Email this page to a friend
Related Stories
List of stories about freeholder meetings
|
Freeholders - April 16
By Ralph Hahn
posted 04/20/05
The Freeholders held their longest meeting to date, primarily to discuss what they would like to include in a proposed Charter. They also took over an hour to listen to Alan Lichter, the final Commissioner to be interviewed by the Freeholders.
Following a discussion guide developed by Charlie Bodenstab, the Freeholders focused on 13 possible features that might be included in the Charter. During a very intense preliminary discussion, the Freeholders agreed that any decisions that they made during the meeting should be those that they would like to make "… in an ideal world …."
From the very beginning of their discussions, the Freeholders have been concerned that, if they propose too many changes or the changes are too radical, the voters may turn the Charter down. They have reiterated several times that their number one priority is to win voter approval for "Home Rule."
This simple change transfers the power to determine the structure of county government from the State to local voters. If this change is successful, the citizens of San Juan County will be able to undertake periodic reviews of county government at any time they choose.
Bodenstab emphasized that the decisions made would constitute a preference only. These "preferences" will later be examined in terms of costs (the Freeholders have said in the past that changes should be revenue neutral … should not increase the cost of County Government) and "saleability" to the voters. Several Freeholders pointed out that they would have a better picture of what citizens wanted or would support after Town Hall meetings were held on each island. In general, it was felt that until the Freeholders had something to present to the public it was impossible to determine what the public would support.
To begin the discussion, Bodenstab proposed that each Freeholder express his or her views on each proposal, after which a vote would be taken. Those proposals that received a two-thirds majority approval would remain on the agenda for future refinement. Those which failed to receive a two-thirds proposal would be shelved. Following is a summary of their preferences for inclusion in the proposed Charter:
- County Administrator/Manager
18 for 1 against
- A hired County Administrator
17 for 1 against 1 abstention
(Hired by and responsible to the Commissioners rather than an elected position)
- Part-time Commissioners
13 for 2 against 4 abstentions
- Voting for Commissioner
County-wide - 1 for
By district - 14 for
By precinct - 3 for
(This is a departure from existing practice which requires Commissioners to be
elected by voters county-wide.)
- Increase the number of Commissioners to six
with four yes votes required to act
14 for 3 against 1 abstention
(Under this system, San Juan would have 3 Commissioners, Orcas/Waldron 2, and
Lopez/Shaw 1)
- Change the Commissioner to a non-partisan office
(In view of the changes being made by the State in primary election voting, the Freeholders decided that this issue was uncertain, at best, and mired in politics. They decided to table the issue permanently by a vote of 16 -for, 1 -against, 11 -abstention.)
- Inclusion of initiative and referendum 17 for 0 against 1 abstention
(Recall of public officials is established by State law and would continue to be an option if San Juan became a Home Rule County)
- Periodic review of the Charter
18 for 0 against
- Restrictions on the borrowing power of the County
(This issue was permanently tabled after discussion. The Freeholders were satisfied that the power to borrow is expressly established by the State and the restrictions imposed are sufficient to control county borrowing - the key restriction being that the County cannot borrow more than its' ability to pay.)
- Change other elected positions
8 for 9 against
(Treasurer, Assessor, Sheriff,
Auditor, Clerk) to hired positions
The remainder of this part of the agenda was spent discussing the election of Commissioners, whether they should be elected from specified districts within the existing 3 districts or elected at-large within the 3 existing districts. No conclusions were reached and the issue was scheduled to be discussed at their next meeting.
Alan Lichter, like Kevin Ranker, had no prepared remarks, preferring to answer Freeholder questions. He did begin, however, by describing what he had been doing in the three-and-a-half months that he has been a Commissioner. He stated that he had talked to a very respected, past Commissioner who said that it had taken him almost two years to gain the experience and knowledge to understand the job. He said that he had made a list of things he needed to do and stopped at number 80. Following are Lichter's observations and responses to questions from the Freeholders:
- He supports the idea of a County Administrator who would relieve the department heads of a lot of work generated by reporting to three bosses. He also believed that the Administrator would relieve the Commissioners of a lot of work, giving them more time to do their work … setting policy … and to research and think about the issues coming to them.
- He stated that we do not presently have an administrator because of lack of money … he believes it may take $200,000 to implement the position. He believes that the administrator will save enough money to pay for the position but it could take two years before the savings are realized.
- He believes that Commissioners should take the time to meet and talk to employees … not to interfere in their work.
- Be believes that that the budget process should be "transparent" - anyone can see and understand it as needed.
- He is opposed to part-time Commissioners because:
- it would shift too much power to the Administrator (as has happened in Whatcom County);
- Commissioners would be less well informed and knowledgeable, therefore less able to conduct the public's business effectively;
- it might allow public business to be conducted outside of the public eye (as has happened in Whatcom County) - "The public's business must be conducted in public.";
- it might result in Commissioners being less accessible to the public;
- he doers not see how a part-time commissioner could do everything he is doing (he related three examples of instances in which he had intervened to create solutions to problems - disposal of batteries on Waldron Island, establishment of parking for Waldron residents in Deer Harbor, processing of a building permit for a couple who was about to lose their financing because their permit application had not been approved three months after it was filed);
- the number of groups (County agencies, affiliated agencies, and community organizations) that he is responsible to meet and liaison with is extensive and requires a great deal of time that a part-time Commissioner would not have.
- He enthusiastically supports inclusion of initiative and referendum in the proposed Charter.
- He was emphatic in his assertion that he represented all of the citizens of the County (he pointed out that he is meeting with people from all over the County) but acknowledged that he had a focus on Orcas and Waldron Islands.
- He stated that he would speak about the proposed Charter when it is presented publicly, to not do so would be "cowardly." If he is opposed to any part of the Charter, he will say so.
Other Action by the Freeholders:
1. The Outreach Committee will establish a schedule for Town Hall meetings on
Lopez and San Juan Islands. These meetings will focus on presenting the work
done by the Freeholders, with the preponderance of the meeting reserved for citizen questions and input.
2. Freeholders were encouraged to speak to community organizations about the work of
the group. Again, the Freeholders were encouraged to answer questions and listen to input.
3. The Freeholders discussed the parameters and structure for a survey of citizens,
agreeing to reserve the subject for a future meeting.
Community Input:
Carla Wright - suggested that a brochure mailed to county residents might be the best way to communicate to the largest number of voters. She also encouraged the Freeholders to simplify the explanation of the Charter provisions as much as possible.
George Steed - complimented the Freeholders for all of their work and effort. He also opined that a larger number of Commissioners would be more accessible to citizens and the greater the accessibility of Commissioners, the less prone citizens would be to seek to use the initiative or referendum process.
Next Meeting;
Lopez Island
Location - to be determined
10:15 a.m. - 3:15 p.m.
Agenda:
Charter Deliberations - Commissioner district's and
"saleability" discussion
Citizen Survey
Initiative and Referendum language for the Charter
Planning meetings in June
Timeline - to complete Charter, voter education, ballot
requirements
|
