I take offense at your attitude when you imply that simply because I no longer live in Newcastle, that I have NO right to comment about the political issues affecting Newcastle’s future.

I care about Newcastle because I spent so much time and energy getting it to even become a city. After incorporation, I spent at least as much time on the city council.

Heck, if it weren’t for me and others in the Newport Hills Now group you would not even be posting opinions in the Newcastle News about your support of the council’s actions….you’d probably be a part of Renton.

It seems to me that there were a lot of people in the Hazelwood community that opposed incorporation….but even if you were one of those people I would still acknowledge your right to your opinion.

I would have hoped that others would allow me the right to my opinion as well.

First, I DO live in Newcastle so I believe I have a right to voice my opinion. Second, I have not personally raised the issue of the campaign contribution. i have simply raised the idea of ethics and transparency. I have not challenged the right of the Council to make a change. In fact, I have acknowledged that they certainly do have a right to make a change. I have, again, only challenged the process that was used and raise it because I, like you, will be affected by their decisions. As for the “sense of purpose” you refer to, and they call their “vision”, I have merely asked them to state what that vision is. If it’s clear enough to them to take action on it then it should be clear enough to verbalize it to us. I don’t think that’s asking too much.

Sue, I believe in your right to state your opinion. But if you’re going to comment on me directly please be sure you have the facts. I moved from Newcastle for a few years and have been a fulltime resident again for quite some time.

Getting rid of Starbard was a critical first step in reining in City spending. The man spent money like it came out of a tap. But then, like you, he didn’t live here so it was just a game to him. The outgoing Council had a sorry record of spending our money on studies and consultants for projects the City didn’t need and couldn’t afford. Good riddance!

As far as Wyman’s contribution to Dulcich’s campaign goes, your finger-pointing ignores the five other councilors who approved hiring Rob back. Three of them weren’t even up for election this time. Even if Dulcich’s campaign had failed for lack of Rob’s $500, the new majority would still have canned Starbard and hired Rob. Try to remember that his is an interim appointment, not necessarily a permanent position. Personally, I am glad to see a Council with a sense of purpose. It’s a nice change from the stalling and dithering of the previous bunch.

And don’t even start in about behind-the-scenes maneuvering. Machiavelli would marvel at how Starbard manipulated the old majority, not to mention using City staff to thwart the efforts of the Council minority and Newcastle citizens.

Face it. We were fed up with being alternately ignored and sneered at. The people who cared voted…and we’re mighty glad we won. The new majority is doing just what we hoped they would.

I’m sure that council members Dulcich and Erxleben will argue that the agreement with Mr. Wyman may be a moot point since it was ratified by a majority of the council. I believe that this displays a disturbing arrogance with regard to the conduct of city business. In essence it is saying to the public “We can do what we want because we were elected by the people and we have a majority on the council that will back us up.”

I don’t believe in elected officials thinking they have mandates either. It gets them in trouble and subjects us to pendulum swings that are not healthy. But again, I’ll give them more than a month before I accuse them of not listening.

We should see issues debated, in public. I’ll be with you if they don’t do that. Again, more than a month….

Please understand that my comments are not directed towards Rob. I know him as well so that’s not my issue. My issue is simply that you can’t run on the idea of transparency and honesty and then make the first major action look as if it was done in the dark of night. I hope we’re all on board with the idea that our Council needs to conduct it’s business on a high ethical level and with openness so we can all understand actions that are taken, whether we agree with them or not.

It’s funny how some people gloss over the double-salary payments that will be made over the next 6 months while at the same time wanting to be very cautious about any kind of city spending. Plus, don’t forget the costs that will be incurred when searching for a full-time replacement for the city manager position. (Unless the council decides to keep Mr. Wyman, but that raises other issues not the least of which are his qualifications for the job.)

Openness & transparency in government was an important issue when I was on the city council. Gary Adams knows this and so does Sonny Putter. Apparently this is something that the new members of the city council need to learn.