Fort Worden PDA To Go Broke,
Lose Executive Director in Next 90 Days

by Jim Scarantino | Jun 29, 2023 | General

Dave Timmons has had enough. The former Port Townsend City Manager (at left above, speaking to the city council at their June 12 meeting) came out of retirement in 2020 in response to requests he step in to save a collapsing Fort Worden Public Development Authority (PDA). He gave his contractually required 90-day notice to the PDA’s Board at its June 27 meeting. Ninety days out is also just about the time the PDA’s financial team says it will run out of money.

Timmons cannot be accused of fleeing from a sinking ship. He jumped onto one in 2020, only to learn that the PDA’s hull was riddled with rot and worm holes. As I wrote after watching his heroic efforts in that year, he worked miracles. He managed to steer away from the shoals an organization hobbled by nearly a decade of incompetent and less-than-honest management. He let it be known that the PDA was “a house of cards” ready to collapse from the weight of debt burdens impossible to bear and the misuse—as well as outright theft—of funds by former management and a senior employee now facing criminal prosecution.

He crafted a spin-off of the hospitality arm of Fort Worden’s operations, the only way the operations could survive. His leadership attracted incredibly generous donations. He secured additional credit from lenders already facing millions in losses. He persuaded vendors to be patient about being paid.

Before he stepped onboard to lend an assist and then to helm the PDA that organization had never—never—received a passing audit from the State Auditor.  Timmons inherited incomprehensible financial records. He oversaw the gargantuan task of converting from accrual to cash-basis reporting. He did all this with a skeleton staff who joined him in working miracles.

But it may have been a hopeless cause all along. The costs of maintaining ancient, obsolete buildings, heating and electrical systems and plumbing has always been a millstone. Revenues have never been enough to keep up. And something major always breaks. The costs of repairs keep rising. There’s never enough money.

As PDA Board Chairman David King (in blue shirt in top photo) told Port Townsend’s city council on June 12, 2023, “We are not currently sustainable.” The maintenance costs are crippling. and the PDA has “no revenue source for debt” incurred by the prior PDA Board and Timmons’ predecessor.

This is a critical time for the PDA, but Timmons has decided he must leave the organization he has worked so hard to keep alive. It is clear from his letter of resignation and other comments that the impetus for his departure is a deteriorating relationship with Port Townsend City Manager John Mauro and City Council.

“We have reached the threshold that cooperation doesn’t exist,” he told council and Mauro at council’s June 12 meeting.

Inheriting a Nightmare

I went back and read my reports from 2020 about Timmons’ rescue mission. I had forgotten the details about the daunting challenges he faced.

“Fort Worden Out of Money…” led the headline for an article I wrote in December 2020. The opening paragraph explained:

“We really don’t have a future if we try to remain status quo,” David Timmons, Acting Executive Director of the Fort Worden Public Development Authority told its Board of Directors at their December 9, 2020, special meeting.

“The PDA will run out of money in several weeks. It needs over $1.5 million to cover operating and capital costs over the next six to seven months, and then it will face over $1 million a year in maintenance costs while the hospitality industry, its major source of funds, recovers from COVID lockdowns.”

Timmons found a way to keep PDA breathing another 2.5 years.

“Fort Worden Finances Plagued With Problems From Beginning” was the headline of a November 2020 article.

“Its financial reports have never been reliable, according to all the audits conducted of the Fort Worden Public Development Authority by the State Auditor. Every audit since the FWPDA opened its doors has found inaccuracies, omissions and failures to comply with required accounting practices. Recent discoveries, which will be addressed in upcoming audits, have uncovered massive malfeasance and irresponsibility that jeopardize the organization’s continued existence.”

Two other articles from 2020 reminded me of how bad was the mess that Timmons took on:  “Fort Worden’s Promised Financial Oversight Never Happened,” and “Criminal Investigators Called Into Fort Worden PDA Mess.”

Then there was the laughable $2 million “glamping” fiasco Timmons inherited: “Fort Worden Glamping A Soggy Mess.”

$125,000 per “luxo tent”! None have ever been rented, not a dime has come back to the PDA.

There was probably no one else in our community up to the challenge.

What’s changed now to prompt Dave Timmons suddenly to submit his resignation?

Mauro versus Timmons

Timmons was Port Townsend’s first city manager. (Michael Hildt was the first “City Administrator.” Timmons was the first to hold the title “City Manager.”) According to a 2019 Peninsula Daily News (PDN) article reporting Timmons’ retirement as PT’s city manager, he graduated from Michigan State University with a degree in environmental studies, then went to work with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources as a zoning manager. In 1978 he was chosen as a city department manager for a town in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula then moved on to be the first township manager. He later declined an offer to be Marquette, Michigan’s first city manager and moved to Cochester, Vermont where he served as city manager for 12 years. In 1997 he consulted with FEMA to help the state with four disaster events and was nominated by then Vermont governor Howard Dean to be the state’s secretary of labor. In 1999 he was hired as Port Townsend’s city manager and served continuously for the next 20 years.

At the same time Timmons was asked to come out of retirement to save Fort Worden, John Mauro was stepping into Timmons’ shoes as PT’s second city manager.

Based on information presumably provided by Mauro, the PDN reported that he was coming to Port Townsend from a high-level, high-responsibility job for the City of Auckland, New Zealand. “Mauro currently reports to the Auckland Council CEO,” the PDN related. “He is directly responsible for 20 employees and has a budget of $211 million.”

That wasn’t true, as I reported in an October 2020 article (“Who Is John Mauro?“), I had contacted the city of Auckland seeking confirmation of the PDN story. The response contradicted these claims about Mauro’s qualifications. Auckland’s mayor had referred my inquiry to the Auckland Council CEO in whose line of command Mauro’s position would have been. Through a spokesperson he told me that Mauro did not report directly to the Auckland Council CEO. He was a mid-level bureaucrat in the planning department under a General Manager. He was not “directly responsible for 20 employees and a budget of $211 million.” Half that number of employees reported to him and the budget for which he was “directly responsible” was $1 million. That was in New Zealand dollars, which is about the equivalent of just over $600,000 US.

Mauro’s job in Auckland was “sustainability officer.” He and his small team, as a New Zealand publication reported, “provide thought leadership, drive strategic direction and champion change.” Change in terms of addressing climate change.

Mauro didn’t build anything, maintain or build roads and sewers or oversee police. He provided “thought leadership.”

Fast forward to 2023. The city now managed by Mauro, as we reported May 25, 2023, is heading over a financial cliff.  Mauro overspent his current budget by millions due to hiring consultants for projects the city admits it cannot afford (e.g., a new $50 million aquatic center, a remake of the golf course, and the Evans Vista development). The city is eating into reserves and cannot maintain its failing streets. I recently learned from a source in the Sheriff’s Office that county law enforcement is still covering patrols for a city department lacking adequate staffing to do the job.

Mauro publicly defends the city’s “solid financial position” to continue providing basic services. But with Mauro’s unique hold on the English language, in the same breath he qualifies that the financially-solid city’s “ability to continue to do so is hindered by increasing costs in excess of revenues and a steady erosion of services and level of service.”  Translated from Maurospeak, the city is heading “over a cliff,” the exact, unvarnished words used by the city’s Financial Sustainability Taskforce.

Mauro had followed his wife to Auckland where she had secured a teaching job. Before that he had been a bicycle activist in Seattle.

Power Play

Mauro wants more control and power over Timmons and the PDA.

The PDA has been slow on churning out financial reports to meet the city’s deadlines.  This is being used as a reason to subject the PDA to direct city manager control over its financial affairs, strategic direction and other matters.  The hook being used is the 2022 financial report. Under city code, it was due three months after the end of the fiscal year, in March. It was delivered in June. Other complaints have been raised, but in the “Draft Corrective Action Plan” written by Mauro and his staff, it is the annual report being 2-3 months behind that is the main justification for increasing city control over the PDA.

The financial reports provided to the PDA Board are matters of public record and easily available to Mauro and his staff, as well as members of the public. Financial reports were provided to the State Auditor. No request for information has been stonewalled.

Timmons operates with a skeleton staff. The woman described as “critical” to their accounting and reporting had been battling cancer and recently passed away, leaving a huge hole in the organization’s capabilities. As Timmons explained at his June 12 City Council dressing-down, the rest of his staff consists of a clerk at 32 hours/week, an administrative assistant at 32 hours/week, an accountant at 24 hours/week, and a contract CPA providing 10 hours of services weekly.

This is the entirety of Timmons’ staff for all PDA’s administrative, executive and accounting tasks. There is no money to hire anyone else. The services of the communications and public relations contractors, PDA Chair David King told Council, were ended because there is no money to pay them.

Mauro has also faced staffing shortages. He has filled gaps by hiring expensive outside consultants. City Council approved a $4.7 million supplemental budget to cover his overruns. Tax increases are looming ahead to get more money to run city operations. The PDA has no taxing authority. It cannot just demand that citizens give it more money, and it has no reserves to cover “supplemental” budget increases.

The PDA is currently required to provide quarterly and annual financial reports. Mauro is demanding that the PDA now provide monthly financial reports. At the June 12 Council meeting, Timmons explained that they do not have the staff to do that, unless those few staff people are taken off the other work they must do. Mauro was dismissive of the limited resources Timmons has, and somewhat mocked his vulnerability to losing any staff time.

(It must be noted that while Timmons was struggling with lingering problems from ten years of mismanagement and facility crises plus the loss of the full contribution of a key team member who was fighting cancer, Mauro took himself off on a five-week vacation after enjoying recent significant increases to his compensation package.)

Mauro’s “Draft Corrective Action Plan” would require the PDA to provide financial reports a week in advance of city oversight meetings, blaming past failures to do so on “struggles preparing the materials due to a lack of process and efficient financial reporting structure/form [that has been] hindering the FW PDA to meet required timelines.” Timmons and King tried to explain that the city’s meeting schedule does not align with the PDA’s own financial reporting schedules and creates huge problems for an understaffed accounting team. Their explanation fell on closed ears.

John Mauro (top left) responds to David King and Dave Timmons (at the podium) on June 12.

The rest of Mauro’s “Draft Corrective Action Plan” turns to inserting city staff in the business operations of the PDA. It would have the city get involved in utility cost allocation and negotiations with the “partners” (the tenants) at Fort Worden. The city would also direct the PDA in resolving billing disputes with the hospitality spinoff.

The PDA was recently forced to increase its line of credit to cover shortfalls caused by delays in the receipt of expected grants. Henceforth, under Mauro’s plan, the city will decide whether the PDA can increase its line of credit.

Mauro is demanding that the city have authority to approve or disapprove capital projects and capital planning.

Mauro wants the city to “monitor and coordinate on future PDA grant applications.”  He wants to participate as a partner in strategic planning in order to “right-size the structure to meet future needs.”

Mauro wants to increase the PDA board to 9 members, with the mayor appointing at least three additional members.

All this to “correct” an annual report being delivered a few months late, even though nothing in the provided report was called out as being false, incomplete or incorrect.

It appears that the late financial report is being used as pretext, or at least an opportunity, to increase the city manager’s control over the PDA and its executive director. As Timmons pointed out to the Council on June 12, these are not “corrective measures. This is an enforcement action. We have reached the threshold that cooperation doesn’t exist.”

Timmons Resignation Letter Says More

Timmons submitted a lengthy letter of resignation. He reflected on his 45 years of public service and the challenges at the PDA that he, his staff and Board confronted together. He thanked the local institutions that stood by PDA and helped keep the ship from sinking. In that long letter, he provides more insight into his motivation for leaving now. He did not have much reason to recognize the city’s contribution to the fight.

Compared to the Herculean efforts of others, and the votes of confidence from lenders and vendors, the support of the City of Port Townsend pales in comparison. Banks extended hundreds of thousands of dollars in new credit. Private individuals donated half a million dollars. Lawyers donated valuable time. Architects, plumbers, construction companies, electricians and fuel suppliers did not act on overdue billings and “never wavered in supporting us with their patience….”

Jefferson County provided two grants, one for $378,000 to help secure debt restructuring and another of $150,000 towards restoring a critical building.

The Washington Department of Commerce helped the PDA secure and close out several grants, the last in the amount of $697,000.

The city, for its contribution, awarded “a competitive grant of $5,000 … and were cooperative with late utility billings.” But unlike the other players in this drama, the city acted to make life more difficult for the Fort Worden PDA, when “they passed code revisions more suitable to provide punishment for the past situation, not necessarily supportive of our current needs.”

Towards the end of his letter, Timmons said that he had learned in his long career not to take the path others would have you take when you know that is not the right path. “I believe we have reached the point where our paths are no longer in agreement.”  For the “past several weeks,” indicating that this was a recent decision, he says he had been having discussions with some of the Board about “my desire to begin the process to transition to new leadership in the role of Executive Director.” He remains “open to discussions about serving in a limited role as an advisor to pass on institutional knowledge. But other events keep derailing this critical conversation while we continue putting out the most recent fire.”  (Author’s emphasis.)

The PDA Board had nothing but effusive praise for Timmons, whose last day will be September 28, right about the time the PDA runs out of money. The hearing on Mauro’s plans to increase his control over the PDA is scheduled for August 21. A public hearing must be held before the plan can be voted on by Council.

For the video of the June 27 PDA Board of Directors meeting in which Timmons submitted his resignation, click here.  The agenda packet for that meeting, containing Mauro’s Draft Corrective Action Plan and Timmons’ resignation letter may be viewed at this link. The resignation letter is attached as the very last document in the agenda packet.

City Finances “Falling Off Cliff” as Cherry Street Project Enters Seventh Year

by Jim Scarantino | May 25, 2023 | General

Unsustainable. In less than five years, Port Townsend will burn through its reserves and be unable to maintain its current level of services. Its finances will “fall off a cliff.” Those exact words were used by city staff in its presentation to the joint session of City Council and its Financial Sustainability Taskforce on May 8, 2023.

The graph at the top of this article shows what’s coming. Starting this year, the city will begin consuming its reserves. The burn rate accelerates each subsequent year until in 2028 the city starts dropping through the “policy level” that represents its ability to maintain existing services. You might notice that the graph shows a significant peak during the past couple of years. Those were years of a massive infusion of federal and state money and savings due to cutting staff during the pandemic lock downs. It was an unreal time of external munificence that won’t be repeated

The unpleasant and, for many people, painful solution will necessarily involve raising existing taxes and the imposition of new taxes. This will make the cost of living in Port Townsend rise even faster, hastening the shrinking of the city’s middle class and making life ever harder for workers. Taxes get passed through to everyone one way or another. Port Townsend already is not a family-friendly place; things are going to get worse for households on limited budgets trying to raise children.  A higher cost of living exacerbates conditions already faced by employers who cannot attract workers or keep on their payrolls younger people who are forced to choose a community that better fits their paychecks. Higher costs in Port Townsend have also driven out some of the creative class. An older, wealthier demographic emerges, including a greater concentration of people moving here to spend their last years and those with surplus money capable of acquiring second homes.

An alternative would be to put ambitious, costly plans on hold and immediately impose austerity measures.  This will be the involuntary consequence anyway if, very quickly, something “radical” is not done. That was the message of Steve King, the city’s public works director. He shared hard truths I can’t remember hearing at any previous city council meeting. He informed council that, “Our tax structure absolutely requires growth.” He said that a “radical” change was needed to achieve a significant rate of growth not seen here in recent memory.

The necessary growth would mean, he said, something like building 75 new homes annually — an unheard of accomplishment under the city’s difficult-to-build regulatory regime. Not discussed at the meeting was radically promoting growth by making Port Townsend much more business friendly in order to attract new employers that would create better jobs than those the tourist trade generates. That requires relaxing business and environmental controls, governing with a very light regulatory touch, and dramatically reducing the cost of doing business here — the opposite of our current high taxation, tightly controlled, closely planned, anti-growth dominant culture.

Five years to go before the city launches off that cliff. It took six years to take a first stab at loosening city codes that were making it difficult to add ADUs — even though the need for housing was declared a “crisis” back in 2017. That same year, the city, with the enthusiastic support and advocacy of its current mayor and deputy mayor, began wasting a pile of money, staff time and public resources on the fiasco of the Cherry Street Project. This supposedly “affordable housing” endeavor has sucked up over $2 million in city funds, bond capacity and land. Entering its seventh year, the project provides housing only to rats, raccoons and the squirrels that I have observed entering the building through holes chewed in the building’s eaves. It is also a publicly-funded place for kids to party and do who-knows-what-else inside the vandalized derelict on the hill over the golf course.

“Lean Thinking”

The May 8 meeting partially focused on how to craft a message to persuade taxpayers to accept a higher tax burden. One slide boasted of steps that have been taken to slow the impending launch into a fiscal abyss.

King informed council it would take at least another $1.5 million annually over future decades to start to turn around the city’s dire streets problem. It will take another $750,000 annually just to keep things from getting worse. The touted “efficiencies,” as anyone with some sense of proportion will realize, are insignificant. The cliff up ahead has been visible since at least the time the current city manager began employment. That’s three years ago, yet this is all that can be claimed in the way of meaningful efforts to cut costs.

Notice that “lean thinking” is cited as an example of an efficiency achieved.  What is “lean thinking”?  Some kind of thought experiment?  An image of an unhealthy overweight person imagining a fit, trim twin in the mirror comes to mind.

At the same time it confronts an impending fiscal crisis, city leaders are spending scarce resources on dreams of a grand new pool and exercise facility. Just a basic pool alone, as was stated during the May 8 meeting, will cost $25 million. Opsis, the Portland, Oregon consultant working for the city, pegs the minimal cost at more than $30 million and running as high as $52.7 million.

The city is also tossing around ideas for remaking the golf course, though it has no money to do anything (already needing volunteers to trim the grass).

And even as a poison hemlock forest again engulfs the Cherry Street Project the city is moving forward on its largest housing project ever – the Evans Vista development. The land was acquired with grants, but the city has shelled out at least $500,000 on consulting services while also using considerable costly staff time for a project that may be a decade away from making the faintest impression on the city’s housing market.

In an act that cannot qualify as “lean thinking,” in October 2022 council approved a large increase in compensation for the city manager, John Mauro. They boosted his salary by 10% and threw in a “retention bonus” of $12,500. They also increased his vehicle allowance and doubled the city’s contractual obligation to provide severance pay from 6 to 12 months. Not long after this act of municipal generosity, Mauro went on a five-week vacation.

Mauro’s base salary is now $189,297, up from his starting salary mid-2020 of $156,000. In addition to his base salary, he also gets 13% of his salary contributed to his retirement account, almost $25,000 annually at his current rate of pay. When he was hired, he received a $20,000 relocation allowance to move him here from New Zealand. His current automobile allowance of $6,600 is equivalent to driving more than 10,000 miles, at the current IRS business mileage rate. One could reasonably wonder how and why the city manager is driving more than 10,000 miles annually on city business. How is that possible? For background on Mr. Mauro, please see our report, Who is John Mauro, Port Townsend City’s Manager?, in which his previous employer in Auckland contradicted published claims about the job Mauro held as an employee of that city.

Just three days before the meeting with the Financial Unsustainability Taskforce, city council had to admit it was going to blow its 2023 budget. It approved a “supplemental” budget that recognized the need for an additional $4.7 million above what had been anticipated. Bills from consultants drove the budget-busting, er, supplemental measure. These consultants are being used to advance the Mountain View pool/rec center and golf course projects. Council was also told that expensive consultants were doing work normally done by staff engineers, as the city has been shorthanded in that department.

At the same time it was claiming it needed more money to pay consultants to fill holes in its engineering department (not to be confused with filling holes in the streets), the city hired a new marketing manager. She will work on “engaging the public,” according to a Peninsula Daily News report, on “decisions including the Port Townsend Golf Course, an aquatics center, streets, housing and…” (get this) “financial sustainability.” In other words, she will be working on selling the public on projects the city acknowledges it cannot currently afford and trying to convince taxpayers to accept tax increases for the sake of “sustainability.”

Recently the city sought to recruit a Director of People and Performance, with a salary ranging from $107,00 to just over $130,000. Desperately needed licensed engineers with a minimum of 6 years experience, meanwhile, were being offered jobs starting at under $75,000, with a top range of $92,000. The opening for Director of People and Performance position has been closed. The city is still looking for three engineers and a Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer. In the meantime, more expensive consultants are doing those jobs and/or services are being curtailed.

As for that Cherry Street Project, in August 2022 it looked like the city would sell the building and property. City staff projected the sale might net $320,000. City council was going to decide whether to impose conditions on the purchaser that required them to build a certain number of “affordable” units, or unload the property for the best deal that could be had. The city has already passed up a $1 million cash offer. City Manager Mauro blew off Keith and Jean Marzan of Morgan Hill who offered to bail the city out of the mess it had created for itself and pledged to build affordable housing on the site (see our report). When Mauro presented the history of the Cherry Street Project to city council last year, he failed to mention that he had rejected this cash offer, which was about three times more than the city could hope for now. I spoke with a council member immediately after the meeting. She said she had never been informed of the $1 million cash offer that Mauro dismissed.

(On May 15, the City Council during its business meeting went into executive session to discuss a real estate sale or lease. The property in question was not identified during the meeting.)

Whether it sells the property or not, until 2040 the city will be making annual payments of $61,896 on its $1.4 million bond principal and interest obligation assumed to rehab the 70-year building barged across the Strait of Juan de Fuca from Victoria, B.C.  Netting $320,000 from a sale would be swallowing about a $2 million loss (the land alone was valued at $600,000 by the city in 2017).

.

Cherry Street Project, May 2023. Top two photos, back of building; bottom photo, front view.

Taxes and More Taxes

Even with the annual 1% increase in property taxes city council always imposes, in five years the city heads into “red ink,” in the words of Mayor David Faber. Just treading water — not demanding more from taxpayers already paying high taxes — means red ink washes ashore very soon. Streets will continue to deteriorate and services will decline. Intermittently and futilely patching crumbling streets guarantees even more costly repairs down the road. Public Works Director King said in the May 8 meeting that replacing a failed street, as Lawrence Street has become, costs 4-5 times more than required to properly maintain a street. He said that F Street and San Juan Avenue “are next” for failure. “We will,” he said, “continue to see those streets go down, and pretty much [then] the whole town is shot, not just the side streets.”

The kind of growth King intimated is necessary to prop up the city’s existing fiscal structure is not going to happen in the time remaining before the edge of the cliff is under city leaders’ toes.

If the city sold all available disposable land identified by city staff, an option discussed at the meeting, it could raise maybe $2 million. The Cherry Street Project was not identified as one of those properties. But even adding the possible proceeds from sale of that failed project, it is still not enough to avert the upcoming cliff dive.

An idea was floated to lease space at City Hall and charge a rental fee for the pool, raising maybe – maybe – $150,000 annually. That’s a big if and would put the city in competition with private landlords for some uses. As mentioned, getting streets into sound condition will cost $1.5 million a year for a long time. The aquatic center city leaders want will require, according a May 10 Leader article, an annual subsidy of $750,000 “for the base option.”

Some “efficiencies” were suggested, along the lines of the “efficiencies” listed above. Let’s be serious. None of this would make much of an impact.  Not on the list, by the way, are salary freezes or more modest annual raises. The trajectory off that fast-approaching precipice incorporates maintaining annual 4.5% to 5% raises for staff.

That leaves raising or adding taxes. The Sustainability Task Force and city staff have plenty of ideas on how to get more out of homeowners, shoppers, business owners, renters… everybody.

Those ideas include the obvious: raising property taxes. A proposal was discussed to raise property taxes by $.50 for every $1,000 of assessed value, and adding this to the basis for annual 1% overall property tax increases. That would mean a $250 increase in the first year for a property assessed at $500,000, which would then increase annually thereafter. This would be a permanent tax increase.

Other ideas for bringing in more money to city coffers: raising the water, sewer and stormwater utility tax; increasing taxation of electric and telephone services; a higher B&O tax; charging parking fees on 500 parking spaces (which requires additional enforcement and administrative costs); increasing user fees; imposing a “transportation benefit district” sales tax; imposing a “transportation benefit district” license fee; imposing a $5,000 per housing unit impact fee; enacting a metropolitan park district property tax; imposing a parks and recreation district levy; imposing a parks and recreation service area levy; collecting a public facilities district sales tax; adding an affordable housing sales tax; and raising development service fees.

This was one of the most important city council sessions in years. It received decent coverage by Peter Seagall of the Peninsula Daily News. It was ignored by the city’s own newspaper. Staff’s PowerPoint presentation is here. You can view and hear the entire 2.5 hour meeting at this link. You will hear city leaders laughing and joking. Yet the situation is so serious that having the county take over the city’s police department, parks, library, planning and engineering services was presented for consideration.

Here is the full list of our reporting on the Cherry Street Project since our first article:

Unhappy Birthday: Cherry Street Project Turns Five Years Old 5/9/22

The Tragedy of the Cherry Street Project, 12/12/18

What’s Happening With the Cherry Street Project? 10/29/19

“Completely Bogus” Numbers–More Problems and Delays for Cherry Street Project, 12/2/19

Multi-Million Dollar Fraud on Taxpayers: The Cherry Street Project Unmasked, 6/27/20

Cherry Street Welcomes First Tenants, 2/28/20

Default the Cherry Street Project Now, 4/22/20

Latest Cherry Street Giveaway Hits Taxpayers Harder, 10/2/20

Cherry Street Project Handover “Not a Done Deal,”10/19/20

Accomplished Developer Will Donate Time and Services for Cherry Street Project, 10/20/20

Cherry Street Handover: Red Flags About Bayside Housing, 3/3/21 (and related articles)

Happy Fourth Birthday, Cherry Street Project! 5/10/21

Cherry Street Project Costs Soar in Bayside Housing Proposal, 6/23/21

New Majority on Council Should Kill the Cherry Street Project, 11/27/21

Cherry Street Project Vandalized, 1/4/22

“Incredibly Expensive” Housing Project Follows Cherry Street Debacle, 1/6/22

Mayor Faber (Almost) Opens Up on Cherry Street Project Failure, 4/23/22

Strangulation by Streateries?

by Ana Wolpin | Mar 30, 2022 | General

Political players at the City of Port Townsend have made no secret of their desire to eliminate vehicular traffic in the city’s primary business districts in favor of a more walkable, bike-able, maybe even pedestrian-only commercial hub. When John Mauro was hired as city manager to replace 20-year manager Timmons, it was on the strength of his “green” credentials. As reported in the Free Press in October 2020 (Who is John Mauro, Port Townsend’s City Manager?), in his prior position as Chief Sustainability Officer for the city of Auckland, New Zealand:

“He gave interviews and wrote climate action plans and plans for planting trees and adding bike paths and eliminating cars from Auckland streets.”

A green and sustainable environment may be a laudable goal. Is the elimination of parking in PT’s Historic Districts — by awarding use of publicly-funded street rights-of-way to some business owners, to the detriment of others — the right way to achieve that goal?

When pandemic response began dramatically changing our local landscape, temporary “streateries” were developed to enable restaurants to relocate their indoor dining to parking areas outside their businesses — literally on the city streets. Naturally, the loss of valuable parking spaces meant potentially reduced traffic for all other businesses along those streets. But, hey, this was an emergency, and the burdens on folks in the food industry were especially onerous.

The emergency is past. It’s business as usual again. But the restaurateurs who have benefited from the expanded real estate do not want to lose it. The city is now proposing that these “streateries” are granted permanent status — benefiting a small coterie of restaurant owners while the majority of the business community suffers the loss of even more already-limited parking options for their customers.

Water Street “streatery”, removing 46 feet of parking, as well as public sidewalk space.

The city posted notification of an “Open House on Streateries” on their website. The presentation took place yesterday evening. According to the timeline on the city webpage, this is the fast-track schedule to codify their proposal:

• March 21, 2022 Survey noted above distributed by Port Townsend Main Street
• March 29, 2022 Open House at 4:30 at the Cotton Building
• March 31, 2022 Survey closes
• April 4, 2022, City Council Meeting reviews public feedback
• April 18, 2022, City Council Meeting – Council will be presented with proposed code and receives public feedback
• May 2, 2022, City Council Meeting presents any revisions of ordinance for the proposed code

Where was the public notice?

The public was never notified of this significant proposed change to city code in the newsletter that is included in all city utility bills each month. It was not mentioned in reports from either the mayor or the city manager. Will next month’s newsletter announce this plan, after the survey has closed and the City Council has already reviewed public feedback?

A press release is linked on the city’s page noted above, but we can find no mention in the Leader of this proposal or process. Nor did Main Street’s Word on the Street publicize it, though the timeline above states that Main Street distributed a survey.

That survey is also on the city’s website, here. It consists of 13 questions. Question 5 is “Do you support the establishment of a long-term program for streateries and parklets?” Free Press editor Stephen Schumacher responded:

“This feels like a theft of public streets by converting ‘temporary emergency’ outdoor dining into permanent space for preferred businesses at the expense of others, who may not have been given legally required public notice. These outdoor street structures are ugly and unnecessary and impinge on parking and reinforce the false narrative that some kind of ongoing ‘emergency’ is going on or may soon be resumed.”

Additionally he wrote, “I reject the premises of questions 6-11 because these illegal takings of public properties for private insider benefits need to be terminated not perpetuated.”

The only public notice of this proposal we were able to find other than the page on the city’s website was a March 16 article in the Peninsula Daily News (PDN), Port Townsend to consider permanent ‘streatery’ program. It notes that a Main Street survey conducted last year found that business owners complained about the loss of parking spaces “and about the way some of the streateries look.”

Unless a resident regularly reads the PDN or frequents the city’s website, one wouldn’t know this giveaway was in process.

The issues with parking, to which the city has turned a blind eye for years, have been an ongoing nightmare for some Port Townsend businesses. Harvey Windle, owner of Forest Gems, anchoring the busy downtown intersection of Washington and Adams, has been a vocal critic of the parking morass for eight years and has written the city multiple times about this proposed commandeering of public property.

His most recent letter, emailed today to Port Townsend’s city attorney, city council and mayor, and City Manager Mauro, questions not only the fairness of serving special interests in this city street giveaway, but the public process itself.

“Besides the negative proposed removal of even more parking spaces for insider special interests, the process looks to be extremely flawed.

My manager knew of the proposal only because she signed up on a mailing list.

Monday with only a few days before input cut off on the 31st I took what little time I could spare and spoke with 2 neighboring businesses. Bergstroms and the new owner of the Antique Mall.

Neither were aware of the proposed unknown final number (problem there as well) Streaterie and Parklet conversions and were shocked at the proposal.

Claims were made that businesses were given information. Where is the checklist of businesses contacted?

Why was this not in the local paper weeks in advance with both sides of the issue covered?

Robin Bergstrom asked me if there was something he could sign in protest. A class action lawsuit is where this is headed.

I contacted the City Attorney then and am now.

I believe most do not know of what is going on. Especially after speaking with other business owners.”

Today Windle spoke with even more downtown business folks.

“Stopped into Gooding O’Hara Mackey. Receptionist knew nothing about plans. Was disgusted that the streatery across the way has not been removed. Never used, she said. Also commented that she has to find parking daily.”

He also visited another business on Taylor “which was bustling.” The owner told him she went to last night’s meeting and “expressed that she did not want the streateries to continue or grow in numbers.”

There is also a safety issue. These are not quaint sidewalk cafes, they are in the roadway. Until (if) all vehicle access is eliminated, diners are literally feet from traffic negotiating the often busy uptown and downtown business districts. A side order of gas and diesel fumes with your meal, anyone? There isn’t even a curb providing a few inches of elevation to deflect a wayward car from careening into unprotected diners.

“Streatery” below the curb, in the street. Grills on the table tops and propane tanks at your feet. Puddles. Cars driving just inches away, some trying to park at the edge of the picket fence. A safe and pleasant dining experience?

The PDN states “streateries are taking about 10 parking spaces out of the downtown-Uptown equation.”  Windle conducted his own survey and estimates that about a dozen spaces are being lost to these “temporary” outdoor dining spaces at present. But there are only three streateries currently installed — one outside of Alchemy on Washington at the end of Taylor Street, two along Water Street (photos at top and above). You can bet that with official city code inviting eateries to annex the street parking outside their properties, there will be many more to come.

Alchemy “streatery”, eliminating 5 or 6 parking spaces

If this proposed plan is codified, these three would likely be the tip of the iceberg. Taylor Street alone could have several streateries. Windle noted that until recently, there were “many others”, outside Sirens and Elevated Ice Cream among them. His letter to the city continues:

“In this case restaurants will think they benefit but where do their customers park?… Where are my special woodworkers spaces? And auto shops? And antiques? When restaurant owner Kristin buys a 6 million dollar parking-not-enforced building I think her losses are manageable without taking from me and others…

Several restaurants are owned by the President of Main Street, run under already compromised Mari Mullen under the influence of Mr. Mauro.

Mauro has a widely known lack of qualifications and has ignored parking issues from his beginning here. It is hard to claim that was not pre-arranged…

Mr. Mauro has no business further damaging limited parking. The City Council is responsible to keep him in his place and doing his actual job.

I am attaching 2 photos for the record of Mr Mauro and Mari along with restaurant owner Kristin’s attempt to close Taylor…

Even restaurant customers need parking. This is insanity. Helter Skelter Insanity against all visitors and business…”

Windle’s comment about “Kristin’s attempt to close Taylor” is in reference to the owner of Alchemy.* These are the photos he provided:

“Open Streets Initiative” on Taylor Street. 
All photos: Harvey Windle

If this “Open Streets Initiative” is the direction this current proposal is headed, there will be far more than a dozen parking spaces lost on Taylor Street alone.

The survey on “Long-term Proposals for Port Townsend Streateries and Parklets” — which the city didn’t announce in its newsletter and the Leader never reported on — closes Thursday, March 31.

*Correction: Past owner

City and YMCA Brace for Court Battle
Over Julie Jaman’s 2022 Lifetime Pool Ban

by Annette Huenke | Jun 13, 2024 | General

On the afternoon of Wednesday, June 12th, attorneys for Port Townsend resident Julie Jaman filed a lawsuit on her behalf. The Center for American Liberty (CAL) registered the official complaint and demand for a jury trial in the Western District Court of Washington.

As we reported in March, legal action was threatened if the City and the YMCA did not meet demands for redress of Jaman’s grievances, including reinstating her pool privileges. The YMCA balked until early May, then declined to settle. The City never responded at all. From the law firm’s official press release:

“The City and YMCA’s failure to respond to Julie’s requests highlights their disregard for public safety,” said Harmeet Dhillon, CEO and Founder of The Center for American Liberty. “By prioritizing political ideology over the protection of children, they have set a dangerous precedent. As we pursue legal action, we demand accountability and a renewed commitment to protecting women’s privacy and civil rights.”

“After witnessing a disturbing incident in the women’s dressing room and raising concerns, I’ve faced a relentless storm of attacks and falsehoods,” Julie Jaman said. “Despite my four decades of community involvement, I’m left with no choice but to seek justice through the courts.”

The Center for American Liberty summarizes the lawsuit thusly:

BANNED FOR LIFE.

When Julie Jaman saw a man in a women’s swimsuit assisting young girls undress in a pool locker room, she was startled and shocked. She believed she may be witnessing a crime in progress.

 

The Port Townsend City Pool — operated by the local YMCA — has a policy that allows men who identify as women to use women’s private spaces like bathrooms and locker rooms. But the YMCA didn’t publicize the policy or warn the women using these facilities that they could be sharing the space with a man at any moment.

 

In the locker room, Julie was understandably concerned by the situation playing out in front of her. She confronted the man and asked him to leave. Within moments of this conversation, YMCA staff began berating Julie for her comments.

 

Instead of addressing Julie’s concerns, the YMCA immediately subjected Julie to a series of escalating punishments:

 

• YMCA staff told Julie that her objection to having a man in the woman’s locker room was “discriminatory.”
• Because Julie’s comment was “discriminatory,” the YMCA banned her for life from all facilities run by that YMCA branch.
• When Julie objected and attempted to explain her side of the story, YMCA staff called the police on her.

 

What began as an attempt to protect two young girls from exposing themselves in front of an adult male ended with a call to the police—to investigate Julie, not the man in the locker room.

 

Sadly, this type of injustice has become a common occurrence in today’s society. It’s a direct result of prioritizing adherence to radical gender ideology over protecting our fundamental rights.

 

Object to a man in the women’s locker room? Banned. Draw attention to the dangers of the bathroom policy? Silenced.

 

That’s why Julie is fighting back.

 

The Center for American Liberty filed a lawsuit against the YMCA and the City of Port Townsend on Julie’s behalf, asking the court to force the City to lift Julie’s lifetime ban. The City of Port Townsend and the YMCA punished Julie because of the content of her speech—because she spoke out after seeing a man in the women’s locker room. Julie deserves justice for the violation of her First Amendment rights and the emotional distress she’s experienced because of this ordeal.

And in her own words…

The written record shows that City Manager John Mauro was not the least bit interested in hearing Jaman’s version of the episode. (See lawsuit Exhibits 8-29 here.) The rush to judgment was immediate and uncompromising, following the arc of ideological narratives one now expects to hear from city hall. Ends justifying the means, City Manager Mauro and advisors swiftly determined that the City was obligated to follow Washington State law alone, forsaking concerns — if they were considered at all — for pragmatic child protection and the U.S. Constitution. It is there — on the constitutional grounds — that this battle will be waged.

The introduction of the lawsuit follows:

1. The City of Port Townsend, Washington (the “City” or “Port Townsend”) has an indoor community swimming facility called the Mountain View Pool (the “Pool”). As with most community pools, residents of this small city use the Pool to recreate and connect with others. But at this pool, patrons must forfeit their First Amendment rights before being allowed in. This is unconstitutional.

2. The City outsources day-to-day management of the Pool to the Olympic Peninsula YMCA (the “YMCA”), a local affiliate of the Young Men’s Christian Association. Although the YMCA is a private non-profit corporation, its operation of the Pool is state action subject to constitutional restrictions. Not only is the Pool government property, but the City remains intimately involved in its management, maintenance, and repair, partnering with the YMCA in that endeavor. In the YMCA’s operation of the Pool and the public messaging associated with the events at issue here, the YMCA and the City have failed to uphold their constitutional obligations as government actors.

3. Plaintiff Julie Jaman is an eighty-two-year-old resident of Port Townsend, where she has lived for forty-eight years. For much of her life, she has served as an advocate for women survivors of sexual assault and domestic abuse. Until recently, she regularly used the Pool for recreational and therapeutic purposes.

4. That changed on July 26, 2022, when the YMCA summarily and permanently banned Jaman from the Pool. That day, Jaman was showering in the women’s locker room after swimming. While in the shower, she heard a male voice coming from inside the locker room. She opened the shower curtain and saw a male in a female swimsuit—an individual who was later identified to her as “Clementine Adams”—with two young girls as they were preparing to use the toilet. Adams was helping one of the young girls remove her bathing suit.

5. Jaman thought she was witnessing a crime in progress, so she spoke up as best she could under the circumstances: she told Adams to leave the women’s locker room. A YMCA staff person immediately entered the locker room, and Jaman asked the staff member to remove Adams. Instead, the staff person berated Jaman for her “discriminatory” statements toward Adams and told Jaman on the spot that she was “banned for life” from the Pool for objecting to Adams’s presence in the locker room.

6. As Jaman later learned, Adams was a YMCA camp counselor and identified as female. Unbeknownst to Jaman, (1) the YMCA’s policy was to allow patrons to use the locker room consistent with their gender identity irrespective of their sex, (2) Adams had the YMCA’s permission to be in the women’s locker room, and (3) Adams had the YMCA’s permission to assist the young girls in using the toilet.

7. Since the incident, Port Townsend officials and YMCA employees have conspired together to engage in a high-profile public relations campaign designed to justify Jaman’s lifetime ban, to smear her, and to make her appear to be bigoted and a serial harasser of transgender individuals. None of this is true. Jaman supports keeping women’s private spaces reserved for women, but she does not harbor hate towards anyone based on their gender identity, nor has she ever harassed anyone at the Pool or elsewhere. Yet that is exactly what Port Townsend and the YMCA have led the public to believe through their false and misleading statements. Like the YMCA’s operation of the Pool, this smear campaign was unconstitutional state action.

8. To this day, almost two years after the incident, Port Townsend and the YMCA have maintained the lifetime ban against Jaman from using the Pool.

9. Defendants’ actions against Jaman were both unlawful and shameful. When an eighty-year-old woman reasonably believes she is witnessing a crime being committed against young girls in a women’s locker room, the government’s reaction should be to gather all of the facts and learn what happened, not immediately take sides in an ideologically charged political debate. Defendants may not summarily punish Jaman for her speech in reaction to what she saw, nor may they defame her for speaking out.

10. Jaman simply wants to return to the Pool she has used for almost forty years and to be compensated for the deprivation of her rights. The Pool is particularly important to her now that, due to her arthritis, swimming is the best form of exercise available to her. In addition, she wants to continue recreating with her friends and fellow Pool patrons. She wants everyone at the Pool to feel safe and secure in sensitive places. And above all else, she wants her life back.

11. Defendants’ lifetime ban against Jaman, their smear campaign against her, and their refusal to allow her to return to the Pool represents the sad reality of constitutional rights and public safety in Port Townsend. Jaman brings this action to remedy this harm.

City Officials’ Presumption of Guilt

Jaman’s version of the initial exchange between her and Adams has been consistent from day one. She said no more than ten words to the young man in a woman’s swimsuit in the ladies’ locker room. Evidently, Rowen DeLuna — the staff person who berated Jaman for her “discriminatory” statements toward Adams, told Jaman on the spot that she was “banned for life” from the pool, and is named as a defendant in the lawsuit — and/or someone else from the Y felt the need to embellish. Jaman was accused of saying things that anyone who knows her would instantly see as inconsistent with her integrity and nature.

Reporting to his “Leadership Team” the day after the August 1st city council meeting where Jaman shared her experience, and many supporters expressed their concern with how the situation had been handled thus far, Mauro sent out a “note to staff” to set the stage — here’s the official story, we should have no deviations from it, beware of misinformation coming from ’the other side.’

City Manager John Mauro’s communication to staff dated August 2nd, 2022. From CAL lawsuit Exhibits 8-29; page 33.

So that’s that. No questions asked — of Jaman, that is. Here is what the Y said you said. Did you, in fact, say these things? No, that question was never posed to the accused. As kangaroo court a hearing of an event as could possibly be held.

It’s all too familiar in government today, when charges of misinformation are commonly cast by the true misinformers.

The staff member, Adams, did not “endure a barrage of unfair, disrespectful and offensive attacks.”

Jaman had no idea she might encounter a male in the locker room, nor that she was expected to use ‘family changing rooms’ if she wished to avoid exposing herself to such males — because the Y did not make this clear to patrons. Not through signage, announcements in the city newsletter, nor discussion with incoming pool users. Purposely? Perhaps, to avoid the controversy. Or maybe they hadn’t gone all in on the changes themselves?

Mauro continues the sermon with a third point, that being Port Townsend’s designation as a sanctuary city, “welcoming of all residents and our diversity.” He proceeds to launch sideways accusations at Jaman, suggesting she was “intolerant, unkind… fueled by fear, anger and hate.” Again, anyone who knows Julie Jaman knows these inflammatory charges are patently absurd.

Throwing Good Money After Bad

Mauro and his advisors spent $3,000 of our city’s precious treasure to hire a PR firm to help manage the debacle. They produced a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) bulletin that was posted on the city’s website. It, too, contained falsehoods, including repetition of the claim that Jaman had “made discriminatory and derogatory comments toward” Adams.

Their FAQ also stated that Jaman had engaged in a “documented previous pattern of disrespectful behavior” at the Pool, a defamatory allegation that was news to Jaman. No such “pattern” had ever been discussed with her by Y staff. No documentation was forthcoming when requested. It does not exist. At least it did not exist before ’the incident.’

Have these actors — obviously so willing to make false claims and character assassinations — been foolish enough to do a little creative backstory-building to cover their rear ends in what has turned out to be quite a serious matter? Let us hope not.

Councillor Libby Wennstrom and Mayor David Faber get (dis)honorable mention in the suit, both for their social media posts suggesting that Jaman was “bigoted and intolerant of transgender-identifying individuals,” with Wennstrom going further by insinuating that Jaman’s presence at the Y had potential to undermine the safety of trans-identifying people.

For greater details, read the lawsuit and the appended exhibits (1, 2). Defendants have 21 days to respond once the Court executes the summonses and the defendants are served with same.  We will report updates in the comment section as we hear of them.

The defendants in this case — and their partisans, too — would do well to pay heed to one of our more timeless proverbs, which has never had more relevance: Pride comes before a fall.

————————————-

Feature image used with permission, Praetorian Public Relations, Walnut Creek, CA