skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The Herald published a very interesting article this morning about the contaminated site the Everett School District bought in 1986. Tainted soil costly for Everett district.
The Everett School District identified their site as necessary for acquisition in 1986, while the Edmonds School District had rejected their new administration site twice before.
The Everett School District knew their site was contaminated and they spent years developing a plan to remediate the existing consequences from known conditions, while the Edmonds School District still has no idea as to the extent of contamination at what was an informal dump site for decades.
The Everett School District determined that removing the contamination would be a far more effective solution to their problem, while the Edmonds School District elected to just pave over the problem.
The Everett School District is performing their clean-up voluntarily instead of in response to a directive from the State, while the Edmonds School District just decided to pretend that no such contamination exists and provided no meaningful information to the State.
The Everett School District held this property for years before developing the site, while the Edmonds School District rushed into their purchase and even rejected their own $3,300,000.00 appraisal in favor of the seller's $5,800,000.00 appraisal.
The Everett School District is paying approximately $450,000.00 to haul contaminated soil from the site, while the Edmonds School District spent $2,300,000.00 to grade and pave their site.
The Everett School District has administrative staff working in three old buildings (One is 40 years old, one hasn't been updated in more than 40 years and another is 97 years old), while the Edmonds School District has administrative staff working in one building constructed less than 20 years ago.
The Everett School District has increasing student enrollment, while the Edmonds School District is shrinking.
The Everett School District has one person managing Facilities and Capital Planning, while the Edmonds School District divides those tasks to prevent the departments from working together effectively.
This arrived from Judson Clendaniel. Notice that it starts out in the third person and then he concludes his statement in the first person.
Clendaniel is a lifetime resident of the Seattle area and has been appraising full-time since 1978 - almost as long as my good friend, former coworker, and respected colleague who preformed the previous appraisal. What has been left out of the commentary is that after the first appraisal, the property had been platted, graded & filled and utilities extended. Streets had been vacated adding to the potential size of the site. The market also continued to improve. These changes were described in my report, in detail, so that the decision makers had up to date information.
As for past real estate agent - yes, I sold houses to pay for College. WSU, 1978 BA, Business Administration with an emphasis on real estate, full tuition scholarship recipient. I hold an MAI designation, am a published appraisal author and past real estate instructor. My client list includes the top developers, bankers, public agencies and attorneys in the area as well as national investors and lenders. Perhaps Mr Zandberg should expand his "real estate circles." And no, I didn't do the Woodway appraisal - I did the review.
Judson H. Clendaniel, MAI
Your assessment of your own conduct is quite breath-taking. Clearly, you decided to respond to comments written on this blog because you harbor some degree of guilt for your part in the financial assault on a public agency. In my opinion, you are just another dollop of pond scum looking for a quick buck in serving your deep-pocket client to further his own financial ends. Sadly, your target was an easily fooled rube that believed the mush you continue to spew without regard for facts, truth or honor.
First of all, your MAI credential means nothing in this argument. The appraisal that was provided by Northwest Valuation was performed (as opposed to "preformed") by someone with the same credential. Attempting to set yourself apart by citing this "illustrious" designation means nothing to the rest of us.
As for your conclusion that the property had been graded, platted and filled - what planet are you on? Were you even aware of the contamination? Did Raskin even inform you of the history of the site? Did any past use make it into your assessment? What good is a graded and filled site if the appropriate response to contamination is to mitigate it?
I will put my faith in the District's appraiser, Jim Irish and John Koster. Those are three highly distinguished individuals that do not agree with your feeble assessment. The King 5 report exposed your scam for what it was - a scam. Your appraisal was making a comparison between apples and oranges. As for the market continuing to improve, just what sage wisdom were you relying upon to draw that conclusion? As a university educated appraiser with a lifetime of experience in real estate issues, how could you not see or hear that train coming? I will say this much, however, you served your master well. I hope you were paid enough to cover the guilt that any normal human being would have to be feeling. Just how do you sleep at night?
Regarding the Old Woodway appraisal and transaction, that discussion will be happening this summer. I have read a lot of material on the topic and have a lot to share when the time is right.
As for expanding my "real estate circles", if it means encountering people like you, I think it might be better if I left the profession all together. Fortunately, there are still a lot of great people in the industry and even a few honest appraisers.
There was a time, not long ago, when we the taxpayers of the Edmonds School District were told of a magical scheme straight from the lips of Nick Brossoit. We were told that if we passed the construction bond for the new Lynnwood High School (after it failed twice before) the District would use the proceeds from the long-term ground lease of the current Lynnwood High School to fund a lengthy list of other projects. Well, it sounded good at the time... to a few of you, at least.
Now that Cypress Equities is "rethinking" their development and delaying the launch of any real revenue-generating project, one thing is for certain - the trough is empty and the cows are coming home to be milked.
As for Marla's claim that Cypress Equities is "still very interested in developing the site", she is clearly detached from the realities of our economic circumstances. Give me a break. Many of us in our 30s are "still very interested in" retiring, it just won't be happening anytime soon.
I have also been informed that Cypress Equities is just keeping their foot in the door. At the moment, they have no real plan to move forward with the current project and would never back out entirely, in case the economy improves in the next few years. What sense would there be to leave the project when they already have a number of available exit opportunities built into the ground lease? Why would they give up their seat in the first chair when it costs them nothing to sit there? There is no expiration date. There is no meter running. Why not maintain the illusion to your investors that you have yet another iron in the fire? Never mind that the fire is just orange paint.
Just how much money has been spent so far on consultants and lawyers to prepare the ground lease? What about the cost of converting the property from public use? What other magical sources of funds are available to renovate the ESC for Scriber Lake High School or develop the contaminated site for the new administration center? And where is all the money from the Old ESC site and the Maintenance and Transportation site?
The board may be dazzled by the illusion of intelligence in district management, but it is all quite relative, I assure you. Five imbeciles and an idiot are easily out-witted by a moron.
Living in Edmonds, we have a great resource right at our fingertips. There is an organization called Northwest Procurement Institute that offers training in public agency procurement practices. Just take a look at the current list of course offerings. Wouldn't it be great to tap that exceptionally endowed organization to review the piano scam and truly put the issue to rest, once and for all?
We could also ask NPI to review the Powerful Partners (conveniently renamed Powerful Tutors) lease and see if it truly is a legally binding document. I don't run an "Institute" but I am fairly sure that I know a lease when I see one, or in this case, write one. If NPI can wield the weight of their considerable intellect and publicly declare whether the lease is valid, it could take a lot of pressure off of the Board and offer a respite from sniping by the blog.
But wait a minute. Isn't that the same organization that is owned and operated by a member of the school board? So, wouldn't it stand to reason that such a review has already taken place? If the Board accepted and endorsed the manner in which the pianos were acquired and declared the lease with Powerful Partners invalid, that would undermine the strength of management at NPI. This is a rather sad turn of events. The Board seemingly had an expert among them and still allowed district management to run amok. It wasn't as if there were five imbeciles on the Board. One of them actually passes himself off as an expert in the realm of procurement practices.
The same can be said of the contaminated site slated to accommodate the new administration building. Someone trained as an engineer should be able to understand the concept of contamination. So, if such an engineer were to be a member of the Board, and I am led to believe that there is such an engineer on the Board, wouldn't he be in a position to know what constitutes a significant threshold? Wouldn't he have an idea as to what constitutes a mathematical certainty and what can be relegated to a less significant margin of acceptability? Wouldn't this person's inability to grasp the concept of contamination cast a questionable shadow across his employer's ability to hire the best and brightest engineers? Of course, since he only recently asked if the site was contaminated, he clearly must have been sleeping since 2005.
We need better people on the Board. While the public may have tapped the current board members for the illusion of intelligence, it hasn't generated the sort of results we have been seeking. Having the credentials to serve the public and using them are two entirely different things. Saying you seek public accountability and actually promoting it are two different things. The Board is currently unable or unwilling to truly govern our district with the sort of leadership we desperately need.
I find it surprising that, as a nation we were able to take an awe-inspiring step forward by electing a relatively unknown senator to become our next president and yet locally, we collectively refuse to embrace the opportunity to change things for the better.
I wonder if the owner/operator of NPI truly believes that the piano scam wasn't a scam at all. I wonder if he truly believes that a signed lease with a public agency doesn't mean anything.
I wonder if an engineer in the aerospace industry truly believes that the new administration site isn't contaminated because Marla confirmed it. Perhaps if Marla taped cardboard wings on a bicycle and confirmed that it could fly, this board member would be packing his bags to fly it to his next vacation.
The foolish choices made by our elected board members, and Gary Noble, do very little to promote the intelligence and objective deliberation of district leadership, but they also weaken the strength of companies in our region.
Blog: Simplified Acquisition Procedures - Advanced - 5 Days - $830. If a public agency seeks to procure anything, just write a lease. Give Perkins a call and I am sure they can draft something hardly intelligible but that meets the minimum legal threshold.
Single reading, approve Acceptance of Public Works Contract, District Support Center - early site grading package, Resolution #08-47.
It was moved by Director Shields and seconded by Director Noble to approve the acceptance of public works contract – District Support Center early site grading package, Resolution #08-47. It was confirmed that there was no soil contamination on the site and that the early site grading was complete. All aye.
So, I have to ask, who "confirmed that there was no soil contamination"? Any reasonable person would have to ask such a question. Confirmation of such a condition would require the requisite qualifications to make such an assessment. Better still, the public should, at the very least, seek "certification" from the designated environmental engineering firm working for the District. The best path forward would be an independent assessment from a third party - which will never happen.
If AMEC is prepared to certify that the site is free from contamination, the public should be reasonably confident that future problems with abating or mitigating contamination would be minimal.
This particular board action item smacks of utter stupidity. Why not just "confirm" that Gary Noble is god, that Nick Brossoit is dependable or that Marla Miller is honest. Under what authority is such a confirmation offered? What good is such a confirmation if there is nothing of substance to back up the confirmation. The only confirmation offered by the board action item is the Board's absolute and irrefutable detachment from any sense of obligation to the community.
Is anyone fooled by this meaningless confirmation inserted into the board minutes? I would be willing to bet that if you can read words written in the English language then you likely share my view that our district is being driven into the ground by a tag team of bobbleheads.
[Nora Cole, Cotton & Company]
Warehouse: I can see that you have put significant effort into downsizing your warehouse functions and therefore costs. However, what led you to downsize your warehouse? Was there a cost study that led you to do this downsizing? Are you using certain cost analyses to see how much you have, or will save by downsizing? If these studies exist, I would be interested in seeing them.
From: Miller, Marla (ESC) [MillerM@edmonds.wednet.edu]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 7:21 PM
To: Cole, Nora L.
Cc: Taylor Dribben; Brossoit, Nick
Subject: Performance Audit Follow-Up: Warehouse
Nora and Taylor,
This message includes attachments related to your questions regarding our analysis of our warehouse operations (see below).
Included with this message are the following:
1. Description of reduction in staff in 2003-04
2. Description of analysis of discontinuation of office supplies (just in time delivery)
3. Description of elimination of leased facility for surplus storage
4. Description of progress report on reducing warehouse inventory
5. Changes to mail delivery times to accommodate reduction in delivery staff
6. Analysis of value of changing shredding procedures
7. Message asking a UPS manager to train our warehouse staff on productivity WITH customer service
8. Initiation of study of merging warehouse and food service delivery operations
Much of this is to give you a flavor of the ongoing nature of our review of ways to improve the efficiency and service of our warehouse operation. We eliminated the surplus storage leased warehouse to save $100,000 per year in the General Fund. That was a fairly straightforward decision – can we fit everything into one warehouse, and if so, downsize!
Please let me know if you have additional questions. Thank you,
Marla
I find it peculiar that Marla wanted to sell the District Warehouse and consolidate all warehousing functions in the leased warehouse, just as the rates there were scheduled to go up. This didn't make any sense at all. Despite my vocal opposition, I contacted Kidder Mathews and arranged for an appraisal to be performed for the District Warehouse. That appraisal came in at just over $1,000,000.00, out of reach for the only party interested in buying the site. Their offer was approximately $850,000.00.
If the District Warehouse had been sold, there would have been substantial on-going costs for leasing the facility for an unknown period of time. Particularly since the new District Support Center hadn't yet been purchased and is still "under development".
What is happening with that site anyway? $5.6 million to buy. $2.3 million to grade. Property values continue to fall from the site's original valuation of $3.3 million.
In response to the entry mentioning the New Administration site.
Fact: the new administration site was formerly a landfill used to dispose all kinds of debris as I-5 was constructed through the county.
Fact: The site directly north of the New Administration site, known as Center 5000, is on the Department of Ecology List of contaminated sites. It too was used as a landfill for I-5 construction debris.
Fact: Preliminary sampling at the New Administration site did show poly nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons above Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) regulatory levels and traces of pesticides.
Fact: Hazardous waste is defined by certain physical characteristics (e.g.flammability, reactivity, corrosivity) or by levels of chemicals.
Fact: Levels of chemicals in soil that pose health risks under MTCA are well under the levels for allowed in hazardous waste. Saying there is no hazardous waste at the New Administration site does not mean there are no chemical contaminants present. What is important are their levels and if they controlled to prevent exposure.
Fact: For better or worse, determination by the Department of Ecology for No Further Action on the new administration site was based on a review of the available data.
Fact: No comprehensive sampling and analysis was completed that statistically shows that the site is devoid of any pockets of contamination above regulatory levels. That, of course, would take money and since the District gave away 2.3 million they cannot pay for the randomized sampling at various depths checking for the full list of hazardous analytes. There is no way of knowing why lies beneath the surface.
Fact: The ESC is scheduled to become the new Scriber Lake High School. It was never intended to be a school. Yet it will be if the new administration site ever gets the funding to be built.
Fact: The New Administration site is not intended to be school. But what if it turns out there is a new boondoggle to be had and a school is put there? In the age of bisphenol in baby bottles, lead in toys and diacetyl in microwave popcorn, I guess one more sleeping dog does not matter. After all, there are plenty of other things to bite you.
Claire Olsovsky, MA, MS
Former Loss Control Safety Specialist, 2000-2005
Imagine that you are a child and your mother gives you a dollar to buy a cookie. When you go to the store, the cashier convinces you that the tastiest cookie is actually the smallest and looks a little dirty.
"Not to worry", says the cashier, "Those are just chocolate sprinkles."
You then ask why the cookie costs a dollar when the sign clearly displays the price as 25 cents.
"Oh, that is the price for 1/4th of a cookie. The entire cookie costs one dollar."
You then give the cashier your mother's dollar and take the dirty-looking cookie home.
As you get closer and closer to your home, you start feeling uncomfortable about the cookie you just bought. You start panicking a little about what your mother might say about spending a whole dollar for the dirty little cookie. You decide to avoid any potential problem with your mother's opinion of the cookie and just shove the whole thing in your mouth.
When you get home, your mother is relaxing on the front stoop reading a romance novel. She lowers the book just long enough to ask about your cookie. Fortunately, you devoured the whole thing on your way home so there isn't anything for your mother to evaluate. She now has to rely upon your description.
"It was delicious. It was the perfect cookie. I know that you trusted me to buy a great cookie with the dollar you gave me and I did exactly that."
Unfortunately, a few hours later you develop an extreme case of botulism, slip into a coma and become hospitalized, your immune system weakens and you become infected with flesh-eating bacteria.
Fortunately for you, death is impossible.
Hint: You are the Edmonds School District. Your mother is the taxpaying public. The cookie is the new adminstration site.
A year ago, the Port of Seattle's plan to tear down a Burien apartment complex drew the wrath of housing advocates.
Several sued to stop demolition, and Port officials, who had hoped to put a big-box store or a cargo warehouse there, were pressured into selling the apartments to the King County Housing Authority.
On Friday, the housing authority and the Port said the sale was off. Tests showed significant soil contamination, left over from the site's days as an auto-wrecking yard in the 1950s.
The 162 Lora Lake apartments, which had become a political poster child for a countywide effort to end homelessness, will come down.
"We're obviously very sad and disappointed," said Rhonda Rosenberg, spokeswoman for the King County Housing Authority.
She said the fight was still worth it.
"It helped focus regional attention on the unnecessary loss of rental housing."
Public Health — Seattle & King County will spend a month looking at whether previous residents could have been exposed to dangerous levels of dioxins, which could increase risk of cancer.
Charissa Fotinos, medical director with Public Health's clinical services, said it is difficult to assess anyone's risk at this point. "We're certainly concerned," she said.
The apartments have been empty since residents moved out last summer.
The private developer who built the apartments tested and cleaned the site in consultation with the state Department of Ecology in 1987, according to the housing authority.
Read the rest of the story by clicking here.
July 8, 2008
Brian Sonntag
sonntagb@sao.wa.gov
Dear Mr. Sonntag:
Thank you for your response to two of my many concerns regarding the Edmonds School District. Your response leaves me, and many others, appalled by what passes for an audit these days. If the Internal Revenue Service conducted personal audits in a similar fashion, no one would pay federal income tax but rather expect a meaningless letter to arrive more than a year after someone else decided to complain.
Piano Scheme
First, the evidence for conflicting interests is abundantly clear. Ms. Miller and Mr. Osborne met with Mr. Tucker numerous times outside of and prior to this piano transaction. They had an established relationship through the Edmonds Jazz Festival and connections through Rotary in Edmonds going back a number of years.
Second, the piano "lease" was crafted with the sole purpose of transferring ownership of a number of pianos from Seattle Piano Gallery to the Edmonds School District. Taking possession of these pianos under the auspices of a lease scheme was merely a ruse to avoid legally required procurement processes.
Perhaps your audit team never viewed a summary of the scheme drafted by the attorney for Mr. Tucker. It may also be found at www.esd15.org/henry.pdfRecommending that the District use a legally required process for future transactions confirms that this transaction was, in your opinion and in fact, illegal. Why would any law-abiding entity have to be reminded to follow the law?
Purchase of Land
First, a point of clarification. I never stated a belief that the District "paid more than the asking price" for the new administration site. The District paid every cent of the seller's asking price of $5.6 million immediately after their own appraisal determined the value to be $3.3 million and without regard for obvious and documented contamination.
Second, the District's own Board Policy requires that a Site Acquisition Committee be convened, in writing, by the Superintendent prior to the purchase of land. That never happened. The closest thing to such a committee was a group of consultants all advising the District not to buy the property.
[http://staff.edmonds.wednet.edu/users/kernsj/5000/5200r1.htm]
Third, state law requires a review appraisal. WAC 468-100-103 "A qualified reviewing appraiser shall examine all appraisals…" A school board may be elected by voters and have the power to make decisions to buy property but the voters do not expect their elected officials to disobey the law.
[http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=468-100-103]
If I wasn't a resident and taxpayer in the State of Washington, I would find it uncomfortably funny that the State Auditor stands behind the statement that an appraisal is required but need not govern the final purchase price. The State Attorney General has numerous published opinions that call such overpayments a gift of public funds.
As a public employee with continued involvement in the procurement of goods, services and property, I am flabbergasted by the lack of oversight provided by the State Auditor and, quite frankly, embarrassed by your dismissive attitude toward the misappropriation of millions of taxpayer dollars.
Sincerely,
Mark Zandberg
I don’t know about how other taxpayers feel but for myself I am tired of funding education its not my job but the Feds and State. I pay for education every time I purchase something and when I pay the property taxes each year. I believe the law says that Public Education is to be fully funded by the government. We are not funding education as it was in the 1930’s, 1940’s or 2000 we need funding for the 2008 and beyond. The students need to keep up with technology we are not purchasing inkwells and pens we need funding for computers and many other high-level technology equipment. Teachers must keep up with all the new technology but the state doesn’t fund it. The funding needs to change so when one pot has excess it can then be used to fund something that is going in the negative. I am tired of hearing about all the different pots of money in the district and how they can’t be intermingled with other funds when it all should be available for the students needs no matter where the need is or which pot the money comes from. The state needs to fully fund the salaries of support staff and pay them for the job they do each day.
We are being taxed out of our homes, is that the goal to hit the older generation so they cannot afford to keep their homes? I for one will not be voting for the tech levy in my district because the state needs and should step up to the plate and start NOW to fully fund Public Education for our students. And the district needs to become very good financial steward of the money they receive for education. Don’t buy land for a new administration building when student enrollment is declining. When I have less money coming into my household budget I make cuts to things I can live without the district has known since 2001 that the enrollment in our district was declining they continued to live high off the hog. The district needs to make cuts at the top. We are too top heavy with Assist. Supt. They may be taking on extra work but so will everyone else. Our titles won't change and our salary won't change. Lets cut the salary of the Supt. and bring it enline with other districts in the state just like all other bargaining groups. Believe me Supt. in other large districts are not making $200,000 salary annually. I wouldn't want to leave the district either if I could make that kind of money and lead our district into the red and still get to keep my job. Supt. said he would not leave the district in the financial bind it is in now for someone else to clean up his mess like the Supt. did in Shoreline. The Supt. also said he would not give up any of his salary to help with the budget.
Please VOTE NO on May 20th.
Editor: Thank you to another contributor.
WENATCHEE — The state Department of Ecology plans to lay down clean dirt or concrete at four schools in north-central Washington this summer to protect children from old orchard chemicals in the ground.
A thick layer of dirt will be laid down at Orchard Middle School, Sunnyslope Elementary and Peshastin-Dryden Elementary, and concrete will be used at Lee Elementary to cover soil contaminated with unsafe levels of lead and arsenic.
After the work is finished, the state will have just one schoolyard left to treat in north-central Washington before completing a cleanup project that began in 2001.
The state tested soils at all schools in Chelan, Douglas, Okanogan and Yakima counties in 2002 for levels of arsenic and lead, which were sprayed on apple orchards in the 1940s to fight codling moths. Many schools in the region are built on old orchard sites.
Fourteen schools in Wenatchee, Orondo, Chelan, Manson, Bridgeport, Brewster and Omak were found to have unsafe levels of the chemicals in the soils.
Contaminated school grounds in Yakima County will be tackled next.
Recently, the Director of Facilities met with Maintenance staff to deliver the news that a clerical position, to be determined almost at random, will have to be offered up to the herd at the trough. A decree has been given - clerical support is not important. The District has just too many sows to feed and we all know the importance of sows. They produce pork chops, bacon and pork rinds.
It was also reported that a mysterious website has brought the new administration site to a standstill. No, it wasn't for a lack of funds. No, it wasn't for a lack of interest in the District's properties available for long-term ground lease. No, it has nothing to do with the contamination. The Assistant Superintendent of Business and Operations has been so busy responding to an endless stream of public records requests that she can't manage to do anything else. Let's hope her shoes stay tied for fear she may tumble down the stairs at the ESC.
I find it mildly bewildering that the Assistant Superintendent has a number of law firms at the ready, dozens of capable employees at the end of her telephone and even an assistant with an assistant and yet these requests have gummed up the entire organization. There must be a lot of requests coming from a lot of other people - because it isn't me. I have six outstanding requests and they are on hold, due to a personal matter.
The delays at the new administration site have more to do with the manner in which development normally occurs in the District. Bamboozling taxpayers takes some degree of planning and coordination. You don't just rush in and baffle the public. You have to take your time fabricating circumstances and manufacturing illusions. It is becoming far too difficult to screw taxpayers when everyone is watching. Lay low for a while and then orchestrate another miscarriage of due process when everyone is distracted by something else.
Why wouldn't the construction process involve Capital Projects? Don't they manage the construction of district buildings? Why wouldn't they be moving the new administration site forward? Is it simply a matter of selecting a developer? I have never seen the Assistant Superintendent involved in "officially" selecting a contractor. Why wouldn't Purchasing be involved in this process? Isn't that why we have a Public Works Contract Coordinator and a Purchasing Manager? Shouldn't they be working to move this issue forward? Just what is the real reason for this lengthy delay?
To the Director of Facilities Operations, on behalf of the mysterious website, please refrain from advertising for others while on the District's dime. If we have something to share, we have the medium to do so. With your employer cutting deals with friends of management, the rest of the District would like to stay informed and this mysterious website seems to be meeting a demand. While we would love to take responsibility for forcing people to stop and think about the new administration site, I fear the actual reason has nothing to do with thinking or deliberation. The time for that was back in 2005 when lesser minds rushed forward in a flurry of wine-saturated delirium.
She stole $143,000 from the Edmonds School District and is going to jail for 14 months:
Lewin, a former district bookkeeper, has no criminal history, and she stood to spend just three months or less in the county jail under the state’s sentencing laws.
By law, Bowden was able to go beyond the standard sentencing range because Lewin had agreed that what she did was a major economic offense against the school district.
Deputy prosecutor Adam Cornell asked for only four months in jail. Lynnwood defense lawyer Michael Mulvihill recommended three months or less.
Bowden acknowledged that Lewin cooperated with school officials and the state auditor when the theft was discovered. She also pleaded guilty, saving the state the expense of a trial.
“Candidly, that saved you a considerable amount of time,” Bowden told her.
After imposing the surprise prison term, Bowden said “I do not do so lightly. I do so because of the magnitude of the crime.”…..
Besides prison, Lewin is obligated to pay back a big chunk of the money, and may be made to pay the rest when an ongoing civil lawsuit is completed.
Hunter and Mulvihill have agreed that she owes at least $68,500.
This information came from "The Subduction Zone"
Now, knowing that Ms. Lewin served a considerable sentence because "what she did was a major economic offense against the school district", how then, should the courts look at the Piano Scam?
If you look at just the amount that Marla Miller willingly handed over to her friend, Arnie Tucker (and then promptly asked to have returned), that $40,000.00 is nearly 60% of the total that Ms. Lewin conservatively liberated from district accounts. Of course, the actual Lewin haul was much larger, but the lesser amount cited by prosecuting and defense attorneys was the figure used in the ensuing guilty plea. The Miller haul is a little more difficult to quantify.
The Piano Scam was likely hatched while "on the clock" for the District, while sitting in a district chair, with feet on a district desk and plotting on a district telephone. Ms. Lewin's offense did not involve anyone else. She didn't have to burn productive hours chatting up her accomplice. She didn't have to meet anyone at a local coffee shop to scheme up ways to make the transaction look legitimate.
Lewin and Miller both violated RCWs. Lewin used a direct approach and just skimmed funds from district accounts. Miller avoided legally-required competitive bidding processes to skim funds for the benefit of a third party. While the Lewin impact can be quantified by critically-evaluating accounts, the Miller impact will never truly be understood because competitive forces, which change with prevailing market conditions, cannot be recreated with any degree of certainty. There may have been a generous philanthropist in our community with 14 brand new pianos just sitting around collecting dust. We will never know.
Of course, Lewin had limited access and limited responsibilities. Her take was restricted by the nature of her work. Miller, on the other hand, realized that no one noticed that she just bamboozled the District with a Piano Scam and could upgrade to something like purchasing contaminated property for millions more than actual value.
It is clear that the Piano Scam was illegal. Whether the State Auditor calls it a crime has yet to be seen, but the impact to taxpayers is the same as if these funds were just taken home by a bookkeeper. If the State Auditor does cite this transaction as being illegal, will the school board act on this information and terminate Miller? If the school board decides not to terminate Miller, they would essentially be endorsing corruption and supporting the theft of public funds. In such a case, the school board would have to be eliminated before more damage is done. Eliminating a school board would require a recall petition.
Fun Factoid: So, if Lewin's haul was $143,000.00 and resulted in a sentence of 14 months. Miller's haul of $40,000.00 from the Piano Scam and $2,300,000.00 from the new administration site should result in a sentence of 234 months, or just a bit under 20 years.
Everett Public Schools is hoping to construct a new $28 million building for the district's administrative and support-services departments.
The district is looking for architects interested in designing a building on property it owns on Broadway Avenue, at the south end of Memorial Stadium near 41st Street in Everett.
For more than two decades, the district has been trying to consolidate these departments into a single building. Currently, administrative services operate in three buildings — Colby Educational Center, the Longfellow Building and View Ridge Elementary.
A spokeswoman for the district said the new building would be funded in ways other than bond or levy money, possibly by interest, rentals or sale of property.
Seattle Times
Editorial: This sounds familiar. They just need to ensure the site near 41st Street is contaminated and we'll have a match.
For those of you who have had the pleasure of working with Reg Clarke, (soon-to-be-former) Director of Transportation, the news of his departure must be terribly sad.
On more than a few occasions, I have had to work with Transportation to ascertain where bus stop locations should be placed to most effectively serve district students. It has always been a pleasure.
Like everyone else in business, property developers are constantly trying to reduce expenses and maximize profit for their company. One very effective way to maximize profit is to minimize the number and magnitude of off-site improvements frequently imposed by County government. The sort of off-site improvements that are normally shifted to the developer include neighborhood sidewalks, specifically the ones that take new students to existing bus stops.
The County relies on local school districts to provide information about where new bus stops should be placed or how existing bus stops should be relocated to accommodate new homes in new neighborhoods. When an existing bus stop is 300 feet away from a development, the school district provides that location to the County and the County provides it to the developer. When the developer receives this unprofitable bit of news, they immediately call the school district to complain about how the current bus stop doesn't make any sense and how a public agency needs to be concerned about the public - specifically the developer.
Weaker minds would take the easy way out and just modify the original response to accommodate the developer's profit-driven demands. This approach would shift the cost of infrastructural improvements back to the County (or future incorporating City) and unfairly penalize the taxpayer by subsidizing new development. I have always believed that it is far better to have the necessary improvements installed while the demand for these improvements is being created. Waiting for the County to build a sidewalk can take a long time and may never actually happen. Unless a child is struck by a car.
When I was contacted by a developer, I walked them through this string of facts and most of them agreed that off-site improvements were necessary, and in fact were an enhancement to the developer's project. However, there were a few developers that required face time and wanted to poke and prod at our organizational justification and methodology. That is when I called Reg.
Reg is a treasure trove of valuable facts and statistics about the real cost of creating a new bus stop. Every time a bus slows down, stops and then speeds up again, 1/16th of a gallon of fuel is consumed. Over the life of an additional bus stop, this can be a phenomenal expense that quickly dwarfs the real cost of sidewalk construction in today's dollars.
Reg also knows the District's service area better than most. In having conversations with him over the telephone, it was almost as if he was mentally driving down the very road we were discussing. Details were plentiful. Facts were abundant. The man is a genius and the master of his profession. If he was even a little unclear about a possible bus stop location, he would drive out to the site to refresh his memory and deliberate the issue completely.
Every now and then it would be necessary to meet with prospective developers. People that were aware of the District's status as a public agency, tapped our resources when they were pondering the acquisition of sites to develop. Reg always responded promptly, knowing that informing a developer in advance would usually result in the construction of needed sidewalks through the inclusion of this expense in their cost-benefit evaluation.
It has become a bit of an open secret that the new site offers some real traffic challenges. While the Alderwood Mall location is ideally-positioned to allow for the starting of all of the District's buses early in the morning without concern from neighbors, the new site will definitely have a dramatic impact.
There is also the issue of access. The Mall, by virtue of the fact that it draws customers from every part of the region, offers great access to the District's fleet of buses traveling in the opposite direction to collect the children of these same customers. The traffic impact along Cedar Valley Road will be mind-numbing. If you live in this neighborhood, now would be a good time to sell. Contact the blog if you need an exceptionally gifted real estate agent. We would be happy to recommend one.
Without a doubt, a man of Reg's exceptional wisdom, would know when to get out of Dodge (and I don't mean the vehicle made by Chrysler). If the District is so committed to manufacturing a permanent legacy for "Nicky Suspenders" without regard for the more practical issue of minimizing the expense to taxpayers, who is Reg to throw himself under the organizational bus.
A wise man knows when to leave, even if he has no place to go.
Editorial: The new Planning and Property Management Clericalist should print this entry for the insight it provides.
Public Hearing: Street Vacations: Edmonds School District
Mayor Gough opened the public hearing. He discussed the purpose, order of speaking and procedures of the hearing. He mentioned that prior to the Question and Answer process, an Executive Session would be held to receive the advice of legal counsel concerning one matter regarding this item.
He noted that they had received a communication from the Edmonds School District dated April 6, 2007 regarding Edmonds School District Street Vacation Request/204th Street SW and associated areas. This was a two-page letter signed by Marla S. Miller, Assistant Superintendent. It was noted that the letter included an attached diagram of parcels in the area associated with the rights of way that are being identified by staff. This letter was included officially in the record.
Staff Presentation:
Public Works Development Services Supervisor Arnold Kay reviewed this matter. He reviewed the history of the area of this proposed street vacation and future use of the proposed street vacations. He stated that after review, staff had concluded that street vacations would not impact current or future traffic plans. He then discussed the five ordinances under consideration and noted that Public Works was recommending vacation of the streets as proposed and approval of the ordinances.
Comment from the School District:
Edward Peters, Capital Projects Director, Edmonds School District, 20420 SW 68th Avenue, Lynnwood, spoke representing Marla Miller who was unable to attend. He stated that he concurred with the information that was presented and offered to answer any questions. He summarized the key points of the recent letter from the school district. The eastern portion of 204th was designated some time ago as a Natural Growth Protected Area (NGPA) and is fenced off. The land is not allowed to be developed or even touched. The school district feels that it is appropriate that the valuation of that land takes that into consideration, as discussed previously by Mr. Kay and as reflected by the diagram and table distributed to Council at the meeting.
I wonder if the eastern portion of 204th, to which Mr. Peters refers, (that is fenced off and not allowed to be developed) was valued at a lower rate than the remainder of the District's $5.6 million site.
The following letter appeared in the Edmonds Beacon.
Bus barn relocation
Editor:We at the Edmonds School District understand a news report aired Monday evening questioning the purchase price the school district paid for the property where our bus transportation and maintenance services will be relocated.You may recall that two weeks ago, we sent all staff and parents of our district a letter explaining the facts about this purchase. This letter is available to read on the district’s website at www.edmonds.wednet.edu. Please share it with other community members who may have questions.
If anyone wishes to ask questions specifically about the purchase, please contact Marla Miller by calling (425) 431-7036 or by email at millerm@edmonds.wednet.edu.
Laurie Parker
Edmonds School District
It would stand to reason that if something was entirely false, there would be no reason to run an ad indicating as much. If someone suggested that the Superintendent was actually a Martian, there wouldn't be a news release refuting this claim. If someone suggested that the ESC is made of green cheese, there wouldn't be a news release refuting this claim.
Why would the Edmonds School District spend so much time and energy denying something that is true for no other reason than to divert attention away from the people giving public money to their friends.
For those of you who quickly side with the District, regardless of the many crimes they commit against taxpayers, your lack of critical thought is shockingly obvious. Try to follow along, if you can.
There was a pivotal meeting at Reid Middleton in Everett where it was decided by everyone in the room that the 11.3 acre site (now known as the District Support Center) is contaminated and should not be purchased. In the room that day was one lawyer, one property appraiser, one environmental consultant, one civil engineer, one licensed real estate agent, one district director with a Masters degree in Public Administration and, despite her claims to the contrary, Marla Miller.
Marla claims that she has never been to Reid Middleton's office. If that was true, how would her information be more reliable than the summary provided by a person who was actually in the room? Why would Marla allow a meeting of that caliber to take place, regarding such an important topic, without being in the room? I am not saying she was qualified to be in the room, but by virtue of her position, it would be professionally responsible to be there.
If my meeting summary was false, how would it violate attorney-client privilege? Even Marla's lawyers have confirmed that the meeting happened and that my summary of that meeting was true enough to suggest that I violated attorney-client privilege.
However, I am still a little puzzled as to how Marla's lawyers could think that I violated attorney-client privilege. I was not the attorney or the client. I was a District taxpayer that also happened to serve a clerical function with the District (according to Nick and Marla's rebuttal to my initial letter in the Edmonds Beacon in March of 2007).
That meeting at Reid Middleton resulted in a unanimous conclusion - the property is contaminated and should not be purchased for anything greater than $3,300,000.00.
Why can't Nick and Marla just admit that they were taken for a ride? Raskin knew the District was drooling over his contaminated piece of dirt and he is a seasoned property developer. He bought the site in 2001 for just over $1,000,000.00 and sold it less than four years later for $5,600,000.00.
The moral to this story: A fool and her money are soon parted, especially if it isn't her money that's departing.
Any appraiser will tell you finding the true market value of a piece of property is part art, part science. Human beings do the work. They have to inject their personal opinions and analysis into the ultimate finding. But when we came upon a transaction where the Edmonds School District paid $2,300,000--70% more-- for a piece of land than their own appraiser said it was worth in the market place, it seemed as though more science and less art needed to come into play.We found that when 2 appraisals are that far off, a government body entrusted with public funds will typically hire an appraisal review, or insist on a 3rd independent appraisal. What was the property worth, exactly?
Back to the art and science of it all. What is clear is the stewards of taxpayer dollars in this case did not follow standard practice to make sure they were getting it right.
Mark Zandberg said:
An incredibly alarming story. Thank you for your effort in bringing it to our attention.
February 11, 2008 5:50 PM
[This entry was actually written by me.]
David said:
The story portrays the Edmonds School District as ignorant of property appraisals and land value. [The District had qualified staff at the time and access to great consultants and lawyers, Marla just decided to over-rule everyone else's position.] The viewer is left with the impression that district officials were careless about the expenditure of taxpayer funds. Nothing could be further from the truth. [Your truth, I suspect] The core real estate transaction was the negotiation for the purchase of a piece of property well publicized as desired by the school district. Public/government entities must reveal the plans they have for projects creating a challenging marketplace negotiating land purchases. [Read board policies. There are plenty of ways to negotiate from a position of strength, like the fact that no one else was waiting to buy this property] The story fails to reveal the core issue of this transaction. The district wanted to centralize maintenance, transportation and administration in one location. The seller knew that, and kept pressure on the district to pay a higher price. [No, the seller kept pressure on Marla, once she was separated from the herd. Ask for copies of all communication between Raskin and Miller and you will see.] Simple exploration of surrounding area (core downtown Lynnwood) would have revealed shocking prices for the sale of property that connects to the redevelopment of Lynnwood. [Like the long line of developers seeking to buy the Old ESC site or ground lease the current bus barn. You need to keep up with a story before you manufacture supporting evidence.] So let me get this straight, KING TV says the district paid too much. [They actually said the District "may have overpaid millions". Reading without retention is unfortunate.] So, would KING TV beat on the school district if the district had used emminent domain to force the sale of the property at a lesser value? I think KING TV is simply trying to make a story where there is no story. [I suspect King 5 knows a scam when they see one. They have been winning awards long before Marla started handing out district money to friends and associates.] Reality in real estate is if you want something, you pay! [Duh, but if you are the only one in the store and the item is damaged, you may have more bargaining power if you actually use it.]
February 11, 2008 5:56 PM
David said:
How fitting that Mr. Zandberg would be first to comment on the story. [I may have known it was coming.] His reputation in this subject area is WELL KNOWN! [You don't know anything about me, but thank you for your interest.] Now it makes sense how KING TV got duped into running the story. You would think a major local new station would have the saavy to check out the source of idiotic observations! [Idiotic or not, King 5 investigated the issue for six months and arrived at their own conclusions. Their work clearly had an effect on you.]
February 11, 2008 5:59 PM
Charles Henry said:
Why in the world would the largest school district in Snohomish County let an unqualified and inexperienced person like Marla Miller negotiate a land deal? She has wasted millions of dollars that could have been used to benefit students. What else is going on at Edmonds School District?
See esd15.org for highlights.
February 11, 2008 6:00 PM
[I did not write this entry, but I think I know who may have.]
gary noble said:
Well, David, at least he published his full name. What have you got to hide? Where do your loyalties lie?
February 11, 2008 6:04 PM
[I suspect Gary Noble did not write this. He would not defend the path of taxpayer advocacy.]
mark zandberg said:
Sounded to me like King 5 did their homework. David's arguments make no sense. It is probably less than two miles from the current adminstration site to transportation and maintenance. Is a $2.8 million overpayment justified for "centralization"?
The real story is where are Raskin's (the seller's) ethics? He took advantage of a poor, old, school district with administrators who should have hired experts. But wait, they did, and ignored their experts, because Raskin wouldn't lead them astray! Shame on him and the school board. I'm voting no in the election.
February 11, 2008 6:13 PM
[I did not write this entry.]
David Hill said:
Amazing - simply amazing. And people do not believe in conspiracy theories. Look at all the wonderful support for this story. [Lemmings, or perhaps just a band of Marla's friends waiting for their turn at the trough.] Centralization is bad because it only eliminates two miles? [Not sure where this came from, but if you are already in the center, any adjustment toward centralization may not take you far. The growth is in the northeast quadrant and that two miles is in the wrong direction.] Gary Noble is asking for my last name? I happened to KNOW Gary Noble, [most people at the trough do] and posting in his name making comments he would not make, are clear evidence of the malformed minds that are involved here. Gary Noble has been one of the targets of these idiots. [So, you can't read board policy either? How have you managed to construct these sentences on your own?] This whole thing is a contrived game of malcontents who have contributed NOTHING of value to the Students in the Edmonds School District! [Perhaps our collective contribution is not feasting at Marla's trough. Read about the Piano Scam.]
February 11, 2008 6:41 PM
James said:
Has anyone noticed how small the property space is?
February 11, 2008 7:03 PM
[Do you mean before or after the District distorted the property boundaries for their $6,000 parent letter?]
charlas said:
What about the people that lost there jobs over this mess? Nick & Marla should loose their jobs over this! How can we trust anyone in the district or board members! What about the cover up at the warehouse, porn & leave reports. Mr Penney should loose his job to!
February 11, 2008 7:04 PM
[I believe Marla and her friends decide when people have to leave.]
ledog3 said:
Now, THIS is the kind of investigative journalism that KING should spend money on. Not stupid idiotic stuff about cars running red lights. I know that news media is traditionally scared of looking too deep into state, local governments and related administrative "irregularities" because they don't want the door slammed shut on them when its interview time about some mundane topic like a pothole not getting fixed on I-5. They want their calls returned. Show some guts you guys. Believe me, advertisers might like the idea of local media bravado with intelligence instead of Greg Forman standing in front of a wind storm at Ocean Shores.
February 11, 2008 7:33 PM
[There are other networks. Of course, I have my favorite.]
lars lindgren said:
Thank You Marla Miller for making children the lowest priority. Make sure the winery in Woodinville gets all the bells and whistles. You directly and negatively impacted my family. Please resign effective yesterday. We need a new beginning.
February 11, 2008 7:50 PM
[I did not write this entry.]
david hill said:
Sorry David, Gary Noble is not your friend. Are you the aromatherapy guy?
February 11, 2008 8:16 PM
[I did not write this entry.]
Editorial: These are just the first 12 comments. There were at least 21 before the site was taken down. Running a blog is not an easy thing. At esd15.org, we get a significant amount of material that we cannot post.
The Herald published a very interesting article this morning about the contaminated site the Everett School District bought in 1986. Tainted soil costly for Everett district.
