Sequim City Council’s recent decision to support Sequim School District’s bond and levy proposal with a letter is now under the microscope of the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC).

Complaints made by Jeffrey Tozzer and Mark Klinke question the legality of a Jan. 22 special meeting where the council agreed to the letter.

In the special meeting, councilors split in a 3-2 decision but ultimately agreed to suspend their rules with deputy mayor Rachel Anderson and Harmony Rutter voting no.

It was the first time they’ve voted to suspend their rules since implementing them.

Anderson said then she had sought clarity from the PDC about changing council rules to make endorsements, but did not receive a follow-up response by the meeting.

Councilors later unanimously agreed to support the school district’s letter, but Anderson and Rutter said in an interview that breaking council rules set a precedent and they had concerns about the fairness and legality of such a move.

Under its 2023 council rules, defined by RCW 42.17A.555, they agreed to not consider requests from outside agencies to support or oppose ballot measures, not permit any public comment on any proposed or pending ballot issue, and not share ballot-related information in any city facility.

Councilor Vicki Lowe said at the special meeting that support for the district’s bond and levy were “extenuating circumstances” citing the schools’ condition.

Councilor Dan Butler asked for the council to consider a letter of support, and legal notice of the meeting was made in the Peninsula Daily News on Saturday, Jan. 18.

City attorney Kristina Nelson-Gross said the special meeting would have to allow time for proponents and opponents to speak about the schools’ proposal. Only proponents spoke at the meeting.

Complaints

In his complaint form to the PDC, Tozzer said councilors’ quotes from January indicated they had already decided to support the school district before hearing from constituents, citing Lowe as saying “the goal (of the special meeting) is to have a letter of support or something in the end.”

The school district had provided a template for the letter of support, too, he said.

“When public officials use public resources to take stances on ballot issues, residents feel that government decisions are being made with bias rather than neutrally or fairly,” Tozzer said. “Officials are elected to represent all constituents, not just those who share their views. If they openly support or oppose a ballot measure, it alienates community members and creates division.”

He and Klinke said the city’s public notice also lacked notification that it would discuss the bond and levy.

Klinke also said recordings show councilors had already formed support for the school district before the meeting and that “the special meeting was a matter of formality so that they would not run afoul of requirements in RCW 42.17a.555 to get to that objective.”

Find their complaints on the PDC’s website here.

Natalie Johnson PDC Communications Specialist said the PDC has a 90-day initial review of the complaint once they’ve opened a case.

“During that time, the agency can either resolve the case, such as by dismissal or a warning letter, or hold an initial hearing to convert it to a formal investigation,” she said.

“There isn’t a time limit on a formal investigation.”

Johnson said the city had 14 days to respond to the case once it was opened (Feb. 11).

“If the case goes to a hearing with the Commission, they’ll also have a chance to participate,” she said.

Staff with the City of Sequim said last week that they were working on a reply to the PDC but did not go into detail about what it would entail.

Only the commission can find a violation, Johnson said, and if the city is found in violation, penalties and case resolutions vary significantly.

“Cases can be resolved by staff with reminders or warning letters, which don’t include penalties,” she said.

“They can also be resolved with statements of understanding, in which the respondent would admit to a violation, which could, but not always, include a penalty.”

Fines can go up to $10,000 per violation, Johnson said, and PDC staff can recommend penalties to the commission based on a number of factors.

According to its 2024 report, the PDC saw a “significant increase in complaint volume” going from 365 complaints with 228 opened cases and 200 closed cases in fiscal year 2023, to 1,563 complaints in fiscal year 2024 with about 75% of complaints from one complainant. As of the report’s publication, there were more than 900 open cases for the 10-member enforcement team.

The PDC also assessed $123,450 in penalties in fiscal year 2024, up from $109,000 the previous year, according to its report.

Council input

Sequim city councilors will consider in late March whether to change 2023 council rules to allow junior taxing districts to seek letters of support.

They unanimously voted on Feb. 10 to direct legal staff to bring back an ordinance change for its March 24 council meeting.

Anderson asked councilors about the change.

“It really feels like we’re out in limbo and I know that junior taxing districts get some funding, but the gap has to come from citizens, and it feels like when we’re out in limbo we only have each other and so I’m trying to think of ways to help support that legally,” she said. “Anything that we can do to help our community.”

Lowe encouraged councilors to think about other agencies’ impact on city assets, too, such as police officers responding to an emergency in a school, and how it could apply to a proposed council rule change.

Rutter said she hopes the language that is proposed in the updated ordinance includes guidance from the PDC.

Nelson-Gross said any change won’t require much refinement.

When asked if she received a response from the PDC about her questions, Anderson said via email that their staff said “if Council makes a change of rules that will be ongoing, it should be acceptable. If the Council changed rules then immediately changed the rules back, it would not be acceptable.”