The Snohomish City Council just adopted guidelines to “rein in” council members who make inappropriate comments during council meetings. Those would be comments that are not consistent with the majority point of view.
The guidelines discourage council members from making personal or disruptive comments. The guidelines were developed and adopted to “force” councilmember Swede Johnson to act more civilly toward his council colleagues.
It is probably true that Johnson lost patience with his council mates and blew his cool on a couple occasions. But when you are dealing with inexperienced novices; that is understandable. I think Swede could have crafted more civil language that conveyed the same point, but he got caught up in the moment. Sometimes acting outrageously is the only outlet when dealing with folks who are closed to outside ideas.
It seems that since council member Johnson is the only member of the body with the experience and knowledge to recognize bad government when he sees it and then point it out in a public meeting, he is being “put in his place” by Hamlin and his posse.
Swede Johnson has more experience in government than Hamlin and the majority of the council combined. His knowledge about how government works and the substance of our local government makes him uniquely qualified to offer insights his council colleagues have not even imagined. Most of the majority have made up their minds that they don’t really care what Johnson has to contribute so they take positions opposite his without really considering the content of his comments. The arrogance of the majority emboldens them to push forward with their agenda, hoping that the public will never know about their errors in judgment.
It really annoys them when Johnson asks questions that are embarrassing to council members or staff when they cannot be answered. It doesn’t seem to bother most of them that the staff managers are not prepared to answer more than most basic questions. Council members are elected to ask the tough questions. It is their job to protect the interests of the citizens by making certain the issues are thoroughly discussed and possible outcomes have been assessed.
I would hope that every council member comes to every meeting prepared to hold the feet of staff to the fire. Responsible council members do their home work and look deeper than the cover sheet on agenda bills. They take the time to know the material and are prepared to take the staff to task if the material is not complete enough to make a good decision. It is clear that some council members take their responsibility more seriously than others.
I don’t live in the historic district so the people I listen to seem to have a different spin on this effort by the council. Comments I hear suggest the average citizen views the Snohomish City council and city management to be a bad joke. And I believe the council is oblivious to it. Unfortunately, that is typical of people convinced that they are the only smart ones in the room. They are so full of themselves they are not listening to anyone else’s input.
I am not suggesting that Swede Johnson is the only one with good questions, but he has quite a few. His many years of experience would suggest he is not a crackpot. His ideas might have some merit.
On the other hand, the lack of experience and knowledge of Hamlin, Guzak, Schilaty, Clemans and Randall suggest they could use all the help they can get. But they don’t like the tone of his input.
Bad decisions by city councils are often not detected until significant time passes. Some are evident right away. Sometimes, bad decisions are as simple as not holding staff accountable for their mistakes. The current crop of rookies is confident that the city manager and his staff will prevent them from making too many bad mistakes. They think staff has their back. It is my opinion with the council we have and the staff we have the blind are leading the blind.
Over the years we have had some pretty decent department heads; finance managers, planners and engineers. That is not my view today. I cannot remember a time when I felt the city was in such jeopardy because of a lack of substance on the council and with city staff.
In difficult times, we hope we have capable leaders and managers to protect the interests of the city. At this time, I have no confidence that our city will have the ability to avoid the pitfalls and capitalize on the opportunities that might come around. Council members aren’t digging into the issues deep enough to be prepared for the tough choices that have to be made or sharp enough to recognize the difference between the two. If they are counting on staff to cover their back side, they are in deep trouble.
Swede Johnson has been a respectable member of the school board and the county council. It is only when he drops back to a city council position that his credibility is called to question. How can that be? I have known Swede Johnson for forty years and he is not the one whose credibility should be questioned.
Council members are not comfortable with Johnson’s input. The truth is often uncomfortable. Dealing with it is often painful. But, council should listen because there is substance in his comments. If nothing else, his questions and comments should serve as a “heads up” to lead them to questions of their own. Sadly, arrogance and ego won’t let them.
Respect is something you earn with your deeds. Swede Johnson has paid his dues and done the work to earn the respect of his peers and his constituents. All I see on the Snohomish City Council is a bunch of whiners who think they can demand respect with a council motion. I’m sure Swede Johnson is quaking in his boots in fear of these intellectual giants.
I am proud of Swede Johnson for having the courage to stand up for the city when it would be very easy for him to sit back and do nothing. I can assure you that based upon the actions of most council members doing nothing is the only thing they do well.
Let’s hope that a code of conduct helps them with those tough choices and good luck with that respect thing!
No Loss for Words 
Is Marital Infidelity a Character Flaw?
by Steve DanaI was listening to the radio this morning and during a segment of the news, they were talking about John Edwards. He has been hounded for a couple years about an extramarital affair he was alleged to be having. Of course, he assured us that there was no truth to the allegations.
He campaigned this past year for president with his wife at his side on many occasions. He talked about being a family man with kids at home and how much they mean to him. He continuously denied the rumors.
Recently, the National Enquirer reported that the woman Edwards was alleged to be having the affair with had a baby. That sparked new interest in Edwards’ continuing relationship with the woman and the prospects that she had his “love child”.
Of course, he said that it wasn’t true. Then when reports were confirmed that Edwards had been caught leaving a hotel room that woman was registered in, he knew he had been caught “with his pants down” so to speak. He decided to come clean and admit his affair.
Personally, I don’t care whether John Edwards cheats on his wife or not. I am trying to figure out whether he admitted to having a short term love affair with a woman he now says he doesn’t/didn’t love. I guess it was just about the sex. Or did he admit to having a continuing affair that has been ongoing for more than two years. I thought the news account said he was recently observed leaving the woman’s hotel room.
Even though the details won’t affect my opinion of the man any more than the general story already has, I am intrigued with the current spin. The admission that Edwards had demonstrated a lack of good judgment two years ago is not the same as a two year affair that continues today.
The wife admits that she knew about the affair two years ago. Was she aware that it was ongoing? How could she be treated that way and still stand by her man?
Does this story sound familiar? Sadly it does.
I am not suggesting that Bill Clinton and John Edwards are the only serial cheaters out there. I think in the circles those guys run in, that is more the norm than the exception.
What I have learned in my brief political experience is this. Regardless of your profession, the elite top performers in any field have “super star egos” that are black holes for attention. They need for people to pay attention to their needs, their whims, their opinions.
I know there are some down to earth regular folks that are successful and don’t let their success go to their heads. My experience is that every politician, actor, musician, you name it, at the top of their game have people around them handling their needs because the public relations people constantly tell these “stars” that they are so great. Before too long, anyone in that position might begin to believe the hype.
Sports stars and actors are the most visible examples of this treatment. In most cases these folks with one endearing quality suddenly find that quality in demand. It starts in high school for jocks. The ones with gifted athletic ability are given special treatment from an early age. Is it any wonder that when they get older, they expect special treatment?
Politicians elected by increasingly larger constituencies tend to equate their ability to sway voters as acknowledgment that they are pretty special people. Just think about the people you know in sports or government. How many of them have big egos?
In government, it takes a big ego to do the work. The responsibilities are enormous. How could any person think they could do the job if they didn’t have that ego?
Certainly that is no excuse for their boorish behavior; it just seems to be the way it is.
For the most part, celebrities have that attitude that they are better than non celebrities. Somehow, they think that the very people that hold them in such high esteem are beneath them. What’s wrong with that picture?
If it weren’t for the fact that Edwards was running for President of the United States, I wouldn’t care a lick about him. He can cheat on his wife all he wants.
I expect better character from my presidential candidates. And I don’t care which party they come from. Left wingers don’t have a corner on the market.
The dilemma we face with public figures in general and political figures specifically is “What part of a candidate’s character matters when we are selecting our leaders? Is the fact that a person cheats a character flaw or is the lying about it the character flaw?”
If all we have to gauge a person’s fitness to serve in public office is their words and deeds, what are we to do when both the words and deeds are pure deception?
The radio news person was interviewing people on the street for their opinions. I think a majority of the responses I heard supported Edwards and the fact that what he does in his private life are his business.
My last question would be “What measure do we use for a political candidate if character doesn’t matter?”
Posted in Political commentary, Snohomish County Political Commentary | 1 Comment »