It seems that a man by the name of Keith Gormezano has requested the list of subscribers to the Mayor's newsletter. The list is available to anyone who asks for it but it seems as if Mr. Gormezano has requested it in the past and then has used the list to send unsolicited email. Nancy Craver of the Mayor's office stated, in the email, "Mr. Keith Gormezano requested this list in August of 2006 and subsequently used this list to send a personal email to all 2,300 subscribers. Although we are required to provide this list upon request, I wanted to inform you of the request as well as remind you of some options that you have to protect your personal information." Ms. Craver goes on to suggest blocking the known addresses used by Mr. Gormezano.
I naturally assumed that Mr. Gormezano would use the address to send out some type of politically minded solicitation. But after completing a google search on Mr. Gormezano I am not so sure. The initial hit was a link to his personal website. I spend a long time looking at the contents of the pages but my initial impression is that he quite the curmudgeon. Things I learned about him include:
- He is a self proclaimed Freelance Administrative Assistant.
- He was once a member of Mensa.
- He only donates money to causes where he gets something like a plaque or brick.
- He has a bizarre "cents" of humor.
- He spent a great deal of time in 1986 creating a fake company in order to be listed on numerous lists.
- He's used up 75% of his allotted 20,480 KB of space of his yahoo group site to post legal documents about a former employers financial disclosures.
It seems that Mr. Gormezano spends the bulk of his time bothering and harassing others so the thought of him sending me unsolicited email make me angry. However part of me (the part who can help but laugh at it all) can't wait to see what he has to say. I will keep you posted.
1 comment:
In regards to the alleged personal email that I supposedly sent to members of Mayor Nickels Newsletter, here is what I actually sent in opposition to the appointment of Sybil Bailey as the tenant representative to the Seattle Housing Authority Board of Commissioners. It was very political. Please give me equal time by mentioning it.
Dear First Name,
As one of the 2,323 subscribers to Mayor Greg Nickels email newsletter which I obtained through a public disclosure request, you probably think that if Sybil L. Bailey, the mayor's nominee as the tenant representative on the Seattle Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners gets appointed, it won't have an effect on your residence at recipient's street address in recipient's city.
You might want to rethink that position.
At the Seattle City Council Housing Committee meeting on August 1st which I attended, nearly a dozen SHA tenants said they didn't want Bailey, speaking for them on the board. That would be like a dozen union members saying they didn't want their union representing them.
John Fox pointed out that Ms. Bailey had opposed the seat that she is now seeking in testimony before the Senate in 1998 (see http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/1997-98/house/2450-2474/2459-s_sbr_022598.txt ). I find this ironic and a position of Chutzpah.
Rick Harrison pointed out how Ms. Bailey helped SHA management write a new SHA Quisling like rule last year that prohibited tenants from putting posters or decorations on the outside of their front doors. Can you imagine, Carl E, being told by your neighbors that you couldn't put holiday decorations or political signs supporting Greg on your property? Well, that was what the issue was about.
Last October, after Resident Action Council (RAC) members balked at the new rule (later suing SHA on free-speech grounds and winning in King County Superior Court), Bailey resigned from RAC on short notice. It makes me wonder what she will do when faced with a similar hot potato issue.
Another example offered was how Ms. Bailey between 2000 and 2003 put RAC on hiatus by refusing to call meetings, hardly the example of leadership for someone wanting to serve on the Board of Commissioners for a professionally run, tenant-oriented business.
One tenant, a former apartment and property manager and architectural firm executive said that she had no business or management experience to be on such a board (he checked with the state and city and couldn't find any evidence that she had run a construction firm with her husband that she testified that she had done.)
Others pointed out that the process in selecting applicants was flawed as out of the five members of the selection panel, only one represented SHA tenants and the rest were from the mayor's office even though the Seattle City Council makes the final decision.
Out of the 16 recruited applicants, only six were interviewed, a mere 37.5 %. There are no Hispanics currently on the Board and the Board is currently out of balance in terms of the number of men to women [2to5].) One Hispanic male executive with a real estate experience was never called in for an interview in spite of a long history of public service including being the Chair of a Seattle City Commission.
Ms. Bailey also rewrote a set of bylaws that stopped the Resident Action Council (RAC) from representing all tenants including the agency's garden, senior, and scattered site communities and other properties, all without residents voting on the change (see Real Change News, http://www.realchangenews.org/2006/2006_07_26/2006/2006_07_26/strongvo
ice.html !Strong Voice or Rubber Stamp?" July 26).
I also checked into the corporate status of the RAC. I discovered that it has not been legally incorporated which makes me wonder how the alleged new bylaws ever got ratified. It makes me wonder if she understands the importance of civil procedure and due process in a public forum.
When Council member Nick Licata asked if there had been a vote, Bailey snorted in reply that in essence, it didn't matter. "They weren't really represented anyway in the Resident Action Council," she said.
It makes me wonder first name, how Ms. Bailey would behave on the board. Would she ignore neighborhood input (the way the parks department did in respect to the new parking garage at the Woodland Park Zoo or concerts at Gasworks Park) because they are not represented on the Board? Would she vote to use the city or the agency's power of eminent domain to take single family homes in multifamily zoned neighborhoods in order to build more ugly, concrete, sterile SHA high rises in our neighborhoods? All for the sake of density. Would SHA Board meetings be open to the public and the decisions transparent? Would she favor building more low-income properties in areas that are currently saturated and over represented in terms of social services or perhaps you will wake up one morning and find a new land use sign from them?
Fortunately, no one seconded Councilmember McIver's motion to approve her. Committee Chair Tom Rasmussen deferred the vote to this Tuesday, Aug. 15th.
So first name, if you don't feel comfortable having an unqualified person be appointed to set policy and make important decisions for a business with FY 2007 budget of 350 million dollars, 6,443 housing units, over 24,500 customers, and 627 employees and make critical decisions that could make a difference on the increasing value of your housing, the quality and quantity of housing in our neighborhoods, and where more affordable housing gets built in Seattle, then I urge you to contact the following Councilmembers and urge them to vote "no" on Ms. Bailey's appointment by 8 a.m. Tuesday morning:
Tom Rasmussen, Housing Committee Chair Tom.Rasmussen@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8808
Sally J. Clark sally.clark@seattle.gov (206) 684-8802
Richard J. McIver Richard.mciver@seattle.gov (206) 684-8800
And a cc: to
Nick Licata, Council President nick.licata@seattle.gov (206) 684-8803,
Mayor Greg Nickels
http://www.cityofseattle.net/mayor/citizen_response.htm (206)
684-4000, and
Claudia Arana, Boards and Commissions Coordinator
claudia.arana@seattle.gov (206) 615-0958
Post a Comment