.
There appears to be little doubt that the allegations of poor leadership and judgment, along with what might arguably be incompetence and misfeasance or malfeasance, have destroyed any hope for any further political career on the part of soon to be former Washougal mayor Stacee Sellers. She has, essentially, disappeared since the election, where a well-planned and deliberate release of documents detailing some very peculiar spending on the city credit card on her part while she was in Vegas, allegedly on city business... along with a certain missing $100,000 or so.
The local paper used an interesting headline in describing the situation: Sellers AWOL in Washougal
It details the impacts of her invisibility, along with the rather juicy tidbit of a U-Haul outside her home.. so where did she go?
Don't know. And, to put a point on it, I don't care.
What I DO care about is that Jon Russell was AWOL THEN.
Russell, erstwhile congressional candidate and fake conservative, is, God help me, a Washougal City Councilman.
But not just ANY Washougal City Councilman.... oh, no.
He happens to be one of the three city councilmen who sat in oversight of ALL purchases made by this same credit card.
So.... where was HE when these many questionable charges, including alcohol, came up? Well, the alcohol apparently drew a flag,and she repaid the city for those charges.
The unanswered... and at this point, even unaddressed, question is this: Where was Russell?
Where was Russell?
Councilmen Russell, Peterson and Greenlee made up the finance committee that APPROVED Sellers' expenditures.
Where were all these fake, high profile objections then? There weren't any?
Why not?
If any of the three actually tasked with oversight of these expenditures had been doing their jobs... shouldn't this issue have come up THEN?
But it didn't. And now Russell, in his effort to get some cheap publicity, is so busy tossing Sellers under a bus that he really hasn't ever explained why HE failed to do HIS job, letting the taxpayers who entrusted him with this responsibility completely down.
Why is that, Jon? And why is it that you've taken the lead in stringing up Sellers when you failed to take the lead in your job of oversight over the credit card debacle?
I'd REALLY like to know... and since you plan on representing me, perhaps you'll swing by and give me an answer.
You won't, of course, because there IS no answer, save your misfeasance. And I'm pretty sure you don't want to talk about that.
.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Do you have problems with this? I do: Jon Russell demands Seller's resignation or impeachment.
.
I've had a few posts here about the good Mr. Russell, a guy running for Congress as if he's a case of dissociative disorder (split personality), or as if he's two different people: the one who made thousands off his efforts to help the Port of Vancouver ram their massive tax down our throats and now the champion of law, order and the people's money.
Here's the problem I've got: before Russell demands Seller's resignation... he should offer up his own.
As I pointed out on October 28, Washougal Council Members Russell, Peterson and Greenlee sat in DIRECT OVERSIGHT OF ALL OF THE CITY OF WASHOUGAL'S CREDIT CARDS.
It's bad enough that Russell actually has the stones to complain about Sellers' stupid credit card antics in Vegas when he, Russell, had completely failed to do his job of oversight on the PURCHASE records of those cards.... but to now engage in THIS kind of self-flatulation?
ALL THREE members of the council who has oversight FAILED TO DO THEIR JOBS.
They should ALL leave office.
What unbelievably rank hypocrisy.
With political leadership like this, who needs enemies?
I've had a few posts here about the good Mr. Russell, a guy running for Congress as if he's a case of dissociative disorder (split personality), or as if he's two different people: the one who made thousands off his efforts to help the Port of Vancouver ram their massive tax down our throats and now the champion of law, order and the people's money.
Here's the problem I've got: before Russell demands Seller's resignation... he should offer up his own.
As I pointed out on October 28, Washougal Council Members Russell, Peterson and Greenlee sat in DIRECT OVERSIGHT OF ALL OF THE CITY OF WASHOUGAL'S CREDIT CARDS.
It's bad enough that Russell actually has the stones to complain about Sellers' stupid credit card antics in Vegas when he, Russell, had completely failed to do his job of oversight on the PURCHASE records of those cards.... but to now engage in THIS kind of self-flatulation?
ALL THREE members of the council who has oversight FAILED TO DO THEIR JOBS.
They should ALL leave office.
What unbelievably rank hypocrisy.
With political leadership like this, who needs enemies?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
So, what does NY 23 mean to the fringe right?
.
Look, like most people to the right of Lenin, I opposed the candidacy of Dede in the 23rd.
Like most mainstreamers, she was a democrat who had found it politically expedient to run as a fake "R" because someone else was running as the "D."
As a rule of thumb, candidates endorsed by the scummier elements like ACORN and Kos are not particularly "Republican" in nature. That the decision to run this miscreant as an "R" was made by 11 county GOP chairs instead of going with a primary or at least getting a PCO vote district-wide shows the all-too-frequent incompetence of the GOP on the ground.
Let's remember the topography here: this Congressional District had ONLY been represented by the GOP since the Civil War.
Since the Civil War.
So, even though in most areas where elections took place, the GOP made gains; some, like in the case of New Jersey, spectacular gains; the GOP also managed to take some moronic, unnecessary loses
And let's remember: Christie was no Hoffman in his political positions or philosophies. Christie was much closer to Dede then he was to Hoffman.
Christie did not win running a campaign on GOP social themes. He ran a campaign on the classic fiscal and integral themes to clean up rampant corruption and to rein in out of control government spending. Fortunately, Corzine was dragged down by the multiple appearances of a clueless president; a situation he obviously (and wrongly) felt to be to his advantage because he, Corzine, had failed to appreciate the impacts of campaigning with a failure.
And looking at New Jersey, let's not forget there was an independent candidate in this election as well, and how well did he do? (He has 5.7% of the vote at this writing)
The largest newspaper chain in New Jersey, the Star Ledger, had even gone so far as to endorse the independent, saying among other things, thus:
That type of attitude is marked here locally with the fringe-right wing support of Tim "The Liar" Leavitt and among those surrounding the conservative in the NY 23rd.
Here locally, we get this kind of garbage from a Jon Russell lackey:
As deftly shown in the NY 23rd, the advice this political ingrate provides is worthless. It's also breathtaking in it's pomposity and arrogance.
I oppose Jon Russell's candidacy for reasons that transcend politics and enter into my personal knowledge of him as a man. No amount of political posturing or branding can change that, and no amount of bullying by his supporters will change the facts of what I know.
There can be no doubt that the GOP ran the wrong candidate in the NY 23. There can also be no doubt that had the powers-that-be ran a primary, or took the control of making the candidate appointment out of the hands of a mere 11 people, that the NY 23 would still be in GOP hands, instead of such a massive embarrassment because the GOP hammered the 3rd party candidate like a nail until, all of a sudden, their candidate, being such great judges of character, bailed and quite effectively endorsed her fellow democrat, there being no accounting for character.
Hoffman's fringe-right perspectives were not enough. His lack of charisma, the GOP's hammering of him on Friday and sudden support of him on Saturday, the lack of a coherent message from GOP leadership, the ultimately successful efforts by the media and leftists to demonize the right... all combined to take away a seat that the GOP has owned, outright, for over 140 years.
The GOP focuses on the wins in NJ and VA... they run around telling us the tide has turned.
And in the same breath, they try not to even talk about the debacle of the NY 23... like it was all a bad dream.
I view myself what I refer to as a "pragmatic conservative," sharing many of the views of the right. But I don't do it so blindly that I can blow past common sense, my own eyes, or develop the ability to suspend disbelief. That goes to the heart of why I've bailed on the GOP.
BOTH sides took hits yesterday. BOTH sides have much to consider. Both sides won, and both sides lost.
The unanswered question is this: what are they going to do about it?
.
Look, like most people to the right of Lenin, I opposed the candidacy of Dede in the 23rd.
Like most mainstreamers, she was a democrat who had found it politically expedient to run as a fake "R" because someone else was running as the "D."
As a rule of thumb, candidates endorsed by the scummier elements like ACORN and Kos are not particularly "Republican" in nature. That the decision to run this miscreant as an "R" was made by 11 county GOP chairs instead of going with a primary or at least getting a PCO vote district-wide shows the all-too-frequent incompetence of the GOP on the ground.
Let's remember the topography here: this Congressional District had ONLY been represented by the GOP since the Civil War.
Since the Civil War.
So, even though in most areas where elections took place, the GOP made gains; some, like in the case of New Jersey, spectacular gains; the GOP also managed to take some moronic, unnecessary loses
And let's remember: Christie was no Hoffman in his political positions or philosophies. Christie was much closer to Dede then he was to Hoffman.
Christie did not win running a campaign on GOP social themes. He ran a campaign on the classic fiscal and integral themes to clean up rampant corruption and to rein in out of control government spending. Fortunately, Corzine was dragged down by the multiple appearances of a clueless president; a situation he obviously (and wrongly) felt to be to his advantage because he, Corzine, had failed to appreciate the impacts of campaigning with a failure.
And looking at New Jersey, let's not forget there was an independent candidate in this election as well, and how well did he do? (He has 5.7% of the vote at this writing)
The largest newspaper chain in New Jersey, the Star Ledger, had even gone so far as to endorse the independent, saying among other things, thus:
The lamentable fact is that the two parties are, themselves, little more than narrow special interests. Their competition for short-term political and/or monetary gain has jeopardized the state’s long-term economic health and left it with a tarnished national reputation.All political parties seem to have become punch lines on the political scene; many of them populated by the most gullible, blinded, desperate, arrogant people I have ever known.
Where the major parties have differed, their differences have been inconsequential. Where they’ve been the same, their similarities have been destructive.
That type of attitude is marked here locally with the fringe-right wing support of Tim "The Liar" Leavitt and among those surrounding the conservative in the NY 23rd.
Here locally, we get this kind of garbage from a Jon Russell lackey:
Finally, I want to offer some advice to Jon’s political opponents within the Republican Party who have so eagerly manipulated this to reflect negatively on Jon. Take a look at all the Comments left by readers of what you’ve published on this. No doubt, I haven’t found all that has been written along these lines but of the ones I’ve found, I haven’t found one single Comment that supported the author’s position. With that in mind, I would encourage you to consider what I have termed the “Hoffman v Scozzafava … Wake-Up-Call …”. As the old folk song says, “The times, they are a changing” and you should be giving more sober thought to how your words and especially your actions, fit in with the current political landscape.
As deftly shown in the NY 23rd, the advice this political ingrate provides is worthless. It's also breathtaking in it's pomposity and arrogance.
I oppose Jon Russell's candidacy for reasons that transcend politics and enter into my personal knowledge of him as a man. No amount of political posturing or branding can change that, and no amount of bullying by his supporters will change the facts of what I know.
There can be no doubt that the GOP ran the wrong candidate in the NY 23. There can also be no doubt that had the powers-that-be ran a primary, or took the control of making the candidate appointment out of the hands of a mere 11 people, that the NY 23 would still be in GOP hands, instead of such a massive embarrassment because the GOP hammered the 3rd party candidate like a nail until, all of a sudden, their candidate, being such great judges of character, bailed and quite effectively endorsed her fellow democrat, there being no accounting for character.
Hoffman's fringe-right perspectives were not enough. His lack of charisma, the GOP's hammering of him on Friday and sudden support of him on Saturday, the lack of a coherent message from GOP leadership, the ultimately successful efforts by the media and leftists to demonize the right... all combined to take away a seat that the GOP has owned, outright, for over 140 years.
The GOP focuses on the wins in NJ and VA... they run around telling us the tide has turned.
And in the same breath, they try not to even talk about the debacle of the NY 23... like it was all a bad dream.
I view myself what I refer to as a "pragmatic conservative," sharing many of the views of the right. But I don't do it so blindly that I can blow past common sense, my own eyes, or develop the ability to suspend disbelief. That goes to the heart of why I've bailed on the GOP.
BOTH sides took hits yesterday. BOTH sides have much to consider. Both sides won, and both sides lost.
The unanswered question is this: what are they going to do about it?
.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Gee... I've been inundated with Russell supporters crawling out from under their rocks.
.
Jon Russell stopped by my blog this evening... or was it one of his surrogates? There've been an even dozen or so, but oddly, only 3 IP's identifying the perps, so to speak.
Ahhh.... no matter. This little gift was left on my doorstep, not unlike the ubiquitous burning bag of poop.
So, since I just finished my gym workout, what say I cool off by crushing this moron's little anon gesture of idiocy here and now.... OK?
Let's set the table, shall we?
The Mayor of Washougal has some problems with city credit card(s) and a little trip to Vegas. The guy running against her, who has his own issues, blew the whistle in a most timely manner to inflict maximum damage on the good mayor, all in the name of political altruism, you understand.
That, of course, is neither here nor there. What happened is that Jon Russell, loyal and good fellow that he is, tossed his mayor under the bus in RECORD time. That, of course, is his privilege.
But in his haste to avoid the splatter, he neglected to mention that he and 2 other council members for the good city of Washougal sit in DIRECT oversight of the very credit cards in question.
Now, apparently, something was said at the behest of the this little group to the good mayor to ask her to reimburse the city for the copious amounts of alcohol she apparently charged on the taxpayer dime will "conferencing" in Vegas.
Clearly, like herpes, what happens in Vegas may not, necessarily, stay in Vegas... particularly when there's a paper trail. Right, Stacee?
All of that said, Mr. Russell, best known for his abysmal failure in ramming the humongous Port Tax increase down our throats; is, along with his two compadres, DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THESE EXPENDITURES.
Well, it would seem that this merry little band approved them all, save for the booze.
But then, our erstwhile congress-critter wannabe, having completely FAILED to do the job he was responsible for doing, spewed thusly:
HOW CAN THIS SLIMEBALL ALLEGE THAT THIS WASN'T BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL????
It was, of course. But the knee jerk reaction of this product of Chicago politics was and is to put as much distance as fast as possible between himself and the good mayor. So, instead of publicly admitting HE had screwed up as well, it came out deny, deny, and then, well, deny.
That leads us to these increasingly lame little comments Russell (and or his Winged Monkeys) are leaving here in blog land.
First of all, let me re-iterate: although I am a professional in politics, I have no professional relationship with any congressional candidate. I personally know both Mr. Russell and Mr. Castillo and I have had professional relationships with both of them; both while they were working for HROC.
That said... here we go.
If he had the guts to take some level of responsibility for this, then we wouldn't be having this little chat. But he lacks that kind of courage and integrity.
That, of course, is why I would support Baird over Russell. Because we already HAVE someone representing us with an unethical, gutless background. Why should we replace him with somebody else?
That's the kind of stretch ol Jon is known for, but I guess the question is this:
Was Castillo elected to either a position in the VA or Edward Jones?
Was Castillo required to go over the credit card expenditures of a mayor while he was in either of those positions?
No? Then why would you so moronically bring this up?
Washougal City Councilman Jon Russell HAD A JOB TO DO. HE VERY CLEARLY DID... NOT... DO IT, AND THEN THREW THE MAYOR UNDER THE BUS TO DEFLECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS INACTION.
That you don't happen to like that doesn't change it one wit. The ISSUE is that it was RUSSELL'S JOB AND HE DIDN'T DO IT.
And dude (or dudette, as the case may be) if you don't like it, that's just too damned bad.
.
Jon Russell stopped by my blog this evening... or was it one of his surrogates? There've been an even dozen or so, but oddly, only 3 IP's identifying the perps, so to speak.
Ahhh.... no matter. This little gift was left on my doorstep, not unlike the ubiquitous burning bag of poop.
Wow I didn't know we wanted councilman to be reviewing all the cities expense reports. This is really one of the most pathetic ways to try to rope a candidate into the scandal. I guess if we are going to start this maybe we need to know why veterans administration had issues while Castillo was there with the hospitals and maybe we need to check to see if any of Castillos clients lost any money under his advice from Edward Jones.I kinda believe this is Russell himself, but it could be any one of those with the flawed reasoning process that would allow them to support a political mercenary like Russell.
So, since I just finished my gym workout, what say I cool off by crushing this moron's little anon gesture of idiocy here and now.... OK?
Let's set the table, shall we?
The Mayor of Washougal has some problems with city credit card(s) and a little trip to Vegas. The guy running against her, who has his own issues, blew the whistle in a most timely manner to inflict maximum damage on the good mayor, all in the name of political altruism, you understand.
That, of course, is neither here nor there. What happened is that Jon Russell, loyal and good fellow that he is, tossed his mayor under the bus in RECORD time. That, of course, is his privilege.
But in his haste to avoid the splatter, he neglected to mention that he and 2 other council members for the good city of Washougal sit in DIRECT oversight of the very credit cards in question.
Now, apparently, something was said at the behest of the this little group to the good mayor to ask her to reimburse the city for the copious amounts of alcohol she apparently charged on the taxpayer dime will "conferencing" in Vegas.
Clearly, like herpes, what happens in Vegas may not, necessarily, stay in Vegas... particularly when there's a paper trail. Right, Stacee?
All of that said, Mr. Russell, best known for his abysmal failure in ramming the humongous Port Tax increase down our throats; is, along with his two compadres, DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THESE EXPENDITURES.
Well, it would seem that this merry little band approved them all, save for the booze.
But then, our erstwhile congress-critter wannabe, having completely FAILED to do the job he was responsible for doing, spewed thusly:
Odd, that. Since this little committee of 3 is personally responsible for reviewing EACH of these credit card expenditures and since they DID nail Sellers for drinking the booze on the taxpayer dime...."I don't think these are cracks, they're craters," he said. "It looks like a pattern that is not being dealt with and that is not being brought to the attention of the council."
HOW CAN THIS SLIMEBALL ALLEGE THAT THIS WASN'T BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL????
It was, of course. But the knee jerk reaction of this product of Chicago politics was and is to put as much distance as fast as possible between himself and the good mayor. So, instead of publicly admitting HE had screwed up as well, it came out deny, deny, and then, well, deny.
That leads us to these increasingly lame little comments Russell (and or his Winged Monkeys) are leaving here in blog land.
First of all, let me re-iterate: although I am a professional in politics, I have no professional relationship with any congressional candidate. I personally know both Mr. Russell and Mr. Castillo and I have had professional relationships with both of them; both while they were working for HROC.
That said... here we go.
Is this were I point out how utterly irrelevant what "we wanted" is? Whether you WANTED it or not, THAT IS PART OF HIS JOB. That "we" may or may not "want it" matters not one wit."Wow I didn't know we wanted councilman to be reviewing all the cities expense
reports"
This is really one of the most pathetic ways to try to rope a candidate into thePerhaps. But his response to all of this is the most pathetic aspect of it. I guess he should have thought of it before he tried to dump all the responsibility on somebody else when he bears part of it himself.
scandal.
If he had the guts to take some level of responsibility for this, then we wouldn't be having this little chat. But he lacks that kind of courage and integrity.
That, of course, is why I would support Baird over Russell. Because we already HAVE someone representing us with an unethical, gutless background. Why should we replace him with somebody else?
I guess if we are going to start this maybe we need to know why veterans administration had issues while Castillo was there with the hospitals and maybe we need to check to see if any of Castillos clients lost any money under his advice from Edward Jones.Really?
That's the kind of stretch ol Jon is known for, but I guess the question is this:
Was Castillo elected to either a position in the VA or Edward Jones?
Was Castillo required to go over the credit card expenditures of a mayor while he was in either of those positions?
No? Then why would you so moronically bring this up?
Washougal City Councilman Jon Russell HAD A JOB TO DO. HE VERY CLEARLY DID... NOT... DO IT, AND THEN THREW THE MAYOR UNDER THE BUS TO DEFLECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS INACTION.
That you don't happen to like that doesn't change it one wit. The ISSUE is that it was RUSSELL'S JOB AND HE DIDN'T DO IT.
And dude (or dudette, as the case may be) if you don't like it, that's just too damned bad.
.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Lies by Omission: Why did Jon Russell neglect to mention that he has direct oversight of Washougal city credit cards?
.
Man... you can take Jon Russell out of Chicago politics, but it seems you can't take Chicago politics out of Jon Russell.
Well, folks, it looks like things are spinning out of control when it comes to the keepers of the Washougal check book... or in this case, credit card.
Unfortunately, the voters of Washougal now seem to be faced with a choice: they can choose someone who, at best, appears incompetent or they can choose a liar for mayor. Not a choice *I* would envy.
Stacy Sellers is having a tough week. Perhaps she deserves one, since, according to the local version of Pravda, Sellars charged, among other things, a "...$57 'surf and turf' dinner. An $88 bottle of wine. A $72 bill at the Eye Candy Lounge & Bar." while on some sort of "official trip" to Vegas.... although why a trip to Vegas for the mayor of Washougal would be official is, perhaps, a subject for another post. (Take some time and run a google search on the "Eye Candy Lounge & Bar" for pictures of others engaging in some distinctly "non-mayor" like activities. I guess what happens in Vegas is reported in the Columbian.)
Apparently, the whistle blower in all this is one Sean Guard, who just happens to be running against Sellers for mayor and who just happened to drop this dime THIS week (as opposed to, say, after the election) not, because, as you might think, he was trying to engage in any kind of politics; oh no. To hear him tell it,
I don't really care one way or the other, but Guard needed to have a surrogate blow the whistle here if he wanted to maintain the high ground. Having someone on the inside as it seems he does, who tipped him off and then covered the information transfer with a FOIA so HE, PERSONALLY could shill Seller's idiocy puts the lie to his claim, quoted above.
There is no altruism in politics. Guard announced this to drive a stake through Seller's political heart; he should have been man enough to just admit it. Leave the game playing to the slimy worms in the White House.
That writ, where was Jon Russell in all of this?
Well, yesterday, we received his version of what I call "Prairie Dog" from Mr. Russell.
You've seen those little critters on TV, haven't you? When they're trying to get a handle on what's happening... on what's going on.... you get this:
Here's what Mr. Russell had to tell us:
But not, I'm sure, the way Russell meant when he spewed this "What? Who, me?" crap.
Because, as it turns out....
JON RUSSELL SAT IN DIRECT OVERSIGHT OVER CREDIT CARD EXPENDITURES.
Man... you can take Jon Russell out of Chicago politics, but it seems you can't take Chicago politics out of Jon Russell.
Well, folks, it looks like things are spinning out of control when it comes to the keepers of the Washougal check book... or in this case, credit card.
Unfortunately, the voters of Washougal now seem to be faced with a choice: they can choose someone who, at best, appears incompetent or they can choose a liar for mayor. Not a choice *I* would envy.
Stacy Sellers is having a tough week. Perhaps she deserves one, since, according to the local version of Pravda, Sellars charged, among other things, a "...$57 'surf and turf' dinner. An $88 bottle of wine. A $72 bill at the Eye Candy Lounge & Bar." while on some sort of "official trip" to Vegas.... although why a trip to Vegas for the mayor of Washougal would be official is, perhaps, a subject for another post. (Take some time and run a google search on the "Eye Candy Lounge & Bar" for pictures of others engaging in some distinctly "non-mayor" like activities. I guess what happens in Vegas is reported in the Columbian.)
Apparently, the whistle blower in all this is one Sean Guard, who just happens to be running against Sellers for mayor and who just happened to drop this dime THIS week (as opposed to, say, after the election) not, because, as you might think, he was trying to engage in any kind of politics; oh no. To hear him tell it,
Right. And I'm Mayor of Munchkin City and I run the Lollipop Guild."Guard said he did not make the complaint to the auditor's office to win votes; he did it to put an end to the misuse of public dollars."
I don't really care one way or the other, but Guard needed to have a surrogate blow the whistle here if he wanted to maintain the high ground. Having someone on the inside as it seems he does, who tipped him off and then covered the information transfer with a FOIA so HE, PERSONALLY could shill Seller's idiocy puts the lie to his claim, quoted above.
There is no altruism in politics. Guard announced this to drive a stake through Seller's political heart; he should have been man enough to just admit it. Leave the game playing to the slimy worms in the White House.
That writ, where was Jon Russell in all of this?
Well, yesterday, we received his version of what I call "Prairie Dog" from Mr. Russell.
You've seen those little critters on TV, haven't you? When they're trying to get a handle on what's happening... on what's going on.... you get this:
Here's what Mr. Russell had to tell us:
Well, there may be some element of truth to that last part... the part about "trust" and the lack of it.Council member Jon Russell said he believed the findings showed that the problems were bigger than oversights.
"I don't think these are cracks, they're craters," he said. "It looks like a pattern that is not being dealt with and that is not being brought to the attention of the council."
Russell said he wants the council to hold a special meeting to look into each problem and discipline responsible parties, even ask for resignations if necessary.
"I don't see how we can trust this administration in moving forward with anything," he said.
But not, I'm sure, the way Russell meant when he spewed this "What? Who, me?" crap.
Because, as it turns out....
JON RUSSELL SAT IN DIRECT OVERSIGHT OVER CREDIT CARD EXPENDITURES.
Here's what the Columbian buried today about Russell's little meat hooks being buried in this particular pie:
The people responsible for that oversight are members of the city council. Three council members — Russell, Lou Peterson and Paul Greenlee — make up the finance committee tasked with approving city employees' and officials' receipts and spending.
The expenditures are first submitted to the finance department, and then go to the mayor for approval, Russell said. Each week, the mayor sends the finance committee members e-mails with the accounts payable receipts and statements for their review and approval, he (Russell) said. Sometimes the statements have details of specific charges, sometimes they only include the employee's name and how much they are to be reimbursed, Russell said. Unless the committee members ask to see the details of those reimbursements, oftentimes they don't know the specifics. And many times expenditures are approved as long as they fall within the amount included in the annual budget, he said.
Russell said he does not recall whether he saw details of the Las Vegas trip expenditures.
"It's not at all a perfect system," Russell said.
The committee members do not meet to discuss the expenditures; that practice ended several years ago in favor of council workshops, he said. Instead, members are told to go to Sellers with questions, Russell said.
"We have been told by the mayor not to talk to department heads to get answers, that everything has to go through her," he said.
The use of city money to purchase alcohol was questioned by the committee and reviewed earlier this summer by the city council. Sellers was notified that the practice was prohibited by city policy and she reimbursed the city for the cost of alcohol charges, Russell said. City officials were not available to comment on the amount of the reimbursement.
"She was under the impression for some reason that it was permissible," he said.
So, Russell KNEW about the booze... but then claims he DIDN'T RECALL whether he "SAW SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THE LAS VEGAS TRIP EXPENDITURES?"
HOW LIKELY IS THAT?????
OK, here are the possibilities.
Russell, who sits on the committee with DIRECT oversight over these expenditures, in fact, didn't know about them; which means that he's guilty of misfeasance;
OR,
Russell, who sits on the committee with DIRECT oversight over these expenditures, in fact, DID know about them, and then lamely engaged in the time-honored "I don't recall" lie, in which case, he's both a liar AND guilty of misfeasance.
Now, the definition of "misfeasance" is
"the unintended, accidental errors, mistakes taken place while managing the business, office or other responsibilities entrusted on a person, causing loss or damage or unfortunate situations out of such mistakes. A misfeasance become a malfeasance when the act was performed with an intention to cause loss."
Now, was Russell's incompetence intentional? I doubt it.
But does that make him any the less incompetent or incapable of performing the task of city councilman, let alone congressman?
That conclusion seems fairly straightforward to me.
.Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Jon Russell's firm grasp of Washougal City administration.
.
As you may have heard, Jon Russell, political mercenary extraordinaire and Washougal City Councilman, is running to represent us in Congress, God forbid.
Well, today he got his name in print as the crusading guardian of "The People's Money." (copyright 2009)
Stacy Sellars, who will, it appears, soon become the former mayor of Washougal, finds her butt firmly affixed to a red hot grill of a hot seat in the matter of a few missing dollars from the Washougal city accounts. Like, well, something on the order of 100,000 of them.
At this point, I don't believe anyone knows what's going on with this money. There's a lot more to examine... to consider... to weigh.
On the surface, it looks pretty bad. Typically, in situations like this, the rats will scurry away at warp speed. But is throwing someone you've supported politically, or a major part of the city staff under the bus to avoid the splatter the way to do it?
As you may have heard, Jon Russell, political mercenary extraordinaire and Washougal City Councilman, is running to represent us in Congress, God forbid.
Well, today he got his name in print as the crusading guardian of "The People's Money." (copyright 2009)
Stacy Sellars, who will, it appears, soon become the former mayor of Washougal, finds her butt firmly affixed to a red hot grill of a hot seat in the matter of a few missing dollars from the Washougal city accounts. Like, well, something on the order of 100,000 of them.
At this point, I don't believe anyone knows what's going on with this money. There's a lot more to examine... to consider... to weigh.
On the surface, it looks pretty bad. Typically, in situations like this, the rats will scurry away at warp speed. But is throwing someone you've supported politically, or a major part of the city staff under the bus to avoid the splatter the way to do it?
Council member Jon Russell said he believed the findings showed that the problems were bigger than oversights.
"I don't think these are cracks, they're craters," he said. "It looks like a pattern that is not being dealt with and that is not being brought to the attention of the council."
Russell said he wants the council to hold a special meeting to look into each problem and discipline responsible parties, even ask for resignations if necessary.
"I don't see how we can trust this administration in moving forward with anything," he said.
In this country, including Washougal, everyone is innocent unless proven guilty.
And that everyone includes the administration of the city that Russell, is, well, tasked to administer.
Russell; who is, as a member of the city council, one of those charged with the oversight of the very administration he now works so hard to condemn, wasted no time in taking what he believed to be the "appropriate steps" to step out of the way of the poop storm.
This misfeasance/malfeasance happened on Russell's watch. Of course, he's been blowing off some meetings and so forth as a result of running for Congress, but hey, who cares about missing votes and such when your eyes are on the much-bigger prize?
Clearly, changes have to be made in the systems of accounting in Washougal. But engaging in these theatrics as part of his political soap opera doesn't speak well for him, since, like it or hate it, it is HIS city and this happened on HIS watch.
Hey, I know: maybe one of those "resignations" Russell's so hot about could be his own? Watchcha think? Would THAT be a hoot?
Imagine... actually taking responsibility for something he'd done... or in this case, failed to do.
I won't hold my breath.
.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Jon Russell tells us "Actions speak louder than words." Really, Jon?
.
There's a certain level of irony when it comes to Jon Russell's doomed-to-failure congressional campaign theme.
I've known Mr. Russell for five years now; I've worked with him on the campaign trail.
I have to admit: actions DO speak louder than words.
For example, when Russell called me to try and get Pam Brokaw's social security number (that was actually his second call to me... ever) while I was working on the Curtis campaign.
I, of course, didn't HAVE her social security number, and wouldn't have given it to him if I had.
But the question here is this: what does that "action" have to say about Mr. Russell?
Actions DO speak "louder than words." So imagine my surprise when I discovered that Mr. Russell was the campaign manager/consultant for the recently smashed Vancouver Port Levy... the largest local tax increase, had it ultimately been successful, in the history of the region... a tax increase which, ultimately, was not needed and was utterly rejected at the polls.
What, precisely, does THAT action speak to?
Look at the results. Look at the results of Russell's efforts to get Roy Rhine and Paul Harris elected. Look at his short tenure as both an HROC staffer and a legislative staffer.
And then, according to Lew the PCO's were regaled with Russell's experience on the Washougal City Council... and then...
Castillo is the guy. He has COMPETENT experience and professional credentials and accomplishments that put Russell's to shame.
And that's in addition to trying to portray yourself as a fiscal conservative after you've run the campaign for the biggest tax increase in our region's history.
H/T to Clark County Conservative
.
There's a certain level of irony when it comes to Jon Russell's doomed-to-failure congressional campaign theme.
I've known Mr. Russell for five years now; I've worked with him on the campaign trail.
I have to admit: actions DO speak louder than words.
For example, when Russell called me to try and get Pam Brokaw's social security number (that was actually his second call to me... ever) while I was working on the Curtis campaign.
I, of course, didn't HAVE her social security number, and wouldn't have given it to him if I had.
But the question here is this: what does that "action" have to say about Mr. Russell?
Actions DO speak "louder than words." So imagine my surprise when I discovered that Mr. Russell was the campaign manager/consultant for the recently smashed Vancouver Port Levy... the largest local tax increase, had it ultimately been successful, in the history of the region... a tax increase which, ultimately, was not needed and was utterly rejected at the polls.
What, precisely, does THAT action speak to?
Look at the results. Look at the results of Russell's efforts to get Roy Rhine and Paul Harris elected. Look at his short tenure as both an HROC staffer and a legislative staffer.
And then, according to Lew the PCO's were regaled with Russell's experience on the Washougal City Council... and then...
Uncalled for in his (Russell's) speech was a subtle but obvious slap towards David Castillo when he said words to the effect of any candidate can speak of work in the government that(sic) may have done.So, as far as that goes one has to wonder: if "any candidate can speak of work in the government" does that "any candidate" include Mr. Russell?
Castillo is the guy. He has COMPETENT experience and professional credentials and accomplishments that put Russell's to shame.
And that's in addition to trying to portray yourself as a fiscal conservative after you've run the campaign for the biggest tax increase in our region's history.
H/T to Clark County Conservative
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)