Clyde Hill News: Mayor’s cost estimate “inappropriate, non-factual, and thoroughly political,” Council agrees 3-0
Called out for “a disservice to the community;” Council also passes resolution supporting staff
First, some trees I enjoyed when I was out for a walk earlier this week. Have I mentioned Clyde Hill is a beautiful place to live?
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.
Misinformation and the Mayor’s cost estimate
This past week’s City Council Meeting included a very strongly-worded statement that followed multiple attempts by the Council to work with the Mayor and administration to address concerns about misinformation:
Resolved: the City Council expresses its disappointment that the Mayor released such an inappropriate, non-factual, and thoroughly political document rather than working with Council to collaborate on something that would serve the public with factual and specific information.
Here’s the vote from meeting:
Context: November Ballot Measure
Clyde Hill voters in November will choose whether or not to change the form of Clyde Hill’s government to “council-manager” from the current “mayor-council” form.
The gist of this change involves whether the head of the city’s executive branch is
an elected, part-time mayor who appoints (and has exclusive authority over) a full-time, professional city administrator to act as chief administrative officer of the city (current mayor-council form), or
a full-time, professional city manager appointed by and accountable to the city council (proposed council-manager form).
Either way, there is “separation of powers” between the executive and legislative branches… the Council cannot interfere with the administration.
The ballot measure is a result of over 150 registered voters in Clyde Hill signing a petition to put this measure on the ballot. Following the process and the law, the City Council approved a resolution to put the measure on the ballot (link). The Mayor refused to sign it:
That’s where this gets political. If voters choose to change the form of government, the current Mayor becomes just another councilmember.
The Mayor’s personal interest in retaining office appears to be interfering with serving the interests of Clyde Hill residents.
Context: Cost Estimate
In response to the petition effort, misinformation about the change started to spread in the community. For example, from NextDoor back in June:
At a June Council Meeting, Cm Friedman warned about “unvalidated conclusions that are seemingly non-factual” that started “going around the community about this matter” — in particular, claims that “the cost to Taxpayers could be half a million dollars” and that “residents’ property taxes may have to increase to pay for the change.” Actually, property taxes are likely to go up — because many city staff salaries have contractual, annual cost of living adjustments. That is completely independent of a change in the form of government.
The first answer to “What would voting for the ballot measure cost the city above and beyond its current expenses?” that councilmembers got from the administration was: “We don’t know.”
From the summary email of a June 27 meeting between the City Administrator and Cms Friedman and Hachamovitch (emphasis added; link):
At this point, the answer to “What will it cost if the ballot measure to change form of government passes” is “We don’t know.”
The cost that several residents sent in ($500K) sounds high to City Administrator Dean Rohla and is not a number that came from him or City Staff.
Separately, the Mayor offered her own estimate (link) in the June 28 Council Meeting packet, without consulting or informing the Council — an estimate that the City Attorney considered high.
The Mayor revised her document, removing the dollar figure but still insisting that the costs would be “significant” after meeting with Cms Friedman and Hachamovitch and the City Administrator. You can read a summary of that meeting here (link).
The Mayor could not deliver a basic, factual consensus cost estimate despite multiple meetings and clear feedback — context that makes the discussion at the July 26 Council Meeting make more sense.
What’s next
There’s still no consensus cost estimate statement to help the community.
The Administration and Council agreed to meet again in an attempt to develop such an estimate. The pro and con statements for the Voter’s Pamphlet are due soon.
With respect to the Mayor’s behavior, there’s little else the Council can do beyond expressing its views with resolutions like this one. How Clyde Hill residents vote in November will have an impact.
What the Council Said
Below are some excerpts from what Cms Friedman and Muromoto said; you can see the entire 42 minute discussion here if you’d like (link).
“You’ve done a disservice to the community”
In this excerpt, Cm Friedman calls out the Mayor for issuing cost estimates that are “inaccurate and well-overstated” with “no facts behind” them. He suggests that the “Mayor should not have put that document out” and should in fact recall the document.
Elsewhere, he said that because of the Mayor’s actions and choices, “we’ve lost our ability to collaborate.”
He finished his comments saying that the Mayor has “done a disservice to the community.” (link)
“It saddens me that we are just in such a political fracas”
During discussion of the motion, here’s how Cm Kim Muromoto began his comments:
“That makes it political”
Here’s another excerpt of Cm Muromoto’s thoughts, agreeing with Cm Friedman and describing the Mayor’s use of the term “significant” to describe unspecified costs political. He went on to say it “was trying to influence the mindset of the public, and that’s disturbing to me.”
Resolution supporting staff
At the meeting, the Cms Friedman and Hachamovitch introduced a resolution, eventually approved 4-0, expressing
“confidence in the city staff to continue delivering services to address the needs of residents” and “commitment to the continuity of government services and to the provision of those services by current staff.” (link)
Cm Friedman explained the resolution was in response to possible concerns from “city staff as well as… the community regarding the potential change in the form of government.”
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