KING COUNTY CHARTER

Final Recommendations--June 1997
MAKING KING COUNTY GOVERNMENT MORE CITIZEN-FRIENDLY, ACCOUNTABLE, AND EFFICIENT

Every decade, the King County Charter is reviewed by an appointed advisory commission composed of citizens chosen both for their knowledge of government and for how well they reflect the diverse population of the county. The 1996-1997 King County Charter Review Commission met from November 1996 to June 1997 and concluded its deliberations with 10 Charter amendment recommendations to be placed on the 1997 ballot and three ordinance recommendations to be enacted in 1997.

The 29-member Commission's recommendations are designed to make King County government more citizen-friendly, accountable, and efficient, while at the same time addressing the issues the government is having with serving as both a regional and a local government. The recommendations are described in the following pages.

Citizen Initiative to Amend the Charter: The Commission determined that the most important amendment it could recommend to make government more citizen-friendly was to permit citizens to use the initiative process to amend the Charter. Currently the citizens have the power to make laws through the initiative and referendum process, but only the King County Council may amend the Charter. Commission members reasoned that the Charter was created and approved by the voters of King County and that the citizens should, therefore, have the ability to amend it. The citizens of neighboring Pierce and Snohomish counties and, in fact, all the home rule charter counties in the state, can amend their charter by initiative. King County citizens should have this option as well.

To keep the initiative process from being used frivolously or resulting in flawed language, Commission members recommended a 20 percent threshold for the number of signatures required to qualify a Charter amendment initiative for the ballot. The Commission also recommended that the County Council be permitted to place a substitute amendment on the ballot at the same time that a citizen-led initiative went before the voters.

Extending Time for Signature-Gathering: An additional citizen-friendly recommendation includes an ordinance that would extend the amount of time currently allowed for gathering signatures for initiative and referendum petitions. The Commission recommends increasing this time from 60 to 90 days for initiatives and from 45 to 60 days for referendums. This change would allow citizens to be more involved in their governance by making a current tool (citizen ability to legislate through initiative and referendum) a more workable option.

When King County and Metro were merged, three regional committees--Water Quality, Regional Transit, and Regional Policy--were established to give the suburban cities and the City of Seattle a voice at the tables where regional policies are made. These committees have had difficulty serving as effective venues for discussion of regional issues. Commission members created a set of five recommendations that would remove several of the roadblocks that have prevented the Regional Committees from being successful. These include:

1. Permitting members of Regional Committees to designate alternates, so that business may be conducted in the event that an appointed member cannot make a meeting.
2. Allowing the Regional Committees to select their own chairs and operating procedures, so that Committee members may feel that they own their process.
3. Allowing Regional Committees to initiate legislation, rather than merely respond to directives from the County Council, so that their work has the possibility of having an impact on pressing regional issues and of reflecting the cities' concerns.
4. Requiring the County Council to respond to Regional Committee recommendations within 90 days by accepting, rejecting, or substituting new policy. Failure to act would result in the Regional Committees' proposals being placed before the voters for action.
5. Striking the word "countywide" from the charter language that enacted the Regional Committees and retaining the word "regional" to clarify the role of the Committees.

Unincorporated Governance Task Force: If there were one issue that the Commission heard the most vocal complaints about during its public meetings, it was the frustration that citizens in the unincorporated areas expressed with their governance on local matters. These residents feel that they lack representation, that their issues are not addressed adequately, and that their needs are not taken into account when policies are drafted, especially where land-use decisions are involved. This extremely important issue of representation in unincorporated King County is born of frustration with King County's increasing role as a regional government and the effects of the Growth Management Act.

The Commission looked at several options for a new local governance structure for unincorporated areas. On balance, the Commission determined that there wasn't enough time to adequately prepare a new governance structure. Commission members are asking the County Council to create by ordinance a task force charged with developing a plan for a separately elected body for the unincorporated area. The Commission's report on the unincorporated issue offers a framework upon which the County Council can begin to address this pressing issue and suggests the following guiding principles:

1. Regional and local decision making need to be separated. Decision makers for unincorporated area issues need to be accountable to the unincorporated area voters.
2. The area for governance needs to be less than a city, so as not to discourage annexation and incorporation.
3. The new entity need to be implemented without adding new taxes, or creating a new taxing authority.
4. The governance structure should have final decision-making authority on matters of area-only jurisdiction.
5. The governance structure would provide for jurisdictional representation on regional decision making.

The task force was also charged with looking at a new method of electing representatives to the County Council that would be different than its current process of electing only by individual districts.

Unincorporated Planning Commission: Commission members recognized the need for a mechanism for citizens in unincorporated areas to be more directly involved in land-use policies and decisions, and recommended that an ordinance be enacted to create one or more planning commissions for the unincorporated area of King County.

The issue of whether King County elected officials (Executive, the County Council, and the Assessor) should be selected on a partisan or nonpartisan basis has been raised often since 1977 and proven contentious and difficult to resolve. Commission members debated the issue extensively and determined that the voters should be permitted to have their say on this matter and put it to rest one way or another.

Independent Ethics Board: Concerns about the independence of the Board of Ethics were raised before the Commission at the same time that an ordinance was proposed to combine the Office of Complaints, Ombudsman, Personnel Board, and the Board of Ethics. Commission members determined that the ordinance proposal combined too many functions under one office, and created more confusion than it improved accountability. But the Commission agreed that since the since the Ombudsman Office was established in the Charter, the Board of Ethics (currently established by ordinance only) should be in the Charter as well. Commission members believed that making the Board of Ethics a separate entity would strengthen its independence. Finally, the Commission thought the Board of Ethics should have the power to hire and fire its own staff.

Succession Plan: Commission members were persuaded that the County needed a provision for automatic interim succession for the offices of Assessor, Sheriff, and Executive in the event of a sudden vacancy. This common sense proposal would establish a procedure whereby the deputy automatically steps up to lead the office in the event of the death or disabling of an Assessor, Sheriff, or Executive. It would provide much-needed continuity in a time of confusion at the sudden loss of a leader and would ensure that important procedures, such as check writing and arrest-authority, among others, would continue uninterrupted. The interim official would serve for no longer than 90 days, during which time a new leader would be selected according to procedures mandated by the State Constitution.

Qualifications for Assessor: Commission members determined there was a need to establish qualifications for the office of Assessor by ordinance. This recommendation was made in response to the concerns expressed by many people that have that the Assessor needs to have technical, management, and policy-making expertise to carry out the duties of the office. Such qualifications would help ensure professionalism in an office that is primarily administrative and managerial.

Biennial Budget: Commission members determined that it would be a useful exercise for the County Council and the Executive to engage in a debate on whether the County would be better served by an annual or a biennial budget. Statewide authority for counties to use a biennial budget has been granted, but King County's Charter currently allows only for an annual budget. Commission members agreed with the Executive that it would be good to have both options available and the matter debated and decided. Commission members did not advocate for either annual or biennial budgeting, although many were persuaded that there may be value in having staff spend more time managing services and less time preparing budgets every year.

Revising Citizen Ordinances: Commission members decided that the County Council should be authorized to revise ordinances (not charter amendments) approved through the initiative process after two years. This would make King consistent with other charter counties, including Clallam, Pierce, and Whatcom; would provide clearer direction for the Council; and would allow the Council, if necessary, to make administrative changes to clarify confusing language in initiatives.

Day Labor: The issue of what labor King County employees are permitted to do with construction and building has a long history in Charter debate. On balance, Commission members recognized that the proposed language represented a hard won compromise and voted to keep the day labor provision in the Charter. The proposed provision would allow King County to use county employees for the construction of public buildings and works, including roads projects, with a value of $25,000 or less, where one trade or craft is involved and a value of $70,000, where two or more trades or crafts are involved.

Clarifying Signature Gathering: The Supervisor of King County Records and Elections asked the Commission to clarify the method for determining the number of signatures for referendum and initiative petitions for matters that only affect unincorporated areas. Annexations and incorporations have created difficulty for counting signatures. A time-consuming and costly screening process that takes eight employees and five weeks worth of work is required to figure out what the starting and cutting off points are for counting signatures. The Commission recommended a basis of not less than 4 percent of the registered voters in unincorporated areas for referendums and not less than 5 percent of the registered voters in unincorporated areas for initiatives would significantly speed up the counting process. Having readily accessible, finite numbers enables a quick and accurate determination of the number of signatures required.

The 1996-97 Charter Review Commission transmitted its recommendations to the King County Council on June 27, 1997. The King County Council has the sole authority to determined which, if any, of the Commission's recommended charter amendments should go on the ballot, and which, if any, of the recommended ordinances should be enacted and implemented. The Commission has recommended that the charter amendments be placed on the November 1997 ballot and that the ordinances be enacted and implemented in 1997. The King County Council has until August 25, 1997 to act in a regular Council session to place proposed charter amendments on the November 1997 ballot.