Tom DeWeese is one of the nation's leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, property rights and back-to-basics education. For over thirty years, he has fought against government oppression.

• Are you a farmer?
  
• Are you a business owner?
  
• Are you concerned about education?
  
• Are you concerned about government interference in our day-to-day lives?
  

Hear Tom DeWeese speak at one of two Bellingham locations, Wednesday November 9:

• 11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. at the Northwest Business Club Luncheon (Elks Lodge, 710 South Samish Way).   Event plus lunch $10 members, $15 non-members.
  
• 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at Meridian High School Performing Arts Building (194 W. Laurel Rd.)   A $5.00 donation accepted at the door. This event is sponsored by the Whatcom County Chapter of CAPR.
  

Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center. He has been an outspoken critic of Agenda 21 since 1992.

The Progressive Voter's Guide is endorsing Jack Louws.  Some of the endorsing organizations, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, SEIU, et. al., say, "Although Louws is not progressive, he is definitely a much better choice than his opponent, conservative State Senator Doug Ericksen."  So now you can all calibrate your Overton Windows. 

Here's the third bit of media that's garnered attention around town,  recorded at a candidate question & answer session in Birch Bay, October 13th:

Question (VanWerven):   "Mr. Oliver, yesterday I attended a forum in Bellingham where ah, Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen was asked if he was aware of a personnel situation in the ah, Treasurer’s office.  The County Executive confirmed that there was a very serious matter, very serious situation.  Now it is appropriate to ask you directly, did you or did you not in your term as county treasurer, engage in a relationship with a female employee at the County Treasurer’s office that involved any form of affection, physical contact, sexual contact, of, or any other inappropriate conduct, yes or no?   Furthermore, please explain to this audience how you as an elected official, how this kind of behavior would affect your job, the ability to conduct the duties of the Treasurer’s office."

Answer (Oliver):   "Well, I wasn’t at the, uh... y'know the forum the other day, but, you know what uh.. y'know what I would... say is, uh that, you know, there, there has been no complaint, there’s no grievance, there no lawsuit, there’s no threat of a lawsuit, there's been no liability, and there's, you know, there was due diligence performed to substantiate that... issue completely.   Well I, all I can say is y'know I love my wife, I love my kids and I’m not going to do anything that’s, y'know, going to hurt them. And, and so--"

Moderator: "Okay, next question."

Two days ago WE shared a local blog post that suggested there may have been a cover-up of a high-level scandal at the Whatcom County courthouse.   Today, the Bellingham Herald published County Treasurer Steve Oliver's total denial that anything ever happened.

YET, we've received footage from the recent candidate debate that seems to confirm that something did happen.   One of those "We report, you decide" moments?   Point is, one of these accounts has got to be false.   Watch the videos, and read the Herald article.

Pete Kremen, County Executive - two questions at Oct 12, 2011 debate:

First Question:

Questioner:  Joe Wilson...  "I have a question for Pete. I've heard specific ah, rumors in Whatcom County affecting the treasurer's office. Recent freedom of information requests were filed, released working doc, documents. Is it true, and you met with the county treasurer, and the other party, and bypassed the human resources [time bell] department? If you did, you can expose the county to a lawsuit for sexual harassment."

Pete Kremen:  "Is that a question or a statement?"

Questioner:  "It's a question. Did you?"

Pete Kremen:  "Did I--"

Questioner:  "Meet with the two parties?"

Pete Kremen:   "Yes, I did.  But you're wrong about the lawsuit part.  That's... I did my due diligence.  And, everything was taken care of, of, with the human resources ah, department, and ah, I did what I was supposed to do, according to the law."

Second Question:

Questioner: (unintelligible)   "Pete, uh, sitting here now sorting (?) the answer you gave with to ah, question back from Joe Wilson, are you saying there's a risk in the treasurer's department, I mean, this is the entity that collects all money for all tax agencies throughout the county, and there's a serious issue that's at hand here. I'm real concerned, a taxpayer, what are we doing [time bell] to be certain that it's clean?"

Pete Kremen:   "All of the responsibilities dealing with the, the meetings I had with those two individuals have been resolved. There's, there's no, both, there's no one, there's no grievance, there's no complaint, and... our prosecutor's office has looked into the matter, H.R.'s looked into the matter, and there's... the county is not e- ex- exposed in any way."

But Steve Oliver's official position, reported in the Herald is:

Whatcom County Treasurer denies rumors about relationship with employee
ZOE FRALEY - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD
October 22, 2011

Rumors of an inappropriate relationship between the Whatcom County Treasurer and one of his employees have led to questions at recent public candidate forums.

Treasurer Steve Oliver said he has not been involved in any inappropriate or sexual relationship with any of his employees, and he believes that whoever is behind the rumor may be motivated by the upcoming election between him and fellow candidate Brian Smith.

"The rumors are just rumors," he said. "It's unfortunate that they've been spun into something nefarious that has occurred. That's just not the case."

"If they really had a concern about county government, they could have asked many months ago," he said. "That they chose to bring it up the week that ballots go out - what does that tell you about their motivation?"    (more...)

A reader shared this troubling leak, which is really about a possible abuse of power and a compromised chain of authority.   [Continues below.]

Wally Wonders Why
October 17, 2011

I haven’t found the time to post much lately, homework, work, kids football and the list goes on, but as our next chance to vote fast approaches I’m finding that one crucial issue has not come fully to light.  The issue is whatever went on in the Whatcom County Treasurers Office between Steve Oliver and one of his employees as well as how our County Executive Pete Kremen handled it.   I can’t tell you what went on for sure, only that something apparently has gone on, but that is the point of this post.   I hope that our local media will shed some light on what has gone on, before we receive ballots asking us to again vote these men into public office.  The people of Whatcom County deserve to know.

For months now I’ve heard rumors of a scandal between County Treasurer Steve Oliver and one of his employees as well as a subsequent hush hush dealing with the situation by County Executive Pete Kremen.   I’ve seen no direct evidence of the situation, so these rumors have remained rumors from my standpoint; I’ve never repeated them.  I frankly had hoped that both County Executive Pete Kremen and County Treasurer Steve Oliver would quietly end their political careers by not seeking re-election this year, or  in Mr. Kremen’s case, election to a new position on the County Council.  Withdrawing candidacy could have left what is undoubtedly also a sensitive personal issue to be dealt with on a personal, not public level.   Sadly it doesn’t look like that is the way it will go down.

Both these men were recently questioned on this subject in open public forums and both seemed to acknowledge the situation, taking it out of the realm of gossip and rumor.  Yet, neither shed light on the facts of the situation and, as of several days later, I’ve read nothing in the news.  So in lieu of the real media at this point, I’ll pass along what I believe to know in hopes that we can make more informed decision.

At a recent NW Business Club forum, County Executive Kremen was asked if he bypassed the human resources department in dealing with a serious situation at the Whatcom County Treasurers office and his response apparently confirmed that he did.
(more...)

The Excavator dredges and shares truth, and it will post publicly available evidence about the story as rapidly as possible.   Sorry to say, enough has rolled-in to confirm officials' reactions.   This raises serious questions about official policy vs. back-room accommodation, something that would reach well beyond "managing a personal matter."

Deep Thought moment:    When our founders contemplated self-rule (government of the people, by the people, for the people), one of the things they worried about was whether we were virtuous enough as a people to govern ourselves.  This wasn't based on some pious desire for morality for morality's sake; it was a practical matter, having to do with protecting the public trust.

If the county's employment policy was side-stepped, and the cover-up involved high-level officials and multiple departments over a long period of time, this has been an egregious and compromising abuse of authority and the truth needs to "out."   Watch for more on this item tomorrow and in coming days.

In July WE reported that a resolution supporting the "American Alps" proposal (to transfer significant Mt. Baker Snoqualmie National Forest land to the Cascade National Park) was hustled through Whatcom County Council without any public notice or debate.  The resolution shot through so fast the public couldn't even see it until  it was published on the county website.   Pretty low.   For some reason, these people keep promoting this - there was a glowing front-page article in today's (Sunday) Bellingham Herald.  We wonder why...

Wenatchee, on the other hand, got wise and resisted going along.   Read all about it, but don't miss ideas below about our situation (including a warning).

Group drops Methow Valley from new National Park proposal
Wenatchee World
Story by K.C. Mehaffey
Monday, September 26, 2011

MAZAMA — A plan to add about 109,000 acres of the Methow Valley Ranger District to the North Cascades National Park has been dropped, due to opposition from mountain bikers, hunters, dog-owning hikers and others.

The American Alps Legacy Project on Friday released its final proposal, which would now add nearly 238,000 acres to the park, instead of the 350,000 acres once envisioned.

Established in 1968, the 684,000-acre park would increase by more than one-third its current size, and could bring more than 1,000 new jobs to rural communities surrounding the park, an economic study of the proposal found. The park is currently one of the least-visited in the lower 48 states.

In the final proposal, a large area between Washington Pass and Mazama was taken out, while land in western Washington was added.  (more)

It doesn't take much to figure out where "land in western Washington" was added.   Maybe it's still not too late to put the brakes on "Alpine Alps."   Have you contacted County Council lately?   WARNING.   WE think it's possible that other eco-activist "conservation" groups may be competing for even tighter "wildland" control over this public property.   So be careful what you ask for if you call or write.      This national forest land should remain just as it is:  largely wild, but accessible and productive.   Keep your antenna up.

WE have previously alerted readers about eco-activist efforts to take “planning” to a shocking new level in Whatcom County.  We dredged on the “Natural Resources Marketplace” (NRM) and the “Ruckelshaus Bill.”

WE have just discovered that Whatcom County Planning has moved ahead like a rocket to kick-start both of these mechanisms.   How are they pulling this off?

Under the cover of “agricultural conservation,” proponents of central ecology control through the Natural Resources Marketplace and Ruckelshaus have steadily taken a very firm grip on the Whatcom County Agriculture Advisory Committee.   Through an elaborate protracted process including a special public-private partnership with eco-activist group Farm Friends, this committee authored the Agricultural Strategic Plan (ASP – yes, like the snake).   The ASP (read it) says Whatcom County government, working with the Natural Resources Marketplace group and others, should manipulate the tangible and intangible ecological resources of all property in the county.  They're talking watersheds.  And they're talking about public and private property.  And all has been framed saying the ASP will enhance and protect agriculture "for future generations."   A person would think this is nice, that it will assure that 100,000 acres of land will be actively farmed, but that's a figleaf.   It's a ruse for convoluted growth management that will be in the hands of a tight cadre that we don't elect, and can't eject.

The complexity of what’s happening may seem hard to wrap your head around, but this is vitally important for the public to understand.   What’s on this horizon will affect everyone.

The activists who helped prepare the ASP want not only tangible “resources” like water to be managed centrally (not so much to accommodate use as to establish fixed limits),  but a host of other vague environmental "resources” and "services."    They presume to deal in commodities like "density," and “carbon credits,” and “ecological uses” through acquisition and trades everywhere.   Their interest is to control the effects of human activity.  And in order to protect agriculture, a new level of central authority will weigh-in on all development and land use:  urban, rural, agriculture, even forestry.

Although this talks about "ag" enhancement and preservation (conservation), the geographic interest of the ASP is not restricted to agriculturally zoned areas.   The ASP intends to oversee and “balance” urban and rural density, uses, and activities everywhere.   This is no exaggeration.

How did this massive scheme slither in, without broad public input and official public hearings?   Committees, boards, and a lot of "technical" input from eco-obsessive staff from Bellingham and at PDS (Planning & Development Services).   If you've never seen the oppressive level of control over farm activity already in place, take a moment and look here.   The same people who have imposed this micromanagement will impose regulations quite like them everywhere.   The staff involved is the same crew.

The ASP was passed by County Council on July 26 (see Resolution 2011-023 if you didn't read it above), without a public hearing.   (That’s the way things happen lately, have you noticed?)   Read through its 85 pages.   It passed 7-0.

Then, by August 31 an RFP (request for proposal) was written by the Agricultural Advisory Committee to hire a “consultant” to nail down whatever processes (recommendations for ordinances and resolutions) and other “jurisdictional approaches” necessary to facilitate the “Ruckelshaus opt-in,” and start the “natural resources marketplace.”   Understand, the NRM and Agricultural Advisory are heavily influenced by groups like Farm Friends, along with zealous staff from PDS and the City of Bellingham and others (cities?  for ag?).    [The NRM “work” was subsidized by the Washington Department of Ecology, too.]   This feelin' local in the slightest?   When you look at the RFP, note the make-up of "Team Structure" on Page 5.   Check out the "other key stakeholders" -- state agencies and "environmental interest groups" and "farm interest groups" - not farmers, and certainly not affected citizens.   And, note how this encourages the consultant to "make departures" from the scope.
 
On August 31 this consultant RFP was passed from the Planning Department, that rubber stamped it and moved it along to Administration (the Executive).

Then on September 13, the RFP was presented to County Council’s finance committee, who ok’d it.*   Who was on the finance committee that day?  Kathy Kershner, Ken Mann, and Tony Larson.   But the rest of council was there too – Barbara Brenner, Carl Weimer, Bill Knutzen and Sam Crawford.   With the exception of a minor change by Crawford, a gesture, this RFP was approved by everyone.  See the committee minutes for yourself.   This got a real "go for it."  *[Editorial note 10/6:   Those minutes say that staff reported that the RFP had already been advertised, before it was reviewed by County Council, at the Finance Committee meeting.   That was bold!]

All this – from the passage of the ASP to the approval of the RFP -- has happened over a period of only 7 weeks.   ("Ruckelshaus" was introduced two days after the ASP was accepted by council, on July 28th, supposedly as a separate issue.   And yet here it is, already specified for "opt-in" within this RFP's scope of work.)

The RFP says the consultant should frame the situation and do whatever it takes to deliver a pre-determined outcome.    Even a full schedule for this outcome is specified in the RFP, that says "to council," December 2012.   All the exhaustive public input, all the pleadings from citizens on bended knee, the science arguments, and review loops through the Planning Commission -- they will basically be a farce.    This is a contract meant to deliver.

This contrived RFP was blessed by the finance committee on September 13 and hustled through county Purchasing at breakneck speed, with an RFP due date of September 20th.   Fellow dredgers, did you get that?   After just one week, bids were due.   Think about it.  This RFP was complicated.  WE can only guess that well informed “consultants” have been waiting in the wings ready to slap a price-tag on it, sign on the line, and crank up the machine.

Will Council automatically approve the contract for RFP 11-82 when it’s presented by the Administration buried among the usual customary "consent items" for funding?  And what will it cost?   Who cares?   The real price the public will pay for this in the long haul is going to be immense.   Through the ASP our lives, and our property use, will be managed and steered like never before.  And the whole council has given this scheme “the nod.”   How collegial.

Knowing what this RFP says, we wonder if our representatives even question whether or not the county should “opt-in” to Ruckelshaus, which will make the County kow-tow to appointed boards.  Are they aware of where the “resources marketplace” is headed?   Have they read it?   They like it?   They -- no, we the people of Whatcom County-- won't have any control over such a "marketplace" under Ruckelshaus.

The citizens of this county should be protected from the wholesale management of our property use and our property rights by unelected bureaucracy and appointees.  But through these “moves,” our council seems to be handing everything over, lock stock and barrel.   And, for all appearances, knowingly.

Could the plug be pulled?  Yes, it's not too late.   But the alarm bell is ringing.   Don't fund the RFP.   Repeal the ASP - pull the "natural resources marketplace" parts.   Opt-out of Ruckelshaus.   This is that serious.

If you haven't read it -- here’s a taste of the “Natural Resources Marketplace.”   This illustrates how it will establish a system of “resource” and “ecosystem” credit trades:

"There are likely to be willing sellers of ecosystem credits i.e. people who will take actions on their land that will be sufficient to generate such credits, and this includes owners of agricultural, forestry, urban and conservation land. We will need to know where these willing sellers are, what potential ecosystem services and hence ecosystem credits could be generated from these sites, and how well these sites match broader priorities for watershed improvement, agricultural land protection, salmon recovery and conservation.

An intermediary function is likely to be needed to assist buyers, particularly larger buyers such as developers or public agencies, in finding suitable credits for purchase. In addition, since the individual sizes of privately owned land parcels in Whatcom County are not particularly large, there may be a need for an aggregation function through an intermediary who can find and aggregate a number of smaller credits into a single purchase for a larger buyer."

Feeling alarmed?   You should be.  WE are.