Category Archives: John Palmer

Hopkins, Circus Ringleader

[Ed note- formatting added]

“It’s a brand new and wonderful council” exclaims Hopkins further stating “The citizens did not like our reputation as a bickering council.”

Oddly enough, the person who created the dissent and encouraged two or three people to continually attack three council members was none other than John Hopkins himself.

Hopkins is the master of manipulation and did so by forwarding city council emails to folks like Chris Chisholm enticing him to verbally attack council members (email obtained via PRR [Ed- Public Records Request]).

  • Hopkins orchestrated now Councilmember Farris’ sudden appearance at a council meeting attacking threecouncil members, demanding they resign, step down and never hold public office again to include calling the City Attorney (now City Manager) a liar and stating that he should be disbarred.
  • This followed on the heels of Hopkins being exposed for non-payment of fees and taxes to Labor and Industries as well as to the US Government for social security and Medicare with holdings for employees.
  • Hopkins used his British buddy Dave Churchman to harass and attempt to intimidate council members through use of the Public Records Act. Hopkins went as far as creating a scenario for a violation of the Open Meeting Act, then had Churchman contact Arthur West who in turn filed a lawsuit against the city. City emails obtain under the Public Records Act show that Hopkins has shared confidential information from Executive Sessions with Dave Churchman who in turn has attempted to use it against the city and or respective council members.
  • He like his mentor, Kathy Turner, are oblivious to the Open Meeting Act requirements. Public records show that Hopkins violated the OMA while serving as the chair of the Ad Hoc committee charged with interviewing and recommending appointments to city boards and commissions.
  • In one case, the committee selected an applicant for continuance on the Civil Service Commission. After the meeting adjourned, Hopkins apparently had second thoughts, contacted Councilmember Shadko telephonically and convinced her to change her vote. Hopkins in turn left a message on Councilmember Swanson’s voice mail (now a public record) indicating he and Shadko had changed their votes therefore an emergency meeting had to be convened—without public notice. Hopkins and Shadko then appointed Paul Mahoney, an ally of Hopkins’ to the Civil Service Commission.
  • Hopkins has no moral compass as evidenced in part by his change in perspective on repayment of Interfund Loans. Repayment of these loans in either 2014 or 2015 based on published budget documents would have converted debt to cash for use in 2017 enabling more infrastructure projects (roads, sewers, water) to be addressed. Hopkins and Palmer have spearheaded side tracking as much year-end funding as possible by stripping Tier 3 (year-end) projects of funding, diverting up to 40% of LTAC funding (by law to be used only for tourism) and by foregoing early repayment of interfund loans in order to build Palmer’s dream sports complex.
  • The council majority already raised your utility rates 26% and is now contemplating raising your sewer rates somewhere between 21% and 38%–as cited in the current draft sewer plan.

“It a brand new wonderful council” that will spend this city back into debt on pet projects that provide no benefit to the majority of the citizens.”

 

Mike Jones

First appeared in the comments section of a TNT article online.

Filed under John Hopkins, John Palmer

Too Bad No One Warned Them…

Litigation - Copy

Puyallup has often been plagued by lawsuits. Many would say they have been the result of corrupt or incompetent leadership. As you can see below, as a candidate, District 1 Councilman John Hopkins attempted to be the champion of ending costly litigation.

“I believe the City has squandered money on pointless litigation…”

-Candidate John Hopkins, 2011 Pierce County Voters Pamphlet

“Against – Excessive and Expensive Litigation”

-Candidate John Hopkins, 2011 “June Brochure”

“Establish good risk management to eliminate expensive litigation. Done.”

-Candidate & Councilman John Hopkins, 2013 Campaign Info Card

“We are now basically law suit free… YEAH!”

-Candidate & Councilman John Hopkins, 10/1/13 www.electjohnhopkins.com

With that job apparently “done” he has changed tactics and is now soliciting for new lawsuits.

For months the business community, voters,staff, and even likely from the city’s own attorneys had warned the council, but it seems that he is incapable of taking sound advice.

The following new and costly lawsuit is presented without further comment.

Click here to read the full lawsuit.

 

 

 

Filed under City Council 2014, John Hopkins, John Palmer, Julie Door, Tax Payers Money Wasted, Uncategorized

Palmer’s Preposterous Propaganda

Councilman John Palmer has again air dropped some propaganda to his growing email list.

In the latest email, sent from his official city address and therefore intending to imply universal truth and authority, he continued the theme of lies and manipulation which have become typical in how he “communicates” with the voters.

PuyallupNow is classifying his words as lies and manipulation primarily because the alternative would mean that Palmer either believes this crap and is therefore incapable of understanding it, or he is so inept that he couldn’t successfully complete a paint-by-numbers.

We will post his full email at the end of this article, but first, let’s examine a few specific passages. We apologize that the truth is more complex and lengthy than Mr. Palmer would like you to know.


Actual excerpts from his email.


What Palmer might have said, if we were being truthful.




Importantly, when the City established the zoning for this agricultural land in 2009, the vision was for a business park, mixed use village, protected agricultural land, a new city park with trails, and a limiting amount of warehouse type development.


I helped plan the future of our last remaining undeveloped economic center using a failed village concept (based on a idealized section of book published 65 years ago about the boroughs of New York). I’ve virtually declared war on our local farmers and yet still want them to give me trail land for free. I “negotiated” an open space agreement with the land owners, but those promises aren’t good enough for me anymore. The agricultural land has already been preserved, but you see, I don’t like the view from there, so I’m causing havoc to make the warehouse land unsalable.




The idea that these former daffodil fields, which are part of Puyallup’s heritage, would turn into a warehouse district with very large warehouses like Fife and North Sumner was never envisioned.


I paved over those daffodil fields years ago when I created and approved of the current underlying zones. I only mention them here to manipulate you. That part of our heritage is completely gone and the only local daffodil fields left are not within the City of Puyallup at all. Truthfully, no one can stop private companies from building warehouses in this area, but since I don’t believe people have a right to their own property, I’d really like everyone receiving this email to believe and support my lies. Also, warehouses were envisioned, even planned, but I just don’t want them in that specific spot.




However, with the rezone and the potential building of this first large warehouse, the prospect that this whole area could develop into a warehouse district is very real (i.e., once one is built, many may follow).


I still can’t believe people believe the lie that warehouses, or any buildings, are capable of asexual reproduction, but boy does it make for a great soundbite. Nearly that whole area is already zoned to allow warehouses. I just don’t think people are bright enough to question my words.




To address this situation… the new Council will vote on additional design standards for warehouse development in this area. The intent of the design standards are to try to ensure Schnitzer’s proposed warehouse and other potential warehouses are built in a way that is compatible with our community and other types of development envisioned for this area as noted above.


This is my private war with Schnitzer and I sure hope they don’t run adds against me when I’m up for reelection next year. I know full well that their project was already approved by the city and vested. After all, I attached part of it to this very email. Any rules I vote in won’t apply to them. Not only that, but the rules I want to impose were designed for a different draconian zoning purpose, voted down by the planning commission who investigated it thoroughly and are so intentionally restrictive that it would effectively block any new job center in that area.




If passed, warehouses in this area would be limited in size, incorporate landscaping amenities, and truck loading docks would be located away from public view.


If passed, my ludicrous rules would have absolutely no effect unless I am able to invalidate the existing legal contract the city already issued. I believe that we can make doing business in Puyallup so expensive that no one will be able to do so.




Tuesday’s City Council is an opportunity for you to provide your views on this issue.


Sharpen the pitchforks, light the torches, and parrot my talking points back to me so I can point and say “look, everyone spontaneously agreed with me.”




I want to stress that I believe there is a “win-win” solution for this area that includes quality development with jobs, acquisition of park land with sports fields, protection of some Ag land, and the land owners receiving high value for the sale of their land.


I have no interest in compromise. Just a few weeks ago I tossed out a plan proposing even bigger warehouses so that I might get a chance at imposing my corrupted will on others. I don’t care about jobs, and the agricultural set aside is already in place and not in danger, but I want the land owners to suffer for supporting my political opponents.




Thank you for your interest in our community.


Please believe my lies, don’t investigate my claims, and just be outraged. Then as I dictate how others will use their own land, I’ll get an expensive park named after me.


 

The full, unedited email is below.

 

From: JPalmer@ci.puyallup.wa.us
Subject: Van Lierop Property/Proposed Warehouse
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 17:06:00 +0000

To: [List withheld]

Dear Concerned Citizens:

I want to provide an update on the development issues related to the Van Lierop property near the Shaw Road Overpass. As you probably know, last November the rezone was approved by last year’s City Council to expand the allowable area for warehouse development. As a result, Seattle developer Schnitzer West has submitted an application to the City to develop a 471,031 sq. ft. warehouse (about the size of 8-9 football fields). Attached is the official site plan.

Importantly, when the City established the zoning for this agricultural land in 2009, the vision was for a business park, mixed use village, protected agricultural land, a new city park with trails, and a limiting amount of warehouse type development. The idea that these former daffodil fields, which are part of Puyallup’s heritage, would turn into a warehouse district with very large warehouses like Fife and North Sumner was never envisioned. However, with the rezone and the potential building of this first large warehouse, the prospect that this whole area could develop into a warehouse district is very real (i.e., once one is built, many may follow).

To address this situation, at the upcoming City Council Meeting on Tuesday (May 20, 6:30pm @ City Hall), the new Council will vote on additional design standards for warehouse development in this area. The intent of the design standards are to try to ensure Schnitzer’s proposed warehouse and other potential warehouses are built in a way that is compatible with our community and other types of development envisioned for this area as noted above. If passed, warehouses in this area would be limited in size, incorporate landscaping amenities, and truck loading docks would be located away from public view.

Tuesday’s City Council is an opportunity for you to provide your views on this issue.

I want to stress that I believe there is a “win-win” solution for this area that includes quality development with jobs, acquisition of park land with sports fields, protection of some Ag land, and the land owners receiving high value for the sale of their land. This area can be a major asset to our community for future generations if we work together to find solutions and keep with the vision established with the land owners in 2009.

Thank you for your interest in our community. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to email me or call me at 253-753-8256. See Tuesday’s agenda for more information at: http://www.cityofpuyallup.org/agendas/agenda_publish.cfm?mt=ALL&get_month=5&get_year=2014&dsp=ag&seq=1004

Sincerely,

John Palmer
Puyallup City Council District 2

Filed under Hypocrisy, John Palmer, Lies, Manipulation

Schnitzer Negotiations

PuyallupNow has uncovered the following secret email.

 

From: John Palmer
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 9:35 AM
To: XXXXXXX@ci.puyallup.wa.us; XXXXXXX@ci.puyallup.wa.us; XXXXXXX@ci.puyallup.wa.us
Subject: Schnitzer Negotiations

Hi XXXXXXX,

I want to set up a meeting up with the three of you to talk strategy with Schnitzer.

Here is the outline of a proposal that I’d like the three of you (our negotiating team) to present to Jeff [of Schnitzer]:

1) Expand the footprint of the Schnitzer development. That is, more buildings to spread the infrastructure cost across more sq feet of buildings. This, of course, would require Schnitzer to purchase more land.

2) Have the development “campus style,” consistent with the design specifications in our overlay zone (assuming we pass it). Mix of business park and a limited amout [sic] of truck oriented warehouses.

3) Schnitzer helps purchase park land (30-40 acres, most likely Knutson land east of the Schnitzer project) as mitigation for the development and in lieu of park impact fees. If Schnitzer financially supports the park land purchase and the city is able to secure this land, the city would have “skin in the game” regarding sewer expansion and the city could help pay a portion of the cost.

Of course there are a lot of details, but this framework may produce a better outcome than our current path.

John

 

 

This is one of the latest attempts by District 2 Councilman John Palmer to block the creation of a new job center in Puyallup.

In the midst of his war against the people of Puyallup, John Palmer has hatched this new ham handed scheme.

After publicly opposing any new development, is Councilman Palmer now suggesting the city seek a bribe from a private company in exchange for concessions at the taxpayers expense?

After he was unable to stop them with an “emergency moratorium” on economic growth, is he now trying to kill the project by tricking its creators into surrendering their vested application, forcing them to adhere to his personal agenda?

Filed under John Palmer

Council Rejects Moratorium 7-0

Tuesday night the city council quickly changed course, voting to postpone the moratorium in the Shaw-Pioneer area of our city.

This vote came after an executive session, and just one week after four members of the council voted in favor of it.

While we will never know what discussions and advice was had between the council and city attorneys, we can infer from their vote and some of the citizen comments that this vote was done to avoid litigation brought by the land owners or developers.

Mr. Harmer, a representative of Schnitzer West, spoke with his comments focused on Councilmember Palmer and the issue of trust. Three days after having what was described as a “burying the hatchet” phone conversation between the two, Councilmember Palmer added the moratorium to the council agenda without any mention of this to Mr. Harmer. The good will and ideas discussed about future trail connections and parks was tossed aside by Mr. Palmer for no apparent reason.

It is disappointing that John Palmer would put at risk the opportunity to partner with a developer and possibly offset some of the cost to add a park and connect a section of the trail in our city. We hope that in the future this council can work to add amenities to the east part of our city and that Mr. Palmer is not a roadblock to these issues.

Filed under City Council 2014, John Palmer