Brian Wurts to run for State House

I have been told by many to respond to a website comment which I rarely do especially to people who make not logical connections but this comment took a direct hit at my integrity and an honest cop cannot allow that.

You may want to look up the definition of hypocritical. There is no connection to my firm view that State government is being wasteful and needs to trim fat to private sector legal businesses that create tax revenue. I lied to nobody in the Proposition One. None of the 100 Lakewood officers working against this Proposition lied to anyone. Millions of dollars in revenue cuts means cuts to police positions. There is no other way. You can take two minutes and read the City budget or you can stand on your high horse and just write false accusations about me. As far as what I prefer? I prefer local business growth in Lakewood. I prefer the State stops making business growth nearly impossible with a mountain of regulation and doubling the unemployment insurance this year and again next year.

Local business success means more revenue for critical services like police officers on our streets. Community based policing by the way would have been the first “non essential” positions cut if your Proposition to ban legal casinos in Lakewood. I know how effective the community policing strategy has been in Lakewood. We have cut our crime rates dramatically after looking at a different way of policing with our citizens. Those cuts would have put us right back to RESPONDING to calls of crime that have outcomes which cost us far more than community policing.

I have no idea what you are saying in your last sentence. How are you using the loss of four of my friends to make any point? Do you not think every single one of them was out there against your ill thought out Proposition? How dare you use any of their memory for a hit piece on me. Shame on you.

I am against banning our lawful casinos because they simply do not cause problems. Grown people can make grown decisions on entertainment in these places. I will never legislate morality on a business like a casino because that is never the role of government and by the vote count on your Proposition the majority of the voters agree with me.

My homework is done on the streets where I see the faces of the people everyday. With all of my contacts in domestic disputes over 14 years you would think I have ever heard a fight or assault happened “because he was gambling” or “because he lost our savings at a casino”. I have never heard it and have never heard of anyone else who works these streets in any police department ever heard it. My education has been done being born here and living in this City for over 30 years. I do not need to cite an obscure book for references of what integrity means. I live it every day and am honored to be among the most ethical and honest coworkers one could have. You and your small group said the PAB, our Guild, and the City lied to you yet you have not cited any lie. We have all stated our opinions based on ALL the facts and the voters sided with us and voted down your Proposition 1 after thinking for themselves which is something I feel every citizen should do, not just a select few bent on legislating your version of morality.

No, David, I have not lied to you.

I am curious, prop 1 aside for now, as to the amount of experience Mr. Wurts has in regards to holding a public seat like this. While this is a good starter pr piece for him, why should someone vote for him?

Ya sure, he coverered the basics in a political pr piece, you know the “frustrated with the system I can do better, support the teachers, don’t forget I’m a cop from Lakewood” thing, very well. I just do not understand why someone would vote for him.

Are we all wrapped up in sentimentality for slain officers so much so that the voice of the 28th is now Brian Wurts? Everyone speaks of change until they get elected. I for one am tired of having my political representatives getting “on the job training”. Show us something other than the same ol reteric we hear from those that want a job like that in Oly.

Is it me, or does this piece sound very vengeful? ” I will fight until I take my last breath to hold the violent people… serving the sentences the judge imposed after a jury finds them guilty.” Do we even dare try to have a debate on sensitive issues with this guy, like wrongeful convictions, false accusations or even police corruption? (gasp)

I am sure that when all is said and done, the voters will ultimately make a good decision and come to their senses and vote another way. In ten years, after a good bout of public service out of the uniform, perhaps then it would be a good time for Mr. Wurts to run for public office. Not now, Oakbrook, Tillicum and University Place won’t swing that way.

Thanks Subtimes for letting me voice my opinion

Hey Wurts, not that I care, but how can you call it hypocritical of Mr. Grey to use the death of four Lakewood cops to make a political point when that’s what you’ve been doing for two months? I mean you’ve exploited the death of those officers in a nauseating way to promote your campaign. So I think THAT is hypocritical. And opportunistic, if you ask me. You wouldn’t be considered a serious candidate if some wacko hadn’t killed four cops and put you on the news every night.

I really don’t care, though. I think all you guys are just looking out for yourselves and not the citizens. Didn’t your labor union get a pay raise in the middle of an economic recession, right after that Prop 1 campaign? Was that payback from the City for your labor union opposing Prop 1?

You might ask Brian Wurts why I am no longer a chaplain with the Lakewood Police Department.

That you have “worked vice investigations, worked narcotics investigations and worked gang invesigations in what is now Lakewood;” and that you “currently supervise the Lakewood Police unit that investigates all three areas of crime” would suggest that your job of investigation includes “thorough research, follow-up, study, or formal procedure of discovery after research” (“Investigation”, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

How is it that you concluded from your “research” that you have never seen any crime problems linked to the casinos” when “A Gamblers Anonymous survey found that 44 percent had stolen from work to support gambling debts; 18 percent had gambling-related arrests; fifty-seven percent of them admitted to stealing to fund their gambling – an average of $135,000 per person; sixty-two percent of addicted gamblers commit crimes, including theft, embezzlement, and insurance fraud to support their habit”?

According to the Tacoma News Tribune, Feb.21, 2008, “total police calls to minicasinos (in Lakewood, 2007) were 234, with 36 classified as serious.” That is one call for Lakewood Police every other day, three serious calls per month.

A public disclosure request to the State Gambling Commission with regards Lakewood casinos yielded 450 pages documenting sting operations on underage gamblers; serving alcohol to minors; cheating complaints; verbal and written warnings, and fines.

That’s on-site casino card-table crime.

Off-site ‘kitchen-table’ crime includes embezzlement, money laundering, loan sharking, bribery, prostitution, check kiting, domestic violence, and property crimes.

That gambling doesn’t contribute to crime is a myth and nothing could be further from the truth.

And the truth, through investigation, is your job.

Please don’t attempt to put words in my mouth “Elrojo”: I sign my real name to my posts which is more than you have done. Yes I was the Deputy Mayor for the City of Lakewood but who are you? I am perfectly capable of making my own points without your help. I’ve seen how government functions from the inside and out with eyes and ears wide open.

I never witnessed Wurts “fighting” for anything but I do know that he is alleged to have used excessive force at least twice: once against an elderly man, ironically at a casino, which the city had to settle for $150,000. The other settlement cost $15,000. For anyone else would have been a crime: assault. We don’t need a bull in a china shop in Olympia or an apologist for increased gambling just so the state, like the City of Lakewood’s government, can continue to pay his (and your) salary. If you’re as blind to government waste and excesses at the local level as you are to gambling related crime, then you have no business running for state office.

Wurts’ current position as president of the police guild is irrelevant when it comes to representing Lakewood’s citizens. Today he represents the interests of government employees: during the anti-Prop 1 campaign Wurts represented the interests of Lakewood’s bureaucracy and casinos. We already have enough such elected “representatives” in Olympia who side more often with the employee unions, government bureaucracy and special interests rather than the citizens who have to pay the bills.

Discussing the facts and an individual’s past experience and behavior is not “dragging” anyone through the mud. It’s what is supposed to happen when anyone runs for political office. Get used to it. In politics you can’t hide behind your badge…..or a pseudonym.

David, I forgot to point out that churches do not provide any tax revenue to the city compared to the casinos, so their associated crime is financed by the tax payers. Again I am not anti-church by any stretch of the imagination. I have only twice been in any of the Lakewood casinos, once for dinner and once for breakfast. I am not a casino supporter, but I sure see a lot more damage being done by taverns.

Let’s put prop 1 aside for just a sec. Let’s also put aside the obvious differences in opinions about casinos. I can see the same arguments that have come up in the past about casinos, and I think those comments are detracting from the issue so let’s get to the brass tacks of it.

Brian Wurts is running for public office. He wants me to vote for him. So I ask this….where’s the experience at?

Being a cop with a badge is completely different than being a politician. Sure, we can say ( and I use this EXTREMELY loosely mind you ) that Brian Wurts is a good officer of the law, but what else can he do? Running around Olympia with a grudge and a hot head is not going to do any good. It is a different set of rules than doing a beat on the street.

If this guy wants me and my neighbors to vote for him, he has to step up to the plate and do some work. Show us the people, that he is the right man for the job. Show us that if we sent him to Olympia, he will represent the needs of my family, my neighbors, and me. Be OUR voice and NOT the voice of special interests or a select few.

And as far as the comment about David Anderson being enough of a reason for people to vote for Brian, man, last time I checked David Anderson never roughed up an elderly man outside of a casino while in police uniform. Can you say that about Brian?

Mr Arbeeny, if you truly had your eyes and ears open when you were a member of the city government then you would know who I am. The fact that even after I described myself and my job you still don’t know me shows just how closed your eyes really were. We met several times and you saw my name many more times. We spoke on several occasions and I know for a fact you heard me referred to as “Rojo”. Time to open your eyes sir.

And by your own words the City “settled”, which I would guess also means that by settling they admitted no guilt. Am I right?

El Rojo – Ocean unit

Brian Wurts was named in a $7.4 million lawsuit (Tacoma News Tribune, October 27, 2008) in which he was charged with “assault and battery, false arrest, use of excessive force, false imprisonment, and negligent infliction of emotional distress” in arresting 64-year-old Kwang Yoon (5′7″, 135 pounds) outside Chips Casino, August 11, 2006. This TNT article further indicated that “He (Yoon) was not charged with a crime stemming from his arrest, according to state court records.”

A public disclosure request revealed that the City of Lakewood paid $150,000 (plus $3,145.41 “deductible reimbursement” August 11, 2006) to settle the Yoon lawsuit. An email from City Attorney Heidi Wachter (also obtained via public disclosure) to City Manager Andrew Neiditz on July 22, 2009 stated, “The first two (there was a second lawsuit naming Wurts settled by the City for $15,000), while very defensible, have aspect that suggest they could have become expensive in terms of defense as well as in potential exposure.”

As to Wurt’s unamed friend ElRojo, “we lost so get over it”? A response from Colin Powell might serve here. In a letter to Dick Cheney about the odds against Powell’s position on tactical weapons, Powell said, “‘I know you’ve got a four-to-one vote against me with the chiefs,’ he wrote Cheney, ‘so it’ll be easy to overrule me. But don’t worry, I’ll be back next year, because I’m right on this one.’” (My American Journey)

In our case against gambling, we won’t be back.

Because we haven’t gone away.

Because we’re right on this one.

Concerned Citizen,
There is no libel going on. It really happened. Mr. Wurts can not deny it because it really happened outside of Chips Casino in Lakewood. I would suggest if you want the information, a public disclosure request might be in order. I believe that you can go to city hall and request the information. As far as I know it is public record. The lawsuit was actually for more ( around 750,00 I think ) but the plaintiff in the case settled for 150k.

As far as I know, the city “settled” because the case would have been costly and hard to defend against. Settling a case, in my eyes, is similar to copping a plea bargain when charged with a crime. While not admitting guilt, they sure didn’t defend his innocence either.

To me, I am calling it like I see it for what it was, a crime. And the city copped a plea bargain to avoid further problems. If anyone else would have done the same thing, it would have been called “assault” and charges would have been filed.

While Senor Rojo points out that Mr. Wurts has done a lot of work recently in Olympia after the shootings of the officers, I would like to know more about this. Can you site references for me to review please?

And to the Sclairs and the Subtimes…guys, thanks for letting us do this on your site. You guys rock! Thanks for the links too!

As an attorney I can say that people “settle” cases when the realize they are at risk. Often there is a confidentiality clause that preventn the parties from discussing the details. There are other clauses, for example, ones that allow the defendent (in this case – the City) to say, as a technicality, that negligence was not proven. It makes people feel better to say that nothing was proven, that there was no finding of negligence or wrong doing by the court. The point is, you don’t settle if you have the facts on your side. If you are really right then there is little risk to going to court other than the attorneys’ fees. Therefore, the City of Lakewood elected to settle the Wurts matter as preferable to the cost of further litigation and exposure to even greater risk. It is true that the City decided to pay out on the case referred to rather than to go to court to defend one of its “defenders.”

Wurts cannot deny the law suit and he cannot deny the City paid money for actions he caused.

Fred Feller, Lakewood

So let me see if I got this right. Elrojo essentially says that if the City pays “hush money” to a victim for a crime committed by a police officer then no one is guilty of a crime because no crime was committed. Is that it? How about if a private citizen commits a crime and pays hush money? Is that acceptable and does that crime too disappear? How about a business? Do crimes associated with that business never make it to the police blotter? That is the slippery slope on which Elrojo finds himself, when payment of money determines whether a crime has been committed. Seems to me that what the City did was plead “No Contest” and took its medicine.

What puzzles me is that to my knowledge no internal investigation was ever provided to the city council at that time. While Deputy Mayor, the city developed a position position on releasing investigations of police misconduct in response to The News Tribune request for such information. As I recall it was decided to release information to the press only on completed investigations where the police officer was found guilty of misconduct or exonerated. Anything else was to be held confidential as to not impugn the officer’s reputation before the fact. Where are the findings of this investigation by someone other than fellow members of the Wurts led Police Guild? If Wurts has nothing to hide, let the public see the results of this investigation. The public has a right to know about their police and would-be representatives.

Another “Wurts” incident, this time involving an African American occurred on 11 August 2007. The victim stated he was directed to lay on the ground and while there was allegedly tasered by Wurts. All charges against the victim were dismissed. Are there similarities between this incident and the earlier one involving an elderly Korean? Yes. Cost to the City of Lakewood? $15,000.

Most recently Wurts was involved in an attempt to influence the Washington State Legislature to approve HB 1317 which would make the photos and birth dates of police officers exempt from public disclosure. You can read about it in the TNT expose: “Police privacy bill based on rumors. Lakewood: Little evidence to support claims after slayings.” 2/26/2010.

On 10 and 24 February 2010 Jamie Daniels, director of the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, testified on behalf of HB1317 during public testimony before state lawmakers. She stated that after the Nov. 29 shootings of four Lakewood police officers, the Lakewood Police Department (LPD) was “barraged” with public records requests for the birth dates and Social Security numbers of the officers’ children. In reality the LPD received no such requests. This has been further confirmed by a 1 March 2010 negative response from the City of Lakewood to public information request 10-293. Indeed the City could not find a single request for such personal police information.

Daniels asserted that she only repeated what Wurts among others had said during meetings of the governor’s task force on the Lakewood shootings. It is possible that Daniels may have misinterpreted what Wurts and other officers said. However, their apparent silence when her statements were known by them to be false, is troubling. Silence is complicity.