Sammamish City Council Campaign Contributions detailed

In my previous post, I gave a high-level recap of who’s supporting whom in the City Council race. I’ve now had the time to detail this based on campaign contributions reported to the Public Disclosure Commission.

The two page PDF may be downloaded here: Sammamish Campaign Contributions90811.

The listing of who’s supporting whom in this format allows the readers to draw their own conclusions across the spectrum of candidates. Most readers are unlikely to know just “who the players are;” old hands understand who’s who and what’s what by looking at this list, and I explained some of this in the previous post.

I’ve now had the opportunity to speak with five of the six candidates on the issues (since July). Future postings will discuss these impressions. The details of the conversations will remain confidential.

Who’s supporting whom in the Sammamish City Council Election

With Labor Day now past, electioneering will pick up in earnest for the City Council races.

A review of the Public Disclose Commission contribution filings gives a sense of the early support for the various candidates.

Position 2

Kathy Richardson vs Nancy Whitten

This is the seat currently held by Michele Petitti, who declined to run for another term. Whitten had held Position 4 but switched to 2.

Neither candidate as yet has reported much in the way of contributions. Whitten reports just $100, from herself. She largely self-funded her 2003 winning election but did bring in contributions from others then and in 2007. So far, there is nothing more to report.

Richardson hasn’t raised much money as yet: just $1,243, including $301 from in-kind contributions. The largest contribution is from Concentric 2 LLC, which according to state records is the business of David Collins of Lake Sammamish Parkway NE. Other contributors: David and Megan Gee, Ursula Geiger and Paul Oostmeyer.

Bob Brady of Sammamish, a commissioner on the Sammamish Plateau Water and Sewer District, has publicly endorsed Whitten.

Position 4

Jim Wasnick v Ramiro Valderamma

This is shaping up already to be the bitterest race that the city will see, with a whispering campaign of innuendos underway against Valderamma. One of those whispers is that he is running as a slate with Whitten and Tom Vance (Position 6). However, a review of the campaign contributions so far couldn’t be more representative of opposite ends of the spectrum.

Continue reading “Who’s supporting whom in the Sammamish City Council Election”

More intimidation, hypocrisy from John Galvin

Sammamish voters received their ballots Friday/Saturday for primary day on August 16 for City Council. Voters have a choice in one race between Ramiro Valderrama, Jim Wasnick and John Galvin.

Galvin, of course, is the person who lectures Sammamish on proper procedures, only to flout the law when it comes to his own candidacy. He is also the master of hypocrisy.

As recently as May, Galvin was decrying campaign contributions by yours truly to past campaigns. In 2009, he attacked people who contributed funds to candidates they support. He attacked my wife’s campaign contribution, among others. This past May he claimed I had “financed” several city council campaigns.

Setting aside the bloviating over-statement of the word “financed” in this context, what does Galvin do when it comes to his own candidacy? Galvin filed for what’s called “mini-reporting.” This means he doesn’t have to reveal who is contributing to his campaign, or the amounts they “financed.”

Sammamish voters have no idea who is financing Galvin’s campaign or who is supporting him. Given his persistent criticisms and lectures about who supported and contributed to candidates he opposed, the hypocrisy is noteworthy.

Then there is the matter of his continual pattern of intimidation. I’ve already documented just two examples in the preceding post. I have two years of emails with many more examples.

But Galvin doesn’t stop there. In what is particularly egregious, Galvin on two occasions verbally accosted the wives of two planning commissioners with whom he disagreed.

Galvin is well over six feet and a stout individual. One of the wives is 5’9″ and height-weight-proportionate and the other, well into her 60s, is shorter. On these two occasions, Galvin accosted them as they were leaving commission meetings (and while their husbands were on the podium, unaware of the events until afterward) and began to berate them for actions of their husbands.

After the second incident, police were on hand at the following meeting to be sure Galvin did not repeat his inappropriate actions.

This is not an individual who should be on the city council or in any advisory role. It is worth noting that he once applied to for a position on the planning commission, and no council member supported his appointment. Furthermore, he applied for appointment to various town center advisory committees and no council member supported any of his previous applications.

These universal rejections of Galvin have nothing to do with his so-called advocacy of “inconvenient truths.” They are entirely because Galvin has an anger management issue (odd for someone who has a PhD in psychology who is a grievance counselor) and because of his history of verbal abuse toward staff, commissions and committees, anyone he disagrees with and the requirement for a time that police be present in case he goes into one of his inappropriate actions.