Vital to move forward

on tsunami preparedness

Owning a home in Ocean Shores is one of the greatest joys I have had, being able to walk the beach, boat on the canal, be involved in our community. Living here does bring some risks as we live on the ocean and Erosion, High Winds, Earthquakes, and Tsunami’s are things which we must prepare for.

Our City has a responsibility to provide the vision for the Safety and Welfare of our Citizens. Developing a plan to deal with a Tsunami and taking an approach of it may never happen and let’s not do anything is not responsible. There have been numerous open meeting presented by experts in their field on Earthquakes, and Tsunami’s all have been well attended, questions answered and the general feeling I got was the audience would like the city to get to work.

There is a vision and a solution, although with any major project there are those who say it’s a waste, have other priorities or get caught up with so much in the details the project never gets to the planning process. We are not the first to move forward on Vertical Evacuation as two other cities have provided us a roadmap for funding and building.

The City has been responsible for paying down debt, fixing our roads, dealing with erosion. Planning for a Tsunami is essential as we are a city without high ground and to quickly evacuate most likely will not be possible. Ocean Shores currently does have the financial ability without increasing taxes to make Vertical Evacuation happen. It is vital for us to move forward in seeking Grants to make this possible. The approach lets not do anything and hope nothing happens is not the approach our government should take.

Jon Martin

(Martin is an Ocean Shores City Council member)

Council meetings and

respectful discussion

As I listened to the November 26, 2018 Ocean Shores City Council meeting, I became upset for several reasons. My first issue was the comments made by several council members. Being offended and/or verbally attacking other council members is inappropriate and has nothing to do with performing council responsibilities. Council members are expected to represent the citizens and keep their personal agendas outside the council meeting.

Is misstating information about the community appropriate? NO! Council members have a responsibility to make sure their information is accurate before sharing it in a public forum. By the same token, accusing a council member of stating falsehoods or publicly chastising a colleague for their comments is just as inappropriate. Council meetings should be a place for respectful discussion and disagreements, especially when it includes an important decision such as discussion of the city’s budget. It is not a place to air grievances, discuss personal business or other professional interests.

During my reading of the Washington State Mayor and Council Member Handbook I came across a great piece of advice from a city council member in another community “If we can’t sit up here and argue and then go out with the same people and have a cup of coffee, then we have no business being on the council.” I hope going forward that council members take this advice and participate in meetings with cordiality and respect.

Joann Lacy

‘Display of animus’

over budget discussion

I have just returned home from attending tonight’s (Nov. 26) City Council meeting for the city of Ocean Shores. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen such a disgusting attack by a relatively new councilor on another member of the council. During discussion of the 2019/2020 budget, councilor Susan Conniry presented a very compelling argument urging her fellow councilors to do their “due diligence” to control spending, recognize the difference between the “wants” and “needs,” and stay within the projected income of the city. Several of the other councilors seemed to think this suggestion that they actually do their jobs was a personal criticism. However, Jeff Daniel, who was recently appointed to fill a council vacancy, took it one step further. During “Good of the Order” he viciously attacked Susan for her remarks, even to go as far as to say that her remarks were only made as a bid to campaign for mayor! I would suggest to Mr. Daniel that if he had a problem with Ms. Conniry’s suggestions for doing their jobs, he might want to talk to her directly instead of verbally attacking her in an open meeting. This disgusting display of animus has no place in our town.

Maggie Ely