Why I'm not Anonymous

It seems I keep coming around to the issue of anonymous comments on the Internet & this site. There are a couple of things about anonymity & the Internet that bother me. Lots of people use the option of anonymity & of course there are different reasons for it, some of them legitimate. I have encouraged people to e-mail Concerned Citizens of Coquille anonymously because I know some people fear retaliation from the authorities. IMO, this is acceptable because trust & confidence is important when one is dealing with powers that potentually can make or break you. My problem with anonymous comments is that some people use anonymity to be vicious, rude & mean, because they don't want to be held accountable for their nefarious actions. The reason I'm saying this is because there are some really contentious issues in the local news lately & some pretty nasty comments out there in Internet media land. I find some of them downright deplorable. I can't stop it from happening but I don't want to be a party to it. I prefer to fight my battles in the light of day. This is where accountability comes in. Every single thing I say on this website is traced right back to me. That also goes for every television & newspaper interview I do. I wouldn't have it any other way. Because holding my self to a standard of transparency & accountability keeps me honest & answerable to my own conscience.

The Continuing Saga...

The arrests of Bryant & Ulmer have turned the tables in more ways then one & I believe there is more then one lesson to be learned in all this. For one thing it's made me consider how far I'm willing to go to make a point or to be "right". I'm not a vindictive person. I don't believe in kicking a dog while it's down. According to my philosophy of life, Ulmer & Bryant deserve to be treated like any other human being, no more no less. If the law won't hold them to a higher standard of accountability because they are police officers then I won't either. They've certainly proved themselves to be regular fallible human beings by their actions & it's important that they get the same treatment as the rest of us. This means that we must treat them with the compassion that they deserve. At the very least the compassion that they've given us...

Coquille Officer Jimmy Bryant Arrested.

I was completely dismayed yesterday to read about the paltry 20 day sentencing of Coquille police officer Randy Ulmer for stealing over $8,000 from the Coquille police department evidence room. Today I had planned to make an issue of that light sentence comparing it to the 5 years the juveniles got that were involved in the Safeway robbery where $200 was stolen.
Then this morning I wake up & hear about the arrest of Coquille officer James "Jimmy" Bryant last night for:
attempted contributing to the sexual delinquency of a minor and furnishing alcohol to a minor.

Even though Concerned Citizens of Coquille has been advocating since June of 2007 for police accountability & has been a critic of the Coquille police department, even though I have been writing about police corruption on this website for 2 years, I am still shocked & dismayed by these recent events.

I think back to the beginning of June 2007 when a small group of angry citizens called for an end to the abuse of power that we had perceived was rampant in the Coquille Police Department.. (Newspaper clipping , photo & post from June 5th, 2007 about that city council meeting click here ) The police chief at the time Micheal Reeves replied to our charges saying:
"These are people who have no respect for the law. Nothing we can do will ever satisfy them. Our best thing would be to let them vent, take notes & try to address them as they come along."
We were ridiculed by certain people who represented themselves as the law-abiding segment of Coquille society & even called names, like "lowest segment of society", "the hairy unwashed" & "the criminal element". ( though to my knowledge, no one involved with Concerned Citizens of Coquille was involved in any criminal activity). At one council meeting in the summer of 2007 city councilman, Bruce Parker, in a fit of righteous indignation even accused us of trying to destroy Coquille's small town values.

Then there was the horrible tragedy of Carl Foster who had his neck broken by officer Jimmy Bryant & officer Chris Webley.
Read about that travesty & the subsequent non-indictment of the officers involved here.

Since those days, we've gotten a new Police Chief, Mark Dannels, who is a vast improvement over Ex-chief Micheal Reeves, but, unfortunately has inherited a corrupt police force. I'm hoping with the arrest of Jimmy Bryant we can finally move forward.

Yost Espelien's slap on the wrist raises questions

Although, the city of Myrtle Point rightfully fired police sergeant Yost Espelien (The World newspaper link here) & got this danerous man out of a position of authority & off the streets, I'm very disappointed District Attorney Paul Fraiser did NOT press criminal charges.

It has been conveyed to me by more then one person, that Yost Espelien is a dangerous person... a loose cannon. Either D.A. Paul Fraiser is naive when it comes to law enforcement officers, or chooses to turn a blind eye when it comes to meting out fair justice

I believe if an ordinary citizen acted in that same manner, pulling a gun on someone & lying under oath about it, that person would have been charged with a serious crime & subsequently incurred a criminal record.

According to The World newspaper link: Espelien started his law enforcement career in 1995 in Scappoose as a reserve officer. Then he moved on to the Coquille Police Department in 1997 and then the Washington County Sheriff’s Office in 1999. He resigned from Washington County in January 2005 and was hired in Myrtle Point on July 2005. Espelien was promoted to sergeant in December of that year.

I have to wonder why Mr. Espelien left all his other law enforcement jobs. Did former superiors also have "concerns about his credibility" as D.A. Fraiser did?
I also have to wonder where will Yost Espelien turn up next? Is he going to move on & grace another small town with his less then sterling presence?

There is a reason that law enforcement officers are to be held to high standards when it comes to ethics. Our brand of democracy & it's concept of "The Social Contract." grants law enforcement officials significant discretion and authority to maintain an orderly society.
They have have the power to search and arrest us, to use deadly force on us, to incarcerate us, to investigate us, their job is to uphold the law not get away with breaking it.

I wonder if District Attorneys were as diligent in charging law enforcement officers with crimes as they are private citizens, would we have less problems with abuses of power by law enforcement officials?

When I first decided to run for city council, I said I was eager to learn about how the system worked. You could say I got a good lesson over the last few mths.

Well, It's finally over & as of last night I'm no longer a contender for city council. The council voted 4 to 2 to appoint attorney Matt Muenchrath to the position. At this point I'm not surprised, but I am really disappointed.

I've always been the first one to protest whenever anyone said their votes didn't count. But in this last city election I found out a lot of votes didn't count. It really is a shame.

I might be down but, I'm not out. I've got plenty of things to keep me busy at the moment & I'll concentrate on them for now.

Moving Ahead

No matter what happens on Jan.5th when the city council makes their decision as to who is most "qualified" (in lieu of who met eligibility requirements & got on the ballot & got "the vote of the people") to be on city council, I plan on moving ahead with everything thing I've been involved with. As my dad used to say, there is more then one way to skin a cat.

That being said, I am very much concerned with the fact that a lot of the voters I talk to feel disenfranchised by the process that the council has decided to take. These people feel as if their vote for a city councilperson to represent them has been trumped by a qualification process that does not take into consideration their vote.

In this new process, the council is being instructed NOT to take votes into consideration when deciding who is "qualified" to be on the council.

I did say in my application letter to the council that I would abide by the council's decision & encourage everyone to do the same.
That of course hinges on whether or not that decision is legal based on the wording of the city charter. This seems to come down to interpretation. One snafu is who is doing the interpreting.

The newspaper blogger(?) that I've alluded to in previous posts is lauding the fact that "staff" at city hall is calling the shots, he states:
" I hope the council will learn to depend more on city staff to research issues that come before it. We pay these folks for their input and to help our city’s leaders avoid at least some of the pitfalls of governance."

He goes on to say:
"When written rules and procedures are followed it can make the difference between an outcome that is balanced and fair for all concerned or fomenting a time consuming environment of distrust and disorganization."...

In the end, when a decision is reached on January 5, the winner will be the public."

Really?
"the winner will be the public" ?
The process already in place, the process of citizens voting for officials to represent them, being superseded by decisions made by paid "staff" makes the public "winners"?

Why don't we just just cut out the voters all together & let "staff" make all the decisions.

An issue of Credibility

For the record, neither I or the group, Concerned Citizens of Coquille (CCC), have ever been involved in any cause before June 7th, 2007, when our group was formed.
We have never used our venue as a citizens group to protest the building of the sewage plant or have we ever been involved in promoting a recall of the City manager or the city council.
I hope and believe that the unexpected controversy concerning our credibility & the purpose of our group can be resolved in a fair, constructive, and above-board manner.*

A certain journalist with a news blog that I have mentioned in a previous article, is asking that I retract the above statement.
Here is his comment (taken from the comment section in my last article):

"And of course Rollins memory is mistaken. direct your attention to nine articles appearing in the Coquille Valley Sentinel between Sept. and Dec. 2003

I look forward to your "retraction."
Robert Jump

The reason I stated the above (paragraph in red) in the first place is that Mr. Jump is implying that our group Concerned Citizens of Coquille (CCC) was involved in something in 2003, four years before CCC was even conceived!
In my opinion, this reporter has attempted to build a flimsy bridge between unrelated events, by not technically lying, but by using irrelevant information that seems to support his argument.

In his eagerness to attack Steve Britton & myself in the name of reporting the news, this person is deliberately trying to muddy the issues at hand. By doing so, he is doing the citizens of Coquille that read his news blog a great disservice.

With the popularity of the internet & the ease of putting up a web site I suspect this sort of thing is a problem in other towns.
As a matter of fact, Mayor Britton brought up in the last city council meeting that the League of Oregon Cities was looking into the issue of what is credible journalism.

Mr. Jump cited his rights to free speech at the city council meeting Monday, December 8, 2008 in response to Mayor Britton bringing up the issue of credible journalism.

Mr. Jump, I suppose you have the right to print what you want on your blog & blur the lines between the truth & fiction, but the citizens of Coquille deserve better if you want to call yourself a credible news source.

*taken from here