Clark County, Time for a Mulligan on County Council

by lewwaters

Playground 1Anybody that has ever been around golf for very long knows of “taking a Mulligan.” For those unfamiliar with the term, it means “when a player gets a second chance to perform a certain move or action; usually due to lack of skill or bitter luck. A ‘Do-Over’.”

Witnessing the ongoing friction and antics of the newly seated County Council as they adjust to a five-member council, we see one of the most dysfunctional bodies of government I have ever seen in my life.

It’s easy to point fingers of blame at David Madore and let’s face it; he deserves his share of blame for his own antics, accusing others of criminal acts, corruption and plotting against citizens.

But he isn’t responsible for every last piece of dysfunction either.

All of the councilors share in what is going on as there is also the appearance of vengeance being a big motivator in the haste to undo what he pushed through prematurely with claims of revisiting those measures soon.

Chair Marc Boldt, when he isn’t shedding tears in a Rodney King type call of “can’t we all get along” is showing an inability to lead the council and maintain order very well. Open arguing and sniping between councilors during public meetings is not uncommon while he sits there like a deer caught in headlights.

Madore engages in long boring explanations of points he prefers while Jeanne Stewart and Julie Olson roll their eyes, lash back, challenge and vote against whatever it was they discussed while a divided audience sits and applauds their particular side.

Any given meeting we will see the same people appear before council, lashing out at the side they oppose and calling for that side to resign.

In short, nobody gets along; nobody works together for the needs of the people, personal squabbles taking precedence.

Of course an all too familiar attitude is the thought of just get rid of Madore and everything will be fine. But will it?

There is no guarantee Madore will lose his bid for reelection and even if he does, where will his replacement stand on the same issues?

Will that person just be another rubber stamp for downtown special interests? Or will they stand up for citizens?

Would they work any better with the other three and just go along to get along and draw more scorn from citizens that felt their needs were ignored prior to the 2012 election?

Would the other side lash back if any replacement did stand up for a more conservative view, giving us the representation we too deserve?

Both sides seem to forget that we all deserve our views represented; neither left or right always having it all their way and their way only, as many of us felt with prior county government.

What ever happened to that much vaunted “middle ground” elected officials used to be able to meet in and compromise after collaboration?

Let’s face it, not everything coming from Madore is bad and calls of a diverse citizenry must also include representation of that diverse citizenry, not just one side.

And that applies to all five councilors.

I don’t for a minute buy that staff are corrupt or criminal, but I also do not believe they carefully consider the needs and wants of citizens, depending more on towing the lines of bureaucratic red tape instead of seeking how better to accommodate citizens within those regulations.

I don’t believe they deserve the accusations hurled about that stresses them out and creates a hostile work environment either.

Bottom line is all can do better and must do better to govern, not rule citizens.

Whether elected or hired, they are there to serve us, not make us their subjects to do their bidding.

I have voted for three of the sitting councilors, only Madore and Boldt have not received my vote and I do not feel I am being represented by this current council of five. I’m sure I am not the only one that feels left out in the cold by the council.

It is time that all five put aside their personal animus towards each other, especially during council meetings and do the job they were elected to do.

No, that doesn’t mean adhering to any party line demanded by the few repeat hotheads blasting them every week. But to actually work together, collaborate, listen in reasonable discussions to each other and the people that bring legitimate issues before them and resolve those issues best they can.

While I am a strong advocate of free speech, I also have to say I am not averse to limiting the speaking privileges of those few that are not speaking to resolve issues, but speak to demean and denigrate sitting councilors, demanding resignations, wagging fingers and hurling blanket accusations every week.

But ultimately, it is the council, all five of them that must get their acts together, stop this bickering and work together for all of us, not select people or groups.

None of you were elected to tell us what we may or may not do, how much more we have to give up from our paychecks for projects they want or what mode of transportation you desire to limit us to.

None are there to cry they are victimized by the others when they don’t get their way.

Just get your acts together!

Help keep this blog active with a voluntary contribution at the PayPal button at the top of the sidebar on the right. Thank you.

8 Comments to “Clark County, Time for a Mulligan on County Council”

  1. Great post Lew!

    Liz Pike WA State Representative, District 18 Cell (360) 281-8720 26300 NE Third Street Camas, WA 98607 Campaign Address: PO Box 662, Camas, WA 98607 WEB:

  2. The Left has been playin’ the Right like a fiddle for decades in America and elsewhere, and any opposition to their collectivism, has been met with the shrill cry of the Alinskyesque crowd. It’s what finally fomented the Tea Party movement.

    Collaborate on what? More high density population through centralized government planning? Prioritizing mass transit at the expense of roads? Increasing “social” programs while law enforcement is underfunded? Always wanting tax increases to pay for their unending problem solving through government?

    Compromise works to the advantage of those who want something from government, which is the Left. If you can’t get the whole loaf now, settle for half. Then get the other half later. What we’re witnessing in this county, is what happens when someone actually stands up and says “NO”.

  3. Then I guess we continue getting no loaf.

    My call for collaboration is for both sides, not just one.

    Madore was cautioned long ago and did not listen.

    Still, other than sowing contentions, what is he accomplishing?

    I was saying no long before Madore and his crew came on the scene and it was Madore that stabbed me in the back and his crew that decided I needed silenced because I would not be theri rubber stamp.

    But in the end, he won’t give an inch, so they won’t give an inch and we end up with nothing!

  4. Generally he’s a good public watchdog. The C-tran Board. The Open Public Meetings law. The Growth Management update. As I’ve stated before, It’s my opinion that there’s an ingrained culture in at least some government departments. Madore raises the apropos issue of “going along to get along”, which he isn’t going to do.

    Specifically, he put up the “Grid”, reduced property taxes, removed park fees and removed fees on business development. Whether one thinks these are good is up to them, but they ARE things he accomplished. Past tense.

    I’m really not sure what you would think of as an accomplishment, present tense. I think no loaf is pretty good compared with the wrong loaf.

  5. He can and will do as he pleases.

    How it works out in the long run remains to be seen.

    I’m not in his district, so I’ll just pop popcorn and watch from the sidelines.

  6. Thanks for the back and forth Lew. It’s good.

  7. Now, if only the two sides of the council would do it 😉

  8. For me, then, the question isn’t now… since my esteemed brother-in-law couldn’t lead a thirsty blind horse to a trough to get a drink.

    Leadership is a learned skill: Marc Boldt has no more idea how to lead than he does on how to perform an abdominal resection.

    He’s like a brand new second lieutenant, fresh out of ROTC, who finds himself in command of a battalion of Armor: he’s got a vague idea of what he’s supposed to do… but no real idea on how to go about it. (And yes, this was an absurdity used to illustrate the point)

    The end result? Disaster.

    This, of course, is as I repeatedly said it would be. The CCRINO contingent would much rather have the disaster of Boldt’s non-leadership than the alternative of a conservative… any conservative… running the show.

    If Boldt actually knew how to lead, none of this would be happening.

    When everything goes right, the leader gets and takes the credit. Isn’t the true fault… for ALL of this… on Boldt?

    When a commander fails… he’s fired. But by the time one becomes a commander, one has first to be a proven leader, with a history of success. Where’s Boldt’s history in that regard? There’s no question that Boldt has failed and continues to fail. But we’re stuck with him.

    As I have pointed out, they won’t “compromise” because they have an agenda and they have the numbers. They vote in lock step on about any issue… because the same puppet masters are pulling their strings.

    And, as I pointed out, they all govern from the Steve Stuart school of governance:

    “And I’ve said it before: I don’t speak for the people… I will NEVER speak for ‘the people,’ I speak for Steve and some of you are going to agree with me and some of you aren’t.”

    As long as the majority governs from that philosophy… where is there room for this compromise you speak of? And is there even a question that such is their rule of governance?

    The only room for “compromise” is on the part of those outside looking in, and it’s movement towards the RINO monolith… so, it’s not going to happen… because, well, the newspaper isn’t beating the hell out of Boldt because he’s doing most of what they want, given his inability to suffer an original thought since he was co-opted shortly after his first election to the county commission… and as you know, when Lefty “likes” you, he “likes” you.

    The question is what’s in our future?

    We have two sets of candidates: the rubber-stamp RINOs (Blom and McDaniel) of the loyal opposition (Madore and Quiring)

    So, we get right down to it: Would we be better off with 5 RINO’s running the show and selling us all out? They would, no doubt, be all in agreement… on EVERYTHING. But would we be, in any way, better off as a result?

    I don’t think so.

    Would the council be any different with one conservative on it? Would the votes be any different? Would the outcomes be any different?


    So, the council itself is in no way “dysfunctional.” In this instance, “dysfunctional” means they get nothing done. And that is not the case.

    They’ve gotten a great DEAL done. The question, though, is what have they done for us… instead of to us?

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: