Letter to the editor from Dr. Eloise Kailin


To: Dale Wilson, Port O Call Editor February 27, 2017

From: Eloise Kailin M.D., Chair Our Water Our Choice PAC

A petition to City of Port Angeles for Change of Government , signed by over a thousand registered voters, and certified by County Auditor has been waiting since last May for the City Attorney to issue its ballot title.

This petition which gives voters more voice in City governance would change our present form of city government to its previous, more spending restricted form, –no doubt a reason city staff dislikes it. It was necessitated because 4 of 7 City Councilpersons in December, 2015 refused to follow a 57% NO Fluoridation vote of all city drinking water customers. The Fluoride Four declared they trusted health officials, one said that parents were incapable of making the right choices for their children’s dental health, and besides city council was elected to make this medical choice for them. So they voted to continue fluoridation for another ten years. The resulting uproar led to a moratorium on fluoridation. Another citizen vote on fluoridation is to be held November of 2017. Will we ever get to vote on the petition?

Reversion of city government to its more conservative form is a democratic choice granted by the state legislature to its citizens. After approval in a general election this change requires re-election of the entire city council: The present City Council is questioning this provision which we think is frivolous since this practice is spelled out in state law and was followed by Sequim when that government was changed.

On Nov. 5, 2013 The City of Port Orchard voted in a general election on a change from the old form of government (RCW 35) to the newer one (RCW 35A) which we have in PA. Result: A SMASHING DEFEAT over 68% NAY to our current form in PA.

Why such a strong response? See Voter pamphlet, “Rebuttal to the Argument For” : ”This measure promotes a much larger government, reduces accountability to the people and further isolates citizens from our elected officials.”

If passed by PA,one of the citizen benefits is that ALL committee meetings must have provision for public comment, of which the most important is probably the Utility Committee in PA, which entirely lacks such provision.

We look forward to a ballot title proposal.


  1. Rik Reynolds

    Representative gov’t is an anachronism dating back to horse & buggy days when it was necessary for people to assemble, often traveling long distances, to make decisions. It wasn’t feasible or practical for all the people to gather together in one place to assert their desires.

    Thanks to technology we no longer need to surrender our decisions to representatives, which have been shown to be too easily corrupted by special interests, or willing to make their own desires prevail over that of the majority, if it can be determined.

    We can, with off-the-shelf technology fulfill the promise of gov’t of, by, and for the people. Using the same tech’ we use in telephone banking we can make decisions by majority rule. We’d still need representatives to watchdog the system, but we no longer need submit to the will of narcissistic egomaniacs like the P.A. city council that think they know better than 57% of their avowed constituents.

    Most decisions gov’t makes are not crisis in nature, but some are, so we still need representatives for crisis reaction, but all decisions that can be made by the majority should be. We need no longer submit to the tyranny of those who think they know better than the majority do.

  2. Mike Libera

    The BEST reason to return to the earlier form of local City government is putting the power of important decisions back into the hands of the people whose money is being spent as a consequence of those decisions. Another very good reason is to get the representatives of those same people to act in ways the majority of the public have clearly stated they want them to act – it’s called “Majority rules” To ignore the will of the majority is exactly what has gotten us to this point . . .

  3. Rik Reynolds

    If the intent of changing the form of government is so that representatives will respect the will of the majority why not cut out the middleman and make all non-crisis decisions by majority rule directly? Democracy is an idea whose time has come. Otherwise every time the new representatives you elect make a decision you don’t believe reflects the will of the majority you have to pay for a special vote of the people anyway.

    What you end up with is situations like we have with Steve Tharinger and Kevin VandeWege, who are nice guys, yet endorse fluoridation. I like these guys but we really don’t need them anymore, except as professional educators to research issues and inform us so we, the people, can make the decisions and then those representatives can execute the majority’s will, not their own.

    Power corrupts and we don’t need to elect a new king to rule over us any more.

    1. polecat

      well …. We may not need them (our esteemed representatives. in Local, in County, and indeed, in State) …. but they sure need Us …. as TAX DONKEYS … what ever it takes, to insure their grift !!

      I can’t stand ANY of them !

  4. anon

    Gonna have to sue to get a ballot title out of them. Who’s the culprit this time?

    1. Rik Reynolds

      I suppose Bloor has been instructed to stonewall the ballot title issue in hopes the public will ignore the election. The issue that must not be named in hope no one will know about it and be disinterested enough to not vote? Maybe he’s having trouble drafting a title. Let’s help him. May I suggest:

      “Shall the citizens of Port Angeles be allowed to express their desires and intent on issues that better, more informed, ELECTED officials have already decided they know better?”

      There. That pretty much sums up the city council’s position, doesn’t it?

  5. Helga Lumos

    Is that Port Orchard voter pamphlet available online? I can’t find it, and this LTE doesn’t seem to provide a working link. I would like to weigh in in the PDN’s on-line comments, and could use some ammunition.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *