The issue of public disclosure and the county’s confidential involvement in NASCAR negotiations is a matter for the Attorney General’s Office. It will determine if there were possible exemptions under RCW 42.17.310 regarding pre-decisional recommendations wherein disclosure might be injurious to negotiations or the deliberative/consultative process. Or, whether any threat or reasonable anticipation of litigation renders preparation an attorney work product exception.
In some states, such as California, negotiations in direct competition with other public or private entities may be postponed regarding public access until it is presented for official approval.
If county officials violated law, remedies and corrective actions per a ruling will also consider whether there was intent to deceive, mislead, and cover up misconduct, or a matter of ignorance. That the initial query for investigation originated from within the county is preferred, and would seem to point to the latter.
No one can begrudge truly legitimate undertakings to uncover the truth. However, articles about how many projects one was able to delay — with links to URLs with autobiographical data — instead appear self-aggrandizing and tantamount to collecting notches on a bedpost.
An objective assessment regarding the ISC/NASCAR proposed project must occur. This includes articulated and substantiated pro and con positions towards informed and intelligent decision-making. Efforts which capitalize upon general cynicism or predisposition to mistrust of public officials discredits that endeavour, circumvents process, and caters to the lowest common denominator.
Whether or not NASCAR ultimately finds its way to Kitsap, it is prudent to become known (via national press) for a rational and professional decision to accept or reject ISC’s offer... not as a place for highly contentious, partisan and successive circus-level antics.
Doña L. Keating, President & CEO
Professional Options
Poulsbo
|
