Comments on Port Watch

She did a lot more than singe it (I think "sign" is what you want).

I like the way you're holding their feet to the fire on this one, Josh. We can't have half a billion dollars in the hands of these nitwits without some kind of accountability.

fix your post's html, you have an unclosed bold/strong tag that is effing up the rest of slog.

Clos your bold tag.

Close your bold tag.

Axis Bold!

She already dribbled, now she's stuck on her pivot foot, Josh.

If only we had tossed that arrogant Davis bitch 2 years ago.
I miss Jack Jolley.

Josh, this type of executive session stuff happens pretty much all the time in all jurisdictions in every state in America.

How do you propose to go about proving what takes place in these meetings is "kosher" if nobody in those secret sessions will speak to you to admit what's going on.

It seems to me that even if some of them appreciate Open Public Meetings law, they all seem to think that no matter WHAT happens in said meetings, they have to keep it quiet.

It's really unfortunate. Public business should be done in public, as far as I'm concerned, and I try to work with people on a daily basis about this.

I think there are generally some misconceptions about the state's Open Public Meetings act that government attorneys often push on leaders - or leaders merely want to play it safe, for whatever reason.

From: "Public Law Ethics Primer For Government Lawyers"

By: the Washington State Municipal Attorneys Association

http://www.mrsc.org/publications/primer.aspx

VI. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS

B. Additional Considerations.

1. Change of Subject. What should counsel do when, in executive session, the discussion wanders away from the topic for which the executive session was convened?...What is the attorney's ethical duty...? The attorney should warn the public body that it is authorized to conduct an executive session for certain limited purposes, and if it wishes to proceed with other matters, the public meeting should reconvene."

Josh you say: Creighton, in fact, says he brought it to the attention of Port legal staff, and they told him the Commission was advised to “reel it back in.”

Does this mean no one from the Legal staff attends the executive sessions? Or that Creighton missed the one where they were told to "reel it in"?

BTW - why don't you name this (these?) mysterious "Port's legal staff" you mention?

Uh... (don't think I'm defending Pat Davis here, I'm just stating the facts) Pat was almost single-handedly responsible for bringing the WTO to town back in the day. You know, city torn apart, flash-bangs and tear-gas, Reichert with a photo-op chasing down looters, anarchists from Eugene actually getting press, fat cats in suits from South Africa just trying to make a few million (dis)honest bucks here and there, cost Mayor Schell his job, the whole reason why Nickels is in office... and you sad sacs all re-elected Pat. Twice, I think. I'm just sayin'.

Hello everyone, wanna be part of some kind of community, possible here? anyone here?