Recall

[Jingles]

In regards to recalling an appointed member think we would be SOL as I'm pretty sure recalls only apply to elected individuals. Best case senario would be for criminal reason , Fraud, imbeselment etc etc

[pasayten]

In my meeting with FOTP's Justin Porter and Ken Malloch, I was told they went with the appointed Board because they were hesitant that an elected Board might get a "negative" Board member elected to it... So much for a free thinking Board... Jeesh...

[Jingles]

I assume that if the measure passes there will be all sorts of potential scenarios involving an interlocal agreement between Okanogan County, Twisp and Winthrop -- who can serve, terms of service, area of representation, maybe election of future members, recall, etc. The lobbying for language to be included in an interlocal agreement could get quite interesting, take some time and burn political capital.

There is no provision in Wa. State law for the election of Metropolitan Park District Commissioners after the fact.

The FOP had two choices when trying to set up the governance of Metropolitan Park District that they are trying to create.

1) Metropolitan Park District commissioners could be elected at the same time as the ballot proposition.

2) Metropolitan Park District commissioners could be appointed.

The FOP choose #2.

Here is the ballot language we are voting on as far as Metropolitan Park District governance is concerned. Nothing more, nothing less.

"The District would be governed by a five member board appointed by the Okanogan County Commission and the Twisp and Winthrop Town Councils as provided by interlocal agreement approved by the three jurisdictions."

If this proposition 1 passes the Methow Aquatic Center (former FOP) holds all the tax dollar cards and will get what they desire.

Complete control, forever.

We are voting only for what is in the language of the proposition. What FOP posts on their website, says in public, or writes in the paper is irrelevant, and is constantly changing.

exactly, when an issue comes up they change their sales pitch to accommodate that issue.

As far as who gets appointed from Winthrop, it will be the person kissing the most council member a$$e$ or greasing the most pockets or making the most believed promises to build it in Winthrop, yea I have no use for the "yes men" serving on this town council

[Fun CH]

I assume that if the measure passes there will be all sorts of potential scenarios involving an interlocal agreement between Okanogan County, Twisp and Winthrop -- who can serve, terms of service, area of representation, maybe election of future members, recall, etc. The lobbying for language to be included in an interlocal agreement could get quite interesting, take some time and burn political capital.

There is no provision in Wa. State law for the election of Metropolitan Park District Commissioners after the fact.

The FOP had two choices when trying to set up the governance of Metropolitan Park District that they are trying to create.

1) Metropolitan Park District commissioners could be elected at the same time as the ballot proposition.

2) Metropolitan Park District commissioners could be appointed.

The FOP choose #2.

Here is the ballot language we are voting on as far as Metropolitan Park District governance is concerned. Nothing more, nothing less.

"The District would be governed by a five member board appointed by the Okanogan County Commission and the Twisp and Winthrop Town Councils as provided by interlocal agreement approved by the three jurisdictions."

If this proposition 1 passes the Methow Aquatic Center (former FOP) holds all the tax dollar cards and will get what they desire.

Complete control, forever.

We are voting only for what is in the language of the proposition. What FOP posts on their website, says in public, or writes in the paper is irrelevant, and is constantly changing.

exactly, when an issue comes up they change their sales pitch to accommodate that issue.

[PAL]

In a county commissioner meeting awhile back it was discussed that if the residents of the Methow pass the MPD that they would go along with an interlocal agreement. That is if the resldents vote it in. Knowing the commissioners, they will back it.

[pasayten]

As I understand, elected officials from jurisdictions within the new district serve as directors until permanent appointments are made. This is to happen within six months.

As I understand it, if the MPD passes and if the interlocal agreement does not finalize in six months, the MPD could then fail and not be legal. Another interesting scenario...

[dhop]

We are voting only for what is in the language of the proposition. What FOP posts on their website, says in public, or writes in the paper is irrelevant, and is constantly changing. This is the worst proposition and easiest NO vote this valley has ever seen. I think FOP is banking on confusion and the need of so many for a summer pool for their kids that people will vote for the measure out of sheer desperation.

[SOulman]

IF the proposition passes, all permanent positions to the district commission would be appointed. Appointment is subject to an interlocal agreement which does not presently exist and will only be acted upon if the measure passes.

As I understand, elected officials from jurisdictions within the new district serve as directors until permanent appointments are made. This is to happen within six months.

I assume that if the measure passes there will be all sorts of potential scenarios involving an interlocal agreement between Okanogan County, Twisp and Winthrop -- who can serve, terms of service, area of representation, maybe election of future members, recall, etc. The lobbying for language to be included in an interlocal agreement could get quite interesting, take some time and burn political capital.

Prior to the election, anything anyone represents about the makeup of the appointed commission is pure speculation.

The mechanics of an interlocal agreement and appointment of future commissioners is no simple matter and fraught with procedural and substantive problems. It's just another mess presented by Proposition 1.

Steve Oulman

[Fun CH]

The way the ballot is written all 5 of the park Commissioners are to be appointed.

The Narrative that three of the Commissioners will be elected officials, one from Twisp and Winthrop town councils and our county commissioner, is only stated in the FOP sales pitch on their web page. Whether that happens or not depends upon how the interlocal Agreements are written.

What we are voting on is for five appointed Metropolitan Park District commissioners. Read ballot language.

The FOP could have used the option for voters to elect Metropolitan Park District commissioners, but they chose appointed commissioners instead so no voter accountability.

But this isn't socialism in either case. Voters in our school district will decide whether or not to pass this Metropolitan Park District proposition. That's democracy.

I would add that opposition to the creation of a Metropolitan Park District is bipartisan. Both liberals and conservatives are united against the creation of a Metropolitan Park District within our school district. Lets not get all partisan about this issue.

[kedski]

I have a question on recall for board member on the recreation district should it pass.
If you have two appointed board members, how can they be removed from their position? How are they held accountable for their actions?
Can a county resident vote in a recall on a town council member?
Is the county commissioner the only one held accountable by county residents?
So a recall may not work if the rest of their district is happy with them.

This recreation district proposal is looking more like socialism at it's worst. This is just scary that anybody would consider this a good deal for the valley.