A Contribution to Salary Commission Deliberations

The following letter was submitted last week to the San Juan County Salary Commission after learning about testimony from the current three County Council members expressing their desire to have their positions be accorded a salary that would reflect, among other factors, a pegging of their new positions as continuing to be full-time.

Having challenged this matter directly in one form or another during personal discussions and in public session with each of the current County Council members over the six months since the election, I was disturbed to hear their continued pitch for a position evaluation so at odds with the spirit of the Charter that was overwhelmingly approved by the voters last November.

As a concerned citizen, it seemed appropriate to share my concerns with the Salary Commission for the reasons stated in the letter. As this issue is now being taken up in public discussions and in the media, it seems appropriate to share this letter more widely.

I write to you, not as one of the several county officials from whom you are gathering input as you proceed in your mission of establishing appropriate salaries for San Juan County elected officials, but rather as a concerned and involved county citizen who was one of the founders of the Charter government movement almost two years ago and who has made a point of attending virtually every County Council meeting since the election in a watchdog role to monitor how honestly and fully the transition to Charter government is executed.

Others have been providing you with detailed input regarding the various tasks and responsibilities of the various positions you are evaluating. My comments will be limited to those positions that are new to the County — specifically the new County Council members — and how your evaluation of those positions for salary purposes relates to the "big picture" transition to Charter government in San Juan County.

I offer several points for your consideration:

1. Separation of Powers and Change of Responsibilities. The shift from County Commissioners to County Council members was probably the most fundamental change proposed in the Charter and approved by the voters. The driving force behind this change was to effect the all-important separation of legislative, administrative and judicial powers that were previously all held by the County Commissioners. It was this very lack of separation that frequently produced the dysfunction that over the years brought about the level of frustration that manifested itself in the landslide approval of the changes called for in the Charter. With the hiring of pro-tem County Administrator David Goldsmith, a considerable portion of the activities and tasks previously handled by the legislators has moved to this new position. In just a few months we have seen what a professional administrator can do to create many of the efficiencies in county government envisioned by the Charter.

2. Part-time vs. Full-time. Perhaps the most significant move the Council members have made against the intent of the Charter has been their ongoing campaign, announced within the first week of being sworn in, to hold on to the notion of their jobs being full-time. This theme has continued unabated up to and including their presentations to you last week as they made their case for their positions to remain full-time. What was quite remarkable was how well their self-evaluations of their tasks and responsibilities so ably expressed Parkinson's Law – "Work expands to fill the time available."

For reasons that are not too difficult to surmise, they made their pitch

• despite the removal of a substantial portion of their duties to the County Administrator
• despite the simple arithmetic fact that whatever workload they are left with after handing over previous responsibilities to others will now be shared among six Council members rather than just the three of them
• despite the extensive proceedings of the Freeholder discussions (all in the public record) expressing the clear intention to make the positions part-time and thus feasible for citizens to offer themselves as Council member candidates without having to give up either their current employment or businesses or indeed retirement as the price for offering their talents in the cause of public service
• despite the clear intention of the Freeholders when drafting the Charter that its implementation be revenue (or rather cost) neutral, funding for the County Administrator to be balanced by reduced funding for the legislators as a group (and each of them even further by the sharing of their "pool" of funding among six rather than three).

What also appears to be missing from the Council members' pitch is a full recognition of another key element of the change from three to six members. In their new positions, they no longer have the entire county population as their constituents; instead they now each represent essentially only one-sixth of the population by virtue of their being elected only from their own geographic district. This significantly reduces not only the scope of their constituency demand but also results in less need and time for travel among the islands in that activity.

3. Resistance to Change. Most of us do not generally welcome change, and this has unfortunately proven to be very much the case with our County Council members. Their resistance to the change called for in Charter government was very apparent in their opposition to it before the election. Regrettably, despite the Charter's landslide endorsement by the citizens of San Juan County, the three incumbents have continued to resist the many changes called for by the Charter. Even more concerning, this resistance has grown rather than lessened, despite multiple conversations, meetings, correspondence, negative editorials in all the county media, and personal pleas, both in private and in public, to help rather than hinder the transition. Time and again the incumbent Council members have demonstrated an unwillingness to adopt both the spirit and letter of the Charter. They have continued to parse the words of the Charter in ways that seek to undermine its core intentions, all the while protesting that they really are in favor of a smooth transition. Details of all this have been covered in the Journal, Sounder, sanjuanislander.com and islandguardian.com.

4. Resistance to Loss of power. The degree to which the County Council members are lobbying for a full-time salary is of particular interest, given that two out of three of them have their previous salaries "grandfathered" to remain unchanged. The third, in having to run again in November, indeed has to contend with the salary of the position, should he win re-election, being potentially quite different from that he currently enjoys. However, while financial compensation for two of the three resisting Council members was protected in the Charter, their previous powers were most definitely not. It is thus reasonable to conclude that what we are observing is essentially a resistance to loss of power. History is replete with examples of how the threat or reality of loss of power causes politicians to use all the means at their disposal, even at the expense of the common good or overtly expressed wishes of the voting public, to hold on to their power.

6. Why the Charter was approved. Not too surprising then that we are seeing history play itself out again, this time on the local governmental scene. As suggested earlier, this is essentially "normal" behavior. But it was primarily such over-reaching of previous County Commissioners (and of course all the current incumbents were previously County Commissioners, grandfathered into their current positions as a "courtesy" by the Freeholders when writing the Charter) that brought about the Home Rule or Charter Government movement in the first place and its subsequent resounding overall endorsement by the voters of the county.

7. Ignoring the words and music of the charter. Any of the above changes called for by the letter and spirit of the Charter would be grounds enough for the three incumbents to understand how untenable their pitch should be for continued full-time employment. That they overtly ignore not just the words but especially the music of the Charter is even more unfortunate.

IN CONCLUSION:

You, the members of the Salary Commission, hold the very success of the transition to Charter Government in your hands. By law, whatever you come up with in the way of salaries for the County Council members is binding. This is one of the few situations in which the County Council members cannot do what so often they tend to do – simply veto anything they personally do not like – for whatever reason, spoken or otherwise.

The essence of your task, as elegantly expressed at your first meeting, is to determine a salary for these positions solely on the basis of what their value is to the citizens of San Juan county, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Charter. How you calculate that value, a key task of any salary commission or compensation committee, will in effect establish the true scope of those positions and how large the pool of candidates willing to respond to the call of public service will be.

The voters of San Juan County have called for significant change in the way they wish to be governed. They are all now looking to you to ensure that their wishes are honored as you go about your critical task.

Thank you for your attention – and for your commitment to this important civic contribution and the spirit of citizen government on which this country was built.

(Stephen Robins "retired" to San Juan Island in the mid-1990s, having burnt himself out as a practicing physician specializing in internal medicine, medical editor, clinical researcher, and co-founder of an international strategic healthcare consultancy and communications organization.

As co-owner of Pelindaba Lavender, he is once again engaged in burning himself out as a farmer and serial entrepreneur, steadily expanding the Pelindaba Project from its farming roots into product manufacturing, retailing and café/salon (ad)ventures.

It is rumored his boat, a major reason for moving to the islands, is still afloat at its dock.)

A Contribution to Salary Commission Deliberations

Click to view the rest of the article ******

From the Council Chamber, Disappointedly

There are some moments when a comment made, even ostensibly in jest, illuminates an entire thought process on the part of the person making it. Such are three that were made to me recently, one by each of our County Council members (you get to guess which one made which remark). All point to a troubling failure, each in his own way, to seize the extraordinary opportunity handed to the Council when the voters of San Juan County – by a landslide – decided to dramatically change the way they wished to be governed.

Let's take them in order…..

"So I hear you are running for Council?"

Our representatives are obviously not used to a keen interest being displayed in their actions, so because I attend virtually all Council meetings and periodically make comments at the severely constrained time afforded for public access at these meetings, they assume I am running for office.

Politics generally attracts those who relish the power and trappings of governmental office, as well as a sandpit for exercising personal influence or ego stroking. Through such a lens, then, I suppose I should not be surprised that my close interest in their activities is interpreted as a desire to be "one of them". How sad that civic engagement solely to help further the civic good is simply too altruistic to be true for this politician.

"You're causing a ruckus."

This was the only response from this Council member to my last column expressing concern about recent Council activities. Was I surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes. After several in-depth attempts over the five months since the election to persuade this particular Council member to seize the unique career-building opportunity of being seen as a leader of a smooth and successful transition to Charter government, my expressions of concern at the current path being followed are judged not on their merits but rather as "causing a ruckus"?

It is a requirement of being in public office that one accepts critique as a measure of public response to one's actions. Indeed, the very concept of "public representation" is to welcome public contributions to the legislative debate so as to improve the quality of one's legislative efforts. It is not a signal to dig in heels and wear a thin skin.

"Why don't you people just back off? We're doing the best we can."

Just like the earlier response of "trust us", this repeated mantra persistently reflects an ostrich-like failure to recognize what should have been a blindingly obvious fact — the Commission form of government, with its overabundance of unseparated powers being vested in just three individuals, has been resoundingly rejected by the voters of San Juan County. For this Council member, his way is the only way. Whether he is right or not seems far less important than the need to oppose those who question him, almost solely because they do question. Political leaders unerringly convinced that their own view is the only acceptable view are many things, but "representative of the people" is not one of them.

*

My take on these responses?

No, I am not running for Council. Even as one of the founders of the Charter government movement, my interest in the political arena throughout has been primarily its strategic objective rather than the day-to-day process. To the extent my background and abilities allow me to make a positive contribution, I shall continue to do so. There are many forms of civic contribution, however, and my preferred choice is to devote my time and resources to sustaining and developing the Pelindaba Project as a multifaceted positive force in our community. I am also interested in extending this concept on a broader scale, fostering and supporting other efforts that promote the healthy development and sustainability of our islands' community (I shall be writing more about this very shortly).

If my rejecting the inappropriate status quo causes a ruckus for those who would maintain it, either abandon the unhealthy behavior that engenders the ruckus or suck it up – much more will be on the way from many quarters if the behavior continues.

As for backing off, I intend doing so, but perhaps not in the manner or for the reasons that that council member might like to think. In the corporate stage of my life, I came to recognize all too well the distasteful readiness with which so many of those in power succumb to the seductive opportunity to pursue personal power, prestige or financial goals at the expense of the organizational good. When I see similar behavior in public servants abrogating their civic responsibilities, I will not stay silent, nor hopefully will others.

And as for this being the best the council members can do, how unfortunate if true. Granted, the office they now occupy may be more challenging than the one for which they ran. They were grandfathered into their current positions — a compromise decision that several Freeholders now regret having accepted when drafting the Charter. But if the present incumbents really are not up to fully embracing the challenge of transition to full Charter government implementation with its call for new attitudes of open-mindedness and public transparency, then the honorable thing to do, especially in the political world of public service, would be to step aside in favor of others who are.

***

HELP WANTED! Those who can sing the tune of the Charter spirit rather than just mouth the words, please apply. The citizens of San Juan County need you badly. We need political leaders who see public service as just that. We need political leaders who look forward rather than backward. We need political leaders who are happy to leave day-to-day administration to professional administrators, and to devote their energies instead to shaping a legal and regulatory environment that nurtures the healthy development and sustainability of county environmental, economic and cultural health. We have a unique and potentially historic opportunity to cultivate and sustain a fresh political environment that fosters and, yes, welcomes the diversity, energy and commitment to place so extraordinarily represented among so many of our citizens.

How nice it would be, hopefully soon, to be able to write a column entitled, "From the Council Chamber, Admiringly."

Click to view the rest of the article ******

Attitude Adjustment

So how are they doing? Its now some four months since the election and two months since the new County Council sat together for the first time in early January. Time for an interim assessment.

Old terminologies are steadily disappearing. "BOCC" is now rarely heard (despite a brief but unsuccessful attempt to retain it in the form of a "Board of County Council members"). While common sense won the day there, this simple semantic blip on the transition screen was emblematic of a wishful scenario in which the ex-commissioners could wake up from the nightmare of Charter Government, look out the window, believe nothing had changed, and get back to exercising the old omnipotent BOCC powers that presumably induced them to run for election in the first place.

Predictably, immediately following the landslide election results, we have previously noted the classic elements of the Kubler-Ross grief reaction. First, shock, as the Commissioners overnight lost their omnipotent status. Denial was close behind. For several weeks, they continued to talk in public forums about how concerned they were about the outcome and all the bad things that might now happen as a result of the election — "concerned" being the all-too-common euphemism among politicians for ideas or opinions they oppose but don't want to declare their opposition outright. In public session, one ex-commissioner and now council member even tried to present elements from the old-BOCC website as "evidence" that little need be different with the change to Charter Government. With almost the next breath, the public heard that (paraphrased) "…. there really isn't any need to move quickly with the transition as we can always fall back on the old ways until all the changes are in place".

Various expressions of the anger stage of the grief reaction followed. These began with the sitting triumvirate's out-of-hand rejection of the offer from the newly formed Citizens for Responsive County Government (CCRG) group of ex-freeholders and others involved with the Home Rule campaign to provide informed citizen assistance in the identification of candidates for the pro tem and permanent County Administrator positions.

Weeks followed of other "thanks but no thanks" and "trust us" responses to multiple emails and meetings offering support and assistance. Expressions of "wanting a smooth transition" stood in sharp contrast to weeks of inaction on moving to interview known candidates for the pro tem administrator position, the interviews finally being scheduled for the day before that position had to be filled.

So much for the preliminaries. All elected officials were sworn in early in January, the pro tem administrator arrived a couple of weeks later, and the transition began.

The new administrator has geared up rapidly, strongly supported by a county staff clearly demonstrating its enthusiasm for at long last having a single, professionally qualified and thoroughly experienced administrative hand at the helm. The added bonus for us all is that he has brought with him direct experience in the process of transition from the commissioner to the charter form of government.

Gently but firmly he is pushing to establish the separation of powers so central to the Charter, even as he runs into various expressions of behavioral opposition from council members. For those of us watching the process, a notable moment was when he was able to respond to the beginnings of an administrative meddle from the Council by telling them that not only did he know about the issue but was already well on his way to its resolution.

The moment did not pass unnoticed. Exercising admirable diplomacy, he has gently but firmly continued to remind the legislators that administrative matters are no longer in their portfolio of responsibility, even as they continue to demonstrate their penchant for rustling in that field.

So where are we now? It has taken nearly two months for the professional search for the permanent County Administrator to get up to speed. The good news is that we have been assured that a May timeframe for hiring is still on target. If so, then interested citizens should soon have the opportunity to observe the interviews and interact with candidates, complementing whatever perspective those candidates might receive from the recruiting firm or directly from the council members before or during their interviews.

Another welcome development has been the council chairman's introduction of humor into his management of council hearings, along with his rapid response to requests that documents be available for public perusal at the time of their discussion, thus contributing to increased transparency in government.

The not-so-good news is that we recently had to battle the Council into submitting to both the letter and the intent of the Charter when it came to how and by whom the Citizens Salary Commission was to be established. While this battle was finally won, it was more than unfortunate that it had to be fought in the first place.

Not only was the Council's attempt to re-interpret the Charter predictably doomed to failure, but it also invited the perception that they were attempting to intrude themselves into the process whereby ultimately their own salaries would be established. That they tried to do this even as their own legal counsel confirmed in great detail and in writing that they really could not proceed as they wanted is telling. To say nothing of how clearly this incident reflected a fundamentally less-than-enthusiastic attitude to the spirit of change called for by the landslide passage of the Charter.

Obstinacy has a bulldog quality. It is characteristically disregarding of contrary evidence to personally held viewpoints. Its most recent expression came when, last week, just before formally voting on the ordinance setting up the salary commission, one councilman took the pointedly unusual step of formally reading into the record a statement on how the County Council, in bowing to their own legal counsel's advice on state and county law, and the demand of Citizens for Responsive County Government that they honor both the letter and the spirit of the Charter, was not setting a precedent (sic).

There is a flavor of déjà vu about this. Commissioners putting themselves above the citizens they were elected to serve is the very behavior that led to the birth of the county's Home Rule movement and its subsequent landslide endorsement by the electorate. Now we have legislators without legal training trying to put their personal interpretation of state law above that of the Prosecuting Attorney who is not only the Council's designated formal legal counsel, but also an independently elected legal representative of the people.

Loss of power is the ultimate tragedy for politicians. Separation of powers is the ultimate protection of citizens against an overbearing government. In the nation's capital it is a favored tactic to manipulate legislation with self-serving amendments in the dead of night when nobody is watching.

In San Juan County, the citizens who put so much effort into developing and then passing the Charter are watching closely. Very closely.

Click to view the rest of the article ******

Welcome Stephen

Welcome Stephen Robins our new columnist!