Letter to the Editor | Scrutiny of PenMet is warranted

The one-sided piece about PenMet’s  ‘successes’ should be read with skepticism.  Ms. Kingsbury, the current Board president seeking re-election in the fall, cannot be considered neutral. This is a thinly veiled campaign piece, also laying the groundwork for a future PenMet request for more tax money. As a park neighbor /constituent, my observations over several years show that PenMet operations leave much to be desired. Here is the REST of the story:

Community Recreation Center: This is a $32 million project that could have broken ground years ago but instead has been plagued by delays, cost overruns, and legal hurdles. Watch closely to see whether this project even pays for its own operations, how it is staffed/maintained, and the value that the community actually receives (and be aware we will also be paying for admission). Last spring the board authorized $600,000 to update the mini-golf course (originally $80,000 budgeted). $600,000 is roughly 6% of the current $10 million budget — equivalent to a household with a $100,000/year budget spending $6000 for a seasonal putting green?? This same group warned that if the 2023 levy lid lift failed, major cutbacks would be needed. Yet another example of PenMet’s imprudent spending and lack of transparency.

Legal Issues: Consistently, PenMet is embroiled in legal disputes, with ever-increasing legal bills (doubling the last four years). The Madrona mess is a good example. A recent writer said that we should give PenMet time to “get this under control”. The Madrona issues have been developing for years, predictable for anyone paying attention, particularly to PenMet as a directly involved party. How much time shall we give PenMet?? Their ‘fix’ seems to be an ethically/legally questionable claim of Eminent Domain, again with ongoing legal charges. If a public records request is filed to specify how the legal money is being spent, the entire invoice is redacted except for date and amount, claiming attorney/client privilege. To know which public employee is meeting with legal and the topic discussed has nothing to do with attorney privilege — by law only material that reveals ‘legal strategy’ can be hidden.

Fox Island: In 2021, PenMet made the questionable decision to evict in-residence park hosts, who opened/closed the parks along with other useful duties and monitoring, for the minimal cost of utilities. PenMet has never given a cogent reason for this decision but did cite ‘liability concerns’. Since host removal, PenMet staff has been paid to open/close 365 days a year, conservatively costing $35,000/year, with gates often closed late or not at all. Now in their wisdom PenMet decided to install an electric gate at the Fox Island Fishing Pier. After months of construction debris, delays, and copper wire left out for theft, the project was finally completed in April. The problem: The gate is designed for cars and does nothing to stop foot traffic from entering the park at all hours — having parties, ‘hanging out’ on the tall fishing pier (no liability there if someone were to fall, right?) PenMet’s security measures are Ring cameras with a 25 ft. radius that presently are non-functional. Worse, the new gate doesn’t currently work and is still being chained by park personnel to ‘close’ the park. With estimated gate cost of $100,000 added to $35,000/year of employee time since 2021, PenMet has needlessly spent close to $250,000. What Ms. Kingsbury calls an ‘improvement’ could better be described as a costly, unnecessary debacle. The lack of common sense and ineptitude would almost be laughable—IF it wasn’t our money they were spending.

New projects: Many of the projects touted are actually ‘deferred maintenance’ — buildings allowed to languish and then restored (at much higher cost). Peninsula Gardens, purchased in 2010, has been totally neglected and used as a disposal site.  Now if/when PenMet ever gets a plan completed, the new shiny object will be displayed as an example of PenMet’s excellence — rather than a long over-due stewardship of a property owned for 15+ years.

Space limits discussion of other criticisms of PenMet’s management and spending, heavily weighted by high executive costs and excessive consultant fees. Speaking against parks can feel like slamming Mom and apple pie, because who doesn’t love parks?! What I also love is prudent use of our taxes, thoughtful decision making and transparency/accountability, all areas in which PenMet repeatedly falls short. This is not ‘negativity’ but a much-needed call for PenMet to be scrutinized closely as a public agency responsible for taxpayer facilities and funds.

On a side note, Mr. McLaughlin was mentioned recently in a reader letter. Certainly, the financial and legal details can be tedious but are well-researched and important. I, for one, appreciate that someone takes the time to do the work and ask the hard questions of PenMet.  We need more of that, not less!

Peggy Power

Fox Island