FONT SIZE
Email this
Print this
POST A COMMENT
City Council contacts
Click here for how to contact the folks who will decide on Dean Bunkers replacement, mayor for the next two years.
This entry was posted
on Saturday, February 13th, 2010 at 9:12 am and is filed under North Coast News.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Access to FilePro has also been problematic today. If you go from Government to Council and then Agenda you only saw the 2/8/10 agenda. If you went to Government and then clicked on FilePro on the left you got in. Strange.
Oh and just so you don’t think I only complain and take no action. I contacted city this morning and brought this to their attention and an error message was sent to the IT person via someone else who was having issues as well.
Glad to hear they fixed the email but then… but didn’t seem to be working this morning.
I just sent a “test” email to all the council members, and have already heard back from one.
None of the emails for any of the city council work!!!!! Call the office and tell them what you want otherwise prepare to have someone from city council take over the mayor spot and that is a rush to fill the position and not in the best interest of the city. 90 days would allow for folks to be interviewed.
360-289-2488
Legally? Styner. He is now the administrative officer of the city. Remember, Council is only policy and guidance. He is subject to the laws of Washington and the existing ordinances of Ocean Shores.
The question that ought to be asked is who is running the city the council or Styner? I thought he was an employee and subject to the authority of the council, so where does he get off by saying what he will and won’t do? Somehow the cart has moved way in front of the horse and is winning the race.
The lynch pin is the fact that Styner said he will only do the job until Feb. 22. If Garland, as Pro-Tem wants to do it, maybe he will hold the place until the search is done. However, the drums say otherwise…
“The person who is selected mayor come next week”
The sickening part is that even though this is probably going to be true, a replacment doesn’t have to be named for 90 days. That would be time to do a search for someone qualified. However I’m confident that the council is going reap the spoils before the citizenry can get organized to demand a proper search.
I suggest a look at “The Bluebook” which is http://www.legalbluebook.com/default.aspx and available for purchse. The use of Him is legally equivalent to Her. The modern way adopted by some legislatures does inclued the His/Her definition. However, it is understood to mean both genders. It really does not matter. The person who is selected mayor come next week may just be the “caretaker” of a city in hospice.
With the premise that “citizenagainstcrime”, as usual has done some homework, I respectfully disagree with this interpretation of state statute. Our elected mayor’s term of office does not end until the end of 2011. Mr Bunkers resigned from ‘his’ portion of the “term”, but as the old saying goes, “the term goes on!” Yes, I know that the correct word is “show”, but thats the law for you. As “citizen” says, who’s checking?
Additionally, does anyone think that the reference in the state constitution to “his term” may be outdated? Maybe even a little chauvanist? “crimes”, how would you have reacted if the outgoing mayor had been a woman? Just kidding, as an explaination of how “terms” can be enterpreted differently by two or more armchair lawyers!
It would surely be nice if citizenagainstcrime is right and the position of city administrator with stronmg mayor could be created now AND within the current budget. perhaps the city council would even be able to entice former Mayor Bunkers to take the position!
The real conclusion is that council will probably do what’s right for council, and not necessarily what’s right for the city. Remember, that if a member of council is appointed mayor, then they will have to also, appoint a new member of council. A self-perpetuating nightmare.
The Washington State Constitution is the issue here. The RCWs speak to increases in salaries. Only Article XI, Section 8 speaks to lowering the salary. It says:
“The salary of any county, city, town, or municipal officers shall not be increased except as provided in section 1 of Article XXX or diminished after his election, or during his term of office; nor shall the term of any such officer be extended beyond the period for which he is elected or appointed. ”
Note it says HIS TERM OF OFFICE. When Dean resigned, his term ended.
If you read the various cases from the Supreme Court of Washington and other areas, the issue is reducing sitting officers. Currently we do not have a sitting officer. Also, this issue came up in Bellingham, it was for a sitting county executive.
We have different facts here.
Also, if the person appointed, and even if it was Dean, did want to take a reduction in salary and the creation of a city administrator position, then there would be no one with standing to bring it to court. Who would be harmed? If the appointee agreed, then the issue is moot.
Something for the council to think about. If the council votes it, the attorney is there, then only if the injured party contests it will there be a court action.
This is as good a time as any to confuse everyone and disagree with “citizensagainstcrime.” The issue of changing the salary for the city chief executive or mayor, mid term, is complex. In fact, it should be left to the city attorney’s capable interpretation. An alternative position to “citizens,” is that the salary goes with the term of office and not the person. Therefore, if the council lowers the salary mid-term, the affect is not applicable until the next term. (The same for councilmatic positions.) Whomever is appointed to fill Mr. Bunkers 1st term, will start with the current salary. After the appointment, an armchair lawyer (like “citizen” and I) could then argue that the mayor is an appointee and not elected. Careful reading of the appropriate RCW’s and WAC’s can then confusedly be interpreted differently. For some reason, elected and appointed government oficials may be treated differently in Washington State statute. I know that I am confused. We will have an appointed person serving in an elective office. The example is even more confusing when considering if the Mayor can or does not vote for the measure. In our case, we do not currently have a mayor, and when we soon do, it will have been by appointment.
If you want a voice in who will be mayor for the next two years, NOW is the time. Call or email your council members and let them know what you want.
Shoo Fly Do Not Bother Me! Will be the response you will get. It is dyed-in-the-wool. All that need be done is spin the wool and weave the fabric.
Speak as you may at council. The ears are closed on most of them. Two or three may listen, but others are decided.