Clyde Hill News — Special Edition: Teamsters allege “dereliction of duty” by City Administrator and Mayor
Also: update on Oct 18 City Council Meeting; Council will not consider a resolution in support Prop 1
The union representing Clyde Hill police officers expressed concerns of “perceived dereliction of duty by the city administration, Mayor Klaas and City Administrator Rohla” in a letter sent last week:
Earlier this evening, the city updated the packet for tomorrow’s city meeting, adding this letter from the Teamsters. The update also removes a resolution considering support for Prop 1 and adds a slide deck (“General Administration Statistics”) that provides more detail concerning city spend (in response to questions asked during last month’s budget meeting).
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.
The Union’s letter and the issue of trust
You can read the letter for yourself here (link). It’s brief — all of a page and a half.
From a resident’s point of view, I think the letter raises an important issue: the trustworthiness of the City Administration’s leaders.
Misrepresentation and inaccurate statements
The letter alleges that “the Administration lied to the Union members during the negotiations process.”
Specifically, the letter claims that the City Administrator told the Union that certain requests had to be dropped, falsely stating that “council said these are non-starters.” The letter claims that during a recent exit interview with a departing police officer, information emerged that the City Administrator “never spoke with the council about the requested contract terms” and in fact “put words in the mouths of the council members in order to get the Union’s negotiations team to drop the contract terms.” Additional coverage of the police exit interview is available here (link).
Following the rules
The letter criticizes Mayor Klaas in strong terms for how she handled the complaint about an officer being called “homeboy.” (I want to be super, super clear that the person who said that to a police officer apologized profusely and appears to be sincerely remorseful about the incident.)
Specifically, the letter describes how there appears to be no written record of an investigation or disciplinary action by the Mayor related to this incident.
The letter details how a memo documenting a complaint about this incident “was given directly to Mayor Klaas” but did not appear in the personnel file of the person involved in the incident. The Union’s letter asserts that “Mayor Klaas’ mishandling of this important public document cannot be overlooked.”
Consequences, Oversight, and Prop 1
The letter from the Teamsters raises questions about what happens next. I don’t know how this will play out, but it is interesting to consider what difference Clyde Hill Prop 1 would make here.
Clyde Hill Prop 1 asks voters whether Clyde Hill should change to a council-manager city or remain a mayor-council city.1 Looking at the two forms of city government:
In a mayor-council city, there is one person — the Mayor — providing oversight on the city administration, and voters choose that one person every four years.
In a council-manager city, there are seven people — the City Council — providing oversight on the city administration, and voters choose Councilmembers on a rolling basis every two years.
If Prop 1 were in place today (and Clyde Hill were a council-manager city), then the authority to discipline the City Manager would fall to the City Council, not just the Mayor. The authority to discipline the Mayor would fall to the City Council.
Today, as a mayor-council city, the one person in the city government with authority to discipline the City Administrator is the Mayor. The one person with the authority to discipline the Mayor is the voter, every four years.
Other changes to the packet
Resolution to endorse Prop 1
An earlier version of the city meeting packet included a resolution in support of Clyde Hill Prop 1.
As a resident, I’m glad to see that this item is no longer on the agenda. As I wrote just a few days ago (link):
I admit I’m scratching my head at this one. The decision is up to Clyde Hill voters. Clyde Hill residents circulated a petition, following the legal process, and obtained the signatures they needed for the measure to appear on the ballot. The City Council did its job: it approved the official text of the measure and picked which election the voters would see the measure at. It’s not clear to me why the City Council or Mayor would take an official position on the issue.
I think residents should see this decision as a strong signal that the Council is focused on the business of government, not power or political posturing. Of course, conspiracy theorists will offer other interpretations.
General Administration Statistics
There’s a brand new slide deck in the City Council Meeting packet. I have just flipped through it. From a resident’s point of view, the deck is interesting in terms of understanding where the City spends money. At the same time, it appears that a lot of voiceover and explanation are necessary to make sense of the data. I’m holding off on commenting until after the discussion at the Council meeting.
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