Krider cleared of ethics violation

Published 12:35 pm Thursday, February 21, 2008

Snohomish County ethics commissioners unanimously dismissed a complaint against prosecuting attorney Jim Krider on Friday Aug. 23, saying that his position is exempt from local limits on the size of campaign contributions.

The move reinforced Krider’s earlier assertions that local limits did not apply to the campaign for his position.

Janice Ellis, Krider’s Democratic opponent in the race for county prosecutor in November, filed an ethics complaint in early July, claiming that Krider’s acceptance of $2,400 from the Affordable Housing Council violated the contribution limit set by the county’s ethics code.

Under the code, people or groups can’t contribute more than $1,250 to a candidate for a county office during an election.

Members of the ethics commission, however, said that local rules could not supersede the state constitution, which insulates prosecuting attorneys from county election laws.

“There’s been no doubt about it: We’re state officers not subject to local control,” said Krider, the Republican incumbent.

“There was never a question in my mind, or in any of the prosecutors I know of,” Krider said. “It was so clear, it’s just a shame to have to go through all this. But, you know, that’s politics.”

When the question first arose, the ethics commissioners weren’t sure whether local campaign limits would apply to the prosecuting attorney’s race.

“This was a gray area. I know I had trouble interpreting it,” said Bill Higgins, chairman of the Snohomish County Ethics Commission. The commission will later make a recommendation to the county council that the code should be changed to clarify that the campaign contribution restrictions do not apply to campaigns for prosecuting attorney.

The commission relied on an outside legal opinion as it reviewed Ellis’ complaint. It could not get a legal view of the issue from attorneys in the prosecutor’s office because they work for Krider, and giving an opinion would be viewed as a conflict of interest.

Instead, David Alvarez, chief civil deputy prosecuting attorney for Jefferson County, submitted an opinion on the issue to the ethics committee. “This state’s ‘Founding Fathers’ wanted … the election of the various prosecuting attorneys to be governed by uniform laws applicable throughout the state,” Alvarez wrote, “rather than have the prosecuting attorneys be subject to the whims of their local county legislatures.”

Ellis said she still disagrees. According to her legal research, the county council does have the authority to set campaign contribution limits for prosecuting attorney races, she said.

Ellis said her prime concern is public confidence in the electoral process.

“I respect the opinion of the commission, but I think they’re wrong,” Ellis said, adding that she will send the ethics commission a letter outlining her key legal points.

Until there is some ruling “by an entity that has jurisdiction over this, (the county code) is the law, and I intend to abide by it,” she added.

Brian Kelly writes for the Herald in Everett. Herald reporter Jim Haley contributed to this report.