Clyde Hill News: Guest column on Prop 1
Also: Residents question $450K budget deficit at Budget Advisory meeting, call out “issues in the management of the city”
This week, the newsletter carries a guest post from Councilmember Scott Moore on the topic of Clyde Hill Prop 1.
First, a quick update from this past week’s Budget Advisory Committee meeting.
A resident point of view: “Why?”
The Administration met with the Budget Advisory Committee earlier this week. This meeting is part of the regular process of developing the City budget. The Administration walked through details of its proposed 2023 budget and the planned $450,000 deficit. Next steps here include another BAC meeting as well as a public hearing to take feedback from the community about the proposed budget.
The key question of the evening came early on in the meeting from resident and Budget Advisory Committee member Mike Foley in response to this slide about the City’s #1 priority, “Expand Level of Service provided:”
Mike Foley asked why expanding the level of service is a top priority for the City. The Administration’s answer took some time and was not clear.
Mr. Foley responded: “I'm saying this is growth for the sake of growth and I'm not buying in unless I see a rationale.” After additional explanation from the City, Mr. Foley continued:
Sounds to me like we've got some issues in the management of the city — okay, fine, sort them out but right now I don't see any benefit in that statement for the citizens of the city of Clyde Hill.
One more item before our disclaimer: if you find this newsletter useful or interesting, please forward it to your Clyde Hill neighbors and friends. Thank you!
Disclaimer: while I am a councilmember on the Clyde Hill City Council, I write this newsletter in my capacity as an individual resident. Any opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily the position of the City. The information and references here are from public sources. I welcome email responses — and if the topic is about City business I will respond from my City email account.
November’s ballot will ask Clyde Hill voters to consider changing their city’s form of government. Below is an opinion piece from Councilmember Scott Moore.
I want to be clear that what’s below is Scott’s opinion, not mine. I’m still working through what I think and how I’d explain it. Right now, I’m still meeting with residents, listening to their opinions, and answering questions about the what this change would mean. I welcome your thoughts, opinions, and any questions.
Why I support Proposition One and Urge You to Vote ✔ For It
By Scott Moore, Clyde Hill City Council Position 2
I have had the honor and privilege of serving on the Clyde Hill City Council since 2016. As such, I’m the longest serving Council member and have been elected twice. I don’t plan to run for office again when my term is up at the end of next year.
Based on my observations over the last seven years in office, I’m convinced that we should change the form of government in Clyde Hill from the current Mayor-Council form to the Council–Manager form. Due to a successful, resident-led petition process, you will have a chance to vote on this important issue in the election on November 8.
The first four years of my term in office were generally smooth sailing. Mayor Martin had already been in office for 16 years and as a retired lawyer he had the time, experience, and quality of character required to be a good steward of the city and its employees.
The contrast between Mayor Martin and Mayor Klaas is stark. The current administration’s record makes the case for change.
The Problem
The problem is not only with our mayor but with our current form of government.
Residents rely on checks and balances to keep government honest and effective.
Currently, checking bad judgment on the part of the executive is nearly impossible because power is so concentrated in the role of Mayor.
In a Council-Manager city, the Council appoints a City Manager to run the executive branch. If that manager exercises bad judgment, the Council is in a position to provide feedback without waiting four years for the next mayoral election. Residents keep the Council on a tight leash with elections every two years.
The Council functions like the board of an organization, providing oversight on a CEO without meddling operationally.
The Case for Prop 1
Mayor Klaas’ poor judgment and refusal to listen to input have been consistent themes throughout her term. Please consider the following events during her administration:
Mayor Klaas elevated an underqualified employee to the position of City Administrator when he threatened to quit if not promoted to that role. In November 2020, when the previous City Administrator retired abruptly, Mayor Klaas hired the finance manager, Dean Rohla, into the role without conducting a search. Rohla had never served as a City Administrator and was demonstrably under-qualified for the job. When I expressed concern about the lack of a search, the mayor told me that (1) Rohla stated that he would leave Clyde Hill if he wasn’t promoted and (2) the mayor didn’t want to have to fill two roles at the same time.
The city has repeatedly and recklessly gotten involved in disputes between neighbors. In one such case, a resident hung an American flag above the roofline of his house to deliberately block the view of his neighbor, going so far as to illuminate the flag at night. The City Council asked the administration to suggest an adjustment to city code to regulate such behavior. In response, the mayor proposed and tried to push through a law that would have codified the right of any property owner in town to erect up to three flag poles of up to 25’ in height and fly as many flags of any size and content as they please. No city in Washington state has any law like that on its books. The City Council voted down the mayor’s proposed law.
After Mayor Klaas was informed that the City did not have a signed and approved contract with its attorney, her response was that she saw no need to change. Operating without a contract is a poor business practice. State law requires municipal contracts to be approved by the City Council. Clyde Hill’s government had avoided this requirement by relying on a two page “letter agreement” dating from 1988, when Clyde Hill was still a town. Only a vote of the Council forced the issue by initiating a competitive bid process to find a new attorney. Even after that vote, the administration dragged out the process for months, resulting in excessive legal fees and wasted time.
The mayor has consistently refused to take policy input from the City Council. Her attitude is “my way or the highway.” For example, Mayor Klaas has publicly admitted inconsistencies in the city’s decisions regarding code enforcement. After the Council expressed its consensus regarding many problems with the city’s code enforcement policies, she ignored Council input, writing: “City Councilmembers have all stated that they believe there is a problem with code enforcement. As Mayor, I do not.”
Likewise, when a seat on the Planning Commission came open late last year, the mayor refused to even consider or meet with two highly-qualified residents who applied to serve on the Commission, instead reappointing a resident who had already been on the Commission for several years. While she acted within her authority, it’s bad judgement and poor leadership to rudely refuse to consider residents who volunteer to serve our community.
Washington State law requires that cities balance their annual budgets. Under Mayor Klass, the Administration has run a budget deficit every year, relying on reserves to balance the budget. This practice is unsustainable and she has not articulated a strategy for addressing the issue. This year’s budget is expected to run a deficit of over $270,000. Her proposal for next year’s budget deficit is over $450,000.
In early August of last year, a few weeks after I had notified the State Auditor’s office of the shady arrangement with the city’s long term law firm and after the Council passed a resolution requiring the mayor to initiate the RFP, my wife and I were seemingly retaliated against. The Mayor, Administrator Rohla and another city employee called me repeatedly while I was on a family vacation to inform me that the city would be forcing my wife and me to remove a hedge that stood in the right of way next to our property for over 40 years due to an outdated provision of city code dating to the 1980’s. Every hedge in Clyde Hill over eight feet tall (of which there are dozens) violates the same Chapter of Clyde Hill’s municipal code. My wife, who was dying of terminal lung cancer at the time, met with the mayor in December of last year. Valerie told the mayor that the hedge in question gave her privacy and comfort and asked the mayor to delay any such enforcement action for a year or two so she could die in peace. The mayor’s response was to state, “During my reign, we are enforcing the rules.” On February 1 the city gave us 24-hour notice that they were cutting the hedge down. My wife died three weeks later. Mayor Klaas had full authority to extend our permit but instead undertook an act of cruelty toward a constituent dying of cancer for no benefit whatsoever to the city. Is that the leadership we want?
The Case Against Prop 1
The committee against Proposition 1 has made three arguments for retaining the current “strong Mayor” form of government.
The first is that it’s been this way for 69 years so why change? The second is that the conflict in City Hall these past three years is due to the City Council. And last, the opposition favors directly electing a mayor rather than electing an expanded Council which then chooses the mayor.
As to the first argument, a lot has changed since 1953 when the city was formed. For one thing, most of our neighboring cities including Bellevue, Medina, Mercer Island and Kirkland have all made the change from “strong Mayor” to Council-Manager1. Independent research proves that Council–Manager cities work better because the format forces consensus and eliminates the ability of one individual to exert an outsized influence on city policy. In 1953 parts of Clyde Hill were restricted to “Aryans only”. No one would argue that we should reinstate such racist practices just because “it was always that way.”
As for the tension between the mayor and council, you can judge for yourself who is to blame for the events described above. Do you think Bellevue with its Council–Manager form is better run than Seattle with its Mayor–Council form of government? I certainly do.
Last, the argument that we should directly elect a mayor who serves for 4 years makes no sense given that no election for Clyde Hill’s Mayor has been contested for over 20 years. Mayor Klaas was appointed to the City Council and then was “elected” mayor without ever facing an opponent on a ballot or debating the issues. In a small city like Clyde Hill, sharing governing responsibility among an expanded City Council makes more sense and is much more democratic than the current situation which favors narcissists over citizens interested in public service.
Please Vote. And Please Vote For Clyde Hill Prop 1
Council–Manager will lead to better accountability, transparency, and efficiency. Shared decision making which will result in policies that are broadly supported by the public. I urge you to vote Yes on Proposition 1 when you fill out your ballot.
Thank you,
Scott Moore
Thanks for reading! Please forward and share with your friends and neighbors, and if you are not already getting this newsletter, subscribing is both easy and free.
Dean Hachamovitch
Ed: corrected typo