Vernonia's voice., June 14, 2011, Page 3, Image 3

opinion
An Opinion: While We Are Waiting...
By Scott Laird
First of all I want to be clear—I
take no joy in writing columns that
are
critical of local government
representatives. I don’t enjoy publicly
pointing out faults and what I think is
wrong, and have always prided myself
on the fact that when I offer criticism,
I try to offer solutions as well. I don’t
like when my solution is “you need to
resign.” But that is, in fact, where I find
myself as I write this.
Right now Vernonia is spending
a lot of time waiting. For the last few
weeks we have been waiting for the
results of the recall election for Councilor
Kevin Hudson—now at last we have
those, after spending City funds to find
out what most of us already knew, that
the majority (83% who voted) don’t
want Kevin Hudson to represent them
anymore. Hudson could have resigned
when enough signatures were collected
to force the election—he chose instead
to burden the city with the expense.
Obviously Vernonians have spoken
loudly and clearly and sent a message
to their Council representatives—we do
not agree with the direction you have
taken this Council. Kevin—do you hear
us now?
We have also been waiting
for the Department of Public Safety
Standards and Training (DPPSST) to
hand down a ruling on Vernonia Police
Officer Mike Kay—the Police Policy
Committee voted to revoke Kay’s
certifications in May; now we are
waiting for the full Board of Directors to
make a final decision.
We are also waiting for the
Vernonia City Council to meet with Kay
and his representatives in a Due Process
Hearing, scheduled for this week on June
13, 2011, to decide whether Council will
continue to employ Kay and keep him
on Paid Administrative Leave while
his case runs its full course, which will
probably last many more months.
We are also waiting to find
out if the four remaining City Council
members will be able to agree on who to
appoint as a replacement for Councilor
Hudson’s vacant seat.
And we are waiting to see who
the applicants are and who Council
might choose to hire as permanent City
Administrator; interviews are scheduled
for June 23-24, 2011.
And finally, we are waiting to
see whether Councilors Willow Burch
and Marilyn Nicks will finally listen to
the people they were elected to represent
after Hudson’s recall. The people have
asked them to be responsive to us and they
have refused. Willow and Marilyn—do
you hear us now? You should choose
to resign rather then spend more of the
city’s money for another recall election.
Sharon Bernal, the petitioner on the
Hudson recall has vowed that Burch and
Nicks will be next when they are eligible
on July 5, 2011.
It seems like we have been
waiting and wondering now for awhile,
with more waiting in the wings. Which
gives us some time to reflect on what has
happened in the past, what is happening
right now, and what might happen in the
future.
Again I will say, I take no joy
from watching things unravel here. I
do not enjoy or take any pleasure in
watching Mike Kay’s career potentially
implode and the negative impact it has
on our entire community. I don’t enjoy
watching the choices that our City
Council has made and watching the
damage caused to friendships, business
relationships, and our city government.
And I certainly don’t enjoy the watching
and writing about the mistrust that has
developed between Council and staff,
between Council and our citizens, and
among the Council themselves.
And yet I see no alternative
but to talk about what is happening and
offer the only solution I see as viable.
Three of our City Councilors have not
listened to the majority of the citizens
when making decisions, have not run
our city like a business, and have chosen
to put personal relationships before the
good of the city. We need three new City
Councilors. The people have spoken
and Hudson has already been recalled;
that leaves Burch and Nicks.
As far as the Mike Kay situation
goes, I know that some people believe
that Kay is not receiving his due
process—that maybe he is being tried in
the court of public opinion. One of the
reasons given for the firing of Bill Haack
was the release of public information
about the accusations against Kay.
And yet, the DPPST committee
made their decision separate from
any discussion that was happening in
Vernonia.
Because the City of Vernonia has
not had a permanent City Administrator,
the City Council will make any decisions
about Kay’s continued employment
here. Apparently there was doubt that
several members of the City Council
were willing and able to consider all
the information about Kay and make
“STILL BIKER FRIENDLY”
• Specialty hamburgers
• Draft beer & mixed drinks
• Pool tables & satelite TV
• Special live music events
• Free Wi-fi
Sun - Thurs 11 AM - Midnight •
733 Bridge St, Vernonia
HOME OF THE
2 1/4 lb.
“All In Burger”
and
$2 Domestic/$3 Micro
Drafts
T-shirts available
Fri - Sat 11 AM - 2:30 AM
• 503-429-9999
an unbiased decision. I know I question
whether they have the ability to be
unbiased on this issue. In my mind they
needed to hear from informed citizens
about the issue to help persuade them to
open their eyes.
Haack and Sosnkowski must
have felt the same way when they tried
to bring up the Kay personnel issue with
Council. Haack and Sosnkowski sent a
memo to Council on April 26, 2011 which
stated “Following on Alex Sosnkowski’s
previous memo and the responses we
received [which are all protected under
Executive Session restrictions], we have
spoken extensively and consulted with
our outside legal counsel as well. We
are deeply concerned that the City take
legal action and appropriate action on
the Kay personnel matter and perhaps
we have been less than clear on what
the City and the City Council is facing in
this matter.”
In other words, the City
Attorney and Haack had made previous
attempts to give guidance to Council
about the seriousness of the issue and
were developing a plan for dealing with
it while protecting the City’s interests.
Haack and Sosnkowski went on
to state in the memo, “We cannot afford
to mishandle this matter, whether by
hasty decision or by decision not made
on a complete record.”
How did Council react to this
guidance? They fired Haack at the next
meeting on May 2, 2011and removed
a discussion about the issue from the
Council agenda until after Kay had his
Due Process. Their Legal Council and
City Administrator were telling them
they needed to be informed. Instead
they got rid of the messenger and then
tried to stick their heads in the sand.
At that point, outside
investigations were clearly pointing
to a problem, just as Haack suspected.
The DPPST Police Policy Committee
apparently also believes there is a
problem; they voted unanimously to
revoke Kay’s certifications for life.
Now Councilors Burch and
Nicks who will have to vote on this,
need to open their eyes and consider
all the documentation and the facts and
make a business decision for Vernonia.
Can they do it? Who knows?
Recently I came upon the
following information, which reminded
me that this is not the first time issues
have been raised about Kay, Krueger and
certifications. This information shows a
pattern of unquestioned support for Kay
and Krueger, apparently without regard
to rules, regulations and processes.
The June 5, 2006 Vernonia
City Council Meeting minutes reveal
that several community members
spoke during topics from the floor and
addressed council concerning K9 officer
Krueger and complained that Krueger
had been out of service for twelve
weeks. It was stated from the floor that
the group that was raising money for
Krueger had lost an estimated $5,000 of
potential money they could have raised
during those twelve weeks.
According to the minutes, Mayor
Sally Harrison explained that the dog has
to be certified and show certifications.
Police Chief Matt Workman explained
that Officer Mike Kay was hired with
the understanding that if the department
could use the dog they would, and that
officer Kay had signed a memorandum
june14
2011
3
Publisher and Managing Editor
Scott Laird
503-367-0098
scott@vernoniasvoice.com
Contributors
Lynn Berry
Rep. Deborah Boone
Mackenzie Carr
Diane K. Danielson
Eric Larke
Karen Miller
Gayle Rich-Boxman
Dr. Chris Scheuerman D.M.D.
DeDe Webb
2011 Graduation Tribute
flighwright design
Photography
Scott Laird
Gayle Rich-Boxman
Want to advertise?
Have an article?
Contact: scott@vernoniasvoice.com
One year subscriptions
(24 issues) $35
PO Box 55
Vernonia, OR 97064
503-367-0098
www.VernoniasVoice.com
of understanding which was determined
to be inadequate—that a lease would
be necessary. Workman later explained
that Krueger must either be certified
by Oregon Police Canine Association
or have 360 hours of certified training.
Officer Kay explained that Krueger
has national certifications but they are
not being recognized by the insurance
carrier. City Attorney Jeff Bennett noted
that the city insurance carrier had notified
the city that the dog was not covered and
that they require training and a lease.
Six people spoke from the
floor in favor of the dog that night:
Helen Johnston (now Helen Hudson,
wife of City Councilor Kevin Hudson)
who raised the initial complaint about
Krueger and loss of fundraising income
and requested that the asset be put back
on the road; Michelle Kay (officer Mike
Kay’s wife at the time); Cindy Ball
(citizen at the time and City Councilor last
year who challenged Haack in October
when he dared to raise questions about
the lease and the validity of Krueger’s
certifications and pulled the dog out of
service to protect the city’s liability);
Willow Burch, ( a citizen at the time and
current City Councilor) who, according
to the minutes, told the assembly The dog
was insured elsewhere. It is the same
dog. She is grateful to have Officer Kay
and the dog. It only takes a phone call to
change insurance companies; Marilyn
Nicks, (a citizen at the time and current
City Councilor) who said she felt the
citizens have let the Police Department
down and asked if there were any other
options; and Noni Anderson who said
she appreciates Officer Kay and the dog.
I don’t want to read too much
into a situation that happened five years
ago. To be fair, none of those people—
Ball, Johnston (or her now husband
Hudson), Nicks or Burch were sitting in
a decision making seat. To also be fair,
I was in attendance at that meeting, and
had forgotten about it.
But those comments sound
eerily familiar to what happened during
this past year--unquestionable support
continued on page 23