Monday, July 6, 2015 -- Proceedings of The Final Meeting of the Charter Review Commission

The final meeting of the Whatcom County Charter Review Commission was held on Monday, July 6, 2015 in the Civic Center Garden Room, Bellingham.

Chairman Ben Elenbaas called the meeting to order at approximately 6:10 pm. 

During the roll call, it became evident that there was an unusually large number of members not present. Eli Mackiewicz acknowledged his presence, but then announced that he was attending under protest, and since there would be a quorum without him, he was departing. Jon Mutchler was at a Ferndale city council meeting, and arrived later.

After the flag salute, Chairman Elenbaas asked for commissioner comments. Seeing none, Mr. Elenbaas made his own statement, explaining the rationale for rescheduling the meeting. He had not planned to have a July 6 meeting, but attorney Dan Gibson had asked for a July 6 meeting. Mr. Elenbaas speculated that perhaps the reason Mr. Gibson wanted the meeting was because he knew the County Council would be proposing their own amendments, and he would have to prepare two sets of amendments before the ballot cut-off date. Mr. Elenbaas also explained that he now understood why the ballot title now identifies which body brought the amendment. He continued, that the County Council appears to be proposing charter amendments in direct response to the Charter Review Commission, so it would be proper to provide the council with the complete set of amendments from the Charter Review Commission, so they could respond to the final version of the charter review process, that was started back in January. 

Elenbaas also commented that at the June 22 meeting, there were only one or two commissioners who said that they could not attend a July 6 meeting. However, a much larger number chose not to attend, which Elenbaas found regrettable, since it was now a matter of choice not to attend, except for one. 

Commissioner Joe Elenbaas added that he supported rescheduling the meeting prior to the council's vote on their amendments, so that the Charter Review Commission's amendments would have precedence in the case where amendments were in conflict. The body presenting the conflicting amendment has the responsibility of providing language describing how to resolve the differences. This would put that burden on the County Council, instead of the Charter Review Commission. The last minute task should probably lie with the body making the sudden change to the process.

Regarding the council's action, commissioner Joe Elenbaas continued that there seems to be no procedure for producing a consent item on an agenda without a meeting where that consent was arrived at. But Mr. Elenbaas noted that no minutes for such a meeting exist, and thus may not comply with state law. In closing, Mr. Elenbaas thanked the chairman for moving the meeting up, so that the charter review process would be completed, and any other body that wants to "taint" the process would have to do it after the Charter Review Commission had cleanly finished its work. 

Chairman Ben Elenbaas continued with old business, bringing forward the eight amendments that would be placed on the ballot:

• Proposed Amendment 1 - Ballot Title, Proposition 1, Proposed 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? February 23, 2015: Approved 8-6 with Donovan, Mackiewicz, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker opposed; Ben Elenbaas absent
• Proposed Amendment 2 - Ballot Title, Proposition 4, Proposed by 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? March 9, 2015: Amended and Approved 15-0
• Proposed Amendment 3 - Ballot Title, Proposition 2, Proposed by 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? March 9, 2015: Approved 8-7 with Donovan, Mackiewicz, May, Mutchler, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker opposed July 6, 2015: Amended 9-0-1 with Donovan abstaining and Mackiewicz, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker absent. Approved 8-0-2 with Donovan and Mutchler abstaining and Mackiewicz, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker absent.
• Proposed Amendment 5 - Ballot Title, Proposition 5, Proposed by Todd Donovan: Shall the Charter be amended to facilitate voting on initiative and referendum? February 23, 2015: Approved 12-2 with Dow and Ryan opposed; Ben Elenbaas absent June 22, 2015: Reconsidered and Amended 12-2 with Ryan and Bell opposed; Langley absent
• Proposed Amendment 6 - Ballot Title, Proposition 7, Proposed by Ken Bell: Shall the Charter be amended to apply term limits to the County Councilmembers, Executive, Auditor, Treasurer, Assessor, and Sheriff? March 9, 2015: Amended and Approved 9-5-1 with Joe Elenbaas, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker opposed. Mutchler abstained. June 22, 2015: Reconsidered and Approved to join with Proposed Amendment 18 as one ballot item, 10-3-1 with Ryan, Stuen, and Walker opposed; May abstained; Langley absent.
• Proposed Amendment 10- Ballot Title, Proposition 3, Proposed by 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? March 23, 2015: Approved 9-2-3 with Stuen and Walker opposed, Donovan, Goldsmith, and May abstaining, Ryan absent July 6, 2015: Amended 9-0-1 with Donovan abstaining and Mackiewicz, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker absent. Approved as amended 8-0-2 with Donovan and Mutchler abstaining and Mackiewicz, May, Ryan, Stuen, and Walker absent.
• Proposed Amendment 13 - Ballot Title, Proposition 8, Proposed by Eli Mackiewicz: Shall the Charter be amended to include four political parties, instead of two, in the districting process? May 11, 2015: Amended & approved 11-3, Dow, Ryan, and Sobjack opposed and Mutchler absent
• Proposed Amendment 14 - Ballot Title, Proposition 6, Proposed by Jon Mutchler and Todd Donovan: 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? May 11, 2015: Approved 9-5, Bell, Dow, Goldsmith, Mackiewicz, and Sobjack opposed. Mutchler absent

Clerk Jill Nixon announced that Dan Gibson was on speakerphone, available for comments and questions. 

Mr. Gibson indicated that he had done more research in connection with proposed amendments 3 & 10 (propositions 2 & 3). These amendments raised some compatibility questions pertaining to the Washington State Constitution, article 11, section 4, regarding limits on the powers of the County Council. Gibson spoke with Bob Meinig, of the Municipal Research Service Center, as well as Randy Gaylord of the San Juan County prosecutor's office, and Josh Reid, past attorney for the Washington State Association of Counties. These attorneys were in agreement with Mr. Gibson's assessment of constitutional problems. 

Mr. Gibson went on to explain what would happen if the measure passed as written, and was the subject of a constitutional challenge. It would end up in court, with Whatcom County having to defend the amendment, and with the ensuing legal costs. 

The commissioners and Mr. Gibson discussed how the amendments could be made constitutional. The remedy was to change the amendments to require a 7-0 majority on the council to override the voter preference. There was considerable discussion about how many members must be present to fix an amendment. It requires 2/3 majority of the commissioners present, in order to modify an amendment.

Commissioner Elenbaas moved (and was seconded) that the other amendments be approved, holding back propositions 2 & 3 for further discussion.

It is a three step process to modify an amendment after the Charter Review Commission has voted to approve it. First a 2/3 majority must vote to suspend Roberts Rules to revisit the amendment, then the changes must be discussed and approved, and finally the amendment must be approved as modified. This was accomplished without the help of the boycotting commissioners.

 Here is the audio from the full meeting:

After addressing a few other procedural formalities, the commission agreed to cancel the meeting for July 13, and adjourn sine die. at approximately 8:05 p.m.