April 19, 2007
Pork of Seattle
P-I: "Davis denies acting alone on port CEO's pay"
But no one else on port recalls pay memo
A majority of the commissioners deny ever approving the golden parachute, so it doesn't look like it will have to be paid.
Still, Pat Davis' attempt to sneak this in after voting to raise the Port's property tax subsidy looks really bad.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 19, 2007
07:51 AM | Email This
1. The House and Senate should strip the Port from collecting any property tax levied to the county homeowners and they can go on their own. The Port of Seattle is a local governing body. It is supported by an annual property tax levy on King County homeowners that will total $68.3 million this year. In the past four years they have been on a speeding spree on none Port projects. Why because of the $68.3 million property tax collections.
2. Lloyd Hara and Alec Fisken would have never in a 1,000 years approved a golden parachute, and emphatically deny it. John Creighton might have conceivably voted to approve a golden parachute, had the matter been properly before the commission. But Creighton is also a wise and honest man, and has to deny doing so. And since there is no legal obligation -- or even legal possibility -- to approve a golden parachute after the fact, Creighton isn't going to do so. Bob Edwards would have probably voted to approve a golden parachute, but isn't stupid either. Edwards is simply basically keeping his mouth shut at this time, and saying as little as politically possible. Probably Edwards deeply regrets that the port commission did not legally approve a golden parachute back when they "should" have done this. On the other hand, he doesn't want to damage his re-election efforts either. As for Pat Davis, too bad the voters didn't get rid of her in November 2005. That election with Jack Jolley was very close. I certainly wouldn't mind if Davis ends up being personally liable to pay Mic Dinsmore the $300,000 or so for his golden parachute. This would be JUSTICE for the more than half a billion dollars that Davis has fleeced from the taxpayers in property taxes during her tenure on the port commission.
3. This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Is there any way for the AG or some government offical to investigate Davis and sue her personally for going beyond her authority? Is there a way to get the money back?
4. Hi, to answer 3, the money hasn't been paid. It will be quite interesting to see if Mr Dinsmore wants to try to hold the Port to what he considers to be a contract. If he does, it would be poetic justice for him to have to explain to a jury what he's actually accomplished, besides losing market share, running up billions in debt, overspending on everything and using tax dollars badly needed for transportation to subsidize cruise line passengers and companies who import goods or develop real estate (example: some of the central waterfront projects, like the parking garage at the World Trade Center).
I agree with Richard Pope's assessment of the commissioners, except I don't think John Creighton would have ever approved a parachute at any time, ever.
5. Un-freaking-believable.
His contract comes to an end, thank him for his service, and boot him out the door.
Where do our elected officials get off suggesting that the taxpayers get any VALUE for their money from this pissin' it away?
A couple of years ago, the Sno-Isle Library board was facing the same thing. The director decided to leave MID_CONTRACT, and he had the big brass cajones to ask for $10 K waling money.
My contention, as a 13 year elected official, was to ask him to pay the library district back for the cost of recruiting his replacement, but no, those muddle-headed board members gave the guy the 10Gs.
Pols and Bureaucrats, you are on notice, when I retire and have bandwidth, I will seek out this foolishness, and smite it wherever found.
The Geez
6. sure glad the parachute & other expenditures will add to my port security confidence. priorities....and our enemies wait patiently.
7. I think John Creighton might have approved a golden parachute for Mic Dinsmore, if that matter had been on the table, and they were negotiating the terms of Dinsmore's departure. Probably not for a year's salary, but he might have favored giving him a couple of months work of "severance pay" -- assuming this had been negotiated. On the other hand, Creighton certainly would never approve giving an outright gift to a former employee without any bargained-for consideration, even if the port commission were to have publicly voted on it. I assume Dinsmore left, because Creighton wasn't supportive of retaining him -- Fisken and Hara certainly weren't, while Davis and Edwards certainly were. Creighton might have supported some sort of "severance package" if it were part of a termination agreement, but not otherwise.
8. Geez--
i have to agree--while i like the free market & open salary negotiations, public negotiators (on taxpayers' behalf) need to get tougher and link parachutes to results and other overall performance metrics after looking back at the candidate's work history. like a "final judgement day." a contingent/forfeitable parachute would sober someone's overall performance & focus on results and responsibility on one's job.
the simple act of leaving or getting fired is not, to me, an event worthy of any reward for its own sake--it should be neutral.
the same happened to recently-disgraced school officials and those accused of criminality--they all seem to get some kind of severance/settlement/hush money or benefit from their screw-up's. where is that logic?
9. Re: "voting to raise the Port's property tax subsidy"
Qing Dao, the second largest port in China, recently decided to take the port public via an IPO. What a stark contrast to our port's reliance on taxpayers to keep them funded.
Imagine, from a "socialist" country, potential dividends from the port. It's time for a "clean sheet of paper" and some new thinking.
10. Dinsmore is the archetype fox in a henhouse. His directed expenditures, such as contributing public funds to a UW professor's retirement, are "chump-change" to a fox raiding a henhouse. First class flights, expensive meal tabs - more examples. It would be interesting to see Dinsmore's expense accounts - they should be available for public disclosure. If not then it's time for a change in POS record disclosure. All that "chump-change" adds up.
Likewise his chummy association with contractors and PAC's should be scrutinized. Just because he's leaving doesn't mean he should be forgotten. Obviously there was no intent to forget him considering the lavish largesse that was being funneled his way in the form of a severance package.
An investigation? Why not?
11. This doesn't surpise me at all. A decade ago I worked an IT contract at the POS and was amazed a the insane level of money wastage there. One only needs to take a tour of their facilities to realize that their office is much nicer than it ought to be
I learned quickly that anyplace that requires 3 signatures, a commitee vote, and a 30 day wait to get a replacement mouse is no place for me.
12. Pat Davis was the gal who brought the WTO to Seattle -- why she was re-elected is beyond me -- but that is what you get with one party rule...