The news of the last few weeks on the Port of Seattle increasingly feels like an ugly story that is going to drip, drip, drip with a steady flow of increasingly disturbing revelations. Talk of criminal probes doesn't exactly lower that sense.
Hey, if you can't get little things like Christmas trees figured out without a big to do, why should there be any hope of getting core missions accomplished with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake?
UPDATE: fwiw, I think the Port's actions yesterday are likely to address many of the issues of concern in the long-term. In the short-term they're still in for a rough PR ride, especially with the criminal probe looming.
Posted by Eric Earling at January 08, 2008 07:47 PM | Email ThisThe name of the game is haul in taxes, pay off the political base, and accomplish nothing on time or within budget. That means more taxes are needed, and the cycle continues.
The bad situation at the Port thrived for over a decade, and the culture of the ruling party in this state enabled it. You can throw a rock around here and find the same thing at the other transpo governments.
Posted by: Fatima on January 8, 2008 08:01 PMWhaaaa....???
I've got news for these people---the state does random audits of businesses around WA and guess what: if they ask to see all your invoices, bank statements, tax returns etc for four years, YOU GOTTA HAND IT OVER AND LET THEM LOOK! Excuse me, but you don't HAVE the luxury of throwing a self-righteous hissy fit and refusing to cooperate; else the state will come down on you like a ton of bricks. Where do these public employees get off thinking they aren't subject to the same rules the rest of us are????? Do they think that we in the private sector aren't seeing this and being furious about the prima donna attitude they're copping while we over here have to hand over the info when asked??
Nail 'em to the wall!
Posted by: Michele on January 8, 2008 08:26 PMpart i'm interested in is where Ron Sims is making some money off all this, this or maybe the maple valley deal, or the Rails into Trails deal (lots of big $$ there and it involves the port)
a man of Ron's ambition can't let billions slip past.
Posted by: righton on January 8, 2008 10:35 PMShe was too busy lining up campaign support from the entities getting the payoffs of public money to verify the POS was complying with the law.
Luckily that is a self-contained, easily managed outbreak of corruption. A little blood-letting at the Port, and we'll be right as rain around here again. The reforms mentioned in the Update by Eric sound like good measures.
Posted by: observer on January 9, 2008 08:59 AMThat statement is conclusive proof that the P-I is more interested in creating soap operas than reporting news. The decision to accept a sole bidder is the news, and taxpayers may properly react against the Port's decision not to award the job competitively.
But flaunting the engineer's estimate as proof of a ripoff is blatant ignorance at best, and viciously misleading at worst. It's an estimate, not a contract, and until the job's done the final cost cannot be exactly forseen.
The buffoon who threw that into her article was merely throwing gasoline to create a big blaze to get excited about. Good going, MSM, that's how to incite mobs at low cost.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 9, 2008 09:01 AMMany public employees do consider themselves apart from and above the law and do have a prima donna attitude regarding their LEGAL OBLIGATION to cooperate with audits. If they don't cooperate from the very first request made by an auditor, they should be summarily fired. Too bad the state auditor doesn't have the authority to do that.
Posted by: Michael H on January 10, 2008 05:14 AM