In the Hall

1. In response to a related Slog post, Trevor Griffey wrote:

   I recently met Chris because he is one of only a handful of people in the city who bother to show up to meetings about open government. These meetings have to my knowledge received no press attention whatsoever.

   During these meetings, Chris played an important watchdog role. The Council has exempted itself from part of the state’s public disclosure laws while passing transparency guidelines that are full of loopholes. The open government committee solicited community organization input into this process, but then promptly dismissed almost all of the organizations’ suggestions. At the last meeting, after recently passing legislation that rejected the possibility of having a single web page to coordinate public disclosure requests, the open government committee had someone from the City of Bellevue give a 40 minute presentation on how they’ve successfully made this transition. Acting as if they had never considered the proposal before, the committee vowed to maybe look into it… in a year. After that, the Council spent almost 40 minutes mischaracterizing Leman’s proposals for increasing transparency so they could casually dismiss them as absurd. When he got up to complain during the “public comment” period, he was treated as a nuisance, and I could tell that the frustration he exhibited at how he was being treated was being used by Councilmembers as evidence that he is unreasonable.

   None of this justifies what Leman may or may not have done at SDOT (would like to get his side first– though obviously the accusations sound bad). But I do think that a lot of people in government use character assassination as a technique to dismiss their critics, especially when their critics are everyday citizens and not people with wealth or power. Journalists should thus be cautious about adopting a similar tone and dismissing everyday people’s criticism of government because of their deportment.

   Though obviously, if someone’s persistent criticism crosses over into harassment, that’s a different matter. I would be sad if that’s what’s happened here

   Video of the May 1, 2009, meeting of Seattle City Council’s Open Government Committee is available on the Seattle Channel’s Open Government Committee page.

2. Frankly, many community activists get shrill at times from the shear frustration of beating our heads against the proverbial brick walls. But this doesn’t mean our messages aren’t valid and legitimate.

   I hope Chris’ unfortunate incident doesn’t serve as justification for some elected officials to continue to be dismissive of community activists. It’s already hard enough to hold them accountability to the voters of Seattle.

3. Mr. Leman needs to entirely remove himself from his self-appointed crusades and try a different line of work. His growing outbursts of frustrated violence are not somehow mitigated by his civic value — if he really has any.

4. I deal with citizens all day in my city job. I’d say that 90% of them are great, 9% of them are understandably angry but reasonable, but there is that 1% that can really be a pain in the ass or even borderline dangerous.

   Many times, the trouble with these folks is that they see their point, but no other points. Just today, I was talking with a guy who wanted me to remove a streetlight because it shined in his house. I pointed out to him that many people in his area were concerned about pedestrian safety, and wanted more lighting, but he was of the opinion that pedestrians were safer in the dark.

5. Here’s a six minute clip of Mr. Leman speaking to the Seattle City Council’s Special Committee on Open Government at their May 1, 2009, meeting. He doesn’t appear to me to be “agitated” as Erica’s un-named sources say he has become.

   Can someone please cite a specific example (date and approximate time, please) of his reportedly inappropriate behavior at a City Council meeting so we can watch the video? These are all available on the Web. Examples should not be difficult to find if the situation is what it has been reported to be.

6. I’ve been on the winning and loosing side of issues as a citizen activist, and it is no fun to loose. However, that doesn’t give people like Chris Lehman the right to threaten violence or manhandle individuals who are simply doing their jobs. Perhaps Chris and others who think his aggressive tactics are acceptable should remember that old saying, “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”

7. @6: Txgrrl, can you provide an example of these “aggressive tactics” besides that which was described in this column? If, as many people keep asserting, this troublesome behavior is displayed often in City Council meetings, it should be a simple matter to go to the video archives and see it for ourselves. I’m happy to help with the leg work; just give me a date and time and I’ll go find the video on seattlechannel.org. So far, I have a sample size of one, and Mr. Leman’s behavior seems perfectly appropriate there. Do you disagree?

8. I had the opportunity to work closely with this guy during a three year city funded open space project in Eastlake. He is the quintessential community gadfly. One of many self-proclaimed “community activists” in our town who believe their own sense of self importance grants them special standing to bully and run roughshod over city employees and members of the community. With this guy, it’s his way or the highway – good god, don’t get him started on I-5 plowing through Eastlake, or bike baths in Eastlake, or green space in Eastlake…he has an ax to grind and doesn’t care who he insults or bullies or verbally assaults in the process. Now, evidently he doesn’t care who he physically assaults in the process too.

   Like it or not, this bully – and yes, this guy is nothing but a community bully – crossed the line when he assaulted this woman and it is now time for him to accept responsibility for his actions.

9. I had the opportunity to work closely with this guy during a three year city project in Eastlake. He is the quintessential community gadfly. One of many self-proclaimed “community activists” in this town who believe their own sense of self importance grants them special standing to bully and run roughshod over city employees and members of the community. With this guy, it’s his way or the highway – good god, don’t get him started on I-5 plowing through Eastlake or bike baths in Eastlake, or green space in Eastlake, he has an ax to grind and doesn’t care who he insults or bullies or verbally assaults in the process. Now, evidently he doesn’t care who he physically assaults in the process too.

   Like it or not, this bully – and yes, this guy is nothing but a community bully – crossed the line when he assaulted this woman and now it is time for him to finally accept responsibility for his actions.

10. @8: Angus, could you explain the difference between “your way” and “Mr. Leman’s way” regarding I-5 plowing through Eastlake, bike baths in Eastlake, and green space in Eastlake? I’m curious if your opinions on those issues differ from Mr. Leman’s, or if he simply demonstrates more conviction than you think he should.

11. Phil, shut up. You’ve already admitted that you don’t know Chris Leman personally, so why are you questioning people’s personal impressions of the guy? Maybe you need to take your puppy-dog enthusiasm and apply it to a new cause.

12. @11: J.R., I’ll try to answer your questions despite the rude and dismissive tone with which you posed them.

    You practically answered the first yourself. I’m asking about people’s personal impressions of him because I don’t know him personally. I’m very curious if people denounce him A) because he’s actually acting inappropriately, or B) because he expresses opposing viewpoints without a sufficient level of sugar-coating with happy talk, shoulder rubs, or whatever else helps people focus on content instead of presentation. Plenty of people are lashing out but few are explaining themselves.

    If I had the time to apply my “puppy-dog enthusiasm” to other causes, I’d likely get out and support many of the same positions that Mr. Leman writes and speaks about. But I don’t have that time, and so I feel fortunate to have Mr. Leman expressing those positions, and I am concerned about the possibility of him being silenced, regardless of the reason for that silencing.

    One person, Trevor Griffey, wrote that Mr. Leman played an important role in the Special Committee on Open Government meetings and made no reference to any inappropriate behavior at that meeting. I found the video, watched it, and posted the relevant portion for others to see without having to wade through the other two hours of video. At that meeting, 20 minutes were alloted to public comment. Only two people requested the opportunity to speak. Each overran the two-minute-per-speaker limit, speaking for eight (Griffey) and six (Leman) minutes, then stopped when asked to do so by committee members.

    Aside from the May 8 police report and Barb Wilson’s account, all we have on the “Leman is an angry powder keg” side are vague and anonymous blog comments and Erica’s un-named sources.

    Someone is bound to make enemies when he 1) stands up for the good of the majority in the face of pressure to make allowances to increase the profits of a powerful minority (by weakening noise ordinances, allowing businesses priority on sidewalks to the detriment of pedestrians, etc.), 2) frequently calls city offices to request public information that city staff have not made available to the public, and 3) pressures our government to operate without the convenience of keeping their actions hidden from us.

    I suggest we figure out if these anonymous comments are coming from people who stand to benefit from suppressing Mr. Leman’s message before we trust that they are accurate. Fortunately, most of the accusations involve behavior at events that are captured on camera and archived on seattlechannel.org, so if there truly have been multiple examples of Mr Leman exhibiting inappropriate behavior at City meetings, we can see for ourselves.

    J.R., would you care to substantiate any of these claims instead of bullying someone who is, because of the aforementioned likelihood of skewed presentation of the situation, simply withholding judgment until more information is available?

13. Phil, What you seem to be missing here is that Mr.Leman has used physical intimidation and aggression when he became agitated. Maybe he did not do it on camera but that does not mean it is not true. This behavior should not be tolerated even when people have disagreements over policies and process. It is unacceptable. Period.

14. @13: I’m not missing that part, I’ve just only heard one side of it and am withholding judgment until there is more information. Other people — all anonymous except for Barb Wilson — keep saying there has been a pattern of increasingly-inappropriate behavior on Mr. Leman’s part that leads them to believe that the alleged incident on May 8 should not be surprising. It’s this past pattern that I’d like to see. I’m not comfortable with all the anonymous character assassination that is flying around here. I see no reason not to expect that it comes from people who simply disagree with Mr. Leman and those who stand to profit from silencing him.

    I completely agree that the behavior described in the police report should not be tolerated. Because I’ve only heard one side, filtered through both a police report and a newspaper reporter who characterizes this neighborhood activist as a nuisance, and because I do not personally know either party, I have no reason to take the information that has been presented about the May 8 incident as fact.

15. I’ve known Mr. Leman for many years. He has very clear ideas of what he wants — in many cases, they’re the same things that other activists are trying to achieve, although he typically takes extreme positions that go beyond what anyone else believes is feasible or even desirable. What Mr. Leman lacks is any concept of tact, compromise and how to work with others. I have never been happy to have Mr. Leman on my side of an issue, as his presentation and manner invariably reduce the chances that our side will prevail.

16. Hey Phil: Mr. Leman’s effectiveness is mostly as a volunteer bully. Unfortunately for his causes, his divisive, incessant, uncompromising and undermining behavior excludes others from assuming leadership. I know him. The formal assault charges are only the tip of this iceberg. You defend the indefensible and accuse from afar those who remain anonomous to avoid the non-physical assaults that are the hallmark of Mr. Leman’s warped interpretation of citizen activism.

17. @16: If you take my statements here to be a defense of anything besides the viewpoints he has expressed on his e-mail distribution list and presumably stated at various public meetings, then we’ve miscommunicated, as this is not what I intended.

18. Phil, I was there for the entire meeting you have that clip from. Afterward I asked Richard McIver about Chris. The Councilmember said that “Chris was exceptionally calm this time around. Usually we have to physically drag him out. Those are the times when he’s not on his meds. And usually his problems are directed at me, rather than the whole body.”

    It should also be noted that he was speaking out on his own issues during an unrelated discussion. The instant he got up to the front every Councilmember looked uncomfortable, and the security guard had moved up front to the side ready to pounce on Chris if he did anything. The council understood he can be a volatile person and they were ready to act in a public setting, but when he confronts individual staff demanding action and lashing out regardless of the results he has crossed the line from activism to assault.

19. Major correction to my previous comment. Chris was not to whom McIver was referring. I was indeed in this meeting on Open Government, but got it mixed up with a meeting just the day before on the Housing Levy. The last person to speak during the public comment section on the Housing Levy was Michael Fuller.

    None of Councilmember McIver’s quotes are in regard to Chris Leman.

    The quotes and description were in regards to Mr. Fuller from the previous day.

    I’m terribly sorry for the error.

20. being in public office in seattle over the past 25+ years has included one thing as sure as death and taxes: learn how to deal with chris lehman. pain in the butt? yes. confrontational? yes. cares about what is happening? YES. consistent and persistent? YES. like almost all those who fall into the seattle ‘neighborhood activist’ mold, chris can be overly negative. but when i was on the seattle design commission i found that about half the time he was spot on in his critiques. the rest of the time we had to say no chris, you might feel passionate, but we disagree. sometimes i thought he might burst a blood vessel, but i never thought he’d turn to physical violence. i am sorry to hear that this happened and hope that it gets resolved in a good way. seattle would not be as rich a place without chis and his sweaty arrivals on his bike at public meetings.

21. maybe chris needs psychological help if he is showing changed behavior as the story says. i think that his long long record in public forums would show that intimidation is not his style. absolutely he is verbally confrontational and passionate and that is absolutely not part of the seattle way, but that is not intimidation and he certainly does not have a record of physical threats.

22. As a member of the Eastlake community for almost forty years…..I’m curious….what has Chris accomplished for this community? It seems like his approach has been countyer productive at best.

    I know members of other Seattle community councils who do not care much for the guy or his approach. I do not know the guy at all, but as a bystander, I think it is time for new leadership in Eastlake.

23. This is all very bad news for Eastlake. Some changes need to be made. I looked at Mr. Lemans resume and it looks like he has never held a real job-nothing but community activism listed. Is Eastlake paying it’s board members now in a way that it could be called a job. I am curious about what his Phd is in. Weldon Robison, Eastlake Community Council board member 1971-72.

24. I sent an inquiry about this to the ECC and Mr. Leman replied in a very cordial manner inviting me to personally discuss these reports with him on the telephone. That is difficult since I am living abroad and it is very expensive for me to call him. It was a very open gesture on his part. He said in his email, that the council is doing very well now and on track to beneficially serve the community. At this point, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I know from experience that one sets themself up for abuse from adversaries in this kind of service to the community. In the old days, our opposition had some choice descriptions for us like “The Lake Union Rat´s Nest” or “The Lake Union Commune.”

Comments are closed.