Letters to the Editor: Ronald Wastewater looks like an old boys club

Saturday, October 26, 2013

To the Editor:

I’m a fairly recent (2005) resident of Shoreline, and I’m somewhat amazed by the politicking around the Ronald Wastewater District. First, in my limited experience, was the packing of the commission by expanding it and reappointing a commissioner who had been defeated in an election. Now the majority of the commission is suing Shoreline to head off municipal assumption of the utility, and one current candidate is running in support of their position. One of the commissioners has apparently been censured by the majority for disagreeing with their position. The agreement on assumption was concluded over ten years ago. Where have these opponents been all this time? Why the controversy at this late date?

The whole thing looks to me like an old boys’ club not being willing to let go of its clubhouse, or else like a knee-jerk Tea-Party-style anti-“big-government” movement, ten years out of date. The “censure” seems worthy of a Maoist group.

Get over it, boys. Get a new hobby.

Chris Nielsen


Anonymous,  October 26, 2013 at 6:59 PM  

Welcome to Shoreline. You will fit in nicely.

Anonymous,  October 26, 2013 at 8:46 PM  

Who needs government censure, Chris? We've got you.

Anonymous,  October 26, 2013 at 8:46 PM  

Wow, the Shoreline Area News has hit a new low in allowing letters in, I don't see where this letter meets with the criteria for being civil or respectful -- but the editor evidently agreed with the sentiment expressed and published it.

Anonymous,  October 26, 2013 at 8:51 PM  

Chris Nielson - obviously not an unbiased opinion since he has benefited from the City of Shoreline funded Shoreline-Lake Forest Park Arts Council. In the interest of full disclosure, why doesn't Mr. Nielson inform us of the fact that he has a show at their gallery. And who is on the board of the Arts Council? The usual Pro Shoreline suspects (and former city councilmembers) Herb Bryce, Kevin Grossman.

Anonymous,  October 26, 2013 at 8:56 PM  

This letter defends Bob Ransom and then attacks the remainder of the RWW board as tea-party style government. This way too funny - Bob Ransom is the tea party member of the RWW board. Furthermore, to use tea party and Maoist in the same phrase is contradictory -- the tea party completely and totally rejects Communism (of which Maoism is a branch). Obviously Mr. Nielson doesn't know much about the tea party, Communism, or Maoism.

It would be nice in the future if letter writers were less emotional and focused more on the issues and the facts rather than conducted baseless smears on the reputations of others.

Anonymous,  October 27, 2013 at 11:08 AM  

It is pretty shocking to see the string of Anti-Ronald letters being published here, day after day! But not too surprising. Pro Shoreline is the "old boys (and girls) network Chris! Hey Shoreline Area News! Isn't there going to be any attempt at fairness in your coverage of this issue? And how bizarre that now Bob Ransom is your friend! REally bizarre!

Since you are new here, you obviously have no idea what has gone on here and how they have dominated the political structures from the inception of the City.

Perhaps you don't know about the quality of the work performed day in, day out by the Ronald Wastewater District? How it was formed way back when and named for Judge Ronald, who was a champion of good governance.

The desire by the Pro Shoreline group to take over every element of governance here, and build their edifices to their self image is very strong, and the voters are naive if they think they won't get stuck with the bill.

Dream on Chris, like the writer above said. You will fit right into the City of Shoreline and all their empire building.

Anonymous,  October 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM  

I find it interesting that despite all the righteously indignant spilled ink defending Ronald's recent actions, nobody has bothered to present a reason or defense for the decision by the commissioners to increase the number of commissioners from 3 to 5, giving a defeated incumbent a new seat. Would anyone care to take a whack at a sensible explanation, or is empty bluster that insults the intelligence of reasonable folks all we're gonna get?

I know it's an uncomfortable subject to explain away, but I'm all ears.

Anonymous,  October 27, 2013 at 6:32 PM  

And why is so interesting that Ronald's recent action to expand the commissioners from 3 to 5 so interesting when Shoreline Fire did the very same only about 20 months before Ronald did? Is it because of the nasty political gamesmanship that the City of Shoreline plays? Why is it that the City of Shoreline claims two new commissioners will cost so much money and then votes this month to give themselves a big raise?

Why does the City of Shoreline claim local control is so important and then sits back why Shoreline Fire discusses joining a Regional Fire Authority with more than several other fire districts? Why does the City of Shoreline claim local control is important and then try to take over a locally controlled government agency, namely Ronald Wastewater?

Why does the City and the City Councilmembers dodge the question of raising utility taxes, telling the public if you don't like higher utility taxes and rates, then vote us out; of course, the damage has already been done. When was the last time you saw taxes and rates rolled back by any government?

We can play this why game forever, I can ask why did Bob Ransom write an email to all the commissioners about an executive session meeting and cc a member of the general public? That is violating the principles of the executive session, letting a member of the public know what was going to be discussed. And this is the same Bob Ransom who did the very same thing in the firing of Steve Burkett in the open public meetings lawsuit, evidently he has not learned a single thing -- that lawsuit cost the taxpayers almost $1 million in legal fees and severance pay. To think people have already forgot and are holding up Bob Ransom as some paragon of virtue, it is unimaginable that Pro Shoreline are backing Bob Ransom since they were behind the open public meetings lawsuit and the campaign to boot him out office -- strange bedfellows indeed.

Steve Paulis,  October 28, 2013 at 11:27 AM  

Anonymous continues to post some interesting comments defending the District and their continued questionable tactics such as attempting to censure a Board member. I find it really interesting the comments concerning Commissioner Ransom supposedly cc'ing a member of the public in an email about an executive session of the Board. Since this type of information is only known by members of the Board and District management, anonymous needs to come out from behind the anonymous title. Come on. tell us what you have to hide !!!!

Anonymous,  October 28, 2013 at 12:47 PM  

Actually, the cc is known to the public because they received the email. You must not have read the comment very carefully.

Terry O October 28, 2013 at 1:50 PM  

Obviously "Anonymous" is likely one of the Ronald board members (or their shill) trying to defend their shameful actions. Mr. Nielsen's letter raises good questions that the Ronald establishment cannot defend.

Post a Comment

We encourage the thoughtful sharing of information and ideas. We expect comments to be civil and respectful, with no personal attacks or offensive language. We reserve the right to delete any comment.

Facebook: Shoreline Area News
Twitter: @ShorelineArea
Daily Email edition (don't forget to respond to the FeedBurner email)

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP