Expand commission to five
Published 2:43 pm Thursday, October 14, 2010
The current Port of Everett commissioners — Michael Hoffmann, Troy McClelland and Mark Wolken — were listening to their constituents when they agreed unanimously to let voters decide a long-standing question: whether to increase the number of commissioners from three to five.
Good for them. The idea has been around for years, but until this year couldn’t muster even two commission votes.
We recommend voters approve Proposition 1, which would add two more points of view to a board that deals with increasingly complex issues, and allow for a better exchange of ideas among commissioners.
We also recommend a yes vote on Proposition 2, which would have the new commissioners elected at-large, rather than creating two new port districts. This would maximize the pool of potential candidates for the new positions.
Nearby ports, larger and smaller than Everett’s, already have five-member commissions — Seattle, Tacoma, Edmonds, Anacortes and Orcas Island. In comparison, having three commissioners limits Everett’s opportunities to reach out to potential trading partners, businesses and governments. In a competitive trade environment, the personal touch of individual commissioners matters.
More importantly, the state’s open public meetings law limits discussion among commissioners to a degree that can hamper thorough deliberations. With a three-member board, two commissioners constitute a quorum, and therefore can’t discuss port business with each other outside of a public meeting. While that maximizes transparency — all commission discussions must occur in public — it also forecloses the benefits of having a proposal discussed at length, which usually increases understanding and gets important questions raised.
Commissioners came under fire earlier this year when they held informational meetings with legislators in Olympia, because those discussions appeared to violate the open public meetings act. But such discussions are important; state lawmakers ought to be able to talk with more than one commissioner at a time about issues that are important to the port. With a five-member commission, two members could make such trips together without violating the law.
Opponents of expanding the commission raise the issue of cost, but that’s a negligible concern. Average annual commission costs would rise by $68,000, and two elections would be added every six years, at a cost of $27,000 each. Those relatively modest costs wouldn’t be borne by taxpayers, but by income generated by port operations.
We think the benefits of a five-member commission — a broder range of views, increased communication and expanded outreach — clearly outweigh the costs.
