Factual inaccuracies at 34th Legislative District Democrat website re:Constantine recall

10:30 PM, Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Open letter to (including to be posted to my blog: http://www.yousoufian.blogspot.com/ ):

Ivan Weiss, Chair, 34th District Democrats, and
Webmaster, 34th District Democrats

Cc's: various media (including Jennifer Langston, whose P-I article you posted at your website, and Vashon Beachcomber and LOOP newspapers)

Item: Comments from the "recall petitioner" in the recent attempt to recall Dow Constantine from office.

Subject: Three significant factual inaccuracies in your March 6, 2005 post at your website re: Dow Constantine recall (see link to the text at your site and the full text pasted below). These concern your statements: #1. That the recall is on appeal; #2. That Constantine "faces mounting legal bills to defend himself ... and needs (your) financial support."; and #3. That the recall was frivolous. Not one of those statements is true, ever was, or could have been as of the date of your posting, if not weeks before.

To: Ivan Weiss, Chair of the 34th District Democrats, and,
the Webmaster for 34th District Democrats website,

Dear Ivan and whoever/whatever is the name of the webmaster (your name is not indicated at your website),

I recently became aware of a March 6, 2005 posting at your website containing significant inaccuracies regarding a matter with which I am familiar.

I am calling those inaccuracies to your attention so that you can correct them at your earliest possible opportunity. I hope you will agree that, although we may not agree on the underlying issue, it's important to present the facts accurately.

The posting relates to the recent attempted recall of King County Council District 8 Councilmember Dow Constantine.

You may recognize my name as having been the petitioner in that matter.

I offer the following facts by way of background before I make my several points:

The recall petition was the subject of a hearing on February 11, 2005. Weeks earlier, on January 24, 2005, the King County Council passed a motion, without any opportunity for public comment, authorizing $50,000 of public money for Constantine's legal defense costs - an amount more than ample to cover a King County Superior Court proceeding and including even an appeal to the Washington State Supreme Court. The judge at the February 11, 2005 hearing ruled that the petition did not meet the "factual and legal sufficiency" threshold test. He also specifically did not make any finding that the recall was frivolous or brought in bad faith. In fact, when those words were put before him (in Constantine's proposed order), they were deleted. Finally, any appeal that I might have made of that decision had to be filed within 15 days, pursuant to the applicable statute. That worked out to a February 26 deadline. I did not appeal.

With the above in mind, I'd like to point out the three inaccuracies in your March 6, 2005 posting, which I ask that you correct ASAP.

#1. It is incorrect to say the recall has been appealed (which would have been to the Washington state Supreme Court). It was never appealed, and the 15 day appeal period deadline (per RCW 29A.56.270) was February 26 - a week before your post - by which time it irrevocably could never have been appealed. Your website's statement that it had been appealed was a surprise to me!

#2. You say Constantine needs to raise funds because he "faces mounting legal bills to defend himself ... and needs (your) financial support." This is patently incorrect. As noted in Constantine's own letter, dated February 15, 2005, which you provide a link to from your website, his legal bills were covered by the King County Council's action on January 24. Furthermore, as of March 6, 2005, the date of your posting, the recall had been a dead issue for at least a week.

#3. It is incorrect to say the recall was frivolous. In fact, the judge made no such finding, and he had the opportunity to do so. Language in the proposed order from Constantine, indicating a finding that the recall was frivolous and brought in bad faith, was specifically crossed out. Further, the crossed out language was initialed by Constantine's lawyer and the King County prosecuting attorney, in the version of the order signed by the judge. In a later proceeding, there was further lack of any finding by the judge that the recall was frivolous, brought in bad faith, or brought for improper motive, despite Constantine's efforts to get the judge to rule in that direction. The statement that the recall was frivolous is simply contradicted by the facts. The recall did not meet the high threshold test for "legal and factual sufficiency", but that's far from being frivolous, and the judge effectively said so.

I must say I find it curious that you posted something to your website at March 6, 2005 that contains such obvious inaccuracies, all of which would have been known to Dow Constantine, who is a lawyer himself.

I also find it odd that, at March 6, 2005 you are posting Constantine's February 15 letter asking for money to defend against a recall that, by March 6, was no longer even an issue.

As I stated at the outset, I suspect we won't agree on the underlying issue of the recall, but I don't understand why you would be asking your members for contributions to a campaign that lost any reason for existence by February 26, 2005 at the latest.

I further don't understand why this post has survived so long past March 6. Hasn't anyone else noticed by now and pointed out the calendar, and that the recall effort is long over? Is Constantine collecting contributions for a campaign he had no reason to spend anything on once February 26 had passed?

Or was someone just late posting that item, and has since forgotten about it and simply neglected to take it off your website?

By the way, and fyi, I was a Democrat Precinct Committee Officer in Seattle's central area prior to moving to Vashon. During the 1960's civil rights era I was a volunteer worker in Democrat sponsored voter registration drives in Newark, New Jersey before the famous riots in the late 1960's. I was a 10 year long gubernatorial appointee of (Democrat) Governor Booth Gardner in the second half of the 80's and first half of the 90's. I am on a first name, facial recognition basis with many Democrats right up to the highest levels of state government, including Phil Talmadge, Frank Chopp, Brian Sonntag, etc. I mention these things considering the characterizations of me in Constantine's February 15 letter as a "right winger" who is "just plain nuts" and "bullying" him. If you ever saw all 5' 7", 150 pounds of me I honestly don't think that description would be anything but laughable (not at my age, and not with my receding hairline)! A jazz and classical violin playing bully at that. As for being a "right winger", I would say it is "just plain nuts" to think that. Anyone who knows me at all is aware I am way too liberal to fit that description.

Armen Yousoufian

Here's what is at your 34th District Democratic Party's website:

See Dow Constantine's February 15, 2005 letter by going to the link:
http://www.34dems.org/action.htm
and clicking on "click here for a document", or, go directly to that letter by going to: http://www.34dems.org/Docs2005/CAPR.pdf "

Below is the link to the text I pasted below:

http://www.34dems.org/action.htm

This is the text of your March 6, 2005 post:

Index to Action Agenda:
Citizens Against Phony Recalls - posted Mar 6, 2005

Citizens Against Phony RecallsSupport Dow Constantine's Defense
Our King County Councilmember, Dow Constantine, voted with the majority of the Council to adopt the critical-areas ordinance required under the State's Growth Management Act. Now he faces a recall petition and frivolous lawsuit. While the recall effort has been thrown out in King County Superior Court, it is being appealed. Councilmember Constantine faces mounting legal bills to defend himself against this effort and needs our financial support. Click here for a document more completely explaining the situation (262kb PDF file), click here for contribution form, or simply send your contribution to "Citizens Against Phony Recalls", PO Box 16285, Seattle 98116-0285.


As of March 6, 2005, the recall of Dow Constantine had NOT been appealed to the Supreme Court and the 15 day appeal period following the February 11, 1005 court hearing had passed. See the RCW below for reference to the 15 day appeal period.

RCW 29A.56.270Enforcement provisions -- Mandamus -- Appellate review.
The superior court of the county in which the officer subject to recall resides has original jurisdiction to compel the performance of any act required of any public officer or to prevent the performance by any such officer of any act in relation to the recall not in compliance with law. The supreme court has like original jurisdiction in relation to state officers and revisory jurisdiction over the decisions of the superior courts. Any proceeding to compel or prevent the performance of any such act shall be begun within ten days from the time the cause of complaint arises, and shall be considered an emergency matter of public concern and take precedence over other cases, and be speedily heard and determined. Appellate review of a decision of any superior court shall be begun and perfected within fifteen days after its decision in a recall election case and shall be considered an emergency matter of public concern by the supreme court, and heard and determined within thirty days after the decision of the superior court.