66 Replies to "Man who requested Block Watch Captain, Night Out organizers' names isn't saying why he wants them, but says he's requested and received the list before"

• jay November 16, 2015 (6:16 pm)

  It’s gadflies like this, requesting records for the hell of it, that clog the system of people actually trying to get useful documents, like the stuff the CIA is hiding about their assassination of JFK

• Advocate November 16, 2015 (6:26 pm)

  Thanks for the pickup on this, WSB. Mr. Gormezano, you’re right that requestors do not have to provide intent when requesting public records (and that’s to everyone’s benefit), but would you be a good community citizen and please share your intent here? Sharing what I will presume are kind and neighborly intentions would strengthen your cause. Many thanks.

• WestSeattleDood November 16, 2015 (6:52 pm)

  Maybe it is just me, but my first instinct is to say

  To what end?

  Mr. Gormezano, you need to evolve.

• Wendell November 16, 2015 (6:54 pm)

  Another example of democracy protecting the nutcase.

• chas redmond November 16, 2015 (7:25 pm)

  I’ve always been a bit off-put by the secrecy. Here’s the Block Watch captains for the Citizens Association of Georgetown http://www.cagtown.com/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/9-16-14%20bc%20list%20for%20website.pdf – I did an online lookup and it looks like a lot of them are quite public. What wold be the advantage of making the list secret?

• Tbone November 16, 2015 (7:29 pm)

  Creepy, if nothing else. I was a block watch captain in my neighborhood (Burien) which was via the king county sheriffs office. I can’t imagine why the citizens who volunteer as block watch captains should be a matter of public record, but apparently it is so. Why that information is available as a blanket of info; ie more than a single specific neighborhood per request is really creepy.http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/silk-suit/Content?oid=15801

  https://www.facebook.com/keithgormezano

• DMH November 16, 2015 (7:39 pm)

  I am wondering why a person who is a privacy advocate (according to the links provided) would be seeking others private info. Definitely makes me think twice about participating in Block Watch. :-/

• wssz November 16, 2015 (7:44 pm)

  Keith Gormezano helped set up my QuickBooks. He refers to himself as Dr. Quickbooks (here he is in a youtube video — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBbTYd3FB1g).

  In this capacity, he recommended that I use Intuit for credit card processing instead of the company I was using, and connected me with what turned out to be a very questionable individual at Intuit, who asked for my bank’s routing number and account number. I learned from my bank that I should NEVER provide that information as it gave that individual full access to all the funds in my accounts. My account was promptly closed to make sure the Intuit contact (and any of his “friends”) would not have access.

  I told Keith about this, and the incredible concern and inconvenience it caused me. He promised that he would contact the man’s manager. I checked in with Keith at least three (probably four) times over the next couple of weeks, and he never made that call or followed up in any way.

  I have no idea why Keith would be requesting the names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. for WS Block Watch Captains and Night Out organizers.

  But Keith, if you are reading this, I would very strongly encourage you to tell us why — or revoke your request. It may not be legally required, but it would be the decent thing to do for all of my hardworking and well-intentioned neighbors and members of my community.

• Julie November 16, 2015 (7:45 pm)

  This actually worked pretty well, I think: because Mr. Gormezano couldn’t request the information anonymously, we know who he is. It’s a good example to remind us how much of an illusion our “private” information is–and of how we should demand that we know who has access to it. We must be able to watch those who watch us, and follow what they do with the information.

• JanS November 16, 2015 (7:46 pm)

  oh, good, jay…bring up a conspiracy theory.

  I’m familiar with the name of this guy through a Yahoo group I belong to. Interesting…if I’m correct, he doesn’t even live in West Seattle. And if it’s above board, no reason to not tell why…but that’s just me. Wonder if he’s requesting info on other areas of the city.

  A lot of people have too much time on their hands, lately, I’m finding out. Maybe he needs a new hobby :-\

• wssz November 16, 2015 (8:09 pm)

  JanS, You are correct that he does not live in West Seattle.

  • WSB November 16, 2015 (8:29 pm)

    Couple notes. No, the request was not West Seattle-specific. I thought that was fairly clear at a couple points in our story – if not, sorry. For example, our friend Justin at CapitolHillSeattle.com tweeted the letter from the Crime Prevention Coordinator (a civilian SPD role) in his area: https://twitter.com/jseattle/status/666413686546804738
    .
    Second, if anyone really is quitting or thinking of quitting the vital role of block watch captain because of this – I don’t know if this is any consolation or dissuasion, but please be aware that information about all of us is far more public than most realize. Most of us interact with the government at many points – registering to vote, getting a driver license, and so many others. What’s the most unusual thing about this from my viewpoint is that SPD chose to send word about the records request to those whose information was involved – particularly if it’s true that he requested and received the same information set before, with no such notification (which isn’t required, though) – this all came out relatively late in the day, and SPD media relations was closed by the time I got his reply mentioning that, but I’ll be asking tomorrow. – TR

• T November 16, 2015 (8:19 pm)

  If the block captains are performing a public service, as I believe they are, then it seems fair that their names be made available to the public.

  It’s interesting that the extra information (emails, fax numbers, etc.) was requested. But since Mr Gormezano has not made his motives known, couldn’t it be that he is just checking to make sure that extra information is indeed being kept private?

  I think the request is a bit odd, but I can’t say anything in the process should be changed. The names of block captains should be public–it’d be creepy if there was secrecy about that–and so of course the names should be available upon request. It’d be nice if Mr Gormezano talked to WSB about this issue, but that is not necessary, and entirely to his discretion.

• 4thGenWestSide November 16, 2015 (8:32 pm)

  Why did Mr. Gormenzano want us to look up his condo at 2300 NE 89th St. #2304 Seattle, WA 98115?

• UrbanFabulous November 16, 2015 (8:48 pm)

  Is it possible for him to sue if they were to deny his request? Maybe he’s fishing for money?

• lookingforlogic November 16, 2015 (8:51 pm)

  He could research the people on block watch and insinuate himself into their lives with previous knowledge of their concerns. He could create an incident and sue them for an orchestrated injury during their watch duties.

• Flight November 16, 2015 (9:03 pm)

  My Google searches also indicate (unless it’s another person by the same name living in Seattle) that he tried to write to Forbes claiming to be a multi millionaire in the late eighties, but the Seattle PI found out it was a hoax. Interesting situation.

• KWS November 16, 2015 (9:07 pm)

  I’m thoroughly confused as to why all my personal information has been released to someone with unclear motives and a history of records misuse all because I volunteered to sign our block up for Night Out Against Crime a few times. AND that I should be okay with this because signing up for the event makes me a public individual? What am I missing here? This is disturbing and has put a big damper on my “volunteering” interests.

• CSIHS November 16, 2015 (9:20 pm)

  Gee, is this the Keith Gormezano who was born on Nov. 22, 1955, and who lives with his parents on North 89th street?

• Kristin November 16, 2015 (9:23 pm)

  Judging from what I read, my guess would be Mr. Gormenanzo is achieving his goal–making people aware/angry/paranoid? their information is so easily accessed. However, as someone who receives multiple survey, marketing, etc calls and endless spam mail, I can’t say this is a shocker. He’s just one more in a long list who has information about how to contact me with annoying calls and mail. Who knows, maybe I’ll get an extra Christmas card this year. In other words, not sure why this is a big deal. Either don’t give your information to anyone or live with the consequences of public information like we alway have. Or, hey, let’s change the laws so people can’t pass on info. Until then, caller id and spam filtering abide.

  As an aside, I have registered for NO the past five years and received no communication of this from the SPD.

• Gunner November 16, 2015 (9:25 pm)

  First I am seeing of this, as Night Out organizer for our block I did not receive this notice.

  Here is more info on requesting public records

  http://www.seattle.gov/police/records/publicdisclosure.htm

• West Seattle Block Watch Captains' Network November 16, 2015 (9:28 pm)

  As a BW Captain (and Co-founder of WSBWCN), I really appreciate being alerted to the situation by SPD. Here are some of my personal concerns about the matter, as well as some things I’m not personally concerned about.

  Whether the person who made the request has been granted the information, and says he has received similar information before, is not the point. He is quoted as saying that those who are distressed by that fact, can in turn look up his voting record and the value of his property. For me, the issue has little to do with him personally, or any details about him. I would hope that his motives are well-intended, but even if he is up to something, or just trying to build his visibility, online reputation or political agenda; he personally is not the concern.
  .
  My primary concern is that I don’t see that anyone/everyone who asks has a legitimate “need to know” this particular information. While we all know that Public Disclosure Requests are legal, disclosing personal information about private individuals, as is happening here, should somehow be reevaluated based on “need to know” – especially since the information is not allowed to be used for commercial purposes.
  .
  I’m concerned about the implications of “outing” all the Block Watch Captains and those organizing Night Out events, without providing a plausible reason — something more informative than just saying he’s curious and has the legal right to do so.
  .
  Speaking to the question of why shouldn’t this be public information:
  * Block Captains don’t work for SPD or the City of Seattle. It’s a volunteer role that varies from neighborhood-to-neighborhood.
  * Someone who organized a Night Out event isn’t necessarily a Block Watch Captain, nor does every Block Watch Captain organize a Night Out event.
  * Most BW Captains who have signed up with the City, or those organizing Night Out events, were not aware that their information would be subject to a Public Disclosure Request.
  * BW Captains often help eradicate criminal behavior in neighborhoods (reporting problems that we see to police), we could easily become targets of those who want to retaliate.
  .
  While this particular request may be a “done deal”, going forward, we need a better process in place to evaluate Public Disclosure Requests that could potentially impact those in our community who are stepping up to make it better!

  – Karen Berge – Co-Founder, West Seattle Block Watch Captains’ Network

• wssz November 16, 2015 (9:30 pm)

  Keith just responded to my comment above (maybe the comment about his looking for a lawsuit could correct, unfortunately). And note to Keith. What I said is correct. You did not follow through. Although that said, I do hope that your intentions are good in this request. I would think that you would be sensitive to the fact that this request could concern many well-meaning people. Why not respond to peoples concerns instead of sending me that email?

  From Keith–
  “I don’t care to read libelous material on the West Seattle Blog where you false stated that I hadn’t followed through on your issue.
  I contacted the supervisor. He chose not to respond to me. I have no control over that.
  I did talk to Gabor and was told that asking for this information is standard protocol. You need it to make a credit card deposit.
  I still agree with you that they should use a secure portal.
  Keith

• aa November 16, 2015 (9:32 pm)

  KWS, I believe the letter says just the names were provided, all other personal info was held back.

  The only two cents I have to throw in is that just because a form asks for all your info, doesn’t mean you have to provide it. Ask questions, or simply omit the parts you don’t want to share. Many forms ask for things I don’t provide. If they need it they can explain to me why.

• KBear November 16, 2015 (9:32 pm)

  KWS, I sympathize with your concern, but your name is not “all your personal information”. I also think our public records laws need updating.

• West Seattle Block Watch Captains' Network November 16, 2015 (9:49 pm)

  To Chas & T: Speaking specifically to the points you raised, people who are part of Block Watch groups do have the contact info for the Captains as well as other neighbors.
  .
  I don’t agree that making our names and contact info public citywide to anyone who wants to know, is required. There are many ways that those within a community, with good intentions, can find us.

• wssz November 16, 2015 (10:01 pm)

  King tv is covering this tonight — http://www.king5.com/story/news/2015/11/17/block-watch-captain-records-request/75911670/

• 15 minutes of lame November 16, 2015 (10:09 pm)

  It appears Keith loves to see his name in the press and will generate requests like this to sit back and watch the drama unfold.

  It’s creepy and it’s disturbing, yet we are giving him the attention he was seeking all along.

  Just reading his facebook page, I can see a guy who is a bit of a disturbed egomaniac. I think we are feeding the beast.

  Keith, congrats – you are famous for all the wrong reasons. Now I suggest you step away from the QuickBooks and explore the world and solve real problems. Hunger, poverty…start there.

• KWS November 16, 2015 (10:11 pm)

  Thanks aa and KBear, I had to read the letter more closely to realize just names were provided not the full request. Still, a strange thing to be considered accessible public record, IMO.

• Sue November 16, 2015 (10:58 pm)

  TR, I totally agree with how much info is already online. I work for attorneys, and I had to contact hundreds of stockholders of one of our clients. When an address came back as undeliverable, I would have to sleuth for them online. I am not trained in finding people online, but I was shocked at how much info I could easily getfrom voter databases and property records. Even obituaries helped me track down relatives who were listed in it, as to where they lived. The internet knows way more about us than we may think.

• wb November 17, 2015 (12:12 am)

  I agree with Karen. “Block Captains don’t work for SPD or the City of Seattle. It’s a volunteer role that varies from neighborhood-to-neighborhood.”

  The information is not SPD’s to give out.

• MD November 17, 2015 (12:29 am)

  As a blockwatch captain I find this request unsettling. Blockwatch captains are not agents of the SPD or security enforcers. For the most part we maintain a contact list for our neighborhood, forward security notices from SPD and various notices from other neighbors out to the list, and organize the annual block party.

  The Seattle PD states the following on their page about block watch captains’ responsibility “The Seattle Police Department does not disclose the names of block watch participants, Block Captains, Co-Captains or Block Contacts to anyone for any reason unless we have been given expressed permission by the individual to give out their individual contact information.” They state that for a reason. They want neighbors to be comfortable stepping up to help prevent crime via communication. They don’t want those people to be targeted by telemarketers, fanatics or malevolent types as a result.

  Based on the behavioral public record of Mr. Gormezano I’m glad he didn’t obtain email or address info. Had he gotten that we all probably would have been added to his disgruntle-spam recipient list. I feel sorry for his audience and do not wish to be part of it.

• sophista-tiki November 17, 2015 (3:29 am)

  Dude sounds cracked, hes up to something shady. The SPD senses it may be an issue which is why they sent out the letter to cover their butts, and this guy is watching everything being said about him on this matter. Sounds like mission accomplished to me.
  You guys are being too polite about it.

• MC November 17, 2015 (5:26 am)

  This guy seems like a major creep.

• Cami November 17, 2015 (6:57 am)

  This is one of the strangest stories to date, TR.

• sam-c November 17, 2015 (8:30 am)

  Like Sue mentions, a lot of info is out there. Recently I had to send a few thank you cards, and our address book was MIA. I looked up all 4 friends and found their addresses online through various searches. I was kinda surprised and disturbed.

• Hey November 17, 2015 (8:47 am)

  Keith can be reached at 206-789-8328 or drquickbooks1@hotmail.com. It would be kind of fun if everyone concerned voiced there concerns to him directly.

• Tim Clemans November 17, 2015 (9:24 am)

  Public records is an issue I care deeply about. Thank you for publishing the letter and full response by the requester. I only found this on here because I was looking up West Seattle traffic.

• HelperMonkey November 17, 2015 (9:52 am)

  well, lets just hope that all this notoriety hurts “dr. quickbooks” business. I certainly wouldn’t hire him to have anything to do with my financials – he seems like a super shady character. There’s literally no reason he needs this information other than to intimidate people. What is his end goal? Without knowing that we can only assume his intentions are nefarious and I hope someone is keeping tabs on him.

• Ms. Sparkles November 17, 2015 (9:53 am)

  “15 minutes of lame” (great name btw) totally nailed it. He’s doing this because he can, it gives him attention and creates drama for his entertainment.

• Tim Clemans November 17, 2015 (10:03 am)

  Now I see why this is such a big deal: “The Seattle Police Department does not disclose the names of block watch participants, Block Captains, Co-Captains or Block Contacts to anyone for any reason unless we have been given expressed permission by the individual to give out their individual contact information.” – http://www.seattle.gov/police/blockwatch/captain.htm

• Lorraine November 17, 2015 (10:30 am)

  OK, so how on earth do we get to a point where the information has been shared with an individual before the persons on the list have been notified? AND on top of this it clearly states SPD does not disclose names unless they have been given expressed permission by the individual to do so!

  I respect the SPD, they are great in my neighbourhood, but really!!!!! It does not add up!

  Having said that – It does make you stop and think, I was looking at some holiday cards on line earlier today, then I looked up the weather at Snoqualmie . . what pops up? every card I hovered over and flashing adds for other holiday cards…. Every move is tracked, enjoy life in the fast lane!!

  “The Man” has got you by the knackers!!!

• LarryB November 17, 2015 (10:31 am)

  @Tim Clemans – Maybe this is the crux – the SPD makes a promise that it can’t keep because it isn’t legal. Thus, grounds for a (frivolous) lawsuit. Just speculation.

• Pile-o-Rox November 17, 2015 (10:34 am)

  The above information regarding the SPD assurance of privacy is interesting when considered in conjunction with Mr. Gormezano’s action.

  It may also provide a potential avenue for action against Mr. Gormezano sounding in intentional interference with contract (i.e., if I have a contract with A and B knows about that contract and intentionally interferences with A’s performance of our contract and/or induces a breach by A, B can be liable in tort).

• BJ November 17, 2015 (10:49 am)

  Personally I agree and disagree with a lot of you in these threads re: this particular situation. Still just makes me wanna kick this guy’s a$$, though…

• RJB November 17, 2015 (10:52 am)

  Google him…not someone I would want to have any personal info about me.

• s November 17, 2015 (11:16 am)

  wssz, you may want to leave a review of your experience on his Yelp review page…
  *
  http://www.yelp.com/biz/dr-quick-books-seattle-5

• Mickymse November 17, 2015 (11:51 am)

  It seems there are many, MANY people here who don’t understand how much of your information is completely open to the public in Washington state and in general. It would be fairly easy for any of us to learn much more personal information than your name and the fact that you have volunteered to be a Block Watch captain or Night Out volunteer.

• SCJ November 17, 2015 (1:07 pm)

  After a quick FB search last night I discovered that I have a few mutual “friends” in common with Keith. I asked one of them to reach out to him. This is his reply to that friend:

  He said he is purely just checking to see if what the spd discloses as the number is actually accurate. He said he had wished there was a way to connect the block watch captains so they could communicate with each other. He wrote for the info in July, and received it on Oct 27. The letter from spd to all of us was just released yesterday.

  I wrote Mark Solomon to find out why the delay in alerting us, but have not heard back.

• mkl November 17, 2015 (2:59 pm)

  Off topic but a fascinating glimpse into the unpredictable nature of yelp reviews. And I say that as a passionate Yelp fan. He has 10 Five Star reviews. And, if you know where to look, another 11 “Not Recommended” reviews. All One star. His 5 star rating is a wee misleading.

• Phil Mocek November 17, 2015 (3:44 pm)

  I’m curious why some commenters here believe that our government should be able to hide this public record–a list of names of block watch captains and Night Out organizers–from us. If they were hiding it from the public, then there would be cause for investigation.

• Scott November 17, 2015 (4:07 pm)

  Half the comments on this post are probably from the dude who requested this information.

  Same guy who feels like he one upped Safeway by posting his membership card info to the internet to mess up their data collection on his buying habits.

  What a waste of time for everyone, including me making this comment.

  • WSB November 17, 2015 (4:10 pm)

    No, we recognize most of the commenters. A few first-timers, though, so who knows.

• wssz November 17, 2015 (4:27 pm)

  Phil Mocek — I think the real question is why someone would target Block Watch and Night Out volunteers. It’s not about assuming that our personal information is not available. It’s that someone wants a complete list of these names. What is that about?

  SJC — I hope that he is being honest to your FB friend. If true, why didn’t Dr. Quickbooks/Keith Gormezano provide that information when asked by the SPD, WSB, and King 5 news?

  MKL — Where are you finding his Not Recommended, 1-star reviews?

• SJC November 17, 2015 (7:23 pm)

  Phil Mocek – From what I understand he’s kind of a weird guy, but my friend thinks he’s harmless. Let’s hope that’s the case.

• Phil Mocek November 18, 2015 (9:25 am)

  Wssz, if before reading this post I had come upon the notice from SPD that they will refuse to provide a public record (as pointed out above by Tim), I very likely would have challenged it by requesting the record myself. It’s a violation of state law for them to refuse public access to this public record.

  I don’t know Mr. Gormezano, but from what I’ve read, I suspect he did this to prove a point about government transparency and about misinformation published by our public staff. Good for him!

• Question Mark November 18, 2015 (10:10 am)

  @WSBWCN, “Need to know” implies secrecy and is opposite of public, as in Public Records. I certainly understand the desire of people to be as private as possible in their lives, but we all, for better or worse, have a public records trail.

• Phil Mocek November 18, 2015 (11:29 am)

  Being a neighborhood watch block captain and registering as a organizer of a Night Out event are public activities, not a private ones. Ditto for the requesting of public records–though that can be done anonymously.

• West Seattle Block Watch Captains' Network November 18, 2015 (10:36 pm)

  @Question Mark and @Phil Mocek: As a visible and easily findable BW Captain, believe me, I am not advocating secrecy. Most other Block Watch Captains I know are not in hiding either, but most I’ve talked with would prefer to have some control over how and if our personal contact info and names are shared. Perhaps “need to know’ wasn’t the best terminology for me to use when I commented earlier, because my point was: Does this requestor, someone outside West Seattle, really have a need to have my name and contact info?
  .
  I totally get that Public Disclosure laws are not based on “need to know” and I realize now that I should have prefaced that remark with the comment that I do not agree that this information should fall under Public Disclosure Laws.
  .
  As a Block Captain, I am not in a “public role” volunteering with the City, but rather I am an individual who is volunteering to be a go-between between SPD/the City and my neighborhood.
  .
  Most Block Captains that I know DO NOT feel that they have volunteered with the City if they registered their Block Watch group with the SPD Crime Prevention Coordinators; rather they feel they let them know that they have/formed a Block Watch group. Many registered so that they would receive email updates and newsletters.
  .
  It’s a similar situation with the people I know who organized Night Out events in 2014 and 2015. Their intent was not to sign up with the City for a public role or as a volunteer; rather most feel they were notifying the City that they were planning an event that night and many were only “signing up” on the Night Out site in order to get permission to block off their street for a party or be included on a map of Night Out events. Some may have even registered so that the firefighters and police officers would stop by our block parties with fire trucks and patrol cars.
  .
  In my opinion, this is a huge distinction. Are we city volunteers, in which case Public Disclosure Request would apply, or are we merely people whose contact data and other information may be stored by the City?
  ,
  -Karen B (Co-founder, WSBWCN)

• Wb November 18, 2015 (11:04 pm)

  Phil, you should understand these are not paid public employees, and don’t deserve to have their information given to questionable individuals. Unless of course, you are offering to pay for their services?

  And for those who passively assume that the internet already knows everything so what’s the big deal? Some of us take great care in keeping private information out of the public domain for job reasons or personal safety reasons — these are exactly the reasons I have quit voting and hold no property in my name. I’ll add not volunteering to the list.

• Phil Mocek November 20, 2015 (8:17 am)

  Karen B. asked, “Does this requestor, someone outside West Seattle, really have a need to have my name and contact info?”

  Only he knows. And it’s irrelevant. A better question, I think, is, “Does the police department need your name and contact information?”

  “Most Block Captains that I know DO NOT feel that they have volunteered with the City [by way of registering] their Block Watch group with the SPD Crime Prevention Coordinators”

  I don’t feel that those people have, per say, volunteered with the city in that circumstance. However, they have registered their group with the city, and that registration is a matter of public record. Maybe they should explore the possibility of registration without providing personal identity. For example, they could send a letter signed only as the group, notifying public staff that the group exists, regular meeting time and location, etc.

  “Many registered so that they would receive email updates and newsletters.”

  Then subscription to a mailing list alone would likely have been a better option for them than to have registered their groups with SPD.

  “[The intent of most people who organized Night Out events in 2014 and 2015 was] notifying the City that they were planning an event that night and many were only “signing up” on the Night Out site in order to get permission to block off their street for a party or be included on a map of Night Out events.”

  Notifying the City that one plans to close access to a public street for a party is a matter of public record. I don’t know if anonymous or pseudonymous notification is acceptable, but it seems preferable for people who wish to provide such notification without divulging their identities.

• Ann K. November 20, 2015 (8:28 pm)

  Found this about the individual in question in this document (chapter from a book):
  http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/fraudid.html

  “Le Beacon Presse appeared to be a classic business success story. Between 1980 and 1984 its sales increased from $15 million to $666 million. That was good enough for 35th place on Inc. magazine’s list of the 500 fastest-growing companies in the United States. However, the company existed only in the fertile imagination of its creator, Keith Gormezano, a Seattle apartment manager. He obtained listings in Standard and Poor’s and Dunn and Bradstreet. He made up phony documents and in a classic move parlayed one listing into another. He also managed to get himself listed in .’Who’s Who in Black America,” although he is white.”

• Keith Gormezano November 22, 2015 (3:41 pm)

  I am very sorry if anyone was upset by my asking for public information again that I have received before (and nothing bad happened then). I had valid reasons for asking for this information.
  .
  If anyone has resigned from being a Block Watch Captain, I would urge you to withdraw it. It is a valuable program that helps make our city safer and allows us to get to know our neighbors through programs like Night Out. The same applies for anyone thinking of becoming a Block Watch Captain or organizing a Night Out event.
  .
  I would have responded sooner but my parents live in France as do my cousins in Paris. I have been distracted worrying about them as well as being the subject of 11 p.m. phone calls, several harassing e-mails and social media posts, and being signed up for numerous political and hate group mailing lists.
  .
  I don’t have a problem with some of you not agreeing with my viewpoint but please don’t engage in cyber-terrorism and bullying. Your parents taught you better.
  .
  Once a public agency has your contact information in a database, that database is subject to public disclosure. Including residential addresses, phone numbers, and e-mails (contrary to what the police department is alleging).
  .
  The reason I know that is because I have been successful in the past in getting the mailing lists for Mayor Ed Murray, 6 out of 7 city council members, the neighborhood business and associations list from the Office of Neighborhoods, the state voter’s database and many others.
  .
  As a privacy advocate, the only way to find out what our public agencies are keeping on us is to examine those records.
  .
  I had three main reasons for asking for the names, addresses, phone, and e-mails.
  .
  The first is that the Seattle Police Department claims that there are 3,800 block watches in the City of Seattle. I think it is reasonable to presume that each watch has one captain. Unfortunately, the list they provided for me
  for the South sector only had 227 and the SW is only 155. If I give them the benefit of the doubt and multiple 5 sectors times 227, I only come up with around 1,100. So where are the missing 2700 (rhymes with 4400)?
  .
  As a taxpayer, I want my dollars to be used well. Or perhaps, the Seattle Police Department needs to be honest with us about the actual numbers.
  .
  The second reason is that it always struck me that Block Watch Captains ought to be able to talk to each other privately. I had the idea of sending out invitations to join a Yahoo or Google Group.
  .
  Then members could talk about what works for them, what doesn’t, which of the SPD Community Organizers are worth working with (I was not impressed with Neil Hansen), etc. without having Kathleen’s Thought Police hovering nearby.
  .
  I have noticed at least one person who commented that they asked for the same information I asked for and were told that the information was not available.
  .
  A third reason is that if you want to start a Block Watch, it would easier if you knew someone who was already an organizer so I will be posting the names of Block Watch Captains for the Southwest and South as the West Seattle Blog covers those area. If you are thinking of forming one or are one, I encourage you to take a look.
  .
  I am still puzzled why the Seattle Police Department posted and sent their announcement (all the recipients are now subject to the public disclosure act) naming me as the requester. What was their legal authority for doing so AFTER the fact. It seems like it backfired from all the anger and publicity it caused.
  .
  What I don’t understand is why didn’t Mark Solomon or Steve Wilske just call me up and say, “Legal says we have to notify everyone on the list. Is there a way we can work on this?”
  .
  And I would have said, “Sure, I can even say why I am asking for this information to make it easier for you.” But they never asked. Why?
  .
  Or perhaps that was their intention. Enough Block Watch Captains resign and the city decides to defund the program?
  .
  Finally, I like to thank everyone who posted links to my websites. As a result of your activities, my social media ranking on Google has doubled from the increased clicks.

• Phil Mocek November 23, 2015 (2:53 pm)

  Good work, Keith!

• wssz November 24, 2015 (2:52 pm)

  I wish I had known more about “Dr. Quickbooks” / Keith Gormezano before hiring him over the summer to set up my Quickbooks.

  I was referred to him by a client. Both of us have been watching this thread, along with our advisers and his staff.

  Neither of us would work with him again nor will we be recommending him.

• Kelly December 1, 2015 (8:07 am)

  I hope Mr. Gormezano will choose not to post the names of Block Watch captains anywhere. We already have ways to organize and network with each other, and are as visible in the community as we each desire to be, so there is no problem to be solved by posting names online. It is presumptuous and tone deaf to concerns about retaliation to insist otherwise.

Sorry, comment time is over.