PDC continues investigation into Whatcom jail mailer

Whatcom County officials who mailed voters fliers about a proposed jail sales tax could still be on the hook after the state was given new information.

Staff for the Public Disclosure Commission, the state agency tasked with enforcing campaign finance law, had found that the officials did not break the law, according to a report included in the commission’s Dec. 3 meeting agenda.

But on Dec. 2 more information was submitted to the staff, including documentation that alleges campaign efforts were coordinated to pass a 0.2 percent jail sales tax to pay for a new Whatcom County Jail, according to PDC staff. Voters rejected the tax.

“I don’t see anything in these materials that we would come to a different conclusion about the flier itself,” said Phil Stutzman, a PDC staff member, “but there was evidence of a coordinated campaign and these materials seem to indicate this.”

The PDC staff opened the initial investigation after 15 complaints from different people claimed various portions of state law were broken when Whatcom County Executive Jack Louws, Sheriff Bill Elfo, and Prosecutor Dave McEachran helped put together a glossy, four-page mailer about the proposed tax.

The mailer was sent only to registered voters in the county, and was paid for with $28,452 of taxpayer money, according to a county contract. That raised questions in the community because state law prohibits – with few exceptions – spending public money or using public offices to promote or oppose any ballot proposition.

Stutzman said the new materials indicated there was campaign planning, including talk about who would run the political action committee in favor of the measure, and information about a survey of registered voters was completed before the flier was put together.

“I think we would want to check into the coordination with the PAC that may have happened,” Stutzman said.

New material

The new materials were submitted by Richard Jehn, who told the commission by phone Thursday morning that he received them from someone else’s public records request from the county.

Louws said he had not received a copy of the new information as of Thursday afternoon.

“When that information comes we’re going to continue to work with the PDC to answer all questions that they have related to this so they can make a decision,” Louws said.

The materials, as obtained by The Bellingham Herald in a request to the PDC Thursday, appear to include notes from June and July meetings between Louws’ staff, Elfo, and DLR Group, the contractor for the jail and mailer in question.

What appear to be minutes from a June 3 meeting in the Executive’s conference room, displayed on DLR Group letterhead, state “Sheriff Elfo is the lead decision-maker from the County team for the campaign. He will identify the key players that shall create the PAC.”

Elfo had not seen those materials until a reporter sent him a copy Thursday afternoon.

“I didn’t pick anybody to serve on any political action committee,” Elfo said.

Elfo said he was concerned about how the DLR Group meeting minutes had been worded.

“They’re talking about a campaign,” Elfo said. “I need clarification — are they talking about the county’s campaign to put out information, or a political campaign to pass the jail? Our attorney made it very clear to us we couldn’t use public assets to do that.”

Elfo said that as a citizen he attended meetings with Citizens for a Humane and Safe Jail Now, the committee that advocated for the jail measure. When asked for information as a county official, he provided factual information.

“I always responded to any question they had,” Elfo said. “Any information I had provided would have been factual information. I know the difference, what you can do, what you can’t do. You can’t use the county system to advocate.”

Louws also said the county had not worked with any PAC in favor of the jail measure, unless it was to provide factual information they requested.

“We provided information for them as we did for everybody that asked questions related to the bond measure,” Louws said.

As for the question of a survey, Louws said that DLR Group had thrown the option out there, but the county never authorized one.

Timing

Some PDC members stated they weren’t fully convinced, even before the new evidence, that no rule had been broken.

The commission asked Stutzman whether staff had requested documentation from Whatcom County officials, but he confirmed that not all relevant documents had been requested, in part because of the timeline required by the complaints.

Five of the complaints were made under a 45-day citizen action system that requires rapid response. That system allows a citizen to take the matter to court on their own if the state fails to act.

Though the 45 days will be up in mid-December, Stutzman said staff had asked an attorney for some of those who filed the complaints whether they would be OK holding off until the commission could investigate further and come back in January with a new report. The attorney replied that could be an option.

The commission voted to take the matter back up in January after staff has done more investigation.

Neah Monteiro, one of the five people who filed the 45-day actions, said she had not yet decided Thursday afternoon if giving the PDC an extension through January would be alright but said that the decision to keep investigating was a good move.

“I think there’s a lot more that we need to know as taxpayers about what their intentions were and what the strategy was behind putting out the mailer,” Monteiro said.

The agenda for the Jan. 28 commission meeting will be finalized about a week beforehand and will be posted online at pdc.wa.gov.

This story was originally published December 3, 2015 at 5:52 PM with the headline "PDC continues investigation into Whatcom jail mailer."