, vasculitis, encephalitis, and myocarditis—even if these complications prove to be rare. The death of the 76-year-old man reported by Dr. Mörz should not go in vain. We need to determine how to promptly recognize and promptly provide optimal early treatment for vaccinated people who may be developing early evidence of similar complications in their brain, heart, both, and/or elsewhere.
In the meantime we should deeply thank Dr. Mörz for performing and publishing his extensive and careful study of this one patient. The scientific quality of his work is excellent. His careful article represents a major contribution to medicine and Humanity. He is to be commended for the expertise, time, effort, and courage it took to present this compelling and valuable information. He has superbly honored the best traditions of science, medicine, and ethics and has performed a great service to Humanity. We should also commend the journal Vaccines for demonstrating the wisdom and moral courage to publish Dr. Mörz’s article. Like Dr. Mörz, Vaccines has honored the best traditions of science, medicine, and ethics, and has honored Humanity in the process.
Rob Rennebohm, MD
Pediatrician and Pediatric Rheumatologist
Retired (formerly at Cleveland Clinic)
Alex French, 25, was arraigned in Jefferson County District Court on Monday, November 21st, for assault in the 4th degree committed on the evening of August 15th. That summer evening, across from City Hall, a press conference organized by women’s rights activist Amy Sousa following the expulsion of 80-year-old Julie Jaman from the YMCA, had turned ugly.
Regular readers will at least remember French’s blood-stained “Discharge” tee shirt. What we didn’t get to see before was his face, covered as it was by that toxic blue mask. Less than an hour before the above frame was snapped, French was pushing between and around women’s and men’s legs on the brick substrate alongside the Cotton Building, adjacent to Pope Marine Park, as can be seen in our previous coverage below. He wasn’t just somersaulting, crab-walking on his back and slithering, though. Six feet one-inch tall, 195 pounds — this hefty agitator was locking rally participants’ legs between his thighs, pushing his head against their groins and butts, disabling their sound equipment and taking their personal belongings.
The feature image is from police body cam footage taken that evening. The video reveals that French was taken by surprise to see a police officer as he strode cockily into the entrance of Elevated Ice Cream’s parking lot, shortly after he’d escaped the grasp of Officer Kamal Sharif and sprinted away.
His fingernails sporting dark polish, hands and shirt filthy from crawling around on his back for an hour — French recovered from his surprise and can soon be heard lying through his teeth, making excuses for himself, then chastising the PTPD for their lack of action on his behalf, ever the victim:
“So I laid down on the ground and they stepped on me and stuff like that, but I didn’t do anything wrong.
I was a little upset by the response from the Port Townsend Police Department, I’m not gonna lie — they weren’t really havin’ my back at all. Not that I wanted them to have my back, but I just wanted them to look out for me… I didn’t do anything anybody else wasn’t doing. All I did was sit there, and sit there, ya know…
I have a lot of PTSD and I’ve always been scared of the police. Like every time I talk to you guys it’s really upsetting… like when you guys pulled me over the other day… I was chill, you know, I usually have a panic attack after I talk to the police…”
In this four-minute video from Aug. 15th (“Protester Shows His Instability”), French tells one of the women he’d just assaulted and robbed that he’s a local and talks to the cops “all the time.” Mm hmmm.
Beginning at around 3 minutes in that video, you can watch what French calls “just sitting there” as the women’s press conference begins — the video quality is poor, but does prove unequivocally that the young man has no tether to honesty. In a turbulent frenzy, he slithers, spins and tumbles wildly on the pavement around Sousa, the first speaker.
Following his spinning and writhing display, French started to work his way at ground level among other people who were trying to protect speakers and equipment. In this 2-minute video below, French can be seen sitting on the ground bumping his head into organizer Amy Sousa’s backside — pausing to lower his mask and yowl at the top of his lungs — as his young lieutenant pokes Sousa with his cardboard sign.
Click on image to play.
French’s last act was one of attempting to push back and reach between the legs of one of the guardians, head ground into his crotch, to unplug the sound system. It was at that point that police finally intervened. Officer Kamal Sharif makes his presence known in bottom right photo.
At the point French was confronted by police, another agitator grabbed Sharif’s vest to prevent French from being nabbed. That distraction allowed him to slip the officer’s grip and he ran off.
“Upon my arrival, I noted that there was a crowd of approximately 250-300 people gathered in the area. Among the crowd were multiple subjects who were wearing dark clothing with their faces concealed with large backpacks. I am familiar with these types of attire based on my several years of working the May Day protest/demonstrations in Seattle as a bicycle officer. Officer Titterness and I patrolled the area on foot.”
This body cam video shows the officers shadowing a pair that they’d identified as carrying a baton and a knife, and they suspected a gun.
Sharif describes being contacted by Julie Jaman’s daughter, who told them that Jaman was being assaulted by people who were constantly bashing into her. He recommended that if they didn’t feel safe in the crowd, they should remove themselves from it. Then he describes approaching the speakers, where he caught French in the act of assault.
“Alexander was on the ground with his hands and feet backing into people backward intentionally. From my viewpoint, he was not able to see who or what he was backing himself into. I saw him back into Julie while on all fours almost knocking her off balance, but she did not fall. I also saw him, shoulder-checking people, but was not sure if that was the group that he was with no one came up to use [sic] to report it. Of note, there were a lot of people in the crowd, and it would not have been safe to enter the crowd at the time. Julie ran out and contacted us again. She reported that someone was going to get hurt if we did not do something…
We began getting more reports of assaults occurring in the crowd. We formed a team and went into the crowd to detain and speak with Alexander. We entered the crowd, to contact Alexander. As we approached the southeast corner of the building where all the commotion was occurring, I saw Alexander who appeared to be disabling the sound system that Julie was using along with the other speakers. There was a small group of elderly men trying to keep Alexander from disabling the system by attempting to block him from it. Alexander was crouched down pulling between their feet. I reach for him with the intention of escorting him out of the crowd. It was at this point that the suspect in the assault 3rd-degree case, later identified as Ryan S. Harris DOB: 04/08/1978 physically prevented me from detaining Alexander by grabbing me from the left side of my body on my vest causing me to use my left hand to physically get him off me.
This deliberate act to interfere and obstruct my lawful duty to detain Alexander for assault 4th degree allowed him to escape custody at the time. Officer Stanton and Officer Titterness were able to detain Harris who was subsequently booked on assault 3 on me.
Based on my observations and the statements from the victim, there is probable cause that Alexander Z French DOB: 12/09/1997 violated RCW 9A.36.041 assault in the 4th degree when he “bashed” himself into Julie Jaman’s ankle causing her to almost lose her balance.”
In later conversations about that night, many of us asked, “Who are these people? Are they from Seattle? Portland? I didn’t recognize any of the agitators…” Ryan Harris, the fellow who prevented Sharif from grabbing French, lives on Hastings Avenue. The tattooed thug who body-slammed me and so many others, and knocked Rachelle Burt Merle to the bricks, also lives in Port Townsend, as it happens. Just the kind of neighbors I’ve always dreamed of…
———————————
Meet Sam Feinson.
Law partner of the self-avowed “pervert” mayor of Port Townsend, David Faber. Legal counsel for Alexander Zachary French.
Sam Feinson, FaberFeinson PLLC
At French’s arraignment, Feinson denied that his client behaved in a way that disturbed a lawful gathering, insisting that nothing French did at that event rose to the actionable legal premise of probable cause for his arrest, saying:
“What we don’t know is if he disrupted anything at all.”
Prosecutor Chris Ashcraft shook his head and shot back, prefacing his remark by acknowledging that he generally finds Feinson reasonable to work with, but he found this defense “disingenuous”.
“I’m shocked he would make that statement,” Ashcraft said. “Everyone knows what went on that day…” He proceeded to list items from the probable cause affidavit that was before the judge.
Feinson repeated that his client “did not disrupt a lawful gathering,” adding that people were “speculating, talking about one person among 250-300 people” — as if it were impossible for a single individual to impact an event.
The pro tem judge ruled in favor of the prosecution, agreeing that there is probable cause and ordered that the case go forward. A pre-trial status hearing is scheduled for January 18th, 2023, and a jury trial is tentatively set for February 9th.
Though Sam Feinson isn’t known for social media posts about having sex with chickens and dogs, like his partner David Faber, he did get some attention for this tweet to women’s rights activist, Mattie Watkins, insisting that the biological male Julie Jaman encountered in the locker room on July 26th was really a woman, because — he said so:
@bald-barrister, “…Your strange obsession with her genetalia” [sic]… meaning “her” penis.
———————————
The Arrest
Officer Sharif decided not to pursue French at the moment the perpetrator escaped his grip and fled on August 15th, choosing instead to investigate the multiple reports he’d received from victims and witnesses that night. Social media posts seen days after the event claimed French was seen in various places on Whidbey Island. There doesn’t appear to be a 4952 Ravenridge in zip code 98368. In this shocking 59-page incident report prepared by Officer Titterness, French is also listed at 441 Van Buren (p. 12), 4952 Ravenridge Drive, Freeland (p. 23) in addition to being referred to as “transient”(p. 1). Perhaps that’s not even his real name. The report includes numerous first-hand accounts of injurious assault, robbery and theft. Why he is not being pursued by prosecution for all that is a mystery.
On September 3rd, a rally organized by members of Washington Three Percenters and the Proud Boys, ostensibly in support of the women and men who were verbally and physically attacked there by the hateful mob a couple of weeks earlier, drew a large crowd of pro-trans opponents as well as roughly 50 law enforcement officers from the city, county and state. As fate would have it, Alexander French could not resist the call of the wild, his chance to be “victimized” once again.
On the lookout, PTPD Officer Chase Stanton spotted him entering the public restroom in the Cotton Building. According to his Supplemental Report filed on Sept. 4th, he contacted his team, and entered the bathroom with two JCSO deputies. The arrest was filmed by law enforcement body cams, the footage of which was acquired through public records requests by Crystal Cox, one of the many women who were assaulted on August 15th.
Handcuffing
French was clearly stunned to be nabbed by police, so successfully had he convinced himself of his own innocence. Not long after he was led outside, he began vomiting into a nearby planter.
Not feeling so hot now
He was eventually asked to sit down on the planter edge, and in no time at all uttered what was surely yet another falsehood.
“I shouldn’t a come down here. I just came down to use the bathroom, then I was gonna go home.”
After French was searched prior to crawling into the Sheriff’s van for his ride to the jail, his phone, wallet and car keys were handed off to a female friend.
Into the JCSO van
She was at the August 15th event, too. When the officer asked who he should give his possessions to, French pointed and said “that girl.” He then called to her to ask, “Would you call my dad?”
Cell phone screen shot of French’s booking.
French’s booking included 1 count of assault, 2 counts of theft and 2 counts of robbery.
———————————
On September 5th, this GoFundMe (GFM) fundraiser was created by Tom French:
Tom French was asking for donations to his legal fund to “Free Alex French.” Relationship between the two is undetermined.
The text is rife with errors — in fact, nothing within it is accurate, including the date of the arrest. The campaign garnered $340 before it was halted by the organizer. Did the anonymous $200 donation come from a local attorney known to support the trans agenda? Did that same attorney approach French to offer his service — perhaps pro bono — of representation? We don’t know, but we’d like to. We do know that French was not screened for a public defender, which is a bit odd for someone whose legal aid had just been the subject of a GFM fund-raising campaign.
———————————
More incongruities, evidence from August 15
In this body cam video, Officer Marc Titterness is moving away from the crowd, and approaches other PTPD members. Officer J. Stuart says to him “at some point Jason wants me and Chase to go inside, so will you guys kinda hang out over here [aiming his thumb in the direction of the front steps of City Hall] and not get involved in that?”
Titterness responds that he’s “keeping an eye out for a big guy with a metal can [a string of unintelligible words] and that’s felony assault, that’s why I’m keeping my eye on him. That’s what I’m watching.”
The men are then approached by three women and a man insisting that they come over to aid and prevent harm coming to the speakers. They’re told that it is not the role of the police to prevent harm, only to respond if it occurs.
One of the officers expresses concern that an assault may occur, but the police are redirected to monitor the City Hall entrance instead. By that time, only a small overflow from a filled council chamber was milling about while, upstairs, a woke city council was heralding Port Townsend’s new trans rights proclamation. It made no sense that law enforcement should retreat from ‘keeping the peace’ to what was clearly a safe, inactive position where they couldn’t even see what was going on in the theater of strife.
This is from the PTPD webpage:
We strive to be fair, courteous, and respectful to whom we serve and come into contact with. We genuinely desire to partner with our community to reduce crime and the fear of crime, promote all aspects of safety, and strive to protect and serve the community in which you live, work, and play.
As Chief, I believe in strong leadership, transparency, and accountability from every member of the Department. My priorities include being responsive to our citizens, conducting thorough criminal investigations and enforcing traffic laws to improve the quality of life within our city. I recognize our ability to serve and maintain public trust is predicated largely upon our actions. Therefore, we shall strive to earn your trust every day we serve.
Some of the police seemed concerned to leave the Sousa/Jaman event given what they viewed as the potential for violence. Mayor Faber pronounced that evening “beautiful.” Something’s not adding up.
———————————
“I have a question for you. When you were a little boy,
is this the man you dreamed of becoming?”*
From the looks of things, Alexander French has zero experience with taking personal responsibility for his actions. If Sam Feinson has his way, that won’t happen this time, either. Restorative justice might advocate for French having to sit down and watch the videos taken on the afternoon/evening of August 15th, followed by all of the filmed denials of everything he’d done that day, and his subsequent defense and disavowal of it.
What chance does this young man have to live an authentic, fulfilling life when the adults in his circle support his lies and misdemeanors with more lies and protection from accountability?
It has been said that “every perpetrator was a victim.”
What has happened in his young life that encouraged the sort of behavior displayed on August 15th? Why did so many of the people in that crowd support it?
How was he convinced that he must go to these lengths to ensure that males can enter female spaces? Or is that not his mission at all? Is he on pharmaceuticals known to contribute to aggression, belligerence, the inability to consider consequences, thus always on the lookout for opportunities to go rogue?
At this juncture we can only guess. Alex French is certainly a victim of these culture wars — as are his peers — born into a degenerate system that was waiting for them with open arms and closed minds. When I imagine the future 25 years from now through the lens we were given that day, it appears very bleak indeed.
* Author Michael LaRocca
———————————
Special thanks to Crystal Cox for her diligent investigative work and sharing of public records acquisitions.
y between Quimper Sound Records and The Old Whiskey Mill are what gives our downtown a rich ambience and celebrated appeal.
