Monday, May 18, 2015 -- Proceedings of The Tenth Meeting of the Charter Review Commission

The tenth meeting of the Whatcom County Charter Review Commission was held on Monday, May 18, 2015.

The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:40 pm by commission chairman, Ben Elenbaas.

After the flag salute (to an image on a smart phone) and roll call, the floor was opened to public comments.

Satpal Sidhu was on hand to present his thoughts to the commission. He implied that the commission was being irresponsible with our children's and grandchildren's futures. Which is what progressives think about any conservative agenda, and vice-versa. 

Proposed Amendment 1, by Joe Elenbaas, Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of council members within the council district from which the candidate was nominated? and Proposed Amendment 16, by Wes Kentch, Shall the Charter be amended to increase transparency in funding between Whatcom County and nonprofit non-governmental organizations (NGOs)? received the most attention from the public.

County Auditor Debbie Adelstein testified that the council clerk verified that the council could probably meet the requirements of Proposed Amendment 15 from Jon Mutchler: County Auditor duties and responsibilities, without the need for a specific change to the charter.

After a short break, the commission resumed the agenda with old business. 

The commission discussed Proposed Amendment 15. Based mostly on the testimony of the county auditor, the commission voted to reject the amendment unanimously, except for commissioner May abstaining. 

Before discussing Proposed Amendment 16, the commission heard from county staff, Tyler Schroeder, project manager from the Executive's office, and Brad Bennett, financial manager, who provided information about the financial review that the county performs on contracts with outside vendors. The commission really wanted to know if the county already does what the amendment is trying to accomplish. The amendment was rejected with commissioner Kentch abstaining.

Proposed Amendment 17 from Richard May: Shall the Charter be amended to include a section on districting restrictions? was discussed. The intent was to prevent gerrymandering or division of neighborhoods by district lines. This amendment failed 6~8. The commissioners who opposed this amendment felt that the districting committee took a very fair and diligent approach to county districting. 

Commissioner Steuen suggested that since there were no more amendments on the agenda, that the next meeting could be canceled. Other commissioners objected that if there were no more new amendments, that the commission could start work on wordsmithing the existing ones. Given that, commissioner Mackiewicz suggested maybe the commission could reconsider Proposed Amendment 1. The commission rejected that suggestion in discussion, saying that it could be done when a concrete amendment to the existing text was prepared. In any event, a 2/3 majority would be required to revisit the amendment. The commission voted not to cancel the June 8 meeting. 

Here is the audio from the full meeting:



The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:30 pm.

Proposed Amendment 1 -- Representation by District

Guest Editorial by Karl Uppiano

Proposed Amendment 1 from Joe Elenbaas: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of councilmembers within the council district from which the candidate was nominated? 

Citizens need to know that the Charter Review Commission cannot force this amendment down anyone's throat. If it makes it onto the ballot, the voters must approve it in the November election in order for it to take effect. In which case, we can expect a vigorous campaign season, and lots of public discussion. Precisely the kind of discussion we ought to be having, in fact. One has to wonder why anyone would want to deny voters a chance to weigh in on this proposal.

There have been some alternatives put forth, mainly concerning the re-districting of Whatcom County into more districts. This is worth considering, and the commission is discussing it. However, the main concern is that this alternative proposal, if two similar amendments appear on the ballot at the same time, would be confusing, with the additional and significant complexity of redistricting; it would probably be a bridge too far for most voters. In fact, some cynics consider this nothing more than a poison pill, that would split the vote, and effectively torpedo the original proposal.

There seems to be a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt being spread by factions on both sides the issue. Progressives fear that representation by district will favor conservatives. Conservatives fear that at-large representation will favor progressives and environmentalists. This isn't necessarily so, however. In fact, one of the main proponents of at-large representation from the last time we flip-flopped, was a conservative from District One, who realized he probably didn't have a snowball's chance of winning a race in his district. 

The fact is, it is hard to predict which faction will be favored in either election model. We have some history from both models, and so far, we haven't had a conservative majority on the council in recent memory, either way. It is hard to imagine a safe, pro-coal majority (as if it were the only issue). 

Would you want Blaine, Lynden or Ferndale citizens electing Bellingham's mayor? Or vice-versa? Why then, would you want them electing representation for your council district? 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 representation by district gives us two councilors per district, and one at-large, which in fact, does cover everyone -- by district! We all have the same access to representation, and save for the one at-large seat, we don't get to select the representation of another district. Our representatives would represent us as a proportion of the county population. Councilors and the citizens would have a closer relationship, and would be elected from among our neighbors.

With the exception of the already designated 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 anyone who wants 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, litter, 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.

Tenth Charter Review Commission Meeting Scheduled for May 18, 2015, 6:30 PM (Monday)

The tenth meeting of the Charter Review Commission will be held on Monday, May 18, 2015, 6:30 PM in The Firs Conference Center, 4605 Cable Street, Bellingham.

Here is the agenda for the meeting. 

The Anti-Coal environmental community has been called out once again to speak out against Proposed Amendment 1 from Joe Elenbaas: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of councilmembers within the council district from which the candidate was nominated? If you have a viewpoint on this issue, you should plan to attend. It is important that both sides are heard.

This meeting was moved up a week, because Monday, May 25 is Memorial Day. It is also an "away" meeting, at The Firs Conference Center.

Monday, May 11, 2015 -- Proceedings of The Ninth Meeting of the Charter Review Commission

The ninth meeting of the Whatcom County Charter Review Commission was held on Monday, May 11, 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.

Glen Morgan led off the public comment, speaking in favor of Proposed Amendment 16 from Wes Kentch: Shall the Charter be amended to increase transparency in funding between Whatcom County and nonprofit non-government organizations (NGOs)? Glen is well known to Washington conservatives for his tenure at the Freedom Foundation.

Local activist Bob Burr held forth on a variety of topics, ranging from non-partisanship to representation by district. He's in favor of non-partisanship, and opposed to representation by district. The partisanship topic came up numerous times as the meeting progressed. Many of the votes were not along party lines, and various commissioners lightheartedly pointed that out.

Several other speakers expressed concern about Proposed Amendment 16, but were somewhat reassured upon hearing that the amendment was being revised, and was on the agenda to be discussed later in the meeting.

As usual, there was mixed testimony about Proposed Amendment 1 from Joe Elenbaas: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of councilmembers within the council district from which the candidate was nominated? A.K.A., district-only voting, or representation by district.

(Results of the commission deliberation and voting will be posted here after the audio has been transcribed. Watch this space, and stay tuned.)
Here is the audio from the first 2:13 of the meeting (evidently 24 hours or approximately nine meetings is the upper limit for batteries in my recorder):



The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:40 p.m.

Ninth Charter Review Commission Meeting Scheduled for May 11, 2015, 6:30 PM (Monday)

The ninth meeting of the Charter Review Commission will be held on Monday, May 11, 2015, 6:30 PM in the Civic Center Garden Room, 322 N. Commercial Street, Bellingham.

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 2 for staff and the record.
5. Approval of Minutes for April 27, 2015
6. Old Business: Discussion and possible vote on proposed Charter amendments for voters at the next general election.
   The Commission will take a mid-meeting break if necessary.
   Proposed Amendment 13 from Eli Mackiewicz: Shall the Charter be amended to include four political parties, instead of two, in the districting process?
   
   Proposed Amendment 14 from Todd Donovan and Jon Mutchler: Shall the Charter be amended to lower the threshold requirement for ballot signatures for Whatcom County Charter changes from 20% to 15% for citizen initiatives?
   
   Proposed Amendment 15 from Jon Mutchler: County Auditor duties and responsibilities
   
   Proposed Amendment 16 from Wes Kentch: Shall the Charter be amended to increase transparency in funding between Whatcom County and nonprofit non-government organizations (NGOs)?
   
   Proposed Amendment 17 from Richard May: Shall the Charter be amended to include a section on districting restrictions?
7. Old Business: Proposed Amendments for Voters at the next General Election The Commission voted to forward these proposed amendments to Whatcom County voters. They will not be discussed at tonight’s meeting. However, any commissioner may move to reconsider these amendments during any meeting.
   Proposed Amendment 1 from Joe Elenbaas: Shall the Charter be amended to provide for election of councilmembers within the council district from which the candidate was nominated?
   
   Proposed Amendment 2 from Joe Elenbaas: 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 from Ben Elenbaas: 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 5 from Todd Donovan: Shall the Charter be amended to facilitate voting on initiative and referendum?
   
   Proposed Amendment 6 from Ken Bell: Shall the Charter be amended to apply term limits to the County councilmembers?
   
   Proposed Amendment 10 from Chet Dow: Shall Charter Section 8.23 be amended to prohibit the County Council from proposing any Charter amendment to Charter sections 2.12 or 2.13?
8. New Business
9. Adjourn

The next meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on May 18, 2015 at The Firs Conference Center, 4605 Cable Street, Bellingham.