In a recall action there are no winners. Even if Conlin avoided recall, he was far from exonerated for what he did. He won on legal technicalities not because he acquitted himself and not because the court found that he had done no wrong.
And had the court found in favor of the recall petitioners, we would not have been winners either, because a recall is predicated on the bad acts of the person subject to recall.
In regards to Conlin's "policy" commentary after the court hearing, that this was just about disagreeing with the City's tunnel policy, since the referendum and this week in the initiative, "policy" has come to mean whatever it is that the City officials want it to mean, that will get them their tunnel.
In the referendum the City attorney's office argued policy is king and no one can undo that; in the initiative hearing this week the City attorney and the State's attorney argued that the policy portion of I-101 didn't mean anything and so should not be put on the ballot - note, the argument wasn't I-101's policy conflicted with City policy, just that "policy" didn't have any heft so why grant it a place on the ballot.
One takeaway for me in all of this is that for a number of reasons government and government officials are becoming less and less accountable, government officials are becoming increasingly hostile and arrogant in their dealings with the public, and the powers supposedly reserved to the people that are supposed to act as a bulwark and control over such things, the powers of referendum, initiative, and recall, they have been and are being greatly diminished.
Conlin should not have been let off, and he should get over himself thinking that we're "his constituents". More of his imperialistic pretentions coming to the fore.
5th times the Winner, @4 - you must be new here.
And had the court found in favor of the recall petitioners, we would not have been winners either, because a recall is predicated on the bad acts of the person subject to recall.
In regards to Conlin's "policy" commentary after the court hearing, that this was just about disagreeing with the City's tunnel policy, since the referendum and this week in the initiative, "policy" has come to mean whatever it is that the City officials want it to mean, that will get them their tunnel.
In the referendum the City attorney's office argued policy is king and no one can undo that; in the initiative hearing this week the City attorney and the State's attorney argued that the policy portion of I-101 didn't mean anything and so should not be put on the ballot - note, the argument wasn't I-101's policy conflicted with City policy, just that "policy" didn't have any heft so why grant it a place on the ballot.
One takeaway for me in all of this is that for a number of reasons government and government officials are becoming less and less accountable, government officials are becoming increasingly hostile and arrogant in their dealings with the public, and the powers supposedly reserved to the people that are supposed to act as a bulwark and control over such things, the powers of referendum, initiative, and recall, they have been and are being greatly diminished.
Conlin should not have been let off, and he should get over himself thinking that we're "his constituents". More of his imperialistic pretentions coming to the fore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvcJqcUlY…
This is Seattle, not LaLa Land.
That's very disrespectful toward Mrs. Campbell. You should be ashamed, I'm sure she's very sincere about all this.