by In the epilogue to a contentious period in Des Moines politics, city council members agreed on March 11 to pay former Councilman Gary Petersen $58,000 to settle his long-standing claim against the city.
The settlement compensates Petersen for legal fees incurred in his successful defense against a conflict-of-interest allegation involving his business – Pete’s Towing, the company’s contract with the city for towing services, and his concurrent position on the council.
After more than years of litigation, the Washington Supreme Court held in 2006 that Petersen had no conflict of interest in owning Pete’s Towing while serving on the city council.
“I am glad the courts have finally vindicated me,” he told me following the Supreme Court decision. This “completely [discredits] the attacks on my honor and integrity.”
But his legal expenses from that case remained an unresolved issue until last week, when six council members voted to approve the settlement. Councilman Dave Kaplan, who was defeated by Petersen in the 2001 city election, voted “no.”
Shortly before Petersen’s first council meeting in 2002, then-City Manager Bob Olander and then-City Attorney Gary McLean told him that, as a councilman, he would have a conflict of interest as owner of Pete’s Towing.
Pete’s Towing provides towing and impound services for the Des Moines Police Department and other city agencies, which it has done for almost 50 years.
Then, not long after Petersen took office, a group of local citizens publicly demanded that he relinquish the Pete’s Towing contract with the city, or divest himself of any interest in the company, or that he resign from the council.
When Petersen declined to do any of these things, the citizens’ group filed a lawsuit seeking his removal from the city council.
At trial, King County Superior Court Judge Laura Gene Middaugh ruled against Petersen, finding him in violation of state conflict-of-interest laws governing local officials.
But instead of taking any action against him, Middaugh declared that both state law and case law were vague as they related to Petersen’s case. She encouraged him to appeal her decision.
Earlier in 2006, the Court of Appeals unanimously reversed Middaugh’s ruling and dismissed the case against Petersen.
The Supreme Court subsequently issued a mandate stating that it agreed with the findings of the appellate court.
“Gary’s willingness to persevere on behalf of himself and other business owners throughout Washington has resulted in significant and important new case law,” Scott Missall, Petersen’s attorney, said in a statement to me after the Supreme Court action.
“The court’s decision upholds the intent of [state law] to encourage business owners to run for elected office. It’s been a hard-fought battle, but worth it because justice prevailed in this case.”
A "Class C" Pete's Towing truck.
Commenting on the unanimous ruling, Petersen said at the time, “The court has once again recognized how hard I have worked to conduct myself honestly in everything that I have done for this city.
“The will of the voters who elected me has again been upheld. This decision underscores the fact that this lawsuit was nothing more than a political attempt to discredit my honor and integrity.”
In the continuing saga of STITA vs the Port of Seattle, on Monday (Feb. 22nd), the Washington state Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the cab company by granting a temporary injunction against the Port of Seattle’s planned contract with Yellow Cab/Puget Sound Dispatch.
This means the Port cannot sign the planned contract “until further order of the Court” (click here to download/read the order as a PDF file), which could happen in April.
STITA’s request to expedite the appeal was granted by Commissioner Mary Neel. The Commissioner’s order states that this case will be heard by a three-judge panel “toward the end of the April 2010 term,” meaning that this ongoing SeaTac soap opera is far from over.
Members of STITA, who filed the original lawsuit against the Port of Seattle on Jan. 29, were obviously pleased with the decision.
“We are thrilled that the court stopped the Port from proceeding with an illegal contract,” said Jesse Buttar, a STITA member and spokesperson. “We’ve only ever asked for a fair process and a legal contract and now we hope the Port has finally listened and will re-do its flawed bidding process.”
Here’s more info from STITA’s press release, issued late Monday afternoon:
STITA, a non-profit co-op with one of the greenest cab fleet in the country, was created in 1989 by the Port of Seattle to exclusively serve the airport and provide reliable service to airport users. Now, after an unfair proposal process, STITA and its approximately 450 members and drivers will essentially be put out of business. They have the airport contract through August 2010.
STITA’s lawsuit claims that the Port’s bidding process violated state law by requiring bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues to the Port. This revenue system violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform. Previously, the Port had charged a per-trip fee to taxis based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies.
Additionally, the lawsuit contends that the Port’s new concession fees violate the King County Code and takes away from the King County Council’s authority to set “just and reasonable” taxi meter rates.
Despite protests from STITA to the Port about these glaring problems with the process and the proposed contract, the Port has so far declined to re-do its flawed contract bid.
A second lawsuit against the Port and Yellow Cab by Farwest Taxi was filed on Feb. 12.
Read our previous coverage of this ongoing legal battle here.
The Seattle Times is reporting that Gino Turrella, a Des Moines man, has been convicted of 19 felony counts for threats he made against Boeing, Shell Oil and Chevron Oil.
Turrella was convicted Friday (Nov. 6th) in US District Court in Seattle after a jury deliberated about five hours following a four-day trial.
According to the Times, Turrella was convicted of:
- 2 counts of making interstate communications with threat to injure persons
- 7 counts of making threats by instrument of interstate commerce
- 1 count of possessing a firearm during threats of violence
- 9 counts of identity theft
He faces between 5-10 years in prison. His sentencing date is scheduled for Feb. 19th.
According to documents, Turrella made eight threats via email in May of 2008, posing as other people by using accounts he’d created himself. The threats included one to Boeing in which he claimed that he was going to bring a gun and go on a shooting rampage, as well as detonate himself as a suicide bomb.
When Turrella’s home was searched, police discovered over 100 firearms.
When you do a Google Search for Turrella, you’ll see that he was also quite active Commenting on various websites, oftentimes with fiery language.
Read the full story here.
Loading ...
