Federal spending

Pensions for electeds are out of whack

Just yesterday I saw her on the senate floor speaking against the high salaries of company CEO’s…..

Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a New York State Senator, now comes under this fancy “Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,” which means that even if she never gets re-elected, she still receives her Congressional salary until she dies.

If Bill outlives her, he then inherits her salary until he dies. He is already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives Bill, she also gets his salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that? We do!

It’s common knowledge that for her to establish New York residency, they purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chappaqua, New York. Makes sense. They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense.

Here is where it becomes interesting. Their mortgage payments hover at around $10,000 per month. But, an extra residence had to be built within the acreage to house the Secret Service agents.

The Clintons charge the federal government $10,000 monthly rent for the use of that extra residence, which is just about equal to their mortgage payment. This means that we, the taxpayers, are paying the Clintons’ salary, mortgage, transportation, safety and security, as well as the salaries for their 12-man staff – and this is all perfectly legal!

The federal government is overbudget – again – but no one in office can understand why. Is it any wonder?

MARK DOENNEBRINK

Bothell

Mountlake Terrace

Meetings problem

start at the top

If she has been rude, take council woman Amundson behind the proverbial woodshed, but don’t embellish the truth to other ends. If the things which the article asserts aren’t simply hearsay or innuendo, the paper owes it to the public to put them on the table.

Who threatened council woman Sonmore? When? We all want her and all councilors to be safe. Who was deceitful? About what? If our capable city clerk felt personally attacked, let her say it, not the mayor and others defending her against phantom wrongs. Amundson’s frustration with what she felt were misrepresented remarks was petty posturing, but she never asked for “verbatim minutes.” The reporter didn’t listen closely. That was council man Housler’s reasonable interpretation of her statement, not a request made by Amundson. From all this hyperbole has evolved remedies which don’t match the problem. Our council meetings are no less decorous than nearby cities, yet those cities don’t require routine police presence. Furthermore, police presence at our public meetings started last summer when plain clothes police went so far as to guard the microphones at the high school Brightwater meeting. The city manager’s armed backup is more threatening and intimidating than anything any citizen has done in the seven years I have been regularly attending these meetings.

The council has longstanding rules for public and council participation, which (Mayor Pat Cordova) chooses to honor at her whim. The decline in civility at council meetings starts at the top with the disrespect and broken promises of the mayor and city manager. If the city manager or council members feel threatened, it is by the open exchange on contradictory ideas, not by the people. They already know what is right for us. When so many people disagree with them, what was an inconvenience is now a threat.

LEONARD FRENCH

Mountlake Terrace

Wants a City Council not a rubber stamp

I took exception to the article “Bad Meeting Conduct Has MLT Taking Action” in the Jan. 31, 2003 edition. It is true Ms. Amundson did talk in what I call “crayon language.” However, I think she went overboard because she had been pushed so far.

From the first meeting I attended, it amazed me how rude the majority of the council members were to Ms. Amundson. I couldn’t understand why they would get so frustrated and roll their eyes when she asked perfectly reasonable questions. I want a City Council that questions every thing and is not a rubber stamp for the City Manager.

At the meeting in question, something happened that I have never seen before. When Ms. Amundson submitted a correction to the prior meeting’s minutes, it was voted down 4 to 3. They voted to have incorrect information reflected in their minutes. She did not ask for verbatim minutes, she asked that they accurately reflect what she said. Because it was Ms. Amundson trying to correct the record, what I have come to know as “the gang of four” voted to not allow the correction. Is it any wonder that she resorted to “crayon talk?”

I try to attend as many meetings as I can, because of how appalled I have been at what I have seen. The 4 to 3 vote is the norm and I am hoping come election time that will change. We are in dire need of some more fresh talent on the City Council.

Thank you. For fairness and balance, I hope you will do a front-page article based on information from people who attend Council Meetings on a regular basis.

RITA DUNCAN

Mountlake Terrace