Effort to Recall Kirkland City Councilmembers ends
A group calling itself, Kirkland Recall, has ended its short-lived effort to call for the resignation or recall of Kirkland Mayor Jim Lauinger and Councilmember Tom Hodgson (the group modified its original goal and later dropped the quest for Councilmember Hodgson’s recall). It appears the recall effort was initiated after the events surrounding the July 1st Kirkland City Council meeting.
The effort ended as abruptly as it began without much fanfare or comment in the press with the exception of an editorial in the current edition of John Gilday’s Eastside Sun. The protagonist of the group, Mr. Gilday, has posted the following statement on the closed website:
“The actions of one person removed all honor and dignity from our efforts.
For that reason I have removed the petition and closed the website.
Without civility and respect for all parties, I have no interest in the continuation of the recall. Anyone else who feels strongly about this, and I know many do, is free to register a name and continue. KirklandRecall.com is closed.
My appreciation to those that assisted and lent their names to our cause.
Thank you,
John Gilday”
It is unclear how large the recall group was as they did not publish their membership numbers. Their stated goal of removing sitting elected officials has now been abandoned and their website has been shut down. The group’s Recall? Yes or No petition is still online.
Related Articles
40 Responses to “Effort to Recall Kirkland City Councilmembers ends”
Leave a Reply
Subscribe
You can subscribe by email to receive newsletter updates:
-
Please support our advertisers
-
"KWM Kirkland Marina Park - 15 by KirklandViews.com"
Thank god that has ended. I have always thought Tom was a very desent man. He is not the way so many have accused him of being. The prospects of the next year being filled with people digging in and arguing about Council people was not what we need. We need problem solving.
Reply
To SRH Resident:
Hate to disappoint you, but the current person taking up this effort has stated that he won’t continue it. That doesn’t mean that someone within his “camp” won’t carry it forward.
On another note, I have never personally known Tom Hodgson, but hearing first-hand all that he spouted during this appeal process, he’s not “fit” to serve on the KCC. His action’s (in public life), do not warrant serving on the KCC and I hope that a qualified person steps up to challenge him the next time he is up for re-election. Tom, privately, may be a fine person to “hang out” with, chat, etc. But in taking up a public position, he has to operate at a higher level, and so does Mr Lauinger as well.
Your the first person that has said anything about “people digging in an arguing about Council people…”, I don’t believe any one else has said that. Perhaps that is what you feel it could become, hopefully not.
IMHO, what Kirkland needs to a balance to CiViK, which I feel we don’t have. KCC only hears from one organized group and pin-point citizens “for” any particular project. Typically, people take the time to show up and state when they don’t like something, if they feel compelled enough. However, the same can’t be said for the flip side…people generally don’t take time out of their day to attend a KCC meeting to express support.
The KCC needs to hear from an organized group of citizens that have taken part in the public review process afforded to us by the City and to express support for projects, etc. This is what is missing in this picture.
EOM
Reply
Rob Butcher Reply:
August 7th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
EOM,
I think that citizen involvement in the public process is essential for good governance. I commend you as a citizen who cares enough about our city to try to make a difference. Kirkland Views will continue be a resource for information and a forum for the community interested in the advancement of ideas for improving our city. Thank you for your comments.
Reply
I agree with EOM. I don’t care what a swell guy Tom is. He has demonstrated behavior as a public servant that is deplorable. And nothing has transpired that convinces me he will do anything other than continue this sort of behavior. Now that CIVIK has gotten their way at tremendous cost to us all I see several references from people who want us to ignore the travesties and “just get along.” Until when? The next time Tom’s “sense of fairness” tramples all over our democratic values and this thing happens all over. We need to fix the root cause and that’s to vote these people out of office.
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
LTKR,
I happen to agree with your instincts regarding how Mr. Hodgson will continue to conduct his “public” life. What convinces me of this is the fact that SRM requested to also see the same memo shared with CiViK attorneys. Mr. Hodgson, in a rather smug way, stated that he would “like” to share the memo, but couldn’t! So, it appears that on one hand he no problem sharing the memo when it suited one parties needs, and after paying his $500 fine, then suddenly couldn’t share this memo. Not to belabor the point, but it was my perception that he stated this in a rather smug manner which I felt exhibited a degree of arrogance. Anyway, I don’t want to get bogged down with this point. Bottom line, is that when I personally viewed Mr. Hodgson’s handling of this question, I feel he will continue to conduct himself in this manner, publicly that is.
As I stated above, I don’t feel Mr. Hodgson is “fit” to serve on the KCC…the events of the past few months have cemented that in my own mind. I will work for whoever is willing to run against him the next time his term is up.
EOM
Reply
It sounds like it’s time to pick up the torch and reinvigorate the recall…should the new recall effort include Tom? there are currently 33 signatures on the petition to recall Jim. It wouldn’t take very long to get the 500 signatures required. Turning in a petition such as this would definitely get their attention . i think it’s important to keep up the pressure on the council members who have established their firm resistance to true transparency. The ‘end justifies the means’ attitude has to be stopped. At the same time, citizens should write letters to the council demanding changes to the rules re; PAC’s and lobbying groups. Any organization such as CIVIC should have to divulge their membership list before they are allowed to negotiate anything having to do with city government.
Is anyone besides me still interested in the recall effort??
Reply
Concerned in Kirkland Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 8:09 am
Regarding PACs and lobbying groups, does this include the Kirkland Chamber of Commerce? In essence, they are a lobbying group.
Maybe we should have campaign finance reform? Should that be statewide? National?
Wait, the buiders, developers, and downtown land owners couldn’t contribute to the KCC campaigns? What about developers sitting on the KCC? Should they (he) abstain on questions that could favor other developers?
Reply
frankly Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 8:27 am
…the Chamber’s membership roster is public as it is with other legitimate organizations… Just looking for full disclosure on any group given power to influence KCC though direct negotiations as was allowed in this case.
Reply
Michelle Goerdel Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
The chamber doesn’t donate money to any political campaign ever. In fact, we will be doing our annual political forum in the fall which allows the candidates in our local legislative and Kirkland council candidates (in the years they are up for election) to explain their views to the local business community and those non-business members who chose to attend.
Reply
al czervik Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
I keep hearing about this developer on the City Council. Everytime I hear this I look to see if this Council Member has any financial interest in any development in the City? The answer is no! In fact the pdc report on this Council Member lists no contributions from anyone! I am at a loss as to why you want to insinuate that there is something wrong with them being on the Council? Is there education, experience and opinion worth less than someone else’s? If so please tell me who on the Council can better fill that role?
I would think that the Chamber’s involvement in the political process should be not less prohibited than the Republicans or the Democrats even those these are supposedly non-partisan races.
Reply
Concerned in Kirkland Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
You must have made some leap that was neither there, nor implied. I think it is a good thing to have a developer on the council. I think it is important to have diverse views and opinions on the council and in the community. I merely asked questions, and some of those are tongue in cheek?
Many of the comments on this blog come from the same half dozen people, and it often sounds like a KCC member doesn’t support their view, that KCC member must be a scoundrel, or there needs to be a smear campaign, or recall effort.
Democracy is imperfect and uneven. It usually works well, but not always. PACs are a way of life in modern politics. I don’t buy the rhetoric here that any member is beholden to any person or group in this community. There views may be more in alignment with one group or another, but I believe ever KCC member votes to support their view of what is best for Kirkland. It just won’t always be in line with what I want, or what you want.
This site would be much more useful and product if people put forward ideas that are productive, like the suggestion submitted earlier about the Costco gas station. Agree or disagree with the idea, but that is constructive, not conspiracy.
Reply
Rob Butcher Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
CKR is right. If some people could apply half as much energy into positive suggestions and ideas and actions for change as they do in negativity and name calling, we would have no problems left in Kirkland!
Another thing you said reminds me of the oft quoted Otto von Bismark, who said something along the lines of, “I have about made up my mind that laws are like sausages — the less you know about how they are made the more respect you have for them.”
Reply
Norkirklander Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
I find it ironic that folks who are critical of the recall effort bring up the subject of productivity, and positive advancement of ideas. The time and resources that went into the BOA appeal “hearing” was not well spent by any measure. The councilmembers who supported the appealant’s position should have voted in May to reject the project since that was what they had already decided.
Reply
I am the 34th person to sign this petition and its been up how long… 24 hours?
I’m sorry the gentleman that started it choose to stop it, but it sounds like he had good reasons.
Reply
East of Marketer, you made a great point. Hodgson was upset that CiViK didn’t get the memo, but it never crossed his mind that BOTH sides should have it. If he had handed it to CiViK and SRM at that July 1st meeting, that would have shown that he thought it should be an open process. But he was more concerned with “fairness” to CiViK than fairness and equal treatment for all. I don’t recall how he put it, but I know that he did not show any regret that SRM couldn’t have it.
Tom Hodgson says he was being fair, and perhaps, just perhaps, he thought he was being fair. If he knew he wasn’t, he was fibbing, and if he honestly thought he was being impartial, that’s even more dangerous, because, sitting as a judicial official, where fairness is paramount, he was prejudiced and didn’t even know it.
Reply
The petition is still up – simply forward to all your friends, lets get these guys out!
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Perhaps if a letter were submitted to the Kirkland Reporter (not sure how many people actually read it) and it got published, it may attract more people to the petition to sign it. The letter would have to be carefully crafted to not appear as a personal attack.
EOM
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 10:54 am
VLTR:
Can you please re-post the URL to this petition here? I can’t seem to find it in any of the previous threads of discussion on here.
Thanks in advance.
EOM
Reply
VLTR,
I think that as long as we still have one petition available for everyone to sign, that we should stick with it.
On another note, the timing of a recall attempt will also be important, IMHO. It would have to be timed such that Hodgson wold be both fighting off a recall effort while at the same time trying to campaign for re-election.
Also, I don’t think too much strategy (at this point in time) should be shared on this blog.
EOM
Reply
If and when someone decides to pick up the torch and restart the Recall Campaign, please add our names to the list of volunteers and we will sign the new petition (if there is one).
Laurie & Mike
Reply
Reading these past few posts makes me wonder if there is enough interest in bridging the divide that has occurred. As long as lines continue to be drawn, meetings held in private (per EOM strategy suggestion), etc. things are going to get worse rather than better. I had hoped a group of pro-active, concerned, constructive people with differing views and perspectives could form as a result of this blog but, wow…it doesn’t look promising, does it? Very sad for Kirkland.
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Murph:
IMHO, a recall effort should be kept separate from the very group that you are referring to “Citizen’s For Proactive Development”, or CPAD for short. CPAD, IMHO, should be engaged in open and transparent discussions involving the KCC members and any one else that would like to join. CPAD should play an active role in public review processes (such as any public review process that is part of the DRB) and also to help clear up ambiguities in the Kirkland Comprehensive Plan. In addition, I believe CPAD should support and encourage potential candidates and existing KCC members that have shown sound and fair public judgement. CPAD should also publicly (meaning in front of the KCC, regardless of any appeals) support development projects for which the organization has played a role with regards to public review.
On the otherhand, a recall effort should be kept a separate matter from CPAD. The reason being, is that a recall effort could potentially damage any KCC candidates that CPAD supported. I was one of the first people to sign on to the recall petition and still support a recall of Hodgson and Lauinger. I feel their “public” behaviour is unbecoming of a KCC member and I question their ability to sit in judgement fairly. Realistically speaking, I don’t think the chances of recalling both Hodgson and Lauinger are good. It’s encouraging to know that both are up for re-election in ‘09. The point I was making above regarding “too much strategy shared” on this blog is purely related to discussing the timing and how a recall effort would be managed. I feel this would be more appropriate to another local meeting between interested parties.
So, Murph, I value your input here, but I’m not advocating for turning the CPAD idea in to the flip-side of CiViK, but rather just feel that any further discussion of timing, technique, strategie for recall effort be done in meetings and not on this blog.
EOM
Reply
Sarah Andeen Reply:
August 9th, 2008 at 7:33 am
I just posted a message on the Wall trying to start a group. EOM I would be thrilled if you would consider joining it and allowing it to be called CPAD. I think your ideas are great. Just wanted to try to get something off the ground. Anyone who is interested in trying to encourage development and re-write the Comprehensive Plan is welcome. Thanks and I hope to see you Wednesday at the Kirkland Public Library at 7:15.
Reply
Michelle Goerdel Reply:
August 9th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Great idea- I’ve already got business meetings scheduled until 9pm that night but I’ll be there with you in spirit!
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Sarah:
I just read your Wall posting and feel that there is enough of an overlap to what I proposed (CPAD) that it could probably be the same group. I’d be more than happy to attend your meeting this coming Wednesday.
One additional item I would hope CPAD could do is to help identify and encourage “key” people within the Kirkland community that might want to run for the KCC.
Do you see any overlap here?
EOM
Reply
Sarah Andeen Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
EOM – I certainly see an overlap and I was hoping you would want to come/provide your CPAD name to the project, etc. I think that identifying key people for the future is necessary as well. So I do hope you can attend on Wed and would certainly welcome as much input/assistance/leadership as you and others are willing to provide. Hope to see you there.
Thanks Sarah
Reply
murph Reply:
August 9th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I want to work with you, LTKR, but I am so over your repetitive rants. I never said I condoned what Hodgson did with the confidential document. I found his actions inappropriate, although I understood his frustration. Was it illegal? I don’t know, that is a call I am not qualified to make. As for Jessica, like her or not, I believe she is following her gut. Ditto for Jim, although I agree that he is not an effective Mayor. These are my opinions. Your claim is that these people are, in essence, bought off by CiViK support. You also allege conspiracy. I do not support your opinion. The Council has made a decision to move forward in order to deal with all of the issues before the City. I do not believe it is in the best interest of the City to focus energy on a recall, or for that matter to perpetuate this negativity and hatred (yes, I said it). There are better places to focus the amount of energy being expended on this rehash and recall effort. Precisely why I have some concern about the formation of a new group, which I advocate – in theory – as long as it doesn’t become a counterpoint to CiViK. I would like to see CiViK members (of which I am not one) be welcome in this group, would you? Until everyone is willing to release their prejudices and drop the divisive rhetoric, what do you think the chances are of having an effective, inclusive group working together toward a common goal? As long as this continues I see no more hope here than with the feverish divisiveness apparent in our national political climate. Right now it feels like one group pitted against the other. I am going to try very hard not to discuss this again because I am doing prciselty what I accuse you of…being repetitious.
Reply
EastOfMarketer Reply:
August 9th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Murph:
I don’t envision CPAD being the flip-side of CiViK, e.g. non-published members, etc. IMHO, any one is welcome to a CPAD meeting, or to officially join the group. In fact, I would bet with this kind of open invite that there will be CiViK members joining just to check out what goes on, etc. A point I made in a previous posting (not sure if it was on this thread) is that I see no harm in having a group that is essentially working closely with the existing process, helping to clear up ambiguities in the KCP, hopefully attracting interested and qualified candidates that would like to run for the KCC. In otherwords, a group that works proactively with new projects going through the DRB review process, etc., and whose members are willing to show up at KCC meetings to express support of a project, in fact also at DRB meetings.
It’s now been twice in 3 years where I’ve seen CiViK file an appeal against projects…they have every right to take that action, if they so choose. However, in 2005 and again in 2008, there was no organized group representing the citizens of Kirkland (as a whole) that are in favor of the downtown projects. This is a role I feel CPAD can fill, in addition to others.
Regarding your point about not condoning Mr. Hodgson’s actions, I’m glad to hear it
However, I think if you take, in it’s entirety, Mr. Hodgson’s actions during the entire appeal process, you have to admit that he has been “less than a statesman” and needs to be “reigned in” at the very least. I think at a time when Kirkland is known to have a budget deficit, it’s the not wisest move, as a council member to take unilateral action which results in the Citizen’s of Kirkland to have to pick up the tab of up to $12,000.00 in legal fees.
Anyway, I feel that to a degree, you’re correct, we should eliminate the hatred, name calling, etc. However, any recall effort of Hodgson should not be a personal attack, but a clear statement of the facts of Mr. Hodgson’s public behaviour and let the Citizen’s of Kirkland decide, within a reasonable period of time, whether they want to continue to support having Mr. Hodgson on the KCC.
EOM
Reply
Sarah Andeen Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 12:09 am
EOM I would be thrilled if you would attend the meeting I have scheduled for Wednesday night at the library to help form a group. I do not think there is a need for two groups to do the same thing and I think we have similar goals. If you would prefer to form your own group great-please do so and I will stop trying to form a group – but if you would like to work together and can attend on Wednesday I would love to work with you.
Reply
Sarah,
What is the Wall?
Reply
Sarah Andeen Reply:
August 9th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
It is a new electronic bulletin board on this site
http://www.kirklandviews.com/community/the-wall/ that can be located on the right hand side if you scroll down. It can be a little hard to find. I keep missing it too. But it is a new place to post announcements about what is happening in the community. Below is what I posted there. Sorry for the somewhat short notice. It was one of the only times I could get a room at the library.
Many of you have indicated that you are interested in working to help streamline the development process in Kirkland.
In order to achieve this goal a new group is forming to work on issues such as:
• Drafting amendments to the Comprehensive Code
• Work to support reasonable development efforts
• Propose ways to manage the budget
This group is meant to operate as a public forum and any membership lists such as they are will be publically available.
There is no set political agenda as yet – just a group of concerned citizens who wish to work to capitalize on what Kirkland has to offer and improve the development process.
Please note this group is intended to focus on issues and not on people issues.
If you would like to participate please join us at the Kirkland Library on Wednesday, August 13th at 7:15 for an organizational meeting.
Reply
Norkirklander Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
I was not able to attend your meeting last night, so I’m not sure that this comment is relevant to your effort, but I have read many posts that suggest that Kirkland Comp. Plan changes are needed to avoid future BOA type conflicts. I don’t agree. I believe that given the opportunity certain members of the community would sieze the opportunity to impose inflexible height limits for the downtown. I also believe that people (especially those who can ante up for a high power land use attorny such as Mr. Aramburu) will always find some technical issue on which to base their appeal of DRB decisions. Instead of spending time to revise the code to try and make it bulletproof, effort should now be focused on fixing the process.
The simplist solution I see is that we should revise City Code to have DRB appeals heard by the Hearing Examiner and take the politics out. The truth is that Councilmembers are not capable to ethically fullfill their responsibilities in quasi-judicial hearings. Let’s take that job away from them! Let the professionalism of the DRB process be respected, and employ the services of an impartial and appropriately educated judge to determine the outcome of high-stakes appeals.
Reply
Tia Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Norkirklander, that sounds like a reasonable solution. That is how the rail-to-trail issue was settled in Sammamish.
Reply
John Gilday Reply:
August 16th, 2008 at 10:36 am
My experience has the Kirkland Hearing Examiner doing the bidding of their stringholders – no more no less.
Fairness and evidence is really not part of the equation. Whatever the people-behind-the-scenes desire / request will be the outcome of any matter brought before the hearing examiner.
A total sham and a complete waste of time. A Kirkland hearing examiner will tell you 5 pounds of hamburger is a ‘vibrant, living cow’ if thats what the puppetmaster tells her to say.
IMHO
Reply
LTKR,
As I understand it, CiViK’s legal appeal was based on the ascertain that the DRB BoA approval did not follow the comp plan. Outside of that, have you ever discussed with any of them what their vision is?
It might be beneficial to a newly formed downtown activist group to invite CiViK in to see if there is any common ground. You might be surprised ro find that they aren’t as anti-development as you all assume. Further, I suspect that within CiViK there are differences of opinions on the future of Kirkland. Make this new CPAD inclusive and open to a variety of opinions.
Reply
LTKR, Thank you for the thoughtful clarification of your views. Are you, or were you, ever affiliated with DRB?
Reply
The Recall List. Of 53 postings, several are multiples and 14 are anonymous. Petitions, Recalls, etc. require one identifiable signature per person.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/KirklandRecall/signatures.html
Reply
Murph:
I just went to the above petition site and noticed that in order to sign it, you have to pay for it through paypal. Furthermore, the amount paid goes to IPetitions and not a fund that may be necessary to support a recall. I’m not complaining, but just stating this. I’m curious if this could be keeping the number of signatures “down” as opposed to the existence of this petition needing more exposure.
EOM
Reply
murph Reply:
August 18th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Since I am not interested in signing the petition, I don’t know or care how it works. In case you are “Andy”, the last two signatures have duplicate comments, one from “Andy” and one from “Anonymous”. There is not sufficient interest in the recall.
Reply
FYI: There are currently 58 signatures on the petition to recall Mayor Lauinger. Of those 6 are duplicates. You do not need to pay to sign the petition but you do need to enter your e-mail address. Comments are optional.
If the petition ever reaches 500 valid signatures it can be presented to the Mayor and the city attorney. It would be somewhat effective even if an actual recall did not occur in that it would put pressure on the Mayor if he choses to run for re-election.
I think the effort should continue.
Reply