Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, March 13, 2009
City Area Woman Claims Victory in Neighborhood Lawsuit
Posted by Dominic Holden on Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Yesterday afternoon, Laurelhurst resident Dixie Wilson withdrew a lawsuit against the Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC) after, she says, the proceedings proved her point: The group doesn’t represent every Laurelhurst resident.
The LCC had filed an appeal to block the expansion of Children’s Hospital (more on the story here and here), spending $34,900 in legal fees to challenge the hospital's expansion over the last two years. Although the LCC claims to represent "the interests of the community's 2,800 households and businesses,” when pressed to name its members in court, the LCC could only produce a post-office-generated list of addresses in the area.
“We feel it is a great victory that the membership list doesn’t exist and that [that] was recorded in [King County] superior court,” says Wilson, who moved to Laurelhurst in 1998 and supports the hospital expansion. Wilson points out that several hundred addresses included in the list are not actually in Laurelhurst, but in nearby neighborhoods, including Bryant, Windermere, and Ravenna.
“I could form a [nonprofit] and say I represent all of Seattle,” says Wilson. “Anyone can go say these things, but [that's] misrepresentation.”
The LCC has a long history of fighting development "in the interests of" those 2,800 households—for example, delaying playfields at Magnuson Park and opposing buildings taller than six stories in the Roosevelt neighborhood. In her suit, Wilson notes that the LCC never polled its members on a decision to fight the expansion of Children’s Hospital.
Now, two land-use attorneys say the LCC's inability to name the people it is representing damages the group’s credibility in future lawsuits.
“It would make any claim that [the LCC] represents all those people pretty dubious, to put it mildly,” says Bob Johns, a Seattle land-use attorney. “I think it would affect their credibility in front of the hearing examiner.”
He adds that as a nonprofit corporation, the LCC is “required by state law to have a record of its members, including names and addresses. If they don’t have that documentation, you have to wonder if the people at those addresses are actually members or if they are just residents who could join if they wanted to.” He notes that the LCC still has legal standing as a nonprofit, but not as a representative of every Laurelhurst resident.
Pete Buck, a leading land-use lawyer in Seattle, concurs. “The [LCC] has the right to assert points of view and present cases to a hearing examiner and go to court,” he says. “What is not true, however, is that they are validly representing the Laurelhurst community. It has no list of members and doesn’t poll those people on land-use issues, and they have been suggesting otherwise.”
LCC president Jeannie Hale has not returned calls for comment.
1
"Jeannie Hale did not return calls for comment" because Jeannie Hale is putting-out her hair fire.
They spent $35,000 last year on attorney fees to fight a CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL!
My god what are these people THINKING! That's CRIMINAL!
Laurelhurst you people outa' be ashamed of yourselves.
(And when I say "you" Laurelhurst, I don't mean the "2,800" people completely fabricated by LCC. I just mean the few grim souls that sit around the conference table at LCC meetings and imagine better ways to be worse neighbors to the rest of us.)
Have a crappy, crappy weekend LCC leaders!
"Jeannie Hale did not return calls for comment" because Jeannie Hale is putting-out her hair fire.
They spent $35,000 last year on attorney fees to fight a CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL!
My god what are these people THINKING! That's CRIMINAL!
Laurelhurst you people outa' be ashamed of yourselves.
(And when I say "you" Laurelhurst, I don't mean the "2,800" people completely fabricated by LCC. I just mean the few grim souls that sit around the conference table at LCC meetings and imagine better ways to be worse neighbors to the rest of us.)
Have a crappy, crappy weekend LCC leaders!
3
These "neighborhood groups" are always frauds, representing the views of lone cranks as if they were those of their thousands of neighbors. Remember the "Lower Woodland Park Neighborhood Association", or whatever it was called, that was fighting the skate park behind the soccer fields? That was one lone nutbar lady too.
I represent the "Vicinity of Fnarf's Body Association", myself, which is like a neighborhood association except it's mobile. You're behind in your dues, by the way.
I represent the "Vicinity of Fnarf's Body Association", myself, which is like a neighborhood association except it's mobile. You're behind in your dues, by the way.
4
Baaa-hahaha!
Every LLC that's registered in the Washington has to file an annual report that lists Managers and Members (names and addresses) of the LLC. It takes a special kind of cluelessness to fail that annual reporting requirement, or to file it incorrectly, or to not understand who should be listed. Members should also be listed somewhere in the operating agreement.
Maybe they should have spent $35,000 on a lawyer to properly set up their organization! lulz
Every LLC that's registered in the Washington has to file an annual report that lists Managers and Members (names and addresses) of the LLC. It takes a special kind of cluelessness to fail that annual reporting requirement, or to file it incorrectly, or to not understand who should be listed. Members should also be listed somewhere in the operating agreement.
Maybe they should have spent $35,000 on a lawyer to properly set up their organization! lulz
5
For the record:
I am now officially the King of Lake City.
I have chosen to represent all of you from Ricks strip club, all the way up to the Taco Bell.
I am a superior intellect and know what's best for you. Just ask me.
My superior land-use opinions, and social engineering skills make me far better suited to understanding your needs than your own free will.
Besides, resistance is futile: A girl I once made-out with in college later got a job on Licata's council staff. I will choose to interpret that as official recognition by the City of Seattle. Accordingly, I will be a pompous ass when dealing with lesser civic bodies.
I will soon be sending-out envelopes to raise money for my merry band of attorneys. I will say that they are "Dues," implying they are owed.
Don't ask me to be accountable for all of this, because I am free to make shit up whenever I want. (The ends always justify the means when you're this righteous.)
I will soon go to Laurelhurst seeking to unite our great Kingdoms of Puffery.
For the record:
I am now officially the King of Lake City.
I have chosen to represent all of you from Ricks strip club, all the way up to the Taco Bell.
I am a superior intellect and know what's best for you. Just ask me.
My superior land-use opinions, and social engineering skills make me far better suited to understanding your needs than your own free will.
Besides, resistance is futile: A girl I once made-out with in college later got a job on Licata's council staff. I will choose to interpret that as official recognition by the City of Seattle. Accordingly, I will be a pompous ass when dealing with lesser civic bodies.
I will soon be sending-out envelopes to raise money for my merry band of attorneys. I will say that they are "Dues," implying they are owed.
Don't ask me to be accountable for all of this, because I am free to make shit up whenever I want. (The ends always justify the means when you're this righteous.)
I will soon go to Laurelhurst seeking to unite our great Kingdoms of Puffery.
6
Hahahahaha! I'm hoping the $35K in attorneys fees really hurts. I just wish that money could have gone toward Children's Hospital funding instead.
Also, just a tiny tweak: Bob Johns is a Bellevue attorney. And he's really nice (if you wanted to work that in).
Also, just a tiny tweak: Bob Johns is a Bellevue attorney. And he's really nice (if you wanted to work that in).
7
Attention City of Seattle Officials:
The next time these frauds show-up, throw them out.
It is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money to be listening to people who are obviously not being truthful in their dealings with their own neighbors, and the City, and who would go to such lengths ($35,000) to block a hospital for kids.
It should likely outrage the people of Laurelhurst to find that their community resources have been squandered on attorneys.
Instead of being such a negative force in the community, LCC should take some time to determine where they can be a positive force for change with other neighborhoods.
Attention City of Seattle Officials:
The next time these frauds show-up, throw them out.
It is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money to be listening to people who are obviously not being truthful in their dealings with their own neighbors, and the City, and who would go to such lengths ($35,000) to block a hospital for kids.
It should likely outrage the people of Laurelhurst to find that their community resources have been squandered on attorneys.
Instead of being such a negative force in the community, LCC should take some time to determine where they can be a positive force for change with other neighborhoods.
8
Dominic,
This whole angle is such bullshit. Everyone in Seattle journalism knows that "community organizations" involve a handful of people who do a lot of work, with most everyone not interested or not involved. LCC has a board that meets regularly and deals with many grass roots issue.
There is hardly a single community group in the city that can prove that it represents a "majority" of viewpoints in a given neighborhood. Take the Capitol Hill Community Council--how many dues paying members? Etc Etc.
Dominic, you're basically pursuing a line of attack spoon fed by the army of publicists and public opinion strategists hired by a very powerful organization, Childrens Hospital.
To attack one neighborhood group as insufficiently "representative" is complete, absolute hypocrisy by The Stranger, which slavishly carries water for "community activists" representing a view point like.
So you want the hospital to grow as much as it wants? Just say so. I would give LCC credit for pressuring Childrens to modify it's growth plans from building high rise towers in a single family neighborhood. In that, the LCC played a constructive and perhaps even positive role, to move Childrens in the direction that makes more sense.
The people of LCC may not represent the unanimous view of a community or the unanimous view of every view on every issue. But c'mon, they do represent at least some viewpoints. This is America, pal. They have a right to push an agenda. You prefer to play into the storyline that to challenge Childrens is to oppose health for babies. Well, here's a news for you, Dominic, a hospital can grow one way or grow another and children continue to get good treatment,
You should be ashamed of yourself. You've been played, chump.
More...
This whole angle is such bullshit. Everyone in Seattle journalism knows that "community organizations" involve a handful of people who do a lot of work, with most everyone not interested or not involved. LCC has a board that meets regularly and deals with many grass roots issue.
There is hardly a single community group in the city that can prove that it represents a "majority" of viewpoints in a given neighborhood. Take the Capitol Hill Community Council--how many dues paying members? Etc Etc.
Dominic, you're basically pursuing a line of attack spoon fed by the army of publicists and public opinion strategists hired by a very powerful organization, Childrens Hospital.
To attack one neighborhood group as insufficiently "representative" is complete, absolute hypocrisy by The Stranger, which slavishly carries water for "community activists" representing a view point like.
So you want the hospital to grow as much as it wants? Just say so. I would give LCC credit for pressuring Childrens to modify it's growth plans from building high rise towers in a single family neighborhood. In that, the LCC played a constructive and perhaps even positive role, to move Childrens in the direction that makes more sense.
The people of LCC may not represent the unanimous view of a community or the unanimous view of every view on every issue. But c'mon, they do represent at least some viewpoints. This is America, pal. They have a right to push an agenda. You prefer to play into the storyline that to challenge Childrens is to oppose health for babies. Well, here's a news for you, Dominic, a hospital can grow one way or grow another and children continue to get good treatment,
You should be ashamed of yourself. You've been played, chump.
9
@8: so why did an actual Laurelhurst resident go to the trouble of suing the LCC, if they're doing so much good? Go away, Jeannie.
10
@8,
Thank you for so eloquently and exactly making the point against LCC.
Indeed, as you yourself said, most "community organizations" only "involve a handful of people."
The point is precisely that! LCC Trustees purport to represent the interests of the entire neighborhood -- as stated in their appeal. (Go read it.)
In fact, LCC is far from being a representative body. The LCC's bylaws and practices are engineered to foster and protect its zoning zealotry, by limiting participation and curtailing elections.
As for your hysteria: Nobody is suggesting that the Hospital be permitted to grow "as much as it wants."
In fact, there were 20-something public meetings that led to an overwhelming recommendation on behalf of the expansion plan (note: the 7th alternative!).
The CAC had plenty of representation with Laurelhurst residents -- who apparently are also LCC members. So how do you reconcile the fact that the majority of LCC members on the CAC supported the recommendation -- with LCC's claim to represent these same people in the appeal process?
The fact is Jeannie Hale and doesn't much like anything that sniffs of progress. (And there aren't many neighborhood councils, community groups and Council members that aren't hoisting a glass tonight!)
LCC had plenty of time and opportunity to make its case through an open, public process. And the basis of LCC's appeal (its standing in the community) has been exposed as complete bullshit. Instead of wild conspiracy theories about the dark forces influencing the media, perhaps you should turn your attention to the very real and proven fact that LCC doesn't represent the people it claims to represent; hasn't been compliant with state LAW regarding public disclosures; and is abusive of LCC members (conscripted) that don't drink Jeannie's batch of Community Kool-Aid.
LCC Trustees have embarrassed themselves on the issue of Children's expansion, and I suspect this (and forthcoming) revelations about their conduct will make their wait in the Zoka coffee line very uncomfortable.
LCC has vastly overspent their political capital.
Now Seattle is now coming to collect.
More...
Thank you for so eloquently and exactly making the point against LCC.
Indeed, as you yourself said, most "community organizations" only "involve a handful of people."
The point is precisely that! LCC Trustees purport to represent the interests of the entire neighborhood -- as stated in their appeal. (Go read it.)
In fact, LCC is far from being a representative body. The LCC's bylaws and practices are engineered to foster and protect its zoning zealotry, by limiting participation and curtailing elections.
As for your hysteria: Nobody is suggesting that the Hospital be permitted to grow "as much as it wants."
In fact, there were 20-something public meetings that led to an overwhelming recommendation on behalf of the expansion plan (note: the 7th alternative!).
The CAC had plenty of representation with Laurelhurst residents -- who apparently are also LCC members. So how do you reconcile the fact that the majority of LCC members on the CAC supported the recommendation -- with LCC's claim to represent these same people in the appeal process?
The fact is Jeannie Hale and doesn't much like anything that sniffs of progress. (And there aren't many neighborhood councils, community groups and Council members that aren't hoisting a glass tonight!)
LCC had plenty of time and opportunity to make its case through an open, public process. And the basis of LCC's appeal (its standing in the community) has been exposed as complete bullshit. Instead of wild conspiracy theories about the dark forces influencing the media, perhaps you should turn your attention to the very real and proven fact that LCC doesn't represent the people it claims to represent; hasn't been compliant with state LAW regarding public disclosures; and is abusive of LCC members (conscripted) that don't drink Jeannie's batch of Community Kool-Aid.
LCC Trustees have embarrassed themselves on the issue of Children's expansion, and I suspect this (and forthcoming) revelations about their conduct will make their wait in the Zoka coffee line very uncomfortable.
LCC has vastly overspent their political capital.
Now Seattle is now coming to collect.
11
Dominic - Thank you for covering this issue. Despite the rantings of Jeanne Hale's minion at 8, you are professional and balanced in your coverage. Many community organizers in Seattle are toasting to you tonight.
12
@8,
Maybe "everyone in Seattle journalism" knew that LCC is just a few hyper-crats, and doesn't reflect the community. But how does refusing to play-along with that lie make any reporter a chump? In fact, revealing the truth is the essence of good journalism.
You are correct (albeit insulting) to note that "This is America, pal."
As you know, in America, we have laws, courts and due process. And in terms of: state law governing non-profits; civil courts to enforce rights; and the Children's CAC process, the Laurelhurst Club has been busy losing, steadily and miserably.
It has been a complete failure and wasted tens of thousands of neighborhood dollars.
LCC deserves everything that's coming to them, now and next.
@8,
Maybe "everyone in Seattle journalism" knew that LCC is just a few hyper-crats, and doesn't reflect the community. But how does refusing to play-along with that lie make any reporter a chump? In fact, revealing the truth is the essence of good journalism.
You are correct (albeit insulting) to note that "This is America, pal."
As you know, in America, we have laws, courts and due process. And in terms of: state law governing non-profits; civil courts to enforce rights; and the Children's CAC process, the Laurelhurst Club has been busy losing, steadily and miserably.
It has been a complete failure and wasted tens of thousands of neighborhood dollars.
LCC deserves everything that's coming to them, now and next.
13
Let me see if I understand this correctly.
Your group takes children's hospital to task for not having their act together on the lengthy environmental impact statement process.
But you haven't met the most very basic requirements of a CLUB, which is keeping a list of members?
No wonder she didn't return the reporters call. It's pretty damn inexcusable.
Let me see if I understand this correctly.
Your group takes children's hospital to task for not having their act together on the lengthy environmental impact statement process.
But you haven't met the most very basic requirements of a CLUB, which is keeping a list of members?
No wonder she didn't return the reporters call. It's pretty damn inexcusable.
14
Just this week, the LCC brazenly sent out its annual "Dues Statement." What an interesting term Dues Statement is -- as if anyone "owes" LCC any money to them. They make it look like you automatically owe $50 just to live there and have them 'represent you.' (Such b.s.) These are not dues -- there are no dues required -- this money is a charitable donation and nothing more than that.
That 50 bucks does the following (according to them, in their Dues Statement mailing): "Supports newsletters, crime watch program, analysis of land-use issues, sidewalk safety, traffic issues, neighborhood improvements, Neighborhood Appreciation Day, community forum." (What community forums? They don't hold any.)
WOW. They refer to their legal fights as "analysis of land-use issues." Do they tell you how much of your hard-earned money they spend on frivilous lawsuits that nobody in the neighborhood wants them to fight? Do they tell you what percentage of all monies collected goes towards those fights? Do they tell you how they go about deciding (in secret, closed-door executive sessions,usually) whether or not to spend your money on these lawsuits? Do they offer any accounting of the monies collected and how they are spent? NO. NO. NO. NO. They don't do any of that.
Organizations that solicit your charitable donations are legally obligated to provide a certain amount of information, for transparency and accountability. The LCC has not done that. Laurehurst neighbors, do not give them any money. They need to come clean on everything.
That 50 bucks does the following (according to them, in their Dues Statement mailing): "Supports newsletters, crime watch program, analysis of land-use issues, sidewalk safety, traffic issues, neighborhood improvements, Neighborhood Appreciation Day, community forum." (What community forums? They don't hold any.)
WOW. They refer to their legal fights as "analysis of land-use issues." Do they tell you how much of your hard-earned money they spend on frivilous lawsuits that nobody in the neighborhood wants them to fight? Do they tell you what percentage of all monies collected goes towards those fights? Do they tell you how they go about deciding (in secret, closed-door executive sessions,usually) whether or not to spend your money on these lawsuits? Do they offer any accounting of the monies collected and how they are spent? NO. NO. NO. NO. They don't do any of that.
Organizations that solicit your charitable donations are legally obligated to provide a certain amount of information, for transparency and accountability. The LCC has not done that. Laurehurst neighbors, do not give them any money. They need to come clean on everything.
15
Send your $50 bucks to Children's Hospital, the University Food Bank, or another charity of your choice. But not to the LCC.
16
You may sneer at the presumptuous tone of that neighborhood group. But many a neighborhood has been swallowed up by the encroachment of for-profit hospitals and educational facilities.
New York is a great example: Columbia owns massive chunks of the Upper West Side, and New York University owns so much of Greenwich Village that it is currently renovating or "privatizing" Washington Square Park despite local opposition: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscar…
Neighborhood councils and community groups don't usually have the means to collect data on their "memberships." Nor can they afford sleek "community relations" experts that would expunge tricky wording that so obviously tripped up this community council.
So please be careful not to let the gloating over the comeuppance of a wealthy neighborhood council get in the way of assessing the merits of their efforts. You have to investigate first just how presumptuous the hospital itself was with its proposed expansion.
New York is a great example: Columbia owns massive chunks of the Upper West Side, and New York University owns so much of Greenwich Village that it is currently renovating or "privatizing" Washington Square Park despite local opposition: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscar…
Neighborhood councils and community groups don't usually have the means to collect data on their "memberships." Nor can they afford sleek "community relations" experts that would expunge tricky wording that so obviously tripped up this community council.
So please be careful not to let the gloating over the comeuppance of a wealthy neighborhood council get in the way of assessing the merits of their efforts. You have to investigate first just how presumptuous the hospital itself was with its proposed expansion.
17
Unfortunately LCC's chief tactic is to perpetuate fear, uncertainty and doubt that some precedent, somewhere, will wreak havoc on civilization as we know it.
By getting people to fear change (virtually any change), they manage to keep Laurelhurst a hermetically-sealed enclave, at the expense of the city's need to grow appropriately.
Nobody (at least nobody serious) thinks Children's is trying to "swallow-up" the neighborhood.
On the contrary, there has been plenty of Seattle process, (with lots of lots of LCC participation), and the resulting plan is overwhelmingly supported: to the chagrin of the fear mongers in LCC.
Let's be fair here.
- LCC certainly don't lack the funds to gather and manage member information.
- LCC (like any other council) shouldn't say that they represent people that they don't. No matter how inconvenient to their purposes.
I'm sure members of the Seattle Community Council Federation will now start to question how they appear as an organization. It's not looking good.
By getting people to fear change (virtually any change), they manage to keep Laurelhurst a hermetically-sealed enclave, at the expense of the city's need to grow appropriately.
Nobody (at least nobody serious) thinks Children's is trying to "swallow-up" the neighborhood.
On the contrary, there has been plenty of Seattle process, (with lots of lots of LCC participation), and the resulting plan is overwhelmingly supported: to the chagrin of the fear mongers in LCC.
Let's be fair here.
- LCC certainly don't lack the funds to gather and manage member information.
- LCC (like any other council) shouldn't say that they represent people that they don't. No matter how inconvenient to their purposes.
I'm sure members of the Seattle Community Council Federation will now start to question how they appear as an organization. It's not looking good.
18
Dominick, thank you for continuing to follow this story. The issues raised seem to reverberate in at least a few of our city's neighborhoods. Please check in with the City Auditor on the status of their report/audit on neighborhood councils.
I hope you'll continue to press the LCC -- and other neighborhood councils -- on being upfront about their operations. While many of these groups do good work, some are "not as advertised." All of them are 'unofficial' (as far as the City is concerned), 'volunteer' organizations; however many of them are in fact quite savvy, and their 'leaders' make this work a full-time job. Nothing wrong with that, as long as they have their act together. Therefore, I have little sympathy for them when their 'paperwork' is not up to snuff, that they can't name who they actually represent, that they don't really hold community-wide meetings to determine a direction, and they refuse to provide legally-obligated information to the members who reside within the boundaries they have defined in their own by-laws.
Hopefully they are all learning something here.
By the way, has Ms. Hale ever returned your phone call??
I hope you'll continue to press the LCC -- and other neighborhood councils -- on being upfront about their operations. While many of these groups do good work, some are "not as advertised." All of them are 'unofficial' (as far as the City is concerned), 'volunteer' organizations; however many of them are in fact quite savvy, and their 'leaders' make this work a full-time job. Nothing wrong with that, as long as they have their act together. Therefore, I have little sympathy for them when their 'paperwork' is not up to snuff, that they can't name who they actually represent, that they don't really hold community-wide meetings to determine a direction, and they refuse to provide legally-obligated information to the members who reside within the boundaries they have defined in their own by-laws.
Hopefully they are all learning something here.
By the way, has Ms. Hale ever returned your phone call??
19
As a 20+ year dues paying member of the LCC, I am grateful that my fellow neighbors finally got to the bottom of this organization. I have never been comfortable with the obstinant NIMBY attitude or the general negativity of several LCC Board members. They don't represent the neighborhood, in fact, they're an embarrassment.
My 2009 dues will be sent to Children's Hospital.
My 2009 dues will be sent to Children's Hospital.
20
At their March meeting, LCC held their discussion of expenditures, finances, and legal costs in executive session so that community members who were observing had to leave. Their main decision-making is opaque.
At their March meeting, LCC held their discussion of expenditures, finances, and legal costs in executive session so that community members who were observing had to leave. Their main decision-making is opaque.
21
I don't understand why LCC insisted on discussing their expenditures, finances, and legal costs in a closed executive session at their last meeting. Why was this meeting not open to everyone living in Laurelhurst, whom the club claims to represent?
22
I HATE Children's Hospital. If this was a shopping center choosing to expand, you'd complain about the commercialization of a neighborhood. But because it's a hospital and its for children, we're expected to bend over and let them have their way with the neighborhood. I have been putting up with their eternal construction plan for 20+ years and I'm sick of it. If you don't live nearby, your opinion on their expansion construction is irrelevant and meaningless. If you love them so much and wan them to expand, then buy my house and you can put up with the endless noise and vibration. They consider their immediate neighbors collateral damage. We are essentially assaulted in our own homes all day every day for months and months. They destroy all peace and quiet everyday. And their solution is for us to evacuate our home during the disturbance. Seattle Children's sucks.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (22) RSS