The only news outlet focusing on Sammamish local issues – for neighbors, by neighbors
The Sammamish City Council approved a $300,000 payment to
former city manager Lyman Howard, to separate from the city, according to a Separation and Release Agreement obtained through a public records request.
Howard’s employment with the city terminated as of August 1, 2018.
The payment includes:
Continue reading “City pays former City Manager $300,000 to separate”
In a wild and chaotic meeting Tuesday, dealing with the city manager’s position, concurrency and development the Town Center, it became clear the business of Sammamish is done behind closed doors and that developers’ influence is running strong.
The Sammamish City Council tabled for one week a contract to hire an interim city manager.
The move came without comment or debate, following a four hour executive session, called to interview candidates for a public employee position and to review the performance of a public employee.
The only employee position the council has direct authority over is the city manager.
The Sammamish City Council is prepared to award a contract Monday, at a special council meeting, for an interim city manager.
This follows an executive session at the start of the meeting “to evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment and to review the performance of a public employee.”
The only public employee position the city council has direct authority over it the city manager.
This means current city manager Lyman Howard appears on his way out.
Howard’s departure has been rumored for months. At this point, it’s unclear if he is resigning or will be fired.
Continue reading “Breaking News: Sammamish prepared to award contract for new, interim city manager”
Editorial
It’s about transparency.
On Tuesday, Sammamish Comment published a post about Council Member Ramiro Valderrama and City Manager Lyman Howard sending an email to staff, with a CC to the city attorney, to talk about a Developers Agreement with STCA, the principal developer of the Town Center.
City Manager Lyman Howard labeled the email Attorney Client Privilege, even though it was addressed to his assistant and only copied to the city attorney and even though it did not ask for legal advice.
Labeling the email Attorney Client Privilege had but one purpose: to keep the email from being produced in a Public Records Request.
The City Council, then in power in November 2017, was not copied on the email.
After The Comment revealed this email and drew the obvious conclusions, Valderrama, typically, tried to cover his tracks.
By Scott Hamilton
Editor
Analysis
The Sammamish City Council continues to wrestle with the controversial and highly complex topic of traffic concurrency.
The council has been backed into a corner by staff, consultants and, as the responsible executive, the city manager. There are no good choices left to the council to deal with the city’s growing traffic problems and balancing these against development.
The process to date has been so thoroughly mucked up that, in reality, there are few choices the council has if it is going to lift the building moratorium in July, its self-imposed target.
Deputy Mayor Karen Moran and Council Member Chris Ross are the key votes that will determine the direction.
The first choice is to adopt the new model that has been proposed by the city staff and consultants.
The second is to go back to the old model, adjusting it to eliminate “credits” for theoretical added capacity that, for the most part, are pencil-pushing solutions.
I favor the second choice. Here’s why. But it may be too late to go there.
Sammamish City Council Member Ramiro Valderrama and City Manager Lyman Howard last year wanted to negotiate a Developer Agreement with Town Center developer STCA, without the required council approval, Sammamish Comment learned.
The revelation is in an email (click to read it) dated Nov. 21, 2017, that the city manager designated “attorney client privileged.” The email was recently determined to be not privileged and released in a public records request.
The email was addressed to another city employee and cc’d to the city attorney and a second city employee. Howard’s labeling the email attorney-client privilege is intended to bar the email from public disclosure.
