Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Veto

Below is a verbatim copy of the language from a Memorandum that I filed with the City Clerk today:


M E M O R A N D U M

To: Councilmembers Wayne Barnhart, George Buckner, David Bremmer, Dennis Hendricks, Chuck Johnson, Sandra McCourt, and Harry Raab.

And to: Dana Barnard, City Clerk

From: Mayor Steven C. Lacy

Date: May 13, 2009

Subject: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAST WENATCHEE, WASHINGTON AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DOUGLAS COUNTY RELATING TO NORTH BAKER AVENUE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE

THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF EAST WENATCHEE DOES VETO AS FOLLOWS:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAST WENATCHEE, WASHINGTON AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DOUGLAS COUNTY RELATING TO NORTH BAKER AVENUE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE

My written objections to the Ordinance are as follows.

At the East Wenatchee City Council Meeting on May 12, 2009, in a 4-3 decision, the City Council approved the Ordinance identified above. Immediately after the decision, I notified the City Council of my intent to take an action which is unprecedented in my nearly 11-year tenure as Mayor of East Wenatchee. I am vetoing a decision by the Council authorizing me to sign an Interlocal Agreement with Douglas County.

Under the proposed Interlocal Agreement, the City would pay Douglas County almost $36,000 for engineering work done by the County over the past several years on a project previously contemplated as a joint project between our jurisdictions. The proposed work was to improve parts of Baker Avenue. The County claims it performed the work based on an understanding that the City would reimburse the County proportionately for work on the proposed project.State law, however, requires that a written interlocal agreement be executed between jurisdictions for matters of this type before a City is authorized to pay tax dollars to another jurisdiction. The City of East Wenatchee did provide a letter of support of a grant application in 2000 for a project to make improvements on Baker Avenue between 15th NE and 27th NE. A grant was secured for that project. However, the County and the City never executed an interlocal agreement for that project. Such an agreement can only be authorized by the City Council, not by the Mayor. Until late 2008, I was never aware of any attempt by the County to propose an interlocal agreement on this project.Meanwhile, between 2000 and 2008, the cost of construction for the project skyrocketed and other logistical problems developed as the County, which was the proposed lead agency on the project, slowly attempted to advance the project. By late 2008, the County had unilaterally decided to scrap the original project in favor a smaller project on Baker Avenue from 25th to 27th Street NE and had sought permission from the State to move all the funding previously obtained to that section. There was no longer any work contemplated within the City limits of East Wenatchee. Nevertheless, without any interlocal agreement in place, and without any showing that the engineering work performed was of present or of future benefit to the residents of East Wenatchee, County officials sought payment for the incomplete design work it had performed over the years since 2000 for parts of Baker within city limits. I had discussions with County agents on the issue, and pointed out that no interlocal agreement had been presented in a timely fashion or ever authorized by the City Council, and that I was not empowered to authorize such a payment. The County then took the matter directly to the East Wenatchee City Council in March of this year, at which time I recommended against the execution of an interlocal agreement to pay funds to the County which would not benefit City taxpayers. I pointed out that the current project is no longer the project for which the City supported in the original grant application of 2000 and that there are no funds to do any of that work in the City at this time. In fact, other infrastructure priorities would, in my view, take priority at this time, which are also unfunded.Eventually, the County proposed to the City Council that, in return for payment of the money, the County would provide a design work for a related culvert project at Sand Canyon and Baker Avenue. The City Council then voted to direct the creation of an interlocal agreement to pay the funds, however, the County then withdrew its offer to do the design project at Sand Canyon.That was the posture in which the proposed Interlocal Agreement came before the City Council on May 12. Despite the concerns which I have referenced, the City Council voted 4 to 3 to approve the Ordinance authorizing me to sign the Interlocal Agreement.

In my view, signing the Interlocal Agreement authorized by the Ordinance would result in the payment of City taxpayer funds to Douglas County without any benefit to the taxpayers of East Wenatchee under circumstances where the County has no legal or moral justification for requesting the funds. I am therefore, for the first time, exercising the power of my office to veto this action of the City Council.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mayor Lacy: I believe you are correct in using your veto authority in this matter. It is often easier for Government officials to make decisions to pay taxpayer funds than to make the tough decision to say no this is not right and should not be done. You have taken the tough but proper stand on this issue and protected the taxpayer. Fred Walk.

Anonymous said...

Since there was some assumption by the County of an intend for the City to share in the cost of the project, just because there was no legal agreement doesn't not mean the City should thumb their noses at the County. There is often a big distinction between what is legal and what is right, and the higher road should have been to at least negotiate some share in the project costs. Since both government entities are recipients of taxpayer dollars, this action just forced one group of citizens to pay a larger share than another.

Anonymous said...

I understand the intent of county including the city portiion in grant application was for better chance of getting grant- since it was their grant, and they did not complete project in city as they told grant people, why should city pay a share? What happened to the cities share of grant funding or when will it ever be built by county? Does the state bill county for roads not built?