Monday, February 23, 2015 -- The Fourth Meeting of the Charter Review Commission

The third meeting of the Whatcom County Charter Review Commission was held on Monday, February 9, 2015. This meeting was hosted by the Lummi Nation at the Lummi Admin Center.

The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:30 pm by commission chairman, Ben Elenbaas.

After the flag salute and roll call, the floor was opened to public comments.

Whatcom County executive staff were on hand to answer questions about which non-profits have contracts or receive money from the county general fund, as requested by Cliff Langley and Barbara Ryan. It is a long list, and to prevent information overload, the commission asked for the top ten, or some other executive summary in a future report, rather than detail and classify every contract.

There were many people lined up to protest "amendment 7" as listed on the agenda. (We have posted articles about it, here and here.) Not all of the testimony was printed, but we will publish the text of the public testimony as (or if) it it becomes available. You can hear the entire testimony in the audio transcription, below.

Stoney Bird brought up some more about proportional voting, which invited some interesting discussion. Watch for developments.

There were a few testimonials for and against Equitable Representation by District.

The commission discussed and passed Representation by District, and deferred the rest of the amendments to future meetings. The reason for this is that the public testimony took up more time than anticipated. There was some discussion of whether the current districting and allocation of councilors could be modified to enhance the effectiveness (or attractiveness) of Representation by District. Note that passage does not guarantee that this amendment cannot be revisited. The modified commission rules make it possible for any commissioner to bring this up for more debate. 

Ben Elenbaas had to leave at 7:30, so the gavel was transferred to Joe Elenbaas.

Here is the audio from the full meeting:

 

Joe Elenbaas gaveled the meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm.

Fourth Charter Review Commission Meeting February 23, 2015, 6:30 PM (Monday)

The fourth meeting of the Charter Review Commission will be held on Monday, February 23 at 6:30 PM in the Lummi Administration Center, 2665 Kwina Road (directions ... ).

This is the first "away" meeting for the commission. These away meetings are intended to help engage the local residents in the Charter Review process. The Lummi Administration Center is a very impressive building, and it should be worth the trip out there for that reason alone. But of course, the real reason for attending these meetings is to have a say in how your Whatcom County government will run for the next ten years. The public session is your chance to be heard. 

Agenda

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Public Session
   Members of the public will have 3 minutes to address the Commission on any subject. Each speaker should state his or her name for the record. To submit handouts, please provide one for each commissioner and two for staff and the record.
5. Approval of Minutes for February 9, 2015
6. Old Business: Discussion and Possible Vote on Proposed Charter Amendments to Voters at the next General Election (The Commission will take a mid-meeting break if necessary.)
   Proposed Amendment 1: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of council members within the council district from which the candidate was nominated?
   Proposed Amendment 2: Shall the Charter, in Article 5.40 and Article 5.60, be amended to increase the "concise statement" limit from 20 words to 40 words?
   Proposed Amendment 3: Shall Charter Section 8.20 be amended to prohibit the County Council from proposing Charter amendments on matters that have been approved by a 2/3 majority of voters?
   Proposed Amendment 4: Shall the Charter Preamble be amended affirm the diversity of our citizens?
   Proposed Amendment 5: Shall the Charter be amended to facilitate voting on initiative and referendum?
   Proposed Amendment 6: Shall the Charter be amended to apply term limits to the County Councilmembers, Executive, Auditor, Treasurer, Assessor, and Sheriff?
   Proposed Amendment 7: Shall the County Charter prohibit grants and expenditures to non-profit organizations unless the County is reimbursed by another organization or jurisdiction?
7. New Business
   Shall Charter Section 4.10 be amended to provide voter education concerning county officials’ election titles?
8. Adjourn

The next meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on Monday, March 9, 2015 at the Civic

Center Garden Level Conference Room, 322 N. Commercial Street, Bellingham

Bellingham Herald Article Misleading on Proposed Amendment

We wrote about a proposed charter amendment that was made at the February 9 meeting. This amendment would curtail the County funding various non-profits around our county.

Ralph Schwartz from the Bellingham Herald was quick to write a headline grabbing article about the amendment.   With a title like " Whatcom government couldn't give to nonprofits under charter-review proposal", we can see why the citizens of Bellingham would be instantly enraged.  We wish that Ralph had included more details because there is much more to the story.

This charter amendment comes out of some happenings during the Whatcom County budget talks back in October, 2014.  The County Council had two meetings where the different departments in the County presented their budget requests.

On October 23, 2014 Ken Mann brings up that he had a meeting with the director of the food bank and he would like to give them more money to buy food.  A summary of the conversation is provided in the draft minutes from that day.  The discussion about the food bank begins on page 17.

The food bank was budgeted to receive $50,000 for service delivery.  Ken Mann wanted to increase the amount by $80,000 for the food bank to buy actual food.  He is immediately told by Dewey Dessler, county special projects manager,  that the County can not give the Food Bank money for actual food because that would be a gift to citizens and that is against the State Constitution. The problem is that the Food Bank does not have it's clients fill out any verification on what their income level is.  The County could give food to people who are poor and infirm. However, the Bellingham Food Bank doesn't ask them for that info so therefore, the County can not give them money for actual food.

In addition, to the transaction not being legal, Tawni Helms from Administrative Services Department,  affirmed to the Council that the food bank had not asked or applied for additional funds.

The rest of the conversation centered on how the County could get around the State Constitution and give the money to the food bank.  Ken Mann, Barbara Brenner and Pete Kremen were both insistent that the Executives office could find a work around.  You know, find a way to break the law, wink wink.

On October 27, 2014 the County Council then voted to send this extra money, that the food bank did not ask for, and is against the State Constitution, to the food bank for purchasing food.  Sam Crawford was the only one opposed.

So now you know the rest of the story.

Here is the audio from the Council meeting on this discussion:

Comment: In Support of Equitable Representation by District

The following comment was presented by Karl Uppiano, District 1, Ferndale, at the February 9 Charter Review Commission meeting.

Whatcom County has a diverse population. The people of District 1 are more urban; the people of Districts 2 & 3 are more rural. Each district has the right to elect representation that reflects their local needs and preferences.

Proponents of at-large representation claim that the Whatcom County Council should represent everyone. That’s absolutely true. But unless my arithmetic fails me, equitable representation by district gives us two councilors per district, and one at-large, which in fact, covers everyone. Councilors and the citizens would have a closer relationship, and more likely to be neighbors.

With the exception of the at-large seat, campaigning by district would involve 1/3 the time, effort, and money per candidate. This makes the job accessible to more people. This ought to appeal to commissioners who want to get the money out of politics. Campaigning by district would also amount to 1/3 the environmental impact, in the form of signs, flyers, rack cards, brochures, and last, but not least, carbon footprint.

If we are going to have districts in this county, then we ought to use them as they were originally intended – representing directly the diverse needs and preferences of all corners of Whatcom County.

View source (PDF) ...

Proposed Amendment: Narrowing the Pay Differential Between the Council Members and the Executive

The following charter amendment was proposed by Roger Brown, at the February 9 Charter Review Commission meeting.

MEMO

February 9, 2015 

To: Whatcom County Charter Review Commission 

From: Roger Brown 

Re: Executive and Council Compensation 

Article 11, sections 3 through 5 of the Washington Constitution control the creation and governance of counties. The constitution allows for two forms of county government: the commission form and the home rule charter form. Of Washington's 39 counties, 33 "non-charter" counties operate under the commission form of government. According to the Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC), 

“The commission form is often referred to as the "plural executive" form of government. Under the commission form, the county governing body consists of a three-member board of commissioners, elected on a partisan basis, who serve as the county's legislative body and also perform executive functions. Counties with populations greater than 300,000 can increase the size of the commission from three to five members…  

Although there is no constitutional or statutory requirement for county commissioners to delegate any of their executive authority to a separately-appointed administrator, many of them have, to a limited degree, chosen to do so.”1 

The other six counties operate under home rule charters. Whatcom County is one of four Washington home rule charter counties governed by an elected council and a separately elected executive. The other three are Pierce, King and Snohomish counties. The charters of each of these four counties mandate distinct legislative and executive branches. The Whatcom County Charter states: 

“Article 1. Powers of the County
Section 1.50 Separation of Powers and Cooperation of Branches.
There shall be separation of powers into two branches of government: executive and legislative. Both branches are to dutifully fulfill their responsibilities and refrain from overextending their authority, as defined in this Charter…”2 

As noted, the commission form of government allocates equal power to each board member. The Council-Elected Executive form of government , however, requires careful partition of responsibilities and balancing of resources to ensure that each branch asserts only those authorities apportioned by law. Avoiding aggrandizement of power within the executive branch, where a single person directs the great majority of the County’s administrative apparatus, warrants particular attention. Setting appropriate compensation levels for the executive and legislative branches is a critically important element of this process. 

The Whatcom County Charter was approved in 1978. For the next 34 years, the County Council set salaries for all County officers. In 2011, the Council passed Ordinance 2011-026, which referred a Charter amendment to a vote of the people . The amendment provided for salaries to be set by an independent commission “ to eliminate the inherent conflict of an elected official setting his or her own potential future salary.”3 This amendment was approved and is now codified in the Charter as follows: 

“Section 6.100 Salaries of Elected Officials. 

The county council shall establish by ordinance and in accordance with law an independent ‘citizens’ commission on salaries for elected officials’ which shall fix the salaries for the county council, executive, assessor, auditor, prosecuting attorney, sheriff and treasurer. Salary commission members shall serve two year terms ending December 31, 2014 and every two years thereafter. Members of the salary commission shall serve without compensation, but may receive reimbursement for mileage to and from meetings and for other such expenses directly related to their service as provided by ordinance. 

The salary commission shall meet biennially and shall file the salary schedule with the county council and county auditor not later than May 1. The salary schedule shall become effective January 1 of the following calendar year and incorporated into the county budget without further action of the county council, county executive or salary commission...” (emphasis added). 

Hence, the unelected members of the Salary Commission set salaries based entirely on their own judgment - with no external policy constraints. This arrangement is admirable for independence but the inherent lack of accountability may not serve the public interest. The following table presents executive and legislative salaries for Whatcom County compared to the other three Council-Elected Executive governments. 

 

The column labeled “COUNCIL PCT OF EXEC PAY” shows council salary as a percentage of executive salary. This indicates that the council’s compensation, relative to that of the executive , is far lower in Whatcom County than in the other jurisdictions. 

The charters of King and Pierce counties specifically address the executive-legislative pay differential:

• King County: “…The county executive shall receive compensation at least one and one-half times the compensation paid to a councilman…” 4 Subject only to this limitation, the King County Council has authority to establish the compensation to be paid to all county officers and employees.
• Pierce County: “…Councilmembers shall be paid 60 percent of the Executive's compensation…”5 Pierce County does have a Commission on Salaries for Elected Officials. However it is an advisory body and does not make a final decision.6 

CONCLUSION

Compensation of the legislative branch in Whatcom County is extremely low relative to that of the executive branch, differing significantly in that respect from the other three counties using the Council-Elected Executive governance model. The reasons for this result are unclear, but in any case the disparity would seem to undermine the Council’s ability to function effectively as a separate and coequal branch of government. In effect, the current salary structure treats the Council as if its work can be accomplished on a part-time basis. I believe this premise is wrong, and that as a consequence many councilors are unable to give optimum attention and study to all the matters that come before them. The Charter Review Commission, whose members are elected and whose recommendations must be submitted for voter approval, should consider adopting policies to guide the Salary Commission. This seems especially appropriate in determining the executive and legislative pay differential, which affects the balance of power between these two branches. I have attached a proposed Charter amendment addressing this issue. It is based on the Pierce County document. cc Salary Commission 5 Pierce County Charter Section 2.20. 6 Snohomish County has a salary commission with powers that parallel those of the Whatcom County Salary Commission, but has produced results generally compatible with those for Pierce and King counties.4 

ATTACHMENT: PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT

Section 6.100 Salaries of Elected Officials. 

The county council shall establish by ordinance and in accordance with law an independent “citizens’ commission on salaries for elected officials” which shall fix the salaries for the county council, executive, assessor, auditor, prosecuting attorney, sheriff and treasurer, provided that council members shall be paid 60 percent of the executive's compensation. Salary commission members shall serve two-year terms ending December 31, 2014 and every two years thereafter. Members of the salary commission shall serve without compensation, but may receive reimbursement for mileage to and from meetings and for other such expenses directly related to their service as provided by ordinance. 

The salary commission shall meet biennially and shall file the salary schedule with the county council and county auditor not later than May 1. The salary schedule shall become effective January 1 of the following calendar year and incorporated into the county budget without further action of the county council, county executive or salary commission. 

The salaries for the county council, executive, assessor, auditor, prosecuting attorney, sheriff and treasurer in effect on January 1, 2012 shall remain in effect until changed as provided herein. (Ord. 2011- 026 Exh. A)

View source (PDF) ...

Proposed Amendment: Discourage Rent-Seeking Special Interests

The following charter amendment was presented by Carole Perry, at the February 9 Charter Review Commission meeting.

Carole Perry read the following email from Whatcom County Council Member Sam Crawford into the public record:

As the County Council is finalizing the 2015/2016 county budget, I thought of a charter amendment (below) that might save the taxpayers quite a bit of money... money that necessarily comes out of our general fund property tax revenues because no other county fund is eligible for public "charitable expenditures". The county's "general fund" is the most vulnerable and greatest-need fund because it's what pays for the county's essential services such as the criminal justice system, sheriff, basic services, etc. 

Over the years we've put money into everything from the Whatcom Symphony to Food Banks to Historical Societies to Festivals to Chambers of Commerce to whatever. Often it is a matter of behind the scenes lobbying (as just occurred for one group who was successful in obtaining $80,000 yesterday, and that's in addition to a bunch of other organization contributions already in the proposed budget) 

Whatcom County Charter Section 6.74 Charitable Appropriations  

The Whatcom County Executive and the Whatcom County Councilmembers shall not distribute county funds via grants or expenditures, whether budgeted or non-budgeted, to charitable, educational, civic, homeowner, neighborhood, arts, trade, business, religious or scientific non-profit organizations or any other similar types of community organizations/groups not mentioned herein, unless the grant or expenditure is directly reimbursed by community, private, state or federal grant agencies for the identical purposes for which the agency/government grant is provided. 

On the other hand, I guess another possibility (if you like the idea of the county taxpayers collectively contributing to some of these various charities) would be to not prohibit these expenditures, but somehow require more public notice and review (not sure how you'd do that through the charter). 

Sam Crawford 

Whatcom County Council Member 

360 676-6690 

Emails by Councilmembers are considered public documents and subject to disclosure.

View source (PDF) ... 

Proposed Amendment: Stricter Residency Requirements for Political Candidates

The following charter amendment was proposed by Delaine Clizbe, District 1, at the February 9 Charter Review Commission meeting.

Thank you all for beginning the discussion about amending the Charter to allow for equal representation on our County Council. In addition to that change, I would also like you to consider adding some residency requirements for candidates running for County Council and Executive positions in our County.

As I'm sure you are all aware, last year one candidate for the 42nd district senate race was criticized for changing addresses at the last minute in order to qualify as a candidate in the district. State law requires only that a candidate is registered to vote in their district at the time they declare their candidacy. In my opinion this leaves a wide opening for address hopping.

RCW 29A.24.075 The name of a candidate for an office shall not appear on a ballot for that office unless, except for judge of the superior court and as provided in RCW 3.50.057, the candidate is, at the time the candidate's declaration of candidacy is filed, properly registered to vote in the geographic area represented by the office. 

Other Counties have added additional residency requirements for County Council Candidates:

Pierce County Charter Section 4.3 In addition, all Council members shall be residents and registered voters of their Council districts for at least one year immediately prior to filing for the Council position, and shall maintain residency in the Council district during the term for which the Councilmember was elected

Snohomish County Charter Section 4.3 Each county official holding an elective office shall be, at the time of appointment or election and at all times while holding office, a citizen of the United States over the age of twenty-one, a county resident for the three years immediately prior to filing for or appointment to office, and a registered voter of the county. No person shall be eligible to be elected to more than three consecutive full terms for any office. For the purposes of this section, different positions on the county council shall not be considered different offices. 

I am suggesting a simple change to Section 2.11 by adding the following statement: All Council members shall be residents and registered voters of their Council Districts for at least one year immediately prior to filing for the Council position ... And to Section 3.21, The County Executive shall be a resident and a registered voter in Whatcom County for at least one year immediately prior to filing for office.

When I moved to Bellingham to attend Western I had to pay out of state tuition until I had lived here for a year. In addition, we require voters to have their voters registration done one month before they can vote. So I don't think it is too much to ask that our County Council and Executive have lived in our community for a period of time before they can run for office. Thank you for considering this proposal.

View source (PDF) ...

Monday, February 9, 2015 -- The Third Meeting of the Charter Review Commission

The third meeting of the Whatcom County Charter Review Commission was held on Monday, February 9, 2015.

The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:30 pm by commission chairman, Ben Elenbaas.

After the flag salute and roll call, the floor was opened to public comments. We will publish the text of the public testimony when it becomes available.

• Dorothy Booth (Birch Bay Chamber of Commerce meeting invitation)
• Stoney Bird (proposal for proportional representation amendment)
• Karl Uppiano (supporting equitable representation by district amendment)
• Bob Burr (encouraging non-partisanship and democracy)
• Gene Goldsmith (opposing diversity amendment to the preamble; proposal for term limits amendment)
• Roger Brown (proposal for amendment narrowing the pay differential between council members and the executive)
• Larry Kellerman (sp?) (supporting district-only voting amendment)
• Carole Perry (proposal for amendment requiring the general fund to be used for essential government services, not charity or non-profit benefits)
• Delaine Clizbe (proposal for amendment requiring stricter residency requirements for political candidates)
• Debbie Adelstein (follow-up information from her presentation last time)

The commission wrapped up deliberation on meeting locations, although they may revisit this again as needed. There were some conflicts with meeting location availability in Sudden Valley, so the clerk was instructed to see if some alternative locations are available. 

A considerable amount of discussion was devoted to determining how to balance the seemingly conflicting objectives of collecting citizen input and having sufficient time to debate charter amendments. A proposal to hold off debate on all charter amendments until near the end of the meeting series (in June) was rejected on a 2/3 roll call vote, required because such a rule change would restrict the commission's options. Finally, a compromise measure that would allow amendments to be debated as they are received, with a rule change that allows any commissioner to move to reconsider any amendment after a vote (usually only allowed for members of the prevailing vote) passed unanimously on a 2/3 roll call vote.

Thereafter, a number of amendments were read into the record, moved and seconded for consideration as old business in the upcoming meetings. 

Here is the audio from the full meeting:

 

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:40 pm. 

Third Charter Review Commission Meeting February 9, 2015, 6:30 PM (Monday)

The third meeting of the Charter Review Commission will be held on Monday, February 9 at 6:30 PM in the Civic Center Garden Room, 322 N. Commercial St., Bellingham (across from the library).

Agenda 

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Public Session - Members of the public will have 3 minutes to address the Commission on any subject. Each speaker should state his or her name for the record. To submit handouts, please provide one for each commissioner and two for staff and the record.
5. Approval of Minutes for January 26, 2015
6. Discuss and Approve Regular and Special Meeting Schedule and Location(s) - Continued from January 26, 2015
7. Discussion and Possible Vote to Amend the Rules of Order Discuss and vote on the process for scheduling proposed Charter amendments on the Commission agenda. (The Commission will take a mid-meeting break if necessary.)
8. Discussion and Possible Vote on Submitting Proposed Charter Amendments to Voters at the next General Election 
   Proposed Amendment #1: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of council members within the council district from which the candidate was nominated?
   Proposed Amendment #2: Shall the Charter in Article 5.40 and Article 5.60 be amended to increase the "concise statement" limit from 20 words to 40 words? 
   Proposed Amendment #3: Expand the preamble to affirm the diversity of our citizens. 
   Proposed Amendment #4: Shall the charter be amended to facilitate voting on initiative and referendum?
9. Other Business - Discuss and approve agenda items for the next Commission meeting.
10. Adjourn

The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, February 23, 2015 at the Lummi Administration Building, 2665 Kwina Road, Bellingham.

Amendment Text (PDF)

Be sure and show up to show your support for (or opposition to) the proposed amendments, and make your concerns heard. The commission cannot represent you if they don't know what your feelings are. If you speak in public session, your opinions will be read into the official public record.