City of SeaTac misled by staff attorney, highlighting the staff infection

“There is an actual and justiciable controversy as to whether the City is liable based on any criminal, dishonest, or fraudulent acts or omissions that constitute a knowing violation of the rights of another person.” 

There are good reasons to hire local government staff, whenever possible, who live under the rules they administer and enforce.  When government staff live outside the city, they become disconnected from the local citizens.  Staff tend to lose their sense of empathy or concern for the residents who must live under the rules government imposes and enforces.  The City of SeaTac is proving to be a good case study in the dangers of this staff disconnect from the people they claim to serve.  As best I can confirm, only a few employees of SeaTac actually live in the City of SeaTac.

SeaTac Whistleblowers – please go here to learn more

I have many personal family connections and history with the City of SeaTac.  Mostly, before it was a city.  My mom graduated from Highline High School.  After my parents divorced, my siblings and I lived with my mom on the west hill of Kent.  In the 1980s we were close enough to my cousins that I could ride my bike and cross over hwy 99 (before it became International Boulevard) to play at their home.  I learned how to swim at Angle Lake and spent many hot summer days snorkeling near the dock, diving for fishing weights and other treasures on the bottom of the lake.   As a kid, we were warned about flying our kites or launching our model rockets into the path of landing planes. These descending jets always seemed so close that on several occasions I feared my kite would tangle with the airplane overhead.  

Watching Disney Movies at the Midway Drive-In with my cousins. Playing in the abandoned home lots that had been demolished for future airport expansion.   My cousin’s first serious job was as a baggage handler for Alaska Airlines. When I was old enough to run cross country, I recklessly spent many evenings running from the Kent-Des Moines Road to 188th (a miserable and not very scenic run at that time) just to leave a note on a girl’s car.  I know what it is like to stop in mid-conversation, without thinking about it, while the planes pass overhead, only to pick up the conversation when the noise subsided enough to be heard again.  When I visit friends who still live there, I fall into the same old pattern.  If you never lived there, you don’t know what I’m even talking about. 

Times have changed, but the airport still dominates the city and the daily lives of those who live in the shadow of the flightpath.  Unfortunately, most of the city staff at SeaTac don’t experience this life outside of their work.  To them, they escape this world when they clock out at the end of the workday.  I suspect this contributes to the staff infection I discussed in my last article.

In January, the City of SeaTac lost a significant $9.6 million jury verdict lawsuit brought by a local commercial property owner against the city (K&S vs. SeaTac).  In a brief summary, K&S  purchases a piece of commercial property in SeaTac and wants to develop it.  The City of SeaTac had other plans for that property.  They denied all development permits for that property for over six years until the owner got into financial difficulty.  Then the City staff use a straw buyer to purchase the debt for the land, threaten the owner with personal bankruptcy (through the straw buyer “the guy”), and they acquire the property at a firesale.  The owner didn’t know it was the city until the final moment of signature.  Years of records requests uncovered the sordid behind-the-scenes Central Planning schemes of SeaTac, and the jury awarded K&S $9.6 million two months ago.  This case deserves a separate story just by itself.

“There is an actual and justiciable controversy as to whether the City is liable based on any criminal, dishonest, or fraudulent acts or omissions that constitute a knowing violation of the rights of another person.”

(paragraph 147 insurance company lawsuit against the City of SeaTac alleging why the insurance company refuses to pay the $9.6 million jury verdict against the city)

I outlined the problems in my last article with the City Legal Counsel, Mary Mirante Bartolo, who does not live in the city.   I was not planning to write about her again anytime soon.  However, I am forced to do so based on her comments to the SeaTac City Council earlier this week (4/26/2016), apparently in response to my last article.   The actual video is linked here, you can see the comment I quote between 1:52:30 and 1:55:30, but review as much of the video as desired for complete context.  Please note that she speaks off camera.  Mary states:

“…that lawsuit does not allege that the city committed fraud…”  

(Quote from Mary Mirante Bartolo – legal counsel City of SeaTac – April 26, 2016 – Council meeting)

This was quickly followed by one excellent question from Councilwoman Pam Fernald, who attempted to partially quote the language that I originally quoted from the lawsuit linked here and posted at the end of this article.  Mary Mirante Bartolo was very deceptive in her answer to Councilwoman Pam Fernald, but it is a great illustration of the willingness of senior staff in SeaTac to mislead  the elected officials.  

“There is an actual and justiciable controversy as to whether any of the claims against the City result from the City or its personnel deliberately breaking the law.”

(paragraph 120 insurance company lawsuit against the City of SeaTac and why the insurance company refuses to pay the $9.6 million jury verdict against the city)

I am always amazed when staff does this, and I can only presume one of the following reasons Mary Mirante Bartolo mislead Councilwoman Pam Fernald and the other elected officials:

1. Mary Mirante Bartolo doesn’t understand the lawsuit filed against the City of SeaTac and believes what she says (this is the best case scenario – she is incompetent and all the avoidable legal problems are due to this incompetence.  It is better to be incompetent than corrupt)
2. Mary assumes that the elected officials are not capable of understanding this litigation either (a bit risky, considering the fact that Mayor Michael Siefkes is a practicing attorney)
3. Mary figures that enough paperwork and chaos can be thrown at the part-time, elected officials that they won’t have time or the interest to vet her statements (this is deceptive, but as a general rule local government staff all over Washington State  frequently get away with this technique).

My last article soft-pedaled the significance of this lawsuit, so let’s clarify: 

• The insurance company IS alleging fraud – see paragraph 120, 128 and 147.  Better yet, read the entire legal document for yourself.  Particularly page 34 to the end and I challenge you to come to a different conclusion.
• I only originally referenced the fraud allegation which is “re-alleged” by the insurance company in multiple places in this document.  The company is also adding additional possible criminal allegations in paragraph 147  which exceed the jury findings  in the $9.6 million jury verdict against the City of SeaTac, but which the insurance county is allowed to pursue if they choose to investigate this further (see page 11 “We won’t cover injury or damage that results from any criminal, dishonest, or fraudulent act or omission committed”)

“There is an actual and justiciable controversy as to whether the City’s liability is based on dishonest, fraudulent, or criminal acts or omissions.”

(paragraph 120 insurance company lawsuit against the City of SeaTac and why the insurance company refuses to pay the $9.6 million jury verdict against the city)

Despite all the power, money, and court deference to the City of SeaTac, the city still lost a significant land use jury verdict in the K&S vs. SeaTac case.  I believe this is the 3rd largest land use jury verdict in Washington State history so far.   If the insurance company prevails in forcing the city to pay their legal fees and K&S prevails in having their millions of dollars in legal fees reimbursed as well – SeaTac could very well get a gold medal and overtake Thurston County’s 2014  Maytown $12 million land use jury verdict fiasco, which currently holds the top position.   It takes bad policy and a lot of bad choices to “win” this.

There is nothing to celebrate for the residents of SeaTac by winning that competition…

It is becoming clearer the deeper I look into these issues in the City of SeaTac that the situation is far worse than it at first appears.  Senior legal staff including Mary Mirante Bartolo is doubling down on their past mistakes and pursuing damaging policies that hurt the people of SeaTac.  The only reason this is even an issue in SeaTac is because the fraudulent, bullying behavior of the central planning staff was supported and approved by Mary Mirante Bartolo in her official capacity.  This happened on her watch, under her supervision and at her direction (among other senior staff – many now gone).  Even this week, staff appears to be willing to mislead the elected officials in public meetings, assuming the elected officials won’t exercise their due diligence.  

I believe that much of this bad behavior and the historic terrible decisions by staff in this city could be moderated or avoided by hiring at least senior staff who must live under their own rules.  If staff have no empathy for the people in the community and if they don’t understand what it is like to live there, then local staff will follow the lead of Mary Mirante Bartolo.  Mary demonstrates a pattern of behavior to actively undermine anyone , outsider or local,  who wishes to reform or fix problems in the city administration.  This will be a very critical challenge this city council must resolve in order to accomplish more than just keeping the seats warm in council chambers.  

This certainly invites many more articles and more research.  Feel free to comment or challenge me on anything written here.  Share if you agree or know someone who lives in SeaTac.  

SeaTac Whistleblowers – please go here to learn more

Our Constitution begins with the phrase “we the people.”  It was the founder’s intent that government be created by the people, to serve the people.  It wasn’t their intention for the people to serve the government.  It was always intended that government which failed to serve the people should be “altered or abolished.”  Until we return to the founder’s intent, we remain We the Governed…

Source documents and related articles linked below:

The City of SeaTac suffers from a serious staff infection

Resident tells SeaTac Council to put aside personal gripes and “fix the damn city”

Childish Political Leadership in Thurston County is Costing Taxpayers Millions

Insurance company rejects payment because of fraud and other reasons by the City of SeaTac