[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6260763,"mediaKeyId","3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed","parentId",3127194,"title","Commission introduces charter amendment to create Whatcom County Office of Ombuds after public backing","audioSeconds",424,"startMs",6544000,"endMs",6968000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed&start=6544&end=6968","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed/thumbnail_6544000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6260763/Whatcom-County/Washington/Commission-introduces-charter-amendment-to-create-Whatcom-County-Office-of-Ombuds-after-public-backing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260763-8d5678436f63b4271ed251a8f5872b63/orig.mp4?Expires=1770627509&Signature=oEuc7zCUXu08FLwx29wwH1~lN7fYQfhLoIV-zI6ru3tPpI1vlYIOF3him6prFVh020cHMAMYuB1yNVD0lkdms6gpqKBvhmcnzR6Sw6X4uoeD3d65Ko48jbAbmigArNuWQpy34BmjcGObwwTeIBdsXZCQmSifPHKVQ33TtTJicGxEtIPDlbxOQ9RvOOYZajkXgOYlu~ckE9K2W5bPkP7DlDUL16vW8utqRayeKSD3hcx3jZzp7ace9Kzsic-WbWUp8OAR5kDu1PQ~7eM-wK-KfuW3pzqxrJnw16474NbxBWwWVbFykM8IsmD1lR28AALQx-xQVO-swxIKbavNS4kAWA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Whatcom County, WA","date","2025-04-25T23:42:52.55Z","article","The Charter Review Commission voted to place a proposed amendment establishing an independent Whatcom County Office of Ombuds on a future meeting agenda after public testimony and commissioner remarks supporting centralized complaint tracking and accountability.

The sponsor, Commissioner Colton Coltenfelt, said the proposed language would create an independent office appointed by the county council, tasked with receiving, investigating and recommending action on complaints about county government operations. The office would also respond to public inquiries and produce public-facing reports.

Kim Ninneman, speaking as a member of a local civic group, told the commission the Riveters Collective “strongly support the development of a Whatcom County Office of Ombuds” and urged the addition of an annual public report and a publicly available strategic plan. Leah Weinman and Marcus Dee, both commenters earlier in the meeting, also urged an ombuds office to improve transparency and to provide a single place for people to lodge concerns that now are handled in multiple department-specific ways.

Coltenfelt moved to place the amendment on the next meeting agenda and the motion passed on roll call, with 13 yes votes, one excused and one abstention recorded.

Why it matters: Commenters said the county lacks a clear, centralized, publicly accountable channel for complaints and requests for administrative review. Proponents argue an ombuds office would provide case management, systemic reporting to the council and an annual public summary of complaints and outcomes.

Next steps: The amendment will be scheduled for fuller discussion at the commission’s next meeting, with supporters urging staff to include language about annual reporting and public-facing performance measures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Whatcom County Charter Review Commission Meeting 4.24.2025","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioners voted to place a proposed amendment to establish a county Office of Ombuds on a future meeting agenda after members of the public and commissioners argued it would centralize complaint tracking and improve accountability.","taxTitle","Whatcom County, Washington","taxId",2976,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6260769,"Commissioners postpone vote on proposed cap for elected-official pay after extensive debate",3220,7674000,10894000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed&start=7674&end=10894","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed/thumbnail_7674000.jpg","/articles/6260769/Whatcom-County/Washington/Commissioners-postpone-vote-on-proposed-cap-for-elected-official-pay-after-extensive-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260769-e4ed46064f3daa918645899a242c9830/orig.mp4?Expires=1770627509&Signature=mPCQ~ih5j1IrGPKVkN3U8ep3WtBIf01jGM01REmgq1mDVH7HPV46d8-TZmOfBf8LPVzZL-9z8~EcWb6ym-tks9RE5BIhKXGvFQi2EWUHL5Vi-MUpOAEPkwQmbsH-MVPV59oJ4n7pIQdt-fstnAa-npk7B2-nl4nE4T8SA5q9at4fubrSiVGea8lSy-8OlWWsqpC9TNN9iC7NXUpyXTFF-kZ9PRvGfQCc7t94gSywEazt24r5Uf2LyBHQM7dgHVfv80-IUeWrhiEcPL6IV6yXcozhBewLTLjvue1RMqSHto6Wm62UMfY5pDKwHJLCvAzPJ9HpJVSoiTzg-mJl0uJhKg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Charter Review Commission debated a proposed charter amendment that would put guardrails on elected-official salaries and then voted to postpone further consideration so the sponsor can revise the language and provide comparative numbers.

Commissioner Andrew Redding introduced a version of Amendment 10 that he described as guardrails rather than fixed caps. The text would have limited certain elected-official salaries by reference to state or peer-county levels and left detailed adjustments to the independent salary commission. Redding said the language was intended to be simple and to respond to public concern that Some Whatcom salaries are relatively high compared with larger counties.

Commissioners asked for clear, contemporaneous figures showing what the proposed guardrails would mean in dollar terms for each elected office; many said they could not responsibly vote for a ceiling without an immediate data table. County Treasurer Steve Oliver summarized the salary commission’s recent action and explained that the salary commission decoupled many salaries from the county executive this year and that the prosecuting attorney’s pay was aligned to a percent of the superior court judge’s salary.

“On July 1 the superior court judge’s salary ... increases,” Oliver said, noting the salary commission’s recent determinations and the annual cost-of-living indexing for unrepresented employees that will apply to elected officials in coming years. Commissioner Jennifer Wright said she wanted to see concrete numbers in a table before committing to a position.

The debate grew detailed and procedural. Some commissioners said they were philosophically opposed to imposed supermajorities or to highly prescriptive charter limits on salaries. Others said a ceiling that the public could understand would be politically defensible. Multiple commissioners urged Redding to incorporate feedback and produce a revision.

Commissioner Joe Ellenbosch moved to postpone and Commissioner Jennifer Wright seconded the motion. The motion to postpone passed, 13 in favor with one abstention and one excused, giving the sponsor time to prepare revised language and updated figures for a subsequent meeting.

Why it mattered: The proposal touches on compensation for elected leaders, public perceptions of value and fairness, and the role of an independent salary commission. Commissioners said they wanted a straightforward, defensible approach and up-to-date comparative tables before asking voters to approve any charter limits.

Next steps: The sponsor will prepare revised language and a clear data table showing present salaries and the effect of the proposed guardrails; the commission agreed to revisit the amendment at a subsequent meeting.","After weeks of drafting and a multi-hour debate, the commission voted to postpone consideration of an amendment that would set guardrails on elected-official salaries so drafters can provide clearer numbers and options.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6260773,"Charter commission narrowly rejects supermajority requirement for county property tax increases",1770,4886000,6656000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed&start=4886&end=6656","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed/thumbnail_4886000.jpg","/articles/6260773/Whatcom-County/Washington/Charter-commission-narrowly-rejects-supermajority-requirement-for-county-property-tax-increases","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260773-52ead6f91336f17584a9ff9a49e071cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770627509&Signature=AXQ8Zvibe5JIjpz6K4aSf2yVZtlGchIOiMnnx2ZhcuK-f8CWd30xERTMpRorQjwW85x1r7fTKjyw8f7g4WMn71JL5XGr7tte8w1K9gkna2JZgEcq88x8JqOOlPnGRuszb6iv-XQVVhlKTrvztG29a7WrwnZeLp36pqUWORbzyiP4vQUTpwSugxkZ1i1m8hKcS3oV3AQ5vkIVdBbReaBurT1kAVyLTwFxaA4PnExhmT5t~ElL-jkX31K8AbKG-yu93ANZm~bY9wm~7tdlzkoCkHFHuE1fgKK-7DPU4Oxa8Mx0yqcEclZ7vyQJGFkwpWk5y5UaDbUSGwBjy5Zc4dksWQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Whatcom County Charter Review Commission debated a citizen-drafted amendment that would require a supermajority of County Council votes to approve property tax increases and rejected it after robust public comment and commissioner debate.

The amendment, proposed by Commissioner John Mutschler, would have required five of seven council members to approve any increase in the county portion of property taxes beyond statutory exceptions. Proponents said the change would restrain tax growth and protect renters and homeowners; opponents said a supermajority would make it harder to respond to fiscal shortfalls and would force deeper cuts to services or layoffs in down years.

Misty Flowers, a public commenter, said she supported the amendment because “we’re seeing such a huge inflation on property taxes that it is causing a much higher problem with housing, availability and affordability.” Chris Fletcher and other speakers warned the commission that multiple proposed charter amendments risk confusing voters and that outreach and clarity were necessary.

Commissioner Joel Pitts Jordan urged a no vote, saying the amendment would “come in bad years … and it’s going to come in years when the economy is likely already struggling,” and that constraints would translate into cuts to services and layoffs. Commissioner Andrew Redding also opposed blanket supermajorities as “minority vetoes.” Commissioner Colton Coltenfelt, among others, supported the measure as a way to force broader agreement before raising taxes.

The motion to adopt the amendment was moved by Commissioner Mutschler and seconded. The roll-call vote recorded seven yes votes and eight no votes, and the motion failed. Transcript-recorded yes votes included Joe Ellenbosch, Lindsey Graham Ellenbosch, Brad Kelly, John Mutschler, Anna Ordos, Rod Stump and Doug Chadwick. Recorded no votes included Liz Darrow, Colton Coltenfelt, Maya Morales, Joel Pitts Jordan, Andrew Redding, Jennifer Wright, Eamon Collins and one other recorded against vote; the motion failed by 7–8.

Why it mattered: The measure directly addressed tax policy and how the county responds to fiscal pressure; supporters said the change would protect taxpayers, particularly renters, from escalating property levies, while opponents said it would limit the council’s ability to preserve services when revenues fall.

The commission did not send the amendment to the ballot. Instead the proposal was recorded as defeated at the meeting and will not appear on the commission’s set of introduced charter amendments as drafted.","After public testimony and extended debate, the Charter Review Commission voted 7–8 against a proposed amendment requiring a supermajority of council members to approve county property tax increases.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6260777,"Whatcom County officials outline steps to boost budget transparency during charter review deep dive",3188,1744000,4932000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed&start=1744&end=4932","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3127194-1605f4c06ec630680558161bf9d7a2ed/thumbnail_1744000.jpg","/articles/6260777/Whatcom-County/Washington/Whatcom-County-officials-outline-steps-to-boost-budget-transparency-during-charter-review-deep-dive","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260777-5419ee023012426588526377f2c2068c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770627509&Signature=FT3Paf~VXmN7qlqN-a5LvTI2LlvYjfBs2SlaLomq7HLHXqI3-kBjQcTFiTOkoa7Fl5m0Z46BOzNQct9gCWaFazGS0SYMZtHqEQTBIaebEPd8GjT0LNIrklkO-vCMMRKGIOqivAMMGHHbXlQ8hKpRPUy3Ih2Vub-ch12~i4nvFo2cYckbVZl-vbZYabeqik5cN-H~14xrqTEsR7j3XAuKc32ZJ8tWBJC9jlAVCjGEdcjt4QckNZBWKiAKoqWQ6VP4evT8Cv8p6DzYOZKLFD~IFWaWlG7w~SAvXYIVa~bJtACyPre58Z0Zc9V5gGhUdOjP5DbqpTsO280ZFg3hbjtD3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Whatcom County officials told the County Charter Review Commission on May 1 during a deep dive on Article 6, Financial Administration, that they are working to give the public and council earlier, clearer information about the county’s budget and spending.

The discussion came after commissioners asked how the public can find out whether collected tax or fee revenue is being spent and how to increase public participation in budget prioritization. “We are actively working on and eager to engage in” earlier engagement and clearer communication, Deputy Executive Ali Panucci said.

The exchange centered on three priorities: bringing the public into the process earlier so citizens’ priorities can shape departmental budget requests, upgrading financial and budgeting software to produce more granular public-facing reports, and improving quarterly and year-end reporting timelines.

“Timing matters,” Panucci said. “As we think about preparing the next biennial budget, departments, the executive and the council should be hearing from the community about priorities before we put the technical pieces together.”

Finance Director Randy Bridal explained where members of the public can already find spending information and how the county will expand that access. “The contracts are approved or brought through council,” Bridal said. “There are quarterly reports where you can look to specific funds. We also have an online contract database where all our active contracts are put.” He pointed to the Healthy Children’s Fund as an example of a single fund with regular reporting.

Bridal and Panucci said the county recently moved to a new financial system. “We are already seeing the benefits,” Treasurer Steve Oliver said, adding that daily cash management and investment practices returned meaningful interest income last year. Oliver told commissioners the treasurer’s office invests funds not needed for immediate obligations and that in the previous year those investments generated “an excess of ... $10,000,000 in interest income for the county,” money that flows back into county funds.

Commissioners pushed for specifics about timelines and accessibility. Commissioners asked whether year-end reconciliations could be ready in six weeks. Bridal said quarterly reports should meet that timeline with the new systems; year-end audited numbers will take longer because of audit requirements and manual closing processes.

Panucci also described plans to pilot public-facing tools such as interactive budget viewers to help residents “click around in the budget” and see spending by program, cost center and fund. “We need a new budget system too,” she said. “That’s next on the list.”

Commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about supplementals and how the council can amend or remove line items in supplemental appropriations. Bridal said the council now has opportunities to discuss supplemental ordinances in committee and to amend items on a line-item basis prior to introduction.

Why it matters: County budget transparency affects what services remain funded and how decisions are made. Commissioners framed the discussion in the charter review as a question of whether charter language or implementation steps should require earlier public engagement, clearer reporting by fund and better timelines for year-end and quarterly reports.

The commission did not adopt charter language at the meeting. Instead staff and elected officials were asked to continue developing public-engagement plans and to return with options for charter drafters, and to accelerate work to make financial data easier to access online.

Quotes in context: “We first have to identify what is statutorily required at what level of service,” Panucci said, urging attention to baseline obligations before asking citizens to prioritize discretionary services. Bridal said the county maintains roughly 80 separate funds and detailed reporting for capital and special-revenue funds is already available in quarterly financial reports.

Next steps: Commissioners asked staff to return with concrete proposals on public engagement timing, options for interactive budget tools and a realistic schedule for quarterly and year-end reporting under the new financial system.","Deputy executive, finance director and county treasurer told the Charter Review Commission they are working on earlier public engagement, a new financial system and more granular online reporting to improve transparency and budget planning.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission introduces charter amendment to create Whatcom County Office of Ombuds after public backing

Commissioners postpone vote on proposed cap for elected-official pay after extensive debate

Charter commission narrowly rejects supermajority requirement for county property tax increases

Whatcom County officials outline steps to boost budget transparency during charter review deep dive