Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ombuds Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Whatcom County charter amendment to create an ombuds office fails after public debate and close roll call
Summary
After hours of public comment and commissioner debate, a motion to place proposed Amendment 14 (establishing a Whatcom County Office of the Ombuds) on the ballot failed on a roll-call vote; supporters argued it would increase transparency and reduce costly litigation, opponents cited cost and the risk of expanding government.
Get email alerts on the Ombuds Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Whatcom County Charter Review Commission commissioners voted against sending proposed Amendment 14, which would create a county Office of the Ombuds, to voters following extended public comment and commissioner debate.
Supporters said the independent office would provide residents and county employees with a neutral place to raise complaints, help identify systemic problems and reduce expensive litigation. Opponents questioned the cost and whether existing county systems could be reallocated to provide the same service.
Proponents at the meeting urged the commission to give voters the choice. “An office of the ombuds would improve civic engagement and community relations by assisting both those within government and the people they serve,” public commenter Debbie Anderson Gray said during the hearing. Ray Deck, founder and CEO of Scoop of Kids, told the commission that an ombuds could identify cross‑departmental issues—he cited contracting delays as an example—and recommended an appointed, long term for independence.
Commission debate focused on structure, independence and cost. Sponsors described the amendment as intentionally general to let County Council shape staffing and operations if voters approved it, with an estimated first‑year cost presented to commissioners of roughly $400,000 for a fully independent office staffed with two full‑time equivalent positions; sponsors said the council would have time to phase funding in the next budget cycle. Some commissioners said they supported the idea in principle but were wary of creating a permanent new office without clearer budget offsets; others said the charter route would better protect the office’s independence than an ordinance.
A motion to formally adopt and send proposed Amendment 14 to the voters was made by Commissioner Coltenfeldt. The commission then conducted a roll‑call vote. Recorded votes were: Lindsey Graham Ellenbosch — no; Colton Coltenfelt — yes; Brad Kelly — no; Maya Morales — yes; John Muschwick — no; Joel Fitzjordan — yes; Andrew Redding — yes; Jessica Rynstra — yes; Jennifer Wright — yes; Doug Chadwick — no; Damon Collins — yes; Liz Darrow — yes; Joe Ellemos (changed from pass to yes). The motion failed 9–4 with 2 commissioners excused.
The failed motion means the commission will not place Amendment 14 on the November ballot at this time; commissioners and speakers noted the argument could be revisited in later charter work or brought before voters by another route. Supporters asked that, if the item resurfaces, the ballot language include an approximate cost estimate so voters can weigh benefits against fiscal impact.

