Olympian Editorials (aka Mike Oakland) Make Me Sick

Navigation

User login

Online users

a.future.with.n...
OlyDowntowner
Judith
einmaleins
Just another voice
jlw
Thad Curtz
Just another voice
Laurian
OperaGirl

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

Lisa P
GRuB
ktcoxster
making a differ...
johnmac

Olympian Editorials (aka Mike Oakland) Make Me Sick

Submitted by hrstruggle on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 2:56pm.

The Sunday editorial from the Olympian is the true embodiment of development and conservative interests:

City Council must move in new direction

There was a mandate for nothing as far as I'm concerned. The job of a city commission is to represent the will of it's constituents.

And as history has shown - those constituents that are organized and make things happen are those that are effective. Mike Oakland needs to crawl back under the rock he emerged from.

I for one will miss Laura Ware and TJ Johnson on our city council and hope the council picks a progressive to fill Doug Mah's empty seat. They need a more diverse council - a less diverse council will be the result if someone is picked that the Olympian supports.

Howard Rosenfeld
No Talking Heads, KAOS, 89.3 FM, Sundays, 5pm

hrstruggle's blog
Login or register to post comments

yeah

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 3:32pm.

Can you believe Pat Rants(developer) is near the top of their list? If they put a developer on our council, that'll just be it. If they think last February was a poke in the eye, they better invest in some industrial type goggles.

It would be nice if he took his own advice

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:03pm.

Instead of demanding the council exhibit professionalism, why doesn't he exercise a little in his capacity as editorial director? And he should know all about the "bully pulpit".

Bully pulpits

Submitted by security_six on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:12pm.

Umm, please correct me if I am wrong, but any media editor, by definition has a bully pulpit, and is expected by their readership to use it.

I expect Rick to use the bully pulpit he has here, and I expect Mike Oakland to use his.

OlyBlog is a bully pulpit...

Submitted by Rick on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:26pm.

...(whatever that is) for anyone in Olympia.

> Say something interesting or say nothing at all. <

Although not an Olympia resident

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:04pm.

I must comment on their "mandate" about avoiding international affairs and working on potholes

TJ Johnson brilliantly addressed that Olympia's share of the Iraq War was about $25,000,000. That fixes a bunch of potholes.

Typically surface level thinking on the part of The Olympian Editorial staff.

I think

Submitted by security_six on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:09pm.

That this is a great opportunity to move away from some of the unusual issues that have embroiled the council the past; "nuclear free zones" and blatant discrimination against Naval vessels come to mind. I hope they can get onto the business of running a city, not trying to score points with seemingly meaningless actions.

I wasn't here for the nuclear free zone, but I was here for Lakefair, and that quite frankly pissed me off. But I suspect that has already been hashed out here...

Personally I would like to see them further address affordable housing, creating a full service day center for the homeless, and instituting a citizen review board for the OPD in addition to the current levels of accountability in place.

Let's keep the issue straight

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:16pm.

The City Council did not discriminate, blatantly or otherwise, against naval vessels. The cost of providing the security demanded by the military was prohibitively high, and even if the Council had been willing to pay it, no proposals were made in a sufficiently timely manner for the Council to even consider accommodating the warships. The City Council didn't decide one way or the other -- there was no vote on this issue. There was public testimony at a City Council meeting, which was reported (rather badly, as usual) in the Olympian, so confusion is understandable, but the decision about Lakefair warships was not in the hands of the City Council. It was due to the military's demand that a lot of security be provided, and the Lakefair organizer's inability to make provisions for that security quickly enough.

Okay

Submitted by security_six on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:17pm.

Then I am wrong on that point. But IIRC TJ had some rather unkind words to say about the ships. At any rate, lets agree to disagree here, because I think the whole issue about if they should be invited or not was blown out of proportion and has already played out.

No Vote

Submitted by Ehver Green on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:18pm.

But let's not pretend personal views weren't expressed. There's still a record without having an official vote.

The cost of providing the

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 7:01pm.

The cost of providing the security demanded by the military was prohibitively high

The City of Olympia would have paid this or the Port of Olympia?

It was my understanding that the Powers That Be of Olympia didn't want the police to provide the type of protection the Navy would have required.

Type, cost, whatever... there wasn't even a proposal

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 11:36pm.

Type, cost, whatever... there wasn't even a proposal for the City Council to consider. And as for their personal opinions being aired, it's pretty customary for council members to comment after the public comment period. What are they supposed to do, say nothing? Lie? I remember TJ had some interesting, insightful comments to make about the militarization of public events like Lakefair... but his opinions had no bearing on whether or not the warships came to Oly. Should he have refused to comment after the public comment period? Apparently some people think so.

Type, cost, whateverI think

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 2:29am.

Type, cost, whatever

I think there's an enormous difference.

"Cost" would indicate the City of Olympia couldn't afford to have the police department for fiscal reasons. I don't think the cost would fall to the City of Olympia but rather the Port of Olympia. I've attempted to find a concrete source to substantiate this feeling but can't at the moment.

Type of security is another matter. Prior to the protesting last month, the Olympia Police Department did next to nothing to stop large scale protesting. In fact, it became so bad that the Thurston County Sheriff's Office told the Olympia Police Department they would no longer pay to have deputies provide support when nothing was going to be done to force compliance with the law.

By providing security for a submarine, the administration at the Olympia Police Department would have to do something about protesting.

Although there may not have been a formal proposal for the City Council to consider, I think behind-the-scenes the vibe was clear that the City wanted nothing to do with providing security.

So now you're blaming the

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 3:32am.

So now you're blaming the City Council for "behind the scene vibes"? Uh huh. Okay. Well, I'm sure you're going to prefer the "pave it over and the future citizens be damned" vibe of the new council.

Actually

Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 9:47am.

According to any current council member, AND The Olympian's article on the subject, the City did not provide security because the Lakefair people waited too late to ask for money for security. The city had not budgeted for it and had already committed their discretionary fund money to other things. This year, the Lakefair people submitted a proposal for next year right after Lakefair was over, most likely they'll get some help from the city. To blame Johnson for the ships not coming is giving him way too much power. If you don't believe me, send an email to the city asking for an explanation, or contact the Olympian and get the article on the subject, I think Matt Batcheldor wrote it.

I think what he was trying

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:08pm.

I think what he was trying to say is that very important city business will now move ahead of national issues. The council will concentrate on running the city and providing city services at a high level. More play is given to things way over a councils jurisdiction when our little town needs to come up with solutions to pressing problems. I dont think the editorial was off base, I thought it was spot on.

Very true

Submitted by security_six on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:10pm.

You did a better job than I did of voicing that Wilson.

But let's be real about the

Submitted by Ehver Green on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:16pm.

But let's be real about the possibilites a single council member will have on getting back any of that $25M or stopping even more from being funneled to Iraq. If The Olympian is on the surface of critical thinking I'd say TJ is either in the weeds or maybe even under water. You don't like Mike Oakland - I don't like TJ Johnson. We can leave it at that.

Think global, act local doesn't do it for me either but it's a start. I'd say when all of our city needs are met and city officials arent' saturated, then we can act global. Until then, I'm with Mike Oakland.

Let's think

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 6:53am.

About a single person turning the computer world upside down and becoming the wealthiest man in the world. That couldn't happen could it? Didn't someone once say that "no one would need a computer bigger than a 486"?

Small thinking gets small results

Retrieving the $25 million has about as much chance as the $9 billion, but we CAN prevent spending more.

I notice that

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:17pm.

no one is touching the subject of what we could do with $25,000,000 pissed away in Iraq.

I expect that will the the untouchable subject.

Tell Us

Submitted by Ehver Green on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:20pm.

How to get it back and I'll give you some ideas. It's untouchable for more reasons than you'd like to admit and not one of them has to do with Olympia.

Perhaps it would be possible to take a lesson from

Submitted by security_six on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:27pm.

Thoreau and find a way to withhold those tax dollars then. I'm sure the relevant text is well known to many here. For those who don't know what I am talking about, googling and reading Thoreau's essay "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" will be interesting.

War Tax Resistance...

Submitted by Phil Owen on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 7:13pm.

...is a fantastic personal strategy for opposing the war. I haven't paid taxes in about 5 or 6 years.

There are a few ways to be a tax resister, some legal, some illegal:

1) Refuse to pay 100% of taxes and inform the IRS as to why. Gather with other tax resisters and use the money saved to invest in local nonprofit orgs. (ILLEGAL)

2) Refuse to pay a certain percentage (anywhere from 25 to 40% based on whether you count interest on federal debt incurred by military) based on the percentage of the federal budget allocated to military spending. (ILLEGAL)

3) -this is the way that I resist war taxes- Maintain an income below the taxable level. You'd be amazed at what you can survive (even thrive) on! (LEGAL)

The Canaanite's Call

The 25m thing is a dead

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:28pm.

The 25m thing is a dead issue now, we have a few issues that have been pressing long before any wars overseas. 1. Affordable housing not only downtown but through our whole community. 2. Aging roads, wastewater, policing, etc.... 3. Diversity in our business base. A very tough problem in our city due to the high cost of space. 4. Severe shortage in Ball field space and community gathering spots The list goes on and on. I am not saying the other stuff is not important but this stuff is the city councils job.

boiled down I think this

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:30pm.

boiled down I think this years election was a mandate for "moving forward"

I remember...

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 6:03pm.

Wasn't it 1994 that we were "moving forward" with the Contract with America?

10 years later, we were in deep doggy doo doo and still in deep doggy doo doo. This was (A) an off year election, thus a low turn out (B) settled in the pages of The Olympian where the assault on Green started early (I still can't figure out how two people can be in a argument at work and it's only one person's fault). Throw in a "TJ, Hippies, etc, etc" and everyone is ready for something new, because the old MUST have been bad.

I say the proof is in the pudding. Let's watch what happens during the next two years.

This war ain't over...

Submitted by Rick on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:30pm.

...and unless we want to be paying another $25m, I suggest that protesting the war is the fiscally prudent course to take at this point in time.

> Say something interesting or say nothing at all. <

Is this $25M the city

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 7:09pm.

Is this $25M the city actually lost or just a number using math that has little to do with actually filling the city's coffers?

And I'm assuming this number can be reversed. I recently read an article in which Iraq and the United States have begun to draw-up long-term plans.

Right now the plan is for American companies to receive preference over any other international company.

I believe - in the long term - opponents of the war are going to want to debate whether more dollars are coming in or out of the US. The same with the dollar being so low.

We're positioning our troops in areas of the world where development is needed (southwest Asia and Africa.) Provided we're successful in stabilizing these regions to the point where investment is feasible, we should be more than able to guarantee the US dollar is competitive for a long time.

For crying out loud,

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 8:37pm.

read a newspaper.

Really Rob

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 10:30pm.

Does this promote sharing? Does this advance the conversation?

read a newspaper.What should

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 2:47am.

read a newspaper.

What should I be looking for?

The Guardian:

In return, Iraq pledged itself to "encouraging the flow of foreign investments to Iraq, especially American investments, to contribute to the reconstruction and rebuilding of Iraq". The promise was immediately seen as a potential bonanza for American oil companies.

Maybe I'm wrong, but this sort of cooperation doesn't seem like Olympia - and the United States - is poised to "lose another $25M."

Couple this with the fact that violence is down across Iraq and refugees are coming back to Baghdad and I don't see how one can't acknowledge that:

1. More troops on the ground can make a difference.

2. There is a light at the end of the tunnel in Iraq and it doesn't need to be an exit on another party's terms.

There's also a proposal floating for the Marine Corps to take over all combat duties in Afghanistan and the Army focus entirely on Iraq.

It's an interesting idea because it would allow the United States to put more boots on the ground in each country and better suit the strengths of each branch.

And again, we're beginning to explore directing military strength at Africa.

I'm fairly certain we'd like to secure similar agreements - "principles" - in another part of the world where development is needed.

today we can all agree that

Submitted by Guglielmo on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:31pm.

stormwater management will be a good first order of business.

Stormwater would be a good

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:39pm.

Stormwater would be a good place to start. Of course what happened today is a freak event but a putting together a plan with other jurisdictions that would treat all of our stormwater that moves into the Sound would be great. Not just something on paper (we have at least three Startegic Plans gathering dust) something that is actually past the pipe dream stage.

"Pipe dream!" You made a funny

Submitted by Guglielmo on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:43pm.

It is certainly something that should be considered when planning the city's future. Many things can be done to mitigate stormwater runnoff rather than installing more pumping stations to send all the crap into the sound. And a lot of the mitigating measures are pretty too.

Pipe dream, that's funny.

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:44pm.

I wonder if it's even possible to avoid what happened today from a wastewater treatment tack. I think we need to look at day lighting creeks and doing some natural storm water management. If Strub is right, today was nearly 3 times what the system can handle, engineering to that level would be expensive (in the billions). If we daylight two or three creeks and design them to take stormwater and runoff to the Sound, we can probably avoid a situation like this again.

Hey folks....

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 4:47pm.

The money has been pissed away and he is asking for more!!!

Am I talking to the same people that voted AGAINST a 3 cents on $10 increase in sales tax?

I have to laugh at how easy it is to justify $25 million here.....$9 billion there, but worry about 3 cents on $10.

You can talk all you want about potholes and surface water issues, but without MONEY you get neither.

Don't ask the Feds. Their money is tied up "overseas".

Yeah....TJ was a jerk.....but the man knew basic math pretty good (heavy sarcasm)

It is odd that the sales tax

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 5:05pm.

It is odd that the sales tax thing didn't pass. The money was for basic services, things our government is abslutely supposed to do. However, we spend local money on all sorts of stuff that may not be high on the "basic services list". By the way, how do you know how I voted?

Wilson

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 5:58pm.

Check the question mark at the end of the sentence. You'll see I was asking, not telling

25m is a lot of scratch.

Submitted by wilson on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 5:14pm.

25m is a lot of scratch. However it is gone, it would be like me fighting the sun setting. I am concerned at the moment with some locl issues that would really enhance our town if the will to move forward is now on the council.

honest curiosity

Submitted by enpen on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 9:44pm.

When you use the word "enhance", what do you mean?

I meant it will increase the

Submitted by wilson on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 8:00pm.

I meant it will increase the livability and and help move the city towards some of it's goals. Mainly affordable housing, which in turn helps business locate to Olympia, which in turn helps parks, which in turn helps policing, etc...

Good editiorial IMO and

Submitted by NWarty on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 5:22pm.

Good editiorial IMO and agreed on all points.

I thought it was well done

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 6:06pm.

It seemed honest and to the point.

Good for Mike Oakland!

Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 11:43pm.

He knows how to "seem" honest, while he calls the PDC with one hand, and tells a reporter to write an expose based on an "anonymous tip" with the other. Cheers to the great man for being able to "seem" honest to guys like Norm, while in reality acting like a two-faced rogue. He'll go far.

Why do you have to argue so many things that I say?

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 4:59pm.

I'm talking about this one piece, not Oakland as a whole. Ask Rob or Meta how I feel about his behavior regarding Meta and the PDC. This editorial sounded right on the money. Olympia voters had a very different idea than some folks have. If that is the way that the council is going to go, more power to them, they are listening to their constituents.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at: