||| FROM MIA KARTIGANER |||
When you appointed your most outspoken advocate to fill the empty seat on your board, you failed the spirit of democracy. This appointed person has perpetuated misinformation about your fifth board member. The same person who has clearly had immediate access to OIFR business without having to go through the public records request process. Democracy means inviting in voices that are not your own. Voices that speak for the entirety of the community.
What you have chosen is parroting and cronyism.
At each of the OIFR meetings this year, the cost of public records requests (PRR) has been noted. Factually, the number of requests is a reflection of the lack of transparency of this board and the department you overshadow. It is also driven by your unwillingness to answer simple questions
with anything but a recommendation to make a PRR. It is a cumbersome and costly dodge.
Since 2020 the department has had a 125% turnover in medics. Other than the two who retired, this has all been driven by you. There were no concerns about the capabilities of our responders. There was no justification. This was either personal and retaliatory or driven by some ill-hatched agenda that the public is not privy to.
Through your over-involvement and sloppy boundaries you effectively removed yourselves as the body to whom a department member should be able to appeal when the chief (who you know shouldn’t be supervising people) is lashing out at them.
Being on the board at OIFR isn’t meant to be your posturing raison d’etre, it doesn’t mean you’re extra special and free to callously toy with people’s lives and livelihoods. It means you are in service to this community. I know you all have vast experience, you remind us often enough. But experience does not guarantee correctness or even basic decency. You were all (self) appointed and then ran unopposed. Kudos to you on the win.
Mr Helminski, when you were at the Lower Tavern on Saturday March 19 of this year, and you told Mr. Christmas that you don’t give a damn what the public wants… people heard you. I imagine you don’t care about that either. But we care. I care that you would have us tilting at your windmills and are contemptuous of those who won’t go along. But we see you.
Enough back room shenanigans. This island, the sponsors of OIFR, have a right to know why you pushed people out the door. Why wouldn’t you move on the vote of no confidence brought by the union when that seems to be happening now anyway? Had to be your idea, done your way? Regardless of the collateral damage to the crew or in order to damage the crew?
Why was a paramedic on paid leave for almost three months?
Why were the complaints against them dismissed and what exactly were they?
How much more are the new hires being paid than the previous crew that you insisted were too costly due to overtime you blamed them for but was created by management? Either you were speaking falsehoods then or you are fiscally irresponsible.
Perhaps both are true.
Why are people who leave the department swiftly purged from the system?
Why did the chief/assistant chief think it appropriate to invite Airlift NW to a public meeting without warning them that the actual public would be present?
Please stop portraying yourselves as being supportive of women. You use them as props to uphold this mythology. Men who are supportive of women listen to them when they say that they are being harassed by another woman. Being supportive of women means believing men when they say they are disturbed by a female coworker’s inappropriate language or behavior. Equality means accountability. Truly respecting women means you don’t say things to them you wouldn’t say in front of your wife. Point is….true respect.
The most difficult thing about entitlement may be that the bearer is rarely capable of seeing it in their own actions. It’s not always the blatant things that are most intolerable. It can be a subtle undercurrent of presumption, a seemingly benevolent offer of inclusion, flattery to coerce or distract. It needn’t be intentional to be offensive. Having a bloated self image that’s dependent on others reflecting it back to you doesn’t leave a lot of room for
differing points of view. Hubris often excludes the self awareness and humility needed for shame or embarrassment.
No one will be making PRRs to get to the bottom of your appointment selection. We all saw it coming. A rare moment of transparency, a now predictable assholery.
Thank you, Mia. You have beautifully captured the problems and exquisitely laid bare the frustration that community members have been facing in simply trying to make OIFR a safe workplace for the team.
The appointment of the new OIFR Commissioner was an absolute disgrace and a slap in the face to anyone who has been asking questions or who cares about how our first responders are being treated internally. I totally agree not shocking given the current hubris on display, but an utter disgrace all the same.
Thank you again Mia for your bravery in saying what simply needs to be said.
Who was appointed?
Board of Fire Commissioners Appoint Leith Templin
By Kim Kimple / March 25, 2022 / News
Good lord Ladies. Have you taken leave of your senses? Reduced to to the intellectual blatherings of a new word Mia…really assholery? That’s the best you have? You said you would produce the hard evidence of wrongdoing. And?
now you slam Lieth for her knowledgeable contribution. Where’s the beef Mia? Responding to your other inaccurate and clearly goofball activism driven comments would be just…well assholery I guess. Good luck with that sort of approach. You have failed at your attempt to contribute.
And oh Lin. Shame on you again for encouraging and promoting this sort of nonsense.
In response to Gary Abood; were you there at the meeting? Because I was. It was my first time. I was shocked and nauseated, especially at the behavior of commissioner Helminski, and the obvious conflicts-of-interest in their 3-1 decision. Thank you, Comm. Shepler, for voting no. It takes guts to vote your conscience and represent your base and go against the majority..
I wish that such a decisive and revealing meeting had been recorded by the gentleman who asked why they weren’t recording it. That could have been up on youtube, and the Public could see what we saw. According to the RCWs in the Open Meetings and Public Records Act, any member of the public can record the public parts of any public meeting. When Comm. Helminski kept saying, “mute him, mute him!” (citing that he cared about the interview with Ms Hansen) – from my perspective, it seemed more like a power play, even though the man’s question was an unfortunate interruption of the interview that did break the flowm and he should have asked at Public Access Time before the interviews.
I witnessed the tone of the interviews and the time given for each candidate. Kate Hansen’s was first. Her interview was short, impersonal, and – I felt- polite but chilly in tone from a few of the commissioners; Again, it was mainly Comm. Helminski who did not seem warm or welcoming. Maybe that is just his personality, I thought… but it sure did a 180 with Leith and Pierrette; then I felt I was witness to some kind of good o’l boys and girls club.. It felt… embarrassing somehow. The same questions were asked of all three candidates, but with very different approaches.. Now as I read Mia’s letter, I can see why I felt this uneasiness and sense that things weren’t played fairly. The two other candidates, Leith Templin and Pierrette Guimond, were given all the time in the world to go on about themselves – were encouraged to, in fact. It was so obvious. We listened to Leith go on and on and on about how great and qualified she is, a 3rd or 4th or whatever generation islander (so is Kate Hansen, by the way – 3rd gen. at least.) I thought the commissioners might defer decision to the next meeting, but no – because that might have meant they would get more public input like mine.
Seems ironic that Leith and Pierrette were the biggest detractors of Patrick Shepler before, during, and after the election – both publicly and privately. I have been quiet about it, but I think the Public should know that they both tried to bait me in the smear campaign. They implied, in this online paper and on the phone with me, that they “had something” on Patrick and others who quit or were forced out. I had to tell Pierrette to stop calling me, stop talking to me about any of it. I hung up on Leith – someone I’ve known peripherally for 40 years – when she phoned me at home one night and I gave an hr of my time to it, and had had enough. Due to the fact that we have both always been able to disagree politely on many issues with respect, I tried to right that with an apology and long email to Leith – but I still feel uneasy about her appointment. Due to my letter to the commissioners, both Leith and Pierrette already know, and knew before that, where I stand, and why. I still think that both their lives are too tied up with all this in ways that are, IMO, conflicts-of-interest. I believe Leith is also on EPRC – I really don’t think people should have more than one board or commission seat at a time. Again, Too many conflicts of interest and in some cases (port, fire district) too much overlap. Without Public eyes on this stuff, there’s too much temptation to be nepotistic if no one is holding you accountable – everyone loses – and we have all lost so much as concerns the Fire District.
Let the Public decide at the elections – and we will. We will make sure those seats are not run unopposed, and that people who will listen to all the employees, volunteers, and their taxing base, occupy those seats. Like it or not, commissions and boards must answer to their tax base. If they choose to ignore or denigrate their base, we will remember at voting time. We insist that they not gaslight or gag-order anyone with complaints; no bullying of others by an authority figure. A commission’s JOB is to oversee and prevent abusive behavior, including from any of themselves. You need people skills for any position of authority – ability to be fair minded and to listen and be humble. That’s what true leadership is.
I wrote a letter to the commissioners while they were still in executive session, stating my reservations about the uneven treatment of the 3 candidates and why I was uncomfortable with Pierrette and Leith for the seats, and my reasons why I was pro-Kate Hansen – an experienced, capable, young fresh face willing to serve the community, which is a rarity in itself – we should have jumped on it. We need new faces, fresh approaches. We will, come election time, support Kate, should she choose to run. Their choosing Kate would have shown the Public and Staff that they would compromise – that they are listening. No surprise that my concerns – too little, too late – were ignored by the triumvirate – but by the time anyone read the email, they’d already chosen. Now they are 4, and our newly elected commissioner is a lone voice in the wilderness – but I know he has the class and humility to weather this, be adult about it, and work collaboratively. Perhaps Leith will help bridge the gap towards collaboration; I hope so. Time will tell.
A vote of No Confidence is a serious thing that was not given its due respect or fair audience or address. There are financial questions on how levy monies were spent and if they were spent on mandated improvements and replacements in rolling equipment. That will be important for the Public to know, come Levy-time.
These wrongs badly need to be righted. I hope there will be some Staff and Volunteers left to benefit. Meanwhile, we can show up, ask questions, ask for Public Records where necessary, and insist on transparency and fairness.
Complaints about “the cost” of Public records? It’s all in the RCWs – the department can charge 15 cents a page to cover costs. Beyond that, unless it’s hundreds and hundreds of pages, they can’t. They MUST respond to all records requests within 5 days, and they must actually provide what is asked for within 21 days – so they can only drag their feet so far before petitioners have legal recourse. Financials, audits, grants and applications, rosters, Annual Reports, SEC stuff, etc – are all fair game and we have the right to ask for them. Inter-dept emails must be kept and the public has the right to see those, too. It’s easy enough to put electronic records on a portable drive nowadays.
TheWA state RCWs state, at the very beginning of the chapter, a declaration:
RCWs > Title 42 > Chapter 42.30 > Section 42.30.010
Beginning of Chapter <> 42.30.020
RCW 42.30.010
Legislative declaration.
*** CHANGE IN 2022 *** (SEE 1329-S.SL) ***
The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 250 § 1.]
NOTES:
Reviser’s note: Throughout this chapter, the phrases “this act” and “this 1971 amendatory act” have been changed to “this chapter.” “This act” [1971 ex.s. c 250] consists of this chapter, the amendment to RCW 34.04.025, and the repeal of RCW 42.32.010 and 42.32.020.
Gary, thank you for generously demonstrating what I am speaking to and flinging your work product around. I knew I could count on you.
I know Orcas is an island, but am surprised that word hasn’t carried about the nonsense of stereotypes of “ladies” taking leave of their senses. The women who have been working on improving the situation at OIFR have full command of our emotions, but do have serious concerns about the role that emotions have played in some leadership decisions at OIFR. As I have said in earlier comments, there is a lot to be ashamed about in regards to what continues to happen at OIFR in terms of failed leadership, but attempts at casting shame on those who are merely asking appropriate questions or publicly calling out some of the issues that have been plaguing the Department are unfortunate and misplaced.
Public records requests will come through eventually, and when they do they are going to paint a really ugly picture about what has been happening. I remain hopeful that the community will rise to the occasion to demand serious changes to ensure that the very people the community relies on for emergency services are treated with the same respect that they show day in and day out to the people on Orcas that they serve.
Really folks, so much nonsense being said without
Proof of all facts.
1. Public interviews of the 3 women looking to be appointed
Fire Commissioners was done in a business like approach.
1. Kate Hansen 2. Pierrette Guimond 3. Leith Templin
Commissioners’s discussion was in executive session., and they voted to appoint Leith Templin who is very qualified to serve on any Board. Why is this questioned and the gossip about the fire dept that his running quite well under Chief Williams and new employees and volunteers that continue to serve us very well
Though I do not have knowledge of the inner happenings at the department any longer, I am compelled to write In response to Mr. Abood’s comment as well as Mia’s article.
Mr Abood: I attempted to meet with OrcasIssues staff a few years back, when I had evidence and information regarding the internal collapse and mismanagement of another public safety office. At that time, I was told that they would not write an investigative piece because they didn’t want to “rock the boat” . Turns out, I was right . . . and those mistakes and mismanagement decisions are costing the county significantly in both financial as well as moral and ethical violations. I do wish a light had been shined prior to the last election; but everyone was afraid to speak up. Social pressures, insecurities, and fear keep our mouths shut as injustices occur. We are scared of the consequences of speaking out, what people will think, and, let’s be honest, it’s easier to sit back and let things slide. In the words of Elie Wiesel, “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
In respose to the comments in the article about Commissioner Helminski, I would like to speak directly to Commissioner Helminski: If you have, in fact, been ringing your own bell as an advocate of women, please stop. As a strong feminist and advocate for social justice for all, I can tell you, we do not need another rich white man in a position of power trying to “promote us.” This, in fact, has the opposite effect than you (I hope) are intending. Instead of lifting us up, It instead places you in a position of power in which the women you are “promoting” are subservient to you. A man in a position of power cannot shout for equality for those who do not have it as a way to further advance their own interests. A man truly supportive of women in equal positions of power would, in fact, encourage the appointment of a woman who possessed a strong and opposing view in order to ensure a true balance of power.
To Mia, my suffragette sister, stand for what you believe is right – always. Do not let your voice be silenced when you are fighting for injustice. I shall be imploring use of the phrase “assholery” immediately!
How about letting the Fire Department move ahead without all this vitriol? Everything published is counterproductive. Time to quit stirring the pot.
I read through Mia’s article, Sadie’s and Marla’s responses and still can’t find a rationale argument. What I see are emotional statements with nothing of substance behind them.
Mia, Sadie and Marla, what exactly is your concern? I’m confused by all of the emotion and lack of constructive, civil discussion. Please outline your argument so that we can discuss it constructively and critically.
I suspect the general public has no clue of the facts in this very public and increasingly ugly food fight.
I”m 100% support Mathew Willis’s comment … restore civility and present the specific facts so problems can be discussed constructively.