Edmonds Hearing Examiner - Scoreboard


January 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue $1,155.00 fee)
February 2009 - 2 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $4,030.00 fees)
March 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,330.00 fee)
April 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,948.01 fee)
May 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
June 2009 - 3 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $4,624.00 fees)
July 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
August 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
September 2009 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $2,915.00 fees)
October 2009 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue $1,605.00 fees)
November 2009 - 1 Hearing = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
December 2009 - 0 Hearings = expense $3,500 (City revenue ZERO)
January 2010 - 0 Hearings (No Work) = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue ZERO)
February 2010 - 1 Hearing 1 advisory report = expense $3,500.00 (City revenue $705.00 fee)
March 2010 - 2 Hearings = expense $3,500.00 = (City revenue $1,705.00 fees)

Number of Hearings 15

Hearing Examiner Contract Expense $52,500.00 minus
City of Edmonds Revenue $20,017.00 =
-$32,482.99 Loss

The Edmonds taxpayers are losing!

The Mayor responds to my emails attaching Hearing Examiner contracts between Toweill Rice Taylor and other municipalities.

March 30, 2010

Dear Mr. Tupper,

Thank you for providing copies of other cities contracts for Hearing Examiner services. These will certainly assist us this year as our contract for services expires at the end of this year. Our current contract was negotiated in 2006 with a start date of January 1, 2007 and expiring 12-31-2010. The contracts that you have provided us were negotiated and effective in December of 2009 in two cases and February of 2009 in the other case. Our contract from 2006 was in line with the previous Hearing Examiner Ron McConnell's contract. I would expect our new contract to be more in line with the three contracts that you have forwarded to us. As always, thanks for your assistance. Mayor Gary Haakenson

Toweill Rice Taylor didn't start until March, 2007. The Mayor pays the new hearing examiner more than the old hearing examiner with more experience. What I love the most is, Mayor Haakenson's promise to fix the contract for 2011. Why not fix the contract now? Is the Mayor so busy promoting a new property tax levy that there isn't time for cost savings steps now?

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