From Island County, where a council member advocates disarming citizens, this is the first in what may become a new series. Our source writes, ”I am sickened by some of the officials we vote into office.”
Will citizens require their elected officials to uphold their oaths? [Extracts of the RCW and Washington State Constitution follow the video.]
RCW 29A.56.110
Initiating proceedings — Statement — Contents — Verification — Definitions.
Whenever any legal voter of the state or of any political subdivision thereof, either individually or on behalf of an organization, desires to demand the recall and discharge of any elective public officer of the state or of such political subdivision, as the case may be, under the provisions of sections 33 and 34 of Article 1 of the Constitution, the voter shall prepare a typewritten charge, reciting that such officer, naming him or her and giving the title of the office, has committed an act or acts of malfeasance, or an act or acts of misfeasance while in office, or has violated the oath of office, or has been guilty of any two or more of the acts specified in the Constitution as grounds for recall. The charge shall state the act or acts complained of in concise language, give a detailed description including the approximate date, location, and nature of each act complained of, be signed by the person or persons making the charge, give their respective post office addresses, and be verified under oath that the person or persons believe the charge or charges to be true and have knowledge of the alleged facts upon which the stated grounds for recall are based.
(2) “Violation of the oath of office” means the neglect or knowing failure by an elective public officer to perform faithfully a duty imposed by law.
[2003 c 111 § 1407; 1984 c 170 § 1; 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 47 § 1; 1965 c 9 § 29.82.010. Prior: 1913 c 146 § 1; RRS § 5350. Former part of section: 1913 c 146 § 2; RRS § 5351, now codified in RCW 29.82.015. Formerly RCW 29.82.010.]
Notes:
ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 33 RECALL OF ELECTIVE OFFICERS. Every elective public officer of the state of Washington expect [except] judges of courts of record is subject to recall and discharge by the legal voters of the state, or of the political subdivision of the state, from which he was elected whenever a petition demanding his recall, reciting that such officer has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office, stating the matters complained of, signed by the percentages of the qualified electors thereof, hereinafter provided, the percentage required to be computed from the total number of votes cast for all candidates for his said office to which he was elected at the preceding election, is filed with the officer with whom a petition for nomination, or certificate for nomination, to such office must be filed under the laws of this state, and the same officer shall call a special election as provided by the general election laws of this state, and the result determined as therein provided. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 p 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.]
SECTION 34 SAME. The legislature shall pass the necessary laws to carry out the provisions of section thirty-three (33) of this article, and to facilitate its operation and effect without delay: Provided, That the authority hereby conferred upon the legislature shall not be construed to grant to the legislature any exclusive power of lawmaking nor in any way limit the initiative and referendum powers reserved by the people. The percentages required shall be, state officers, other than judges, senators and representatives, city officers of cities of the first class, school district boards in cities of the first class; county officers of counties of the first, second and third classes, twenty-five per cent. Officers of all other political subdivisions, cities, towns, townships, precincts and school districts not herein mentioned, and state senators and representatives, thirty-five per cent. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 p 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.]




My first response/comment to this video when I saw it a week ago was “The voters of Oak Harbor should exercise their rights under Article 1 Section 33 of the Washington Constitution which allows for the “Recall of elective officers.” It allows for recall in the case of a violation of an oath of office.”
Glad to see I’m not the only person recommending such a remedy.
I hope a NRA Certified Instructor in Island County speaks at the next council meeting and informs people of the existence of the “Eddie Eagle” program.
Amazing that video has well over 360,000 views of the 3 instances on youtube I’m aware of.
A Newtown, CT father takes a stand for the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution
KOMO news provide “The Rest of the Story” as Paul Harvey would say. There was an Oak Harbor citizens follow-up at the next meeting:
It’s been three weeks since an Oak Harbor city councilmember started a national controversy by trying to kick out a wounded Army veteran who was legally carrying a weapon during a council meeting. Councilmember Rick Almberg then walked out. The council was met by 160 people Tuesday night, many of whom were packing heat.
There were handguns in holsters and rifles slung over shoulders and an unknown number of people concealing their weapons as the Oak Harbor City Council met. Many attended the meeting to show support for veteran Lucas Yonkman who Councilmember Almberg tried to have kicked out of City Hall last month, including Joe Hawkins who openly mocked him. “Mr. Almberg I just want you to know that I have a concealed ham sandwich right here I don’t want you to get up and walk away,” he chuckled.
http://mynorthwest.com/11/2195317/Crowd-packs-heat-Oak-Harbor-backs-down