Saturday, August 09, 2008

Auditor dismisses whistleblower as disgruntled.

From: Miller, Marla (ESC)
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:05 PM
To: Hughes Val; Brossoit, Nick; Carter, Debby (ESC)
Subject: FW: [BULK] Questionable Property Decisions at
Importance: Low

Just got a call on this ... Val, your colleague is working on a letter telling Mark to cease and desist using the website. We may need to expedite that notification.


From: Miller, Marla (ESC)
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 6:42 AM
Sadie Armijo; Courtney Amonsen
FW: [BULK] Questionable Property Decisions at

Dear Sadie and Courtney,

I wanted to make you aware of a situation that is percolating here at the Edmonds School District. A disgruntled employee is using the Internet to cast wide allegations regarding district finances and the propriety of property transactions. He is mad at me for a personnel action.

I have issue the email message, below, to encourage people to go to the source regarding the audit review. I appreciate your work, and am sorry to have added to your load this spring. If you have any concerns or suggestions, please don't hesitate to let me know.

I will forward the e-mail that prompted my message, so you can see that as well. Nick asked that I send out a response to point people in the right direction.

Take care, and thanks again for your work in the district,


From: Miller, Marla (ESC)
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 6:43 AM
To: Sadie Armijo; Courtney Amonsen
Subject: FW: [BULK] Questionable Property Decisions at
Importance: Low

FYI, and as referenced in my last message.


From: Sadie Armijo
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 7:31 AM
To: 'Miller, Marla (ESC)'
Cc: Courtney Amonsen
Subject: RE: Questionable Property Decisions at


Thank you for forwarding this information in case our office gets calls on this issue. I am sorry to hear that a disgruntled employee is causing you so much trouble.
But I appreciate you forwarding this message. On his blog he mentioned our office. Since he mentioned us on his blog, I can tell you he did contact our office regarding the Old Woodway property sale, but as we have previously discussed we did not find any problems with the sale of that property. If you would like to discuss this in more detail, I would gladly discuss it over the phone with you. I can be reached today at 425-257-2137.

Again thank you for forwarding this information.

Sadie Armijo
Audit Manager, Team Everett
Washington State Auditor's Office
3501 Colby Avenue, Suite 100B
Everett, WA 98201-4794
(425) 257-2137

Blog: What sort of investigation is going to occur when the Audit Manager is referring to the whistleblower as "disgruntled" within months of receiving the formal complaint and prior to an objective review of facts.


Anonymous said...

Hasn't Marla & Company ever heard of Freedom Of Speech? Things are heating up! Mark, I am certain that you have "all your ducks in a row". Don't back down; you have lots of supporters!

Anonymous said...

I thought Marla said there were no "personnel ions". This is a great email displaying how narcissistic and evil she really is.

Anonymous said...

Yeah. If the auditor is accepting the biased terminology of the person at the center of the examination, it casts serious doubt as to the validity and/or seriousness of the proposed audit.

An auditor is a PUBLIC SERVANT; s/he is supposed to be unbiased. It is very hard to imagine that there was a serious look at the District when the auditor "chats up" officials of the District who may be responsible for improper acts. It is not for them to judge who is on which side (i.e., who is guilty) BEFORE an audit begins.

Name calling is prejudicial behavior; it shouldn't be practiced by anyone in the state auditor's office. said...

I must confess that I may have used a name or two in this blog.

District Lawyers: I am not suggesting that I have been using multiple names in commenting to blog entries. I am saying that I may have dropped a less-than-flattering label now and then. said...

Technically, the Auditor didn't call me "disgruntled". They merely affirmed the label in responding about my contact with them.

I suspect some may try to demonstrate by this email that Marla had no idea that I was reporting misdeeds to the Auditor. However, I had been communicating with the Audit Team since the number of questionable calls increased dramatically.

It happens to correspond with the arrival of Nick Brossoit. said...

Wait a minute. This email exchange seems to blow the whistleblower protection issue.

If a person makes a whistleblower complaint and then happens to mention the State Auditor on a blog site, their identity can be revealed?

I should take a closer look at what was said on the blog in those first few days. It was only up and running for a week before Sadie Armijo outed me.

Anonymous said...

So who is Sadie Armijo and what is her position? She clearly says to Marla, "sorry to hear that a disgruntled employee is causing you so much trouble" after Marla uses the phrase in her communication with Sadie A. If she works for the State Auditors Office, she is speaking for them. It is a very different thing to write an e-mail under the auspices of the SAO discussing/naming a "disgruntlerd employee" than it is to write a letter to the editor as a private citizen concerning district policy.

And, in the name of honesty (which we should all strive for), I occasionally make anonymous comments on the blog rather than sign them, because sometimes I just get lazy. I estimate that 80-90% of my comments are, however, signed. And, no, I do not write comments and sign Chris's name. We do edit each other's work, however.

Anonymous said...

Did you notice at the end of Marla's e-mail to Sadie; she said, " I owe you one"! Wonder what she meant? Another "favor"?

Anonymous said...

I think that may have been Mark's editorial comment. In the blue text in a later entry?