[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-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],{"_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",6150689,"mediaKeyId","5507085-9eac6eee41282ffe80b3865f93eee032","parentId",5507085,"title","Clallam County committee debates limits on commissioners serving on nonprofit boards","audioSeconds",1850,"startMs",4750000,"endMs",6600000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507085-9eac6eee41282ffe80b3865f93eee032&start=4750&end=6600","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507085-9eac6eee41282ffe80b3865f93eee032/thumbnail_4750000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6150689/Clallam-County/Washington/Clallam-County-committee-debates-limits-on-commissioners-serving-on-nonprofit-boards","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150689-e379d52b094a8e5fe3f8760a5c328d82/orig.mp4?Expires=1774942876&Signature=lvnKLy4F2WZv0BINAmSdZyhVvSxM1wbpqT86TjfU8hXCqIiHlbP4LebbcT2LzvtFwHl85BP-NQisqwIssyAfjTxo7D~WFlcgt~hOMmQk3GAIz7cUTcwUC7IuAWtK~U-39F7Q7tswB7kM-KJG8qYC7tuQ6o5B8WQm6KVzHMOb5eeqtnNRpKxsOPKaILvE4XfnKJRI0XIYAuOH2YXxryWUf-aYzcF7Jw3jQtPIfoW9rReiwVW-9wL~hzY1RJMmPZJPvRMJeJSybfBFEX54RpiKfZviXOherK3gm46TJG7SnznGRwNbcodJf1MZiT2rGSsErS6wOWtwhLuHPIEH4tzBYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Clallam County, WA","date","2025-07-24T00:00:00Z","article","Clallam County's Charter Review and Ethics Committee turned July 24 to whether county commissioners should serve on nonprofit or quasi-governmental boards that may receive county funding, with members and a public commenter urging clearer rules on recusal and possible limits.

Public commenter John Worthington urged the committee to \"change them back,\" arguing commissioners should not serve on boards that both seek county money and make policy for those organizations. \"To serve on the board where they are making policy when the NGOs are expecting to get money from the county, that is totally out of line,\" Worthington said during public comment.

Committee members framed the policy question as a balance between (1) enabling commissioners to represent county interests at regional or nonprofit tables and (2) preventing conflicts when a commissioner's board membership could affect county funding decisions. Several members said they favor recusal when a vote would directly benefit an organization on which a commissioner serves, but they stopped short of endorsing a blanket ban.

What the committee asked staff to do: Members directed staff to compile lists of the NGOs and boards commissioners currently serve on in an official capacity, to identify which of those organizations receive county funds or enter contracts with the county, and to draft concise code language addressing conflicts of interest and required recusals. The group discussed state law (RCW references were read during the meeting) as a baseline and agreed to align county language with applicable statutes.

Quotations and examples: Several members used the YMCA and the Economic Development Council as examples where board membership could pose a conflict if the county awards grants or contracts. One commissioner summarized the committee's practical approach: if a commissioner sits on a board and a county funding decision directly affects that board, the commissioner should recuse themselves; other members said that approach should be codified.

Ending: The committee left the question open for legal review and drafting and asked staff to return recommended language and the NGO inventory at the Aug. 12 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Charter Review Commission Ethics Committee Meeting - July 24, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members and a public commenter debated whether county commissioners should be barred or restricted from serving on nonprofit boards that seek county funds; the committee asked staff to compile NGO lists and draft conflict-of-interest language.","taxTitle","Clallam County, Washington","taxId",54309,"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},6150694,"Clallam County committee to draft ethics review commission after reviewing Clark County model",7141,172000,7313000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507085-9eac6eee41282ffe80b3865f93eee032&start=172&end=7313","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507085-9eac6eee41282ffe80b3865f93eee032/thumbnail_172000.jpg","/articles/6150694/Clallam-County/Washington/Clallam-County-committee-to-draft-ethics-review-commission-after-reviewing-Clark-County-model","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150694-8899febb4cba120f79eabebb74aae53d/orig.mp4?Expires=1774942876&Signature=kcu1KnKm~Yp7b-Pz~6Idqq58ARZnnnBafBXw3~ytzfLw8Wy6oWG26c1oNKqsw4PxmnOXF63YD9tJiWOd~YTfgzEo3wMOoQUxA~Bco-hZCh71VvQUwAobgFiJBABfSSGDp-j-77SmLpJB9dLr1m8k-HwgSYafVjxtCr11RzuPiMV-5n4AoVVenk2dNqCPZNW3Tg3qDF2I8d0lYZdLuzjiBBcHEOcCsoeLC3peXK0YACvR9-hGNVw~UMTWekxRZ4qrK-LCc4R~q2t9873FP-tw3LLxrOiec1g3xvVNUSgp2MzRQDmnTGntQ-XSbDfbZCwN6drXvGBc~Kl1EwGgf5U35g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Clallam County's Charter Review and Ethics Committee agreed July 24 to develop charter amendment language to create an ethics review commission for elected officials and to gather information from Clark County's recently established system before the committee's next session. Committee members said they want a structure that allows findings or censure but avoids heavy monetary penalties that could trigger large legal bills or complex due-process obligations.

The committee took up the topic after a report from Commissioner Jeff Tozer and a presentation by Dee Bowden, chief civil deputy in the Clallam County Prosecutor's Office, who summarized Clark County's approach and the practical lessons Clark's staff identified. \"The single most important thing from her perspective is ... you're gonna need staff to actually put all of these things together,\" Bowden said, describing Clark County's experience providing staffing through the county manager's office.

Why it matters: Committee members said Clallam County currently lacks a clear enforcement or complaint-processing mechanism for elected officials, and voters asked the Charter Review Commission to address that gap. The committee framed the effort as two discrete steps: (1) create a board or commission by charter amendment so a forum exists and (2) leave detailed bylaws, procedures and complaint forms to staff and the new board to develop.

Key details from the discussion: Bowden said Clark County implemented charter provisions (identified in the meeting as charter sections 8.12 and 8.13 and related code Title 2, chapter 7) that required an ethics office and review commission; she said Clark's process relied heavily on staff work and that the county had only one full hearing since the charter changes took effect. Bowden told the committee that Clark County's hearing process took \"more than a year\" for the single case that reached a hearing, and that Clark's ordinance leaves a broad menu of remedies (\"public admonishment, public resolution of censure, or any action as allowed by law\") that committee members worried could be read expansively.

Members contrasted Clark's arrangements with Clallam County's existing code. Bowden noted differences in indemnification and defense provisions in Clallam's code and warned those differences could complicate who pays for outside counsel if multiple parties need representation. \"If you're going to have to go to outside counsel to represent the board and retain a different outside counsel to represent the accused and then a completely different outside counsel to represent the county itself,\" Bowden said, \"those are things that should be analyzed under our current code.\" Committee members asked Bowden and staff to research whether a process limited to nonmonetary remedies (for example, a public finding or censure only) would reduce due-process obligations and the county's exposure to litigation costs.

Committee directions and next steps: The committee asked staff and counsel to collect Clark County's code, bylaws and \"business process\" documents and to return with a formal legal query that addresses (a) how Clark County staffed and funded its ethics office, (b) how long investigations and hearings have taken there, and (c) the likely cost and due-process implications for Clallam County if the committee limits remedies to nonmonetary findings. The committee also expressed consensus that monetary penalties and recall would not be part of its initial recommendation; the group instead prioritized creating a mechanism to receive complaints and issue findings. The committee scheduled a follow-up meeting for August 12, 1:00'3:30 p.m. to review materials and draft amendment language.

What remained unresolved: Committee members raised several outstanding policy questions they asked staff to analyze: whether Clallam's indemnification clauses would obligate the county to provide counsel in ethics matters; whether an appeals process should be written into code or left to board bylaws; and how to limit remedies to avoid heavy due-process burdens. Bowden offered to help re-contact Clark County staff and to provide copies of the materials she reviewed.

Ending note: Committee members agreed to base initial amendment language on Clark County's structure but to narrow the remedies and clarify staffing, appeals and due-process protections before proposing language to place before voters.","Clallam County's charter review/ethics committee agreed July 24 to draft language for a voter-facing amendment to create an ethics review commission for elected officials, directing staff to gather Clark County materials and research due-process and cost implications before the next meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Clallam County committee debates limits on commissioners serving on nonprofit boards

Clallam County committee to draft ethics review commission after reviewing Clark County model