Letters to the Editor

Frank's departure

Recently, Al Frank, director of parks in Snoqualmie for the past six-plus years, was fired. Actually, I believe he was asked to resign, but isn't that the same thing?

Was Mr. Frank fired fired because of poor performance? Was he just another cutback in this poor economy? Did they eliminate his position? No to all of the above. He was let go because your mayor, Matt Larson, determined that Al hasn't been "aggressive enough" in getting all the bugs worked out with the YMCA to advance the building of a new community center.

According to Mr. Frank's annual reviews, the last one being in June of this year, he is an exemplary, above-aveage, hard-working employee

While other communities in our nation are trying to do all they can to keep their qualified employees, your mayor is thinking only about making a name for himself. His interest lies in having a monument built in his memory by the time his term is up, and receiving credit for acquiring this addition for your community.

Mr. Mayor, a bond for building this community center has been on the ballot three times over the past few years and three times the majority of the people have voted it down.

I think that would tell you that possibly, they do not want it.

There is always a way to push things past the people. You gave them a chance to approve this building, and when they didn't, you will do it anyway.

As for Mr. Frank, this is just a bump in the road for him. He'll get a new job, but the city will lose one of the best parks directors they have ever had and a darn nice person to boot.

And, this will affect not just the city of Snoqualmie, but the city of Kent. When the Franks sell their home, if they can sell their home, and move out of the area to wherever his new job takes him, the Kent School District will lose one of the best sixth grade teachers they have ever had. All in all, Mr. Mayor, big mistake,

Susan Eddy

Kent

Editor's note: While only 40 percent of Snoqualmie residents supported a community center bond in 2002, the 2006 and 2008 votes garnered 52 percent and 55 percent 'yes' votes, respectively. Bond issues require a 60 percent "supermajority" to pass.

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Read the latest Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Sep 24 edition online now. Browse the archives.