MARYSVILLE – A recall campaign against Marysville School Board members Helen Mount and Ron Young can move forward, the state Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
Recall backers will meet with their attorney on Wednesday to decide their next step. They say they could decide to begin gathering signatures immediately, or could choose to survey supporters to gauge community sentiment first.
“The recall effort won’t be over until Ron and Helen are removed from office,” said Lisa Griffith, one of the three Marysville School District residents who filed the recall petition nearly a year ago.
Recall backers have 180 days to gather enough signatures to place the measure on the ballot. For Young, that would be about 4,340 signatures; for Mount, 3,500.
Ideally, Mount and Young would resign to save taxpayers the cost of a special election next year, Griffith said.
“They should do the right thing and step down,” she said.
However, Mount said, “Ron and I intend to continue to do the job we were elected to do.”
Their terms end in November 2005.
Mount, in her third four-year term, said she made it clear three years ago that this would be her last term, and she is sticking to that commitment.
Young has also said he will not run for re-election.
The recall campaign followed a state-record 49-day teachers strike in fall 2003. The strike angered much of the community, and three incumbent school board members lost their re-election bids.
The school district earmarked $50,000 in election costs for this school year. That could include a bond measure, the recall, or, theoretically but unlikely, both on the same ballot.
Recent Marysville School District election costs have ranged from $13,792 in the 2003 general election to $55,918 in May 2003 when the district unsuccessfully tried to pass a bond measure.
School board members may earn stipends of no more than $4,800 a year. In her three campaigns, running twice unopposed, Mount has spent $250.
The costs vary by how many parts of the county have ballot measures. The more crowded the ballot, the less the cost for individual branches of government.
The nine-member state Supreme Court’s unanimously ruled to allow the recall campaign to continue.
The Supreme Court affirmed a January ruling by Snohomish County Superior Court George Bowden that there were sufficient legal grounds to allow a recall election based on a school board decision in February 2003 to schedule a makeup day on Feb. 14 even though it was supposed to be a nonschool day under a board’s agreement with the teachers union.
“We agree with that court that if an elective public officer knowingly and willingly breaks a collective bargaining agreement and thereby unnecessarily causes substantial financial harm, this may be considered an improper act and a violation of oath,” the Supreme Court ruled.
By state law, it is not up to the courts to decide if the allegations were true or not. Rather, the courts must decide if the actions constitute misfeasance, malfeasance or a violation of the board members’ oaths of office.
The Supreme Court ruled that the charges were sufficient to move forward with the recall, and it would be up to voters in the district to recall Mount and Young.
Mount said the school board relied on advice from an attorney in making the decision to schedule the makeup day and set aside money for the teachers one day of lost pay in the event of a legal challenge.
Superintendent Larry Nyland, who started his duties in July after a controversial $340,000 buyout of former Superintendent Linda Whitehead, said the board has been cohesive in his brief tenure.
“They have worked hard at creating positive ways to work with one another,” Nyland said.
Reporter Eric Stevick: 425-339-3446 or stevick@heraldnet.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
