I think I see how the Whatcom County Council is going to dispose of the Order of Invalidity from the GMHB. They are going to literally use the Home Court Advantage.
I read the petition that the County filed in Superior Court on the GMHB Order of Invalidity.
And I couldn't help but notice that the petition was filed in the Superior Court in Whatcom County.
Huh.
Now, I don't know if any one but me has noticed, but there are not three independent branches of government in Whatcom County.
The budget of the Superior Court in Whatcom County is determined by...
...the Whatcom County Council.
The same Whatcom County Council that wants this Order of Invalidity reversed.
And they are going to the judicial venue over which they have direct financial influence.
I'm sure that the Whatcom County Council and the GMHB will both get a fair shake in Whatcom County Superior Court, and I'm sure that the Whatcom County Superior Court judge will not at all take into account that the the petitioner is the same body that decides what that judges' annual budget will be.
I'm also sure that the sky is not blue. I'm also sure that the earth is not round.
Bravo to the entire Sierra.
Spare a glance at a portion of the RCW a moment...
Now, the County is taking action against the GMHB, whose address is listed as being in Olympia.
Last I checked, Olympia was not in Whatcom County.
So, the RCW would seem to dictate that Whatcom County would either have to use the venue in Olympia (which would be Thurston County), or in Skagit County (the nearest County to Whatcom County)... but the main point is this is not supposed to be presented to the Whatcom County Superior Court.
Comments.
Please.
The snarkier the better.
This stinks all to be damned.
I read the petition that the County filed in Superior Court on the GMHB Order of Invalidity.
And I couldn't help but notice that the petition was filed in the Superior Court in Whatcom County.
Huh.
Now, I don't know if any one but me has noticed, but there are not three independent branches of government in Whatcom County.
The budget of the Superior Court in Whatcom County is determined by...
...the Whatcom County Council.
The same Whatcom County Council that wants this Order of Invalidity reversed.
And they are going to the judicial venue over which they have direct financial influence.
I'm sure that the Whatcom County Council and the GMHB will both get a fair shake in Whatcom County Superior Court, and I'm sure that the Whatcom County Superior Court judge will not at all take into account that the the petitioner is the same body that decides what that judges' annual budget will be.
I'm also sure that the sky is not blue. I'm also sure that the earth is not round.
Bravo to the entire Sierra.
Spare a glance at a portion of the RCW a moment...
RCW 36.01.050
Venue of actions by or against counties.
(1) All actions against any county may be commenced in the superior court of such county, or in the superior court of either of the two nearest judicial districts. All actions by any county shall be commenced in the superior court of the county in which the defendant resides, or in either of the two judicial districts nearest to the county bringing the action. [Emphasis Added.]
Now, the County is taking action against the GMHB, whose address is listed as being in Olympia.
Last I checked, Olympia was not in Whatcom County.
So, the RCW would seem to dictate that Whatcom County would either have to use the venue in Olympia (which would be Thurston County), or in Skagit County (the nearest County to Whatcom County)... but the main point is this is not supposed to be presented to the Whatcom County Superior Court.
Comments.
Please.
The snarkier the better.
This stinks all to be damned.
I think the venue is always the nearest Superior Court unless someone files a motion that the court is conflicted. I guess that would be Futurewise, which probably has standing to make that challenge.
ReplyDeleteSkagit would be better--their courts haven't been stunk up by a prosecutor and court administration that hasn't had a breath of fresh air since the 1970s... that's the real issue, not who signs the checks and pays the bills (Superior Court is notoriously over budget, so they obviously have ways around the council's check singing authority)--but Whatcom SC has been better at reading GMA than Whatcom's __incredibly__ corrupt hearings examiner, probably one of the highest paid public officials in the State of Washington. Talk about a hand in every till!
All of that said, Whatcom SC has been generally terrible at reading GMA. And the court's record of being overturned on appeal (a marker of the strength of a court's application of law) is statistically high. Not the best.
My guess is the county will succeed in getting the order overturned. They will be able to demonstrate their moratorium meets the GMHB goal of protection while council screws around and forever fails to adopt a protective rural plan.
The overturn will be appealed and itself overturned by a better court, reinstating the Order. But not before the moratorium expires. Then, stampede to vest.
Remember, the goal here is to pour down asphalt as fast as possible, bust it up, burn it out, strip rural character so fast that the debate is suddenly over. Hand the game over to Swanson so forcefully that his firm can't help but win the thousand lawsuits filed against the county on the taxpayer dime.
You don't have debates about forests once every tree has been cut to the ground. Eye on the prize.
Whatever one might think about the County's overall strategy on this issue, Chuck Snyder is a fair judge and a smart guy. The matter has been assigned to his courtroom, and I'm sure that he will give it a fair hearing.
ReplyDeleteJean makes an excellent point.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm sure that Judge Snyder is everything Jean says he is.
But I insist that it is unfair to Judge Snyder to place him in such an awkward position.
The ethical standard is not impropriety itself, it is the appearance of impropriety alone that is to be avoided.
Change of Venue please.
ReplyDeleteSnyder may appear to be honorable but he should NOT be made to choose between representing the upper class land speculators or the law / common good.
Sam Crawford's script on rural lands:
ReplyDelete"We could do anything. Like run up bills on the joint's credit.
And why not? Nobody will pay for it anyway.
Take deliveries at the front door and sell it out the back at a discount. Steal a case of booze and sell it. It doesn't matter. It's all profit.
Then finally, when there's nothing left, when you can't borrow another buck from the bank, you bust the joint out. Collect the insurance.
You light a match."
For a real good summery of all the excellent writing that Shane and others have done on this subject, check out The Political Junkie, where I have compiled all the various stories about this issue:
ReplyDeletehttp://sweeneyblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/county-council-breaking-the-law/
Another topic.
ReplyDeleteRep. Rick "the traitor" Larson just voted to extend the Patriot Act against U.S. Citizens.
lest we forget....