Lipstick on a pig. The side of the Carmel House the public sees from Cherry Street shows new plywood sheeting where windows were broken out during the extensive vandalism on January 3, 2022. It looks like maybe the city is somewhat taking care of its largest, most costly housing project. To deter further vandalism, city crews also posted warnings that the building is under video surveillance. And, wonder of wonders, after years of swinging open to the wind (and me calling out this negligence), the front doors have finally been closed.
It’s all for show. Get a little closer and you’ll see shards of glass everywhere in the weeds. The refrigerator teenagers launched through a picture window is still where it landed.
Walk around back and you’ll see the city has done nothing to protect the building from the elements. All the broken windows are still broken and uncovered. My favorite is the one that looks like a cat in the window (featured at top).
The rest are just ugly, and admit snow and rain, dirt, insects, birds and bats. The place already was overrun with rats and home to raccoons. And, once again, it appears the grounds have a homeless camp.
Those surveillance cameras that are supposed to be watching and recording are nowhere to be seen. It’s the same cheap trick homeowners play when they think they can scare off burglars with fake “Protected by ADT” signs.
The city is jumping into a huge development project with its acquisition of the Evans Vista property at the first traffic circle coming into town. City leaders contemplate building hundreds of units and possible commercial spaces — an entirely new village at the entrance to the city. Yet, it can’t even take care of this single dilapidated, fantastically expensive derelict of a building.
Why be so confrontational by calling it “Faber’s Folly?” David Faber, our current mayor, like the two mayors before him — Deborah Stinson and Michelle Sandoval — has been a vocal supporter of the project, from his years on Council to his current position. He pushed the financing through over pleas of caution and requests for due diligence from former councilor Bob Gray. The financial documents in front of Faber at the time showed the project was doomed to default. Despite the abject failure of this boondoggle, Faber recently boasted “I wouldn’t change a single thing about what we did.”
Faber owns this, as does City Councilor Amy Howard, who also overrode Gray’s calls for caution and due diligence to protect taxpayers. During the discussion on going huge with the Evans Vista village, and with the failure of the Cherry Street Project hanging over council, Howard, now our Deputy Mayor, echoed Faber’s delusional braggadocio and declared she, too, had no regrets.
What this means is that our Mayor and Deputy Mayor have no regrets about saddling taxpayers with the tab for their gross negligence — a nearly $1.4 million debt, highly valuable land rendered unavailable to provide housing for people instead of vermin, and the cost of tearing this thing down and cleaning up the site, an inevitability the politicians think they can ignore. As I have written elsewhere, the costs sunk into this project already exceed $2.2 million and the last cost estimate predicted at least another million would be needed before the first of eight modest apartments would be ready. That was before construction costs began soaring.
While the city suffers under the affordable housing emergency that is depriving businesses of workers, and workers of a place other than a car to call home, the city-owned lot occupied by the rotting Carmel House is unavailable for any kind of sensible housing project, public or private.
The housing crisis is so bad a downtown business owner, who moved here from Asia and invested his savings to pursue a dream in a new country, is on the verge of moving out because he can’t find a home for his family when he loses his lease in less than a month.
Our city leaders have been dithering around since they joined the county’s declaration of a housing emergency… in 2017. We fought and won a World War in less time. It will be many more years before the “incredibly expensive” Evans Vista project (to quote former Mayor Michelle Sandoval) provides a single room of human habitation. I will be writing about this project in my next article.
The only Cherry Street Project related work in the 2022 city budget is simply paying the monthly principal and interest on the bond, with a decade-and-a-half of debt service still to go. Nailing up some plywood boards to partially mask vandalism damage and buying the false surveillance camera signs was presumably off-budget.
To “Faber’s Folly,” let’s add “Howard’s Hovel.” Faber and Howard earned the honors. They were on council when the city approved the Cherry Street boondoogle and when it thumbed its nose at a $1 million offer from Keith and Jean Marzan to take the project off their hands and actually get some affordable housing built. No one else who dumped this wasteful lemon on taxpayers is left in city government. Let’s hope the new council has functioning brains and enough backbone to cut the city’s losses, bulldoze the decaying hulk and put the land to better use.
By the way, Howard’s Hovel/Faber’s Folly turns 5 years old in a few weeks. Somebody, bake a cake.
Last November, a group of concerned parents of Port Townsend School District (PTSD) students garnered nearly 600 signatures on a petition demanding that there be no Covid-19 vax mandates for school attendance. In an introductory letter, the parents made clear that they’d done their homework, writing:
“We urge you to consider the fact that invoking such a requirement will be seen as a divisive, discriminatory and potentially dangerous dictate by parents who understand the health risks associated with contracting Covid-19 in school-age children have been proven to be negligible.
“When the unknown potential long-term risks associated with this vaccine in children and the CDC’s “Reported” injuries and deaths (over 700 vaccination-related child deaths) are weighed in combination, the evidence speaks for itself. There is no justifiable reason to place our childrens’ health at risk due to injury or death by vaccine as a requirement to attend public school.”
They went on to question whether or not “funding in the form of financial incentives to the school district” may have been an underlying force. As Free Press contributor Brett Nunn reported here in January, we now know that those financial incentives were real and significant.
As the narrative further unravels and “public health” justifications no longer bear weight, the vaccine and mask mandates are being rescinded throughout the country. One of the last holdouts, WA Governor Jay Inslee, has finally let go… sort of. His latest masking directive has given broad latitude to regional jurisdictions to make choices at local levels.
Schools look to be the next battleground, as evidenced by this urgent letter written Friday, March 11th, to the PTSD superintendent, principal and board:
“We would like clarification as to the changes for the mask policy beginning Monday, March 14th, 2022. Per governor Inslee, the WA state health department, and Dr Berry, indoor masking in public schools is no longer required. The PT school district has sent numerous emails to parents stating this change.
“That said, many of our students came home from school today and told a very different story regarding this subject. The main topic was segregation. Separating the masked students from the unmasked, and even forcing students to wear masks while in certain classes if the teacher insists they do. Many students said their teachers stated they ‘can make students wear masks if they choose to.’ Also stated was if there was a shortage of desks kids would be forced to sit on the floor.
“It is VERY concerning to us as parents as to why a school district would be encouraging any kind of segregation, especially one who prides themselves on non-discrimination. We as parents will NOT in any way support this. We would like clarification immediately so steps can be taken as parents to make sure our students who will be exercising their rights to unmask will not be excluded, segregated, or in any other way felt guilted into wearing something they are not legally required to. Our children should never feel bullied by their teachers or any school staff members.
“We request a meeting immediately if any of the above stated will be implemented. If our children could potentially face any kind of opposition from school staff while exercising their rights to not wear a mask, we as parents are to be contacted by phone BEFORE our children are confronted by staff. Also, we do NOT support our children sitting on floors or made to feel uncomfortable in any way by any school staff member while exercising their right to unmask.
Senior Leader columnist Bill Mann is at it again, unleashing his second wave of trash-talk against so-called “anti-vaxxers”, calling them “stupid”, “idiots”, “foolish”, “deniers”, “clueless”, etc., etc., etc.
In a bizarre reversal of reality, Mann blames lockdown opponents for locking his grandchildren into a “bubble” that “deprived [them] of a normal childhood”:
I don’t blame my cautious daughter in Oregon for the protectiveness she affords our two under-5, un-vaxxed grandkids. They’ve never been in a store or restaurant. They only go to empty playgrounds. They have only one “bubble,” three other kids in a small family that they play with. And we can all hardly wait until the day those kids under age 5 can get vaccinated. If all the clueless and heedless had been vaccinated, our grandchildren may not have been deprived of a normal childhood.
Mann is mistaken regarding the relative risks versus benefits of the Covid quasi-vaccine for otherwise-healthy youngsters, who have virtually zero risk of death from the virus but serious known and unknown risks from the vax.
New studies are finding healthy boys have about 4-6 times higher chance of cardiac hospitalizations than catching Covid,with 1 of every 4515 adolescents hospitalized for myocarditis in Hong Kong after the second dose, and similar destruction of young hearts in the U.S.
Mann’s new column is a sequel to his similar screed from August 25, 2021, which unloaded even more vituperative verbiage:
dehumanizing his neighbors as “boneheads”, “spreadnecks”, “dolts”, and “knuckle-draggers”;
demonizing them as public enemies “making innocent people sick, especially children”; and
urging they “should not be allowed in public spaces” and “not work.”
The Leader‘s blithe promotion of Mann’s provocative hate speech, coupled with their continued censorship of contrarian voices, unleased a flood of letters to the editor and critical responses online. When none of this criticism was allowed to see print in their Opinion Forum, protests outside the Leader offices followed.
Unfortunately, Mann is not just shouting at the moon, but is a small but angry cog is a larger campaign to fan up fear, hatred, deplatforming, discrimination, and violence against so-called “anti-vaxxers”.
The “anti-vaxxer” slur has nonsensically been extended to embrace those who are pro-vaccines but anti-mandates, as well as anyone who questions any aspect of the current lockdown narrative.According to its current usage, the majority of Americans are “anti-vaxxers”, given the unpopularity of vaccine mandates.
The authoritarian risks from this hate campaign are not just academic… an unhinged Department of Homeland Security has now issued a crazy dangerous bulletin targeting those spreading “misleading narratives” or factual “malinformation” including about “vaccine and mask mandates” as “domestic terrorists”!
If the malefactors behind this classification get their way, what’s next?
Burning books and outlawing free speech, as is already happening via social media monopolies following illegal executive branch marching orders in defiance of the First Amendment?
Rounding up thought-criminals into concentration camps like those being built in Australia?
Freezing or stealing their bank accounts as done to working-class truckers and their supporters in Canada?
To his credit, Mann now expresses openness about ending mask mandates, but is quick to say that doesn’t make him “anti-mask”.Wrong again… at least according to the broad-brush “anti-vax” definition rules, Mann’s statements are as “anti-mask” as the nuanced views of most supposed “anti-vaxxers”.
Given that his county health officer is still urging everyone to wear masks, the fact that Mann’s “anti-mask” published views differ from the official truth means Mann is spreading medical “misinformation” as defined by Homeland Security. That also means Mann may now officially be a “terrorist”, whom the covid coup threatens to censor and persecute along with the “anti-vaxxers” that Mann despises. Maybe he can share a prison cell with them.
——————————————-
The Leader saw fit to print Mann’s two feature columns dedicated to abusing “anti-vaxxers”, despite (or because of) their being filled with “insults, taunts, bullying, intimidation, and profanity” … the very language that specifically violates the Free Press commenting policy against flame wars deterring and drowning out serious discourse.
As writers and editors, we wrestle to discern what level of civil discourse we should aspire to and enforce… what would be most true, kind, and helpful. I am concerned that my own words of criticism are sometimes too barbed and unkind in this and other articles I have written, and if so, I truly apologize.
But it is also true that our own county’s namesake was adamant that his sharp words should stand in our Declaration of Independence, where Thomas Jefferson wrote: “A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”
Public radio compromised by government money. Wanting more news coverage from what they perceive as a non-threatening, if not friendly media outlet, Jefferson County Commissioners gave $10,000 to KPTZ to hire a producer/reporter to cover county business. You read that right, politicians bought themselves a reporter to write about the things they do.
KPTZ can no longer be considered an independent news source. It was never an unbiased, objective news source. It definitely has its left-ward tilt, and that’s okay. There is no such thing anywhere as a totally unbiased news source. But now KPTZ is not only biased, it is also dependent on money from the very government it covers in its news broadcasts.
Commissioner Heidi Eisenhour started the process of compromising KPTZ’s integrity. She approached KPTZ to persuade them to provide more news coverage of what commissioners were doing. As she explained at the February 28, 2022, Board of County Commissioners meeting, she wanted KPTZ to do more to get the word out about “a lot of things going on on behalf of the community by the county right now.” She wanted them to do what she called “county works spotlights.”
KPTZ was ready to take county money to hire a producer/reporter. Their own fundraising was not going that well. Government money would fill the hole in their budget.
On February 28, 2022, as an item on their consent agenda, the commissioners approved a $10,000 gift of taxpayer money to KPTZ.
Placing the grant’s approval on the consent agenda meant it was not an item up for discussion or debate. Despite a public comment preceding the consent agenda expressing concerns that this was a “gift of public funds” to a media outlet, the grant was given an automatic pass as one of fourteen perfunctory items “enacted in one motion.”
Imagine if Donald Trump had given thousands of dollars to Right Side Broadcasting to hire a reporter to cover what he was doing “on behalf” of the American people. Politicians buying journalists is politicians buying journalists is politicians buying journalists. And journalists taking money from the government and politicians they cover is unethical. Period.
The wording of the grant does not explicitly require KPTZ to cover anything the commissioners do. But that is being disingenuous. The expressed intent of the commissioners during their public meeting, echoed by the county manager, is for KPTZ to hire a reporter to cover the stuff they do. They now have someone on KPTZ’s payroll. There is no longer any boundary between KPTZ’s local news and county government.
This article is difficult for me to write. I appreciate KPTZ’s musical and community events programming. But they want to be a lot more. They want to be a news station. That subjects them to the same scrutiny and standards as journalists who write and broadcast reports about government, politics and public affairs. KPTZ General Manager Kate Ingram, who sees no problem at all with taking government money, says the station wants to do “high quality journalism” and this money will help them do that. “High quality journalism” requires high quality ethics. You can have your viewpoint and push it as hard as you want. But if you’re being paid by the people you’re covering you’re just being corrupt. Instead of being a journalist, you’re a shill.
KPTZ is Not Unbiased.
The resolution giving ten grand to the radio station stated:
“The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners values an electorate informed by unbiased news sources, of which KPTZ is one. Their expanded news coverage will help inform our citizens and residents about the work the county is doing on their behalf.”
Politicians first declare which media is unbiased, then grace their “unbiased” journalists with public largesse. Let’s unpack that.
Unbiased? Immediately before its local news casts, KPTZ broadcasts Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now! That program is decidedly, unapologetically left wing. Several organizations that rate media bias, such as allsides.com, also place the “left wing” label on the outlet’s reporting. But to its credit, unlike KPTZ, Democracy Now! does not accept any corporate or government funding. It is openly biased, and proudly independent.
Several years ago, Scott Hogenson, who was then a contributor to the Port Townsend Free Press and who has an extensive career in journalism, from being a university professor to serving on an NPR board to co-founding CNSnews, approached KPTZ to see if they were interested in programming that would add diversity to the left wing viewpoints they broadcast. He was informed the station was not interested.
The “unbiased” KPTZ has repeatedly shown its bias in covering local events, such as the arrest last year of Rachelle Merle for protesting Governor Inslee’s masking mandate, and the Back the Blue motorcade in August 2020. Their news reporter described that event as “polarizing.” The same label was not applied to the blockades of Water Street and Center Road by anti-law enforcement protestors doing the “Hands up, don’t shoot!” antic (never mind this never happened in the Michael Brown case, as the grand jury testimony of mostly Black witnesses revealed).
“We’re not here to foment controversy,” KPTZ General Manager Kate Ingram told me in a telephone interview. They’re just out, she said, “to tell people what is going on, not to comment or be editorial.”
That is demonstrably false. KPTZ regularly “foments controversy” to further progressive, left-wing objectives. Take, for example, it’s shameful, highly controversial broadcast, “The Reckoning,” from July 2020. This program gave airtime to people to throw wild, racist accusations against our local law enforcement, which has never had a single case of racially motivated misconduct. A man who had been facing charges for trying to break into a house (with the owner on the other side of a glass door and holding a gun) and who had a considerable record of other encounters with police due to his substance abuse, was given use of KPTZ’s airwaves to viciously and falsely attack law enforcement.
As I wrote on August 3, 2020 in covering this detestable, unjustified smear job on our local law enforcement, “The moderators were far from impartial. One of them, KPTZ radio show host Paul Rice, has encouraged activists to pursue and harass a local law enforcement family and in the past has himself attempted to injure the reputation of at least one other law enforcement official. This program was created and sold as a kind of set-up of our Sheriff.”
How could this program have gotten aired? Perhaps because one of those biased moderators, the person who arranged the confrontation, was Kate Dean, one of the Jefferson County Commissioners who later approved giving KPTZ ten grand. KPTZ gave its airwaves to a politician wishing to push her ideological agenda on the station’s listeners.
Other KPTZ programming has also fed into a left-wing narrative and at times sought to energize and rally the troops for local protests. It happens so often it is a regular feature of KPTZ programming. And, of course, there is the totally noncontroversial daily Democracy Now! show.
Just one more example: In a December 9, 2021 news broadcast the KPTZ reporter described wins by climate activists as “encouraging” and pondered, “what might be the results of another lost decade on climate action in this region?” This is not unbiased reporting. It is cheerleading.
Such programming is not improper. KPTZ can choose sides in this community, which it has done for years. But KPTZ is not unbiased. That’s okay. Just don’t lie about it.
Sycophants or Journalists?
KPTZ’s other bias — being a team player with the local political establishment and government leaders — shows in what they do not cover in their news reports.
In democracies, a free press, including radio and television journalism, is expected to maintain an “adversarial” relationship with government, and serve as a watchdog, a deterrent against corruption, waste, abuse of power and incompetence. That is why we have protections for the press written into our constitution. The Fourth Branch of government is supposed to be a counterweight to government, not one of the gang.
I asked KPTZ General Manager Kate Ingram if KPTZ has ever engaged in any critical reporting of local government. Has it ever performed this important, foundational function of journalism? That’s when I got the answer about them just “telling people what’s going on” and not engaging in any sort of editorial commenting.
Opinion can be expressed in what reporters say (and opinion regularly enters the reporting on KPTZ). It is also expressed in what they cover, and avoid covering. I think it is a fair statement that KPTZ never reports on anything that causes difficulties for the local political establishment or challenges the ideological monoculture of Port Townsend. I cannot recall a single story where they have called out any of our local officials for their failures or sought to hold them accountable for decisions that have caused problems in our community.
For instance, did they cover local governments’ failures, negligence and indifference to human suffering in permitting the chaos and tragedy of the homeless encampment and open-air drug market at the Fairgrounds for over a year? Have they ever covered the abject failure of the Cherry Street Project, Port Townsend’s largest public housing project? Have they covered the drug overdoses and suicides among the county’s growing addicted population? Have they covered any story of local government waste, incompetence or corruption? (The answer to these questions is uniformly in the negative.)
The county commissioners just raised commissioners’ salaries to over $100,000 (plus benefits and other freebees).* That puts their income at twice the median income for a family of four in Jefferson County. Few people in this county have seen their incomes rise as fast as the compensation packages the commissioners enjoy. On the very same day commissioners feathered their own nest, they also (again) raised taxes. Did KPTZ mention this even in passing in its local news coverage? Nope. In light of KPTZ now taking money from these same politicians, one is entitled to ask: Were they then in discussion to receive a gift of county funds? Were they hoping to get county money? Is that why they avoid news that could stir up criticism of the commissioners? What other stories has KPTZ avoided broadcasting so as not to jeopardize its chances of getting county money, or to maintain friendly relations with local leaders? What stories will it avoid reporting in the future out of gratitude for the large gift of public funds, or in the hope more public money could be coming their way?
Biased Is Okay. Unethical Is Not.
Unless KPTZ never again reports on anything involving county government, it is engaging in unethical behavior. As I mentioned above, to their credit Democracy Now! refuses to accept government money because it will compromise the integrity of their reporting, either directly or indirectly, or by way of creating both an actual and apparent conflict of interest.
The folks behind Port Townsend Free Press joked about requesting our own $10,000 grant of county funds to hire a reporter to cover county government. We could guarantee satisfying Commissioner Eisenhour’s wish for more news reporting on the actions of county government. We were only joking, because taking money from the government and politicians we write about is straight-up unethical.
The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics states that a journalist’s duty to act independently is one of the four basic principles of ethical journalism. To act ethically a journalist should “Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived” and “Refuse gifts, favors…and special treatment…that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.”
Taking money from someone you are going to cover is unethical. What KPTZ is doing is unethical. As for the county giving KPTZ a gift of money, it may be illegal.
Illegal Gift of Public Funds to a Private Entity?
The $10,000 “grant” is an outright gift of public funds to a private entity that does not serve a fundamental purpose of government. To the contrary, it is corrosive of the independence of the press, which is a fundamental value of our society.
There is no explicit quid pro quo stated in the “grant.” Indeed, it was described during the Commissioner’s meeting as a “no strings attached” grant, but in the next breath, they talked about how this would get them more news coverage. In terms of what was actually written into the grant, the only clear limitation on how the money is spent is that it must be spent on paying a “producer/reporter.”
Commissioner Dean described this as “capacity building.” Under her approach, the county could subsidize any media the commissioners liked or considered “unbiased” because it did not cause them any difficulties. They could give more and more money to local media they liked, every year. Why, this could spread to other small counties, allowing politicians to use public funds to prop up newspapers and radio stations they like, and withhold subsidies from journalists who cause them headaches — a monetary carrot and stick approach to dealing with journalists.
The Washington State Constitution should stand in the way. Article 8, Section 7, in short, prohibits any local government from bestowing a gift on a private party. Washington courts have developed a two-part test to ascertain whether a transfer of public funds to a private party is an illegal gift. First, are the funds being expended to carry out a fundamental government purpose? If the answer is no, the gift is illegal. But, if the answer is not clearly in the negative, courts then ask whether the governmental entity had a “donative intent” or whether it was receiving an adequate return for the transfer.
Compromising the independence of the media: Is that a fundamental governmental purpose? I recognize that is a loaded question, but it is precisely what is accomplished by the county paying for a KPTZ reporter. The commissioners’ action is directly contrary to the concept of an independent press–it makes the press dependent on government. This, in turn, undermines the intent in both the Washington and United States Constitutions behind freedom of the press.
The county resolution authorizing the grant makes an attempt to meet the “fundamental governmental purpose” standard, but falls short. The resolution states that KPTZ was already in the process of raising funds to expand its coverage “of all things Jefferson County,” but needed help. “The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners values an electorate informed by unbiased news sources, of which KPTZ is one. Their expanded news coverage will help inform our citizens and residents about the work the county is doing on their behalf.”
Is promoting a certain slant of news coverage a “fundamental purpose of government?” The Commissioners value an electorate informed by news sources they consider “unbiased,” of which there is really not a single example in broadcast or print news. Maybe they value an electorate that does not get news from news sources that might look at their actions with a bias against governmental corruption, waste, abuse and incompetence. Maybe they only want an electorate lulled into complacency by indifferent and pollyannish reporting.
Their statement also suggests the kind of spin they want to see in the reporting they will subsidize: they want the stories written to tell citizens about the work the county is doing “on their behalf,” implying positive coverage for the actions of county government. Information about what county government is doing that may not be in taxpayers’ best interests — wasting money, feathering their own nest, pursuing policies that hurt the working poor, raising taxes, making it hard to do business in Jefferson County — is not what the commissioners want reported.
Is giving money to a radio station in the hope of favorable news coverage a fundamental purpose of government? To ask that question is to answer it.
Even if the inquiry gets past the first test, it fails the second: the intent of the commissioners is donative only. The county gets no direct benefit from giving a “no strings attached” grant to KPTZ. There is no “scope of work” except hiring a reporter. That grant does not require the reporter to do anything. It is not a violation of the scope of work for KPTZ to hire a reporter who, for ten grand, broadcasts only a single story on the sexual behavior of the sea otters under the city’s piers. KPTZ needed a “no strings attached” statement (however disingenuous) to avoid endangering its FCC license, which prohibits it from accepting money in exchange for broadcasting specified content. Sure, the money was given to buy news coverage of all the “good stuff” the county is doing, but that was only an unwritten understanding. There is nothing enforceable in the language of the scope of work by which the county can demand any kind of value in return for the money it gave away. On its face, hoist on their own petard, the grant to KPTZ appears to be an illegal gift to a private entity.
This issue is so potentially damaging to the independence of media, and so unethical, I will be filing complaints with the State Attorney General and State Auditor to examine whether this “grant” is an illegal gift of public funds. This action by commissioners is also damaging to our democracy. The corrective action for that is up to voters.
Advancing Left-Wing Fascism
Fascism couples government and the ruling party with businesses, industry and institutions, particularly the press and broadcast media. It seeks to control people’s beliefs, using government or ruling party controlled media to push out stories to agitate or placate the populace, shape their beliefs and motivate them to act the way the ruling clique wants them to act. Fascism always seeks to control speech and expression and suppress, exclude or marginalize dissent and contrary information. The goal post is conformity of thought and behavior. Orwell’s Ministry of Truth is the ultimate target.
Fascism was always a left-wing ideology, borne of socialist manifestos. Mussolini used the phrase to describe a society where everything — education, religion, media, business, industry, science — were bundled and dominated by the ruling party. He was a socialist. Lenin, another left-wing fascist, was a communist. The Nazi platform was always socialist; they even used the word in their name.
You can argue about this take on left wing fascism. I’m not sure how much it matters whether the fascism is “left” or “right.” What is not arguable is that our local radio station is now an organ of the left-wing ruling party. The news coverage of that station is dependent on government funding. It has received funds because it is viewed as a friendly media outlet by those in control of government. Those political leaders have declared it “unbiased” because it has abandoned the fundamental role of media in a democratic society, that of being an adversary to government in order to serve as a watchdog against corruption, waste, abuse and incompetence. KPTZ willingly allows itself to be used to reinforce government’s efforts to influence and control the population and obtain compliance with the ruling party’s goals and policies.
KPTZ is not “community” radio. It is government and ruling clique radio. Its ready acceptance of government money only confirms the conclusion many of us, sadly, had already reached.
*The commissioners unanimously approved pay increases for all county elected officials beginning in 2022, with commisioner increases delayed until their next election as required by the Washington State Constitution. Commissioners were paid $93,847 plus benefits as of their meeting vote on December 6, 2021. Their salary was automatically tied to 47% of the $199,676 paid to superior court judges, but since that rises to $203,169 in July, commissioners will automatically receive a proportionate increase to $95,429. Because commissioners voted to increase their percentage to 50.78%, their salary will further rise to $103,169 with the 2022 election for the council position currently held by Greg Brotherton, and then for the other positions when they are up for election. The original version of this article incorrectly described the timing of the raise in commissioners’ salaries.
In the realm of policymaking, global to local, predicted costs of measures taken today often bear little resemblance to the reality that unfolds. In the case of Jefferson County Public Utility District (PUD), poor policy choices have resulted in additional costs to ratepayers, not least of which is reliance on a crew coming from inland Washington (image above).
Early last fall, we reported here on the PUD’s controversial decision to mandate covid jabs for all employees. No other PUD in Washington State felt the need to be so exclusive at the time, and the policy met with pushback from employees and PUD contractors, customer/owners and one commissioner.
Our follow-up article was published on Dec. 23rd, three days after the deadline for being considered “fully vaccinated” had passed.
The inability of the jabs to prevent infection or transmission was already well established, even within the PUD. Subsequent to his firing for non-compliance (despite his accepted religious exemption), 7-year veteran lineman Kurt Anderson recounted in a letter to the commissioners and his co-workers how unjust this policy was, given facts on the ground:
“One only has to look to the PUD roster to see this truth, after being fully vaccinated a PUD employee contracted covid. The fully vaccinated coworkers of this individual were allowed to continue working regular and overtime hours, the unvaccinated coworkers were sent home on unpaid time off for 10 days quarantine with the requirement to complete a covid test…”
Also in his letter, Anderson highlighted the dubious claim by both General Manager Kevin Streett and Commissioner Ken Collins that the mandate was necessary to “be in compliance” with state edicts filtered through the Department of Transportation (WSDOT), despite the fact that this agency had already agreed with the Washington Public Utility Association (WAPUDA) that PUDs were exempt. There was not an iota of curiosity that no other PUD was concerned that they were “out of compliance.”
As the penny drops — tails, we lose?
It’s as though talking point memos have been distributed to PUD leadership. In unison now they’re using the straw man defense that imposition of the unpopular mandate was “to comply with the governor’s order.” That order mysteriously did not affect other PUDs in Washington state.
The fallout is measured in employees and contractors who’ve lost their jobs — or taken the jab (against their better judgment) to keep them. Recent records requests reveal that our PUD has granted four employees exemptions from the mandates and, sadly, three have been fired.
Fallout is also measured in higher costs to the customer/owners because the only electrical contractor our PUD management could procure who purportedly had “fully-vaccinated crews” is charging us a shocking premium to cross the Cascades to lend a hand.
At the first meeting of the year on Jan. 4 it was announced that Palouse Power, an electrical contractor from Quincy WA, would be replacing Titan, the outfit that was fired in December.
Confusion among PUD leadership around bidding was apparent that evening. When presented with the request that the board “accept the qualified line contractor applicant, Palouse Power,” Commissioner Collins asked, “So what action is required of the board?” GM Streett replied, “A motion by the board to approve them…”
At this point, Counsel Joel Paisner interrupted with “I think it’s to accept them as low bidder.” GM Street said, “No, no, per RCW all line contractors are approved by the board. Yearly, we bring a list to you, this is the first one… it’s just the formality that we do yearly.”
Streett said Titan left because of the mandates and “vaccinated crews were tough to come by.” He claimed that there were some locally, but they were busy. He admitted that Palouse “is a bit more expensive.” Commissioners Dan Toepper and Jeff Randall inquired further about bidding, with the latter asking if there will be a bid process. Streett replied, “For the next while Palouse will be our contractor… We’ve gone through our [RCW] obligations, it was difficult” referring to the challenge of finding vaxxed crews.
Included in the agenda packet was a resolution “declaring the [storm] period of December 24, 2021 through January 8, 2022, a state of emergency,” an exemption process provided to municipal entities through RCW 39.04.280. Recovering from his earlier delusive reference to “the lowest bidder,” Counsel Paisner confirmed that this declaration allowed the PUD to “waive the competitive bidding requirements” that normally applied based on RCW 54.04.070. It is unclear how the future end of the emergency, January 8th, was arrived at a week before, when the agenda was prepared.
At the Jan. 4th meeting, I requested an estimate from GM Streett for additional costs to ratepayers for Palouse over Titan. In a responsive letter, Operations Director Scott Bancroft explained that making a direct cost comparison was difficult because of varying crew qualifications and how each contractor charged for equipment. It appears that Palouse is adding a markup to employee wages. The contract also guarantees overtime.
Inside sources tell me it was the perks our PUD offered that incentivized Palouse top-tier journeyman linemen to commit. Scheduled overtime is a real sweet deal compared to what our utility’s line crew gets — regular interruption of family life — dinner, kids’ ballgames, sleep, holidays…
My sources disagree with other details in that letter from Bancroft, including crew structure needs and how Titan fulfilled them in the past. There are also serious concerns about misuse of emergencies to bypass bidding requirements and the legality of these projects vis-à-vis the Small Works Roster.
Line crews are arguably the most critical position in an electrical utility. Current and former employees say that in order to develop and maintain a healthy, cohesive line workforce, the PUD needs to train them from pre-apprentice through to the journeyman lineman stage. They know what the job entails and work best without micromanagement. Our PUD is struggling to achieve these ends.
Was the mandate ever enforced without prejudice?
Now, as jab mandates around the globe fall faster than the scales from many Americans’ eyes, our sources reveal continuing unequal — even dishonest — application of the vax policy from the very beginning. Why Kurt Anderson was fired despite the acceptance of his religious exemption remains a mystery.
Senior administration reportedly told contractors at the outset “just sign the [attestation] form,” indicating that one only needed to say that they were complying.
After firing main contractor Titan which supplied back-up crews, as well as some of our own linemen who refused to take the shots, then discovering that “it was difficult” to find all-vaxxed replacements because no contractors imposed that requirement, Jefferson PUD was in a tough spot. Like Titan, Palouse had a mix of jabbed and unjabbed linemen.
There is suspicion that Palouse Power was brought in from the other side of the mountains because none of the PUD employees who work in the field would know for certain the jab status of their crews, which was not the case with the familiar Titan employees. Palouse could send unvaxxed linemen and no one would be the wiser.
From internal communications, it looks like there was no other choice — Palouse was the end of the line. In a letter to the commissioners and GM Streett, Scott Bancroft explained that Titan “would not provide documentation for vaccination or an accommodation.” Nor would four other contractors on the PUD’s small works roster that Bancroft reached out to. But in a phone call with Palouse — who was not on the roster and had not even bid on the contract — Bancroft was told yes, they’d sign the requested forms:
“Palouse Power was called and they were able to provide a vaccinated dock crew [to] the Jefferson County PUD.”
As with local contractors who simply were asked to sign unverified “attestation” forms, it appears the PUD required only the appearance of vaxx status to seal the deal for Palouse crews, too.
————————————
At the February 15 meeting, GM Streett assured fired contractor, Marty Kithcart, that “contractors, when they come in our yard, have to be vaccinated. That’s a true statement.” But PUD employees claim that they’ve seen people they understand to be unvaxxed in the yard.
Click above for archived recording of Feb. 15 meeting. Exchange below between Kithcart and staff takes place from 2:01:00-2:05:00.
Streett appeared to struggle to answer more questions from Kithcart:
Marty Kithcart: So if you’ve got one vaccinated person versus an unvaccinated person, can they ride around in the truck together?
[extended pause] Kevin Streett: So… we’re vaccinated, so I’m going to say there would be vaccinated people together.
Marty Kithcart: But if one is unvaccinated?
Counsel Joel Paisner: You know, I’m going to step in and answer that and say that that’s really a hypothetical and it’s hard, because the policy itself has to be applied to individuals. So, so it’s hard to know.
Despite that eye-watering feat of doublespeak, the dodged answer to the question is obvious.
What’s going on here? We were promised transparency.
Policy-driven emergencies or emergency-driven policies?
Whose idea was the mandate? In its own right, it created an emergency — fewer line crew, an unhappy workforce, highly questionable ‘fair labor’ practices — all the while staring at the likely prospect that this policy would ultimately be rescinded, based on numerous observable situations at the time of its enactment.
It looks to be an expensive choice, as well. As it stands, Palouse is charging the PUD $41,287 per week. Any personnel needs above that are charged per diem. We paid $5,980 to lodge the crew at the Harborside Inn during the holiday storm power restoration and cleanup.
As of February, they moved to three RV spots at Point Hudson, which cost us roughly $2,355/month (the estimate we were given publicly was $1,800/month). We were told at a meeting in January that we’ll be using those spots for temporary housing for incoming employees after our need for Palouse is behind us.
As a comparator, we were charged $21,959 per week for Titan’s last dock crew. No RV spots. No per diem.
This ill-advised course of action was initiated by general manager Streett and supported by legal counsel Paisner and two commissioners, Collins and Randall. The position these four men have taken has proven to be untenable. At the moment it appears that they’ve painted themselves into a corner from which they cannot emerge gracefully.
Arrested for refusing to wear a mask. The charge was trespassing, but it was really about a woman’s refusal to wear a mask while shopping in the Port Townsend Food Co-op. With the end of the statewide masking mandate approaching, we’ve been asked, “What happened to that woman who was arrested in the Co-op last year?”
On April 5, 2021, Rachelle Merle was engaged in shopping in the Co-op, where she is a member and co-owner, and was told by management to put on a mask or leave. She went about her business without a mask. The Co-op called in Port Townsend police who arrested, handcuffed and charged her with trespassing. See, “The Arrest of Rachelle Merle: The Food Co-op on Trial.”
Merle was also “trespassed” from the Co-op for one year, meaning the Co-op revoked this member’s rights to shop in the store and threatened to have her arrested again if she stepped inside the store during the next twelve months. I have written previously how this violated Merle’s rights as a co-owner.
Behind the scenes, the Co-op told the County Prosecutor’s Office it did not want to press the charges or see the case go to trial. See my prior articles on this turn of events.
Merle never did go to trial. The charges against her were dismissed December 23, 2021. You didn’t read about this in The Leader, which never even covered the arrest, though thousands of people came to Port Townsend Free Press to read and comment about it on our site or social media.
The dismissal is “with prejudice,” meaning charges cannot be refiled without violating Merle’s right against double jeopardy — a citizen’s right, basically, not to have to defend the same charges more than once. The charges were dismissed as part of a plea bargain.
As Jefferson County Prosecutor James Kennedy explained in his statement to the Free Press (reproduced verbatim, below), “Ms. Merle entered into a Continuation for Dismissal (or CFD) with the Prosecutor’s Office. It is essentially a diversion. The way it works is that if the defendant abides by certain conditions and stays out of trouble for a certain length of time the Prosecutor’s Office will move to dismiss the case once the time period has elapsed.”
He added, “The time period for this diversion was 6 months…and the defendant fully complied with it.” Merle, a mother of three, had no prior criminal record whatsoever. Her choices that day contained no element of criminal intent whatsoever.
Merle made no secret of her reasons for incurring and accepting the arrest. She is opposed to the mask mandate and strongly believed it was a violation of individual rights and not justified by the best medical science. She has repeatedly in social media posts warned against creeping totalitarianism wrapped in the COVID mandates from the governor and Jefferson County Public Health Officer.
Merle raised thousands of dollars to hire criminal defense attorney Calebjon Vandenbos, who has taken on several of these types of cases. He provided the following comments to Port Townsend Free Press:
Vandenbos:
Rachelle asked me to send some thoughts along to you about her case and its significance. In my opinion legal cases don’t have much of a chance of being important at this point. Right now, the debate is with hearts and minds, a cultural and value disagreement, not legal.
That being said, this case is an example of what makes this cultural conflict particularly difficult. Private and public forces can suppress dissent without ideological or legal accountability and this case was a good example. The formal criminal trespass case against Ms. Merle was pretty straightforward — the store told her to leave and she didn’t. There wasn’t much to fight there from a purely ‘legal’ perspective. That’s why the case resolved the way it did.
But the real reason Ms. Merle was arrested was because of her dissent. Regardless of if the science is agreed, the ‘right’ response to COVID 19 depends on a person’s values and beliefs. But the coop and the government are able to side-step these issues: the store points to the dubious mask mandate, and the government points to the store’s decision to expel. A confrontation over the real issues — discrimination based on ideology and the legality of the mandates — is avoided. It’s a problem, and there is no apparent solution at this point.
Here are our questions to the County Prosecutor and his full response (it has always been my practice to publish verbatim responses to written questions):
PTFP: Do you have any comment on the case against Rachelle Burt Merle, involving the charge of trespassing for being inside the PT Food Co-op without a mask and refusing to leave? Also, why were the charges dismissed and under what terms?
Prosecuting Attorney Kennedy: Ms. Merle entered into a Continuation for Dismissal (or CFD) with the Prosecutor’s Office. It is essentially a diversion. The way it works is that if the defendant abides by certain conditions and stays out of trouble for a certain length of time the Prosecutor’s Office will move to dismiss the case once the time period has elapsed. If the defendant fails to abide by the conditions then the prosecution can move to revoke the agreement. If the court agrees, the court will then review the discovery to determine if the crime alleged was in fact committed.
These types of diversions are not uncommon when we are working with cases where the offense is relatively minor and the defendant does not have significant criminal history.
In this case, the defendant had zero criminal history that we are aware of, additionally there were some other facts and circumstances that were unique to the case (e.g. the victim being a co-op, which the defendant is a member) that led us to believe that a diversion was the proper way to adjudicate the case. The time period for this diversion was 6 months (this can vary from case to case) and the defendant fully complied with it. Consistent with our agreement we dismissed the case.
So I think I answered your second question without answering your first. To answer your first – The prosecution and the defendant came to a resolution that would allow the defendant to avoid having a criminal conviction by way of a diversion agreement. The defendant fully complied with the agreement so the prosecution, in fulfillment of its end of the bargain, moved to dismissed the case.
You mentioned this in your email, but I think it is important to reiterate, what was charged was Criminal Trespassing, not a violation of any public health order. The issue of masking is what lead to the charged offense, but was not the offense itself.
