Is Jay Kehne Using his position to funnel Info to Conservation NW?

[WAcoyotehunter]

I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem in this case...  CNW is quite active and would have been on the wolf poaching case right away whether or not Jay was an employee. 
What kind of info might CNW get from a commission member that would be a concern?

[Northway]

I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem in this case...  CNW is quite active and would have been on the wolf poaching case right away whether or not Jay was an employee. 
What kind of info might CNW get from a commission member that would be a concern?

That was what I was wondering. I don't even know if offering a $7500 reward for turning in a poacher is anything other than a symbolic move. If you are dumb enough to tell someone that would turn you in about poaching a wolf, you're probably dumb enough to leave a trail of other clues as well. You know, like trying to mail a bloody wolf pelt to someone.

[pianoman9701]

I'm going to wait to answer that question until I receive the pertinent documents from the DFW.

[KFhunter]

What kind of info might CNW get from a commission member that would be a concern?

• Someone on the commission floats an idea,  it's a fantastic idea     
• Jay Kehene informs CNW about the fantastic idea   
• CNW disagrees with the idea,  instructs Jay Kehene to kill the motion   
• The commission proceeds anyways, Jay is out voted   
• CNW is made aware Jay couldn't sway the vote to their favor    
• CNW funnels money to the governors office, makes demands. 
• governors office removes certain commission members (Gary Clark)   
• new commission members are appointed, members that are better aligned with CNW ideology.   
• no more arguments, CNW has no trouble pushing forward their agenda now.   

This is all speculation on my part, I have no special knowledge this is how it went down.

[idahohuntr]

I fail to see how CNW getting information about a possible wolf poaching from a commissioner is an issue.  Are commission meetings not public anyways? 

[KFhunter]

I fail to see how CNW getting information about a possible wolf poaching from a commissioner is an issue.  Are commission meetings not public anyways?

Who say's it has to be in a meeting,  it could be an official Email - or heck even unofficial.


Something like:

director@dfw.wa.gov  TO>  commission@dfw.wa.gov
February 10, 2014
ALL;

Commission members this is to inform you that there was a wolf poached in northern Stevens CO.
Expect it to be addressed at the next committee meeting. The investigation is ongoing and won't be made public until the end of the month.   

Phil Anderson


Then Jay fires that off to CNW:


Hey CNW buddies!  Terrific news!!!!

I just learned a wolf was poached in northern Stevens CO
We need to get our ducks in a row and gather up donations,  let's not let this crisis go to waste!
This will bring a LOT of money to our coffers,  we'll offer up a $7500 reward!   

We need to break this story with our reward attached to it, national media attention will give us a tremendous boost to our membership and donations.

If we make national media and our donations will far exceed the $7500 payout!
If we're lucky we won't even have to pay out a reward!!

Yours forever;
Jay 



crude, but something along those lines

[idahohuntr]

Again, wheres the problem? Jay heres about a wolf poaching and tells somebody.  ??

[KFhunter]

Again, wheres the problem? Jay heres about a wolf poaching and tells somebody.  ??

Do I need to break out my crayons again?   



How is what I described above any different than insider trading?  I agree it's crude, and puts a lot of words in their mouths - but it's necessary to draw a picture sometimes for those who either can't understand or don't want too.

[idahohuntr]

Lets try this a different way so you can try to understand the issue:  Please direct me to the law or regulation where a commissioner is limited in who (s)he discusses public information with...seems like you are trying real hard to create a problem that does not exist. I think commissioners should communicate with any interested group that is willing to listen...whether they share my opinions or not.

[pianoman9701]

Let's say hypothetically only that someone is working within our state government in a paid position. That person also works for a non-profit in their spare time. The state department they're working for is planning on launching a new program. However, the new program is against the ideals and thrust of the non-profit. The person in question gives privileged information, info not yet released to the public, to his non-profit. His non-profit then gets others involved. When the department goes to launch the program, the opposition has everything in place to block their efforts and the launch is a failure. Any state employee taking advantage of their position to the gain of a private organization has some problems to address.

[KFhunter]

Lets try this a different way so you can try to understand the issue:  Please direct me to the law or regulation where a commissioner is limited in who (s)he discusses public information with...seems like you are trying real hard to create a problem that does not exist. I think commissioners should communicate with any interested group that is willing to listen...whether they share my opinions or not.

 

Sounds like a confession.

You seriously don't see a problem with that? 

[KFhunter]

Lets try this a different way so you can try to understand the issue:  Please direct me to the law or regulation where a commissioner is limited in who (s)he discusses public information with...seems like you are trying real hard to create a problem that does not exist. I think commissioners should communicate with any interested group that is willing to listen...whether they share my opinions or not.

The commission is REQUIRED to take ethics training

OPERATING PRINCIPLES:
Through principles of operation, the Commission is striving to provide the best possible
environment conducive to fulfilling the Department of Fish and Wildlife's mission and
goals.
1. Commission members shall:
a. Be clear when speaking for the Commission versus as an individual;
present only the results of formal decisions (e.g., where five or more
Commissioners have agreed) as official Commission positions.
b. Work collaboratively with other Commission members and Department
staff on decision-making.
c. Be respectful of other Commission members.
d. Establish sound working relationships with other Commission members.
e. Be a customer using and observing the opportunities the Department
affords the public.
f. Be responsible about where work is best done, i.e., issues pertaining to a
specific sub-group shall be given to the sub-group chair.
g. Maintain confidence about all matters of Commission executive business.
h. Keep focused on big decisions and issues (big picture).
I. Represent all citizens of the state (who own the resource), not
constituents from a particular area or special interest.
j. Serve actively on Commission sub-groups.
k. Keep other Commission members informed on individual activities of
Commission business.
l. Not engage in any activity which gives rise to a conflict of interest or
appearance of conflict of interest as a Commission member.

I bolded some of the areas of concern by having Jay Kehne on the commission.


ethics training here:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.52.365




commission members are subject to ethics rules,  so take your pick!   some of these probably fit pretty good

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.52

[KFhunter]

careful what you ask for Idahohntr;  you might get it.

[idahohuntr]

A commissioner discussing or sharing public information with any organization, even one he works for, is not an ethics violation.  If mr. jay shared some executive business related to hiring say a new wdfw director with CNW...that would be a violation.  Discussing public information about poaching...not so much.

I get people don't like this commissioner...but lets not confuse legitimate disagreements over issues with ridiculous allegations of ethics violations when no such evidence exists.

[Knocker of rocks]

What kind of info might CNW get from a commission member that would be a concern?

• Someone on the commission floats an idea,  it's a fantastic idea     
• Jay Kehene informs CNW about the fantastic idea   
• CNW disagrees with the idea,  instructs Jay Kehene to kill the motion   
• The commission proceeds anyways, Jay is out voted   
• CNW is made aware Jay couldn't sway the vote to their favor    
• CNW funnels money to the governors office, makes demands. 
• governors office removes certain commission members (Gary Clark)   
• new commission members are appointed, members that are better aligned with CNW ideology.   
• no more arguments, CNW has no trouble pushing forward their agenda now.   

This is all speculation on my part, I have no special knowledge this is how it went down.

I think your points are moot.  The commission operates in the open and their meetings and e-mails are public documents.  A Manchurian candidate isn't needed