By Moana Kutsche
You have probably read a great deal about proposed Charter amendments 1 and 2, but not much about the third proposal. Proposition 3 will ensure better transparency in county government by requiring that all County Council meetings, and all subcommittee meetings, must be properly noticed and open to the public. Exceptions are made for meetings that concern personnel issues, real estate purchases, and a few other exceptions laid out in the RCWs.
Transparency in government is essential to ensure fairness in the legislative process. Washington has a very strong Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). The principle behind this legislation is to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in public, warts and all; that the deliberative process leading to legislation is as open and transparent as possible, and that citizens can participate as fully as possible.
This wasn’t an issue for our county under 3 commissioners, since any two constituted a quorum and the OPMA obviously applied. But things changed when the Charter went into effect and there were six Council members. Subcommittees could be formed with 2 or 3 Councilors without creating a quorum that would trigger the Act.
If two or three Council members get together to study an issue in depth, sometimes with community members, one could reasonably conclude that their recommendation would carry a great deal of weight when the Council votes on proposed legislation. The process by which they reach that recommendation should be public. Further, it takes four Council members to pass legislation, so any three could agree to block a vote. Reaching such an agreement should be done in public.
The 6-member Council started out conducting its subcommittee meetings in private, without public notice. They relied on a preliminary legal opinion by the County Prosecuting Attorney, who thought that the OPMA did not apply. Several months later, he pursued the issue in greater depth and concluded that subcommittee meetings were subject to the Act after all. Shortly thereafter, the County Council voted to make this their official policy.
So, it’s moot now, right? Wrong! The Charter needs to protect open public subcommittee meetings. If the PA could, in good faith, advise the Council first one way and then another, then nothing but the good will of the Council prevents a vote to eliminate transparency. The Council needs a statement from County voters that we believe in government transparency. Period.
I hope that you will vote to pass all three of the Charter amendments. Regardless of your position on Props. 1 and 2, I strongly urge you to vote for Prop. 3.
Moana Kutsche serves on the Charter Review Commission.
Thanks, Moana, for the clarification on Proposition 3. I join with Moana, and encourage all voters to vote YES on the CRC’s Proposition 3.