Everett, Wash.
Published: Sunday, June 28, 2009

Monroe's business gets done in secret

Fear about losing the city's insurance coverage may have chilled a drive toward more openness.

By Debra Smith
Herald Writer

 MONROE -- Monroe city leaders had a tough issue to discuss June 2 -- a proposal to give a $4,000-a-month pay hike to Tim Quenzer, the police chief who also has been running City Hall since January.

A few minutes into the discussion, the City Council did something it often has this year: Council members voted to make their chat private.

Whether that was legal isn't clear. It is something Monroe officials do frequently.

Since January, the City Council has spent about a third of its time in meetings discussing public business in closed-door executive sessions. In all, there were nearly 12 1/2 hours of secret talks from January to May, an analysis of City Council meeting records shows.

State law requires public meetings for city councils and other government bodies. Exceptions to the rule are few.

Elected officials don't get to decide what's best for the people to know, said Toby Nixon, the president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government.

"The public has the right to know everything that goes on in their government with a few specific exceptions," he said.

One of those exceptions is when leaders need to discuss a lawsuit or the threat of one. That was the reason Monroe leaders cited for talking about Quenzer's pay in private.

Except there wasn't a lawsuit -- threatened or otherwise.

"No, no, I never thought about that. No," Quenzer said when asked about potential litigation.

An analysis of Monroe City Council records found 17 instances of closed-door sessions between January and May.

In some meetings, the council spent more time closeted in executive session than they did working in the open. At two regularly scheduled gatherings, the council asked the public to leave the meeting three times so they could resume talking behind closed doors.

It's hard to tell if Monroe is following the law, said Tim Ford, an open government ombudsman with state Attorney General Rob McKenna's office. Government agencies aren't required to keep records of what happens during executive sessions.

Still, the amount of time Monroe officials have spent chatting in private this year is striking, Ford said.

"Maybe they were complying with the law to the letter," Ford said. "When you start taking numerous executive sessions for long periods, the perception is the public's business is being done behind closed doors."

---

Monroe has been dealing with a string of challenges, including a budget crisis.

For years, the city and state have squabbled over issues surrounding water and sewer service at the Monroe Correctional Complex. That dispute, which has been a focus of closed-door talks, has now reached a boil.

The council fired its city administrator in December and appointed Quenzer, without adjusting his pay, to temporarily run City Hall.

After a developer walked from the North Kelsey shopping center project, Monroe got stuck owning the land. It's been trying to sell the property for months while at the same time covering hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest payments.

The North Kelsey project is the issue they council has spent the most time discussing behind closed doors, City Council minutes show. Through May, the council called 11 executive sessions on that subject and logged more than eight hours of closed-door chats.

Mayor Donnetta Walser said the council was talking all that time about setting the sales price of land, one of the legal exemptions allowed under the law. The issue is complex, particularly because of changing property values in the tough economy, she said.

Ford of the attorney general's office said the state's Open Meeting Act recognizes there are times when a private discussion by a city council best serves the public good.

City Councils can review an employee's performance -- but not salaries -- in private, he said.

If a city is selling or leasing property, council members should set the price privately so the city can negotiate the best deal.

Council members also can talk with an attorney about how to handle a lawsuit or how to respond to a legitimate threat of a lawsuit.

It's not enough for a government body to think the city might be sued at some point in the future, Ford said. There has to be cause, such as a threat made in public, he said.

The attorney general's ombudsman said he didn't know enough about what happened at the Monroe meeting where Quenzer's compensation was discussed to know whether it was handled appropriately. However, he said city councils don't have legal authority to discuss an administrator's salary in private. Moreover, if a city council is in executive session to discuss a lawsuit -- the reason Monroe gave -- the city attorney should be present, Ford said.

The council met alone to talk about Quenzer's pay.

During that June 2 meeting, the mayor proposed pay increases for Quenzer and a deputy police chief.

Councilmembers discussed the proposal in public for about 20 minutes. Then Councilman David Kennedy said he'd like to go into executive session so the council didn't have to talk about the issue in front of Quenzer and the deputy chief.

The mayor wondered whether that would be legal. Kennedy said there were "potential claims."

"If we're going to get this solved tonight, I believe that's going to be necessary, and I think there's liability so that's the reason for my motion," he said during the meeting.

Councilman Mitch Ruth said he supported a closed-door chat because Kennedy is an attorney.

"I would hope he would be better versed than those of us who are not," Ruth said at the council meeting.

The council voted 5-2 to move into an executive session with council members Tony Balk and Geoffrey Thomas voting against. So far, the city hasn't decided what to do about compensating Quenzer for working two jobs.

After the June 2 meeting, Walser said she felt pushed into the executive session.

"It was difficult to control when the majority of the council wants it," she said. "Maybe I should have done more."

Kennedy said he was just trying to look out for the city's best interests. He said he can't discuss what happened during the closed session but he had legitimate concerns the issues discussed could have resulted in a lawsuit against the city.

"I am all for open government," he said.

---

Monroe officials say they are being driven behind closed doors in part because they fear lawsuits, and also the possibility of having the city booted from a municipal insurance pool.

Not long ago, some Monroe councilmembers were pushing for more open government. In late 2007, they suggested broadcasting council meetings and online access to all city documents, including e-mails. That didn't happen.

In January 2008 the City Council got a warning from Lew Leigh, executive director for the Washington Cities Insurance Authority, which provides insurance to dozens of cities in the state.

City leaders were considering disclosure of documents that contained legal advice, so long as the documents didn't pose a risk of lawsuit.

Leigh said that was too much disclosure, and warned that Monroe risked "immediate member termination."

Leigh did not return calls from The Herald.

Councilman Mitch Ruth said he thinks the council's reservations about talking in public now may be connected.

"We wanted more disclosure and when we pushed forward it died because of these threats," Ruth said. "He told us very succinctly he had the independent discretion to cancel our insurance."

Monroe is not the only city that got the message, said Nixon of the open government coalition.

"This is happening all over the state," he said. "A quasi-government entity is going around and telling cities if you release anything you aren't required to, we will yank your insurance. I think it's despicable and ridiculous."

Nixon said he thinks Monroe officials are simply too worried about lawsuits.

The reality is any government action could spark a lawsuit, Nixon said. "There are people who are just mad at the world. If that turns out to be an allowed excuse, pretty soon nothing will be discussed in the open," he said.

Councilman Ruth, who voted for closed-door session on Quenzer's pay, said he plans Tuesday to ask the City Council to make public the issues that were privately discussed June 2.

The executive session felt right at the time, he said. Now, Ruth said he wants that meeting on the record.

Debra Smith: 425-339-3197, dsmith@heraldnet.com
© 2009The Daily Herald Co., Everett, WA