Bozeman Leaving City for Port CEO Job

Check the Sun’s main page for most of the latest information on the resignation of Bremerton Mayor Cary Bozeman. There’s no scandal afoot. The mayor is taking a new job as CEO at the Port of Bremerton.

The story on the main page has information about what will happen in Bremerton and at the port.

I just got off the phone with George Behan, U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks’ chief of staff. He said Dicks was surprised by the news. Behan said he was in an Interior Appropriations Subcommittee hearing with the congressman when he got the message on his Blackberry. He passed the news along to Dicks in between questions of the head of the U.S. Forest Service.

“He was absolutely stunned,” Behan said of Dicks.

One of our wonders was whether this was hiring was done with someone pulling strings from above, but every indication I have is that few people knew this was going to happen and were as surprised as we were to learn about. The port, in the midst of an effort to be more transparent, managed to keep this one under wraps pretty well.

And from what we can tell, state law gives the port every right to do just that when it comes to hiring someone.

21 thoughts on “Bozeman Leaving City for Port CEO Job

  1. April Fools day was quite awhile ago, Steve.

    LOL, this would be comedy if it weren’t so serious.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  2. Who nominated him? How did each member of the Port vote? Who were the other potential candidates? Was Bozeman in attendance at the meeting? Were other candidates in attendance at the meeting?

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  3. I like his video interview.

    “some people like staying in the same job, I like changing ever 7 or 8 years”

    That’s because you figure out that’s about the time people get tired of you jerking them around and get ready to vote you out of office.

    Bellevue, he built a bunch of parks and brought the city into economic hardships that they were able to dig themselves out of once he was gone.

    Bremerton, he built a bunch of parks and brought us into ecoomic hardships and now his off to other things.

    Port of Bremerton… yeah, rinse and repeat.

  4. Interesting news. The selection of Bozeman was a surprise for many, myself included. Many of us were aware of some of the applicants given the grapevine, but very few (if any) persons knew who all candidates were vying for the position.

    The staff position was advertised. Applicants competed of their own accord – no one was nominated.

    And yes, under RCW 42.30.110 (1)(g) executive seesions are held to evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for employment. Discussion of salaries, wages, and other conditions of employment typically occurs in public meetings. The suggestion that the Port or any other entity should abandon this is an interesting one.

  5. When I said “nominated him”, I meant who brought his name up for the vote. Someone has to make the “nomination” to appoint him. I was wondering which of the commissioners did that. Apparently, according to someone who was at the meeting, it was Larry Stokes.

    There was no suggestion that the Port “abandoned” the rules. My questions were for clarity, not accusation.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  6. “When I said “nominated him”, I meant who brought his name up for the vote. Someone has to make the “nomination” to appoint him. I was wondering which of the commissioners did that. Apparently, according to someone who was at the meeting, it was Larry Stokes.”

    It would seem more appropriate to include a hire as an agenda item, with Stokes making the motion to proceed with a vote.

    And you might consider that my comment about transparency was made to the person who originally brought up the issue.

  7. Well the mayoral election just got a whole bunch more interesting.

    By the way I know Roger Zabinski is running for Port Commissioner.

  8. It would be interesting to hear/read Roger’s take on this, since he is a candidate for Commissioner Kincer’s seat.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  9. An agenda item for a hire that was a decision of the Board would still require nominating an individual. I think the item was on the Port’s agenda, but they couldn’t put a name there because, of course, that decision hadn’t been made… right? (smile)

    Still begs the question about how City Council President McConnell could be called into speak with Bozeman and the City Attorney and told at 9:00, when the Port’s meeting wasn’t until 9:30. It also still begs the question as to how they set Bozeman’s salary at $120K, without negotiating with him.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  10. Jake,

    His “dust” hasn’t settled yet with contact information. 😉

    I was also hoping he would post here so that it got good visibility.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  11. There’s no reason why the Port couldn’t evaluate applicants in executive session, which would involve discussion of salary and conditions of employment as well as candidate qualifications. This would allow the Port to set the salary in accordance with those meetings.

    If the commissioners discussed the merits of the final 4 applicants and it became clear from their expressed opinions that one was more qualified than the other three, it may reach a consensus and eliminate applicants from further consideration, then conduct a public “final action hiring” of an applicant for employment without violating the Act.

    This ‘final action’ obligation doesn’t mean commissioners were clueless about their choice until 9:30am. Since that final vote was 3-0, there was apparently a consensus where Bozeman was concerned, and the issue of who made the motion is ultimately a formality.

    I wasn’t privy to the details of discussion held between McConnell, Bozeman or the City Attorney so cannot speak to what was specifically discussed. However, if there was a way to give McConnell the common and professional courtesy of notice prior to a public meeting and news stories whilst honouring the Act, it would certainly make sense to do so.

  12. The Port has the right to meet in executive session for the stated items on their agendas. They stated they were meeting to discuss the qualifications of applicants for the CEO position. I didn’t see any agenda item regarding meeting in executive sessions for “negotiations”, which would be required to be itemized separately.

    Further, negotiating a contract with an individual before voting, in public, on whether to appoint that individual is dubious at best and hardly in keeping with the spirit or letter of the law.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  13. Where was it determined or indicated that the Port held contractual negotiations with Bozeman prior to final action hiring?

    I wasn’t at the meeting and haven’t seen or heard anything to this effect, but did see the agenda item “4. Consideration of Selection of Chief Executive Officer.”

  14. The original article, which posted very shortly after the story broke, mentioned that his salary would be $120K. Could have sworn that the Port advertised the position with a salary range, not a set salary.

    So, either the salary negotiation happened during the meeting or afterwards. If it was during the meeting, I’ll see it when I watch the video on BKAT. If it was afterwards, the timeline doesn’t work. A reasonable explanation for the two inconsistencies I have pointed out (1. McConnell being told ahead of time. 2. The salary being set at the time of appointment as if it had been negotiated in advance.) would be nice. In the absence of information, speculation could be rampant. I prefer not to speculate, so am raising the question.

    Regards,
    Kathryn Simpson

  15. The official Port press release advertising the job doesn’t mention salary, but the Kitsap Sun article published in February discussed Attebery’s $120k salary. McConnell generically mentions being “told the news”, but it isn’t clear how specific that news is.

    I recall reading the Sun article, which indicated there was an announcement at the Port meeting that Bozeman will begin June 8 and will be paid $120,000. My prior comments addressed how dates and amounts might have been informally determined during the interview process or prior to final action – but who knows? We’re in the same boat, except I don’t get BKAT. Thus, I’ll have to check the Port’s website for the airing, or wait for minutes.

  16. I’ll give Roger an email. It took some political classes with him and he is very smart (he is a scientist) and a nice guy.

  17. Roger is indeed nice and an intelligent (scientist) fellow. What really matters, however, is his vision for the Port and ability to achieve those objectives. I look forward to hearing or reading more about this so voters can make an informed decision versus an “ABC” vote.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before you post, please complete the prompt below.

(Not a trick question) What color is the pink house?