UNTRUTHFUL CITY ATTORNEY

CLAIM: At January 19, City Council Meeting the City Attorney claimed the city refunds the Appeal Fee to a prevailing appellant.

TRUTH: The City of Edmonds does not always refund a successful appellant as the citizen claimed at the Council meeting AND SCOTT SNYDER REBUTTED.
In the following matter, the staff changed the type of hearing midstream by renaming an appeal to some unknown and uncodified type of hearing not found in the City Code and referred to as an Exception Hearing. Then the staff denies the Appellants request for refund of Appeal Fee saying only successful appeals to the City Council are refunded.

Here's the letter from Public Works Director Noel Miller to the Appellant denying refund of the Appeal Fee.
File number APL20090003. APL is an abbreviation of the word appeal. On the bottom of the page, below Mr. Miller's signature (JZL744973.DOC/00006.900000/). JZL stands for J. Zachary Lell an Attorney with Ogden, Murphy Wallace Law Firm.

https://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/1021200974312770.pdf
(click to read the letter.)

Here is the actual city file for APL20090003 with clear and convincing evidence THE STAFF MODIFIED the file name and purpose during the pendency of the matter.

https://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/923200916334274.pdfhttps://permits.edmonds.wa.us/Data/Live/PERMIT/PMT_63352/923200916334274.pdf (click to read and see the actual staff report and exhibits)

Page 1, Staff Report Title and Date Jorgensen Request for Exception to Allow Infiltration
APL20090003 September 22, 2009

Page 8, Appellant's appeal letter.

Page 55, Notice of Appeal and Hearing Examiner Hearing
APL20090003, September 16, 2009 (six days prior to preparing the Staff Report for the Hearing Examiner)

This is the most damning document.
Page 64 City of Edmonds - Planning Division Request for Comment Form routed to Noel Miller and Public Works.
Project Description: Appeal of Engineering Interpretation regarding infiltration - Edmonds Community Development Code 18.30
September 9, 2009
SIGNED BY NOEL MILLER - THE SAME PERSON THAT SIGNED ZACHARY LELL'S LETTER DENYING THE REFUND
OF THE APPEAL FEE.

In layman terms this type of transaction is referred as a BAIT AND SWITCH scheme. Tell the buyer, the car is equipped with six-cylinders when only 4 cylinders are under the hood. Enough said the City Staff and City Attorney failures are incredible.

AT NEXT WEEK'S COUNCIL MEETING WILL MY REPRESENTATIVES DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS UNETHICAL CITY ATTORNEY BEHAVIOR.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EMAIL TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT

Dear D.J., If you get a chance, I would appreciate your sharing the attached PowerPoint with the Citizens Committee. This information provides evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the City of Edmonds has been providing Fire and Emergency Medical Services for less than the cost of service to the unincorporated Esperance and Fire District No. 1. I'm hoping the group will truly look to Budget before focusing on just the taxpayer's pocketbook. The question I ask you; Is the newly created EMS Transport fee required for the subsidization of the two interlocal agreements with Esperance and Woodway ? The council, mayor and staff have not done proper due diligence of the current and passed city financial decisions to start requesting more and new taxes from the citizens. Fire District No. 1 collects tax revenue 1 million City of Edmonds charges 300,000 for service. City of Edmonds makes annual payment for Station No. 10 to Fire District No. 1 65,000. City of Ed
Read more

Lighthouse Law Group's inferior legal representation

 Email to Jeff Taraday  PROVIDED FOR THE RECORD:   In Washington State there can be only one open public hearing.   The Hearing Examiner had 10 working days to make a decision. Any extension of that time requirement requires agreement from the applicant and the parties. Uniquely, the Edmonds City Code requires agreement from all parties. I testified at the hearing and was not asked to participate in this extension or provide any further testimony. In fact, my participation has been excluded because of the one open meeting. If there have been communications between the Hearing Examiner and the Applicant those communication would  be ex parte and needed to be provided to me.    Mr. Clugston testified that traditionally the Planning Staff posts the Agenda and Staff report at the Civic Center and Library. Then he stated that ECC 1.03.09 didn’t apply that was for City Council hearings. He stated the Agenda was posted on the City’s website 7 or 6 days prior to hearing. The City C
Read more

The Edmonds City Council Again Violates the Open Public Meetings Act.

Edmonds City Council First Executive Session of May 26th 2020 The City Council may meet in executive (closed) session but only for one of the reasons specified in and in accordance with procedures identified in RCW 42.30.110. A personnel matter including a separation agreement is not specifically identified in RCW 42.30.110(1) and therefore is not a legally sufficient reason to meet in closed executive session. The Council discussed the Finance Director Scott James, Separation Agreement in the closed executive session under the guise of potential litigation. When in fact, any potential litigation ceased to exist on May 25 th , 2020, and the seven days from the date Mr. James signed the Separation Agreement, May 18 th , 2020, thus waiving all of his rights to pursue any civil action against the City of Edmonds. On May 26 th , 2020 during agenda item (4) Council President Adrienne Fraley-Monillas moved to add an Executive Session regarding “potential litigation” per RCW 42.30.1
Read more