Anti-charter PAC fights Clark County home rule

A new political action committee has formed to fight a proposed overhaul of Clark County government.

The group hopes to counter the money and message of another political committee backing the adoption of the home rule charter.

The opposition committee, known as Don’t Lose Your Voice, trails the pro-charter political committee in money and, seemingly, prominence — at least for now — but its supporters say it’s working on a ground-up campaign.

“We plan to counter with a grass-roots effort,” said Sharon Long, the committee’s treasurer.

So far, the PAC, formed in late August, has raised $4,150, according to filings with the Washington state Public Disclosure Commission. The money will be spent primarily on signs and literature, Long said.

Most of it has come from one source, Chuck Miller, a Republican activist who’s previously fought against same-sex marriage and illegal immigration. His wife, Anna Miller, is Clark County Commissioner David Madore’s personal assistant.

Chuck Miller did not return a phone message Friday.

Other donors include Jennifer Sohn, who contributed $500, and Commissioner Tom Mielke, who donated another $500.

With less than two months before voters will decide whether to approve the charter, the Don’t Lose Your Voice PAC is part of a coordinated effort by Clark County Republicans to fight it. Last month, local Republican precinct committee officers voted to support a resolution opposing the proposed charter, approved in spring by a 15-member board of freeholders.

Charter opponents also have created a website, www.votenocharter.com, to spread their message. It includes video statements from critics of the charter, including Mielke and Yacolt Mayor Jeff Carothers.

Among their concerns is that the charter calls for transforming commissioners into “councilmembers,” with some of the day-to-day operations handed over to an appointed county manager. The county currently operates with a county administrator, but he answers to the commissioners and acts on their direction.

Supporters of the charter say that it would give citizens more direct access to the county board while at the same time diminishing overt partisanship.

The board would be responsible for hiring and firing the county manager, charter supporters say, and there would be a charter review committee that could make changes to the document in the years ahead.

Ultimately, the county manager would be accountable to the elected officials, said Nan Henricksen, who served as chairwoman of the freeholders and remains one of the charter’s top supporters.

“How that is an uncontrolled bureaucrat I have no idea,” she said.

Supporters of the Don’t Lose Your Voice PAC say they’re confident they can do more with less money because past attempts to change the county charter have failed.

“This is not something Clark County citizens have asked for,” said John Anderson, a Republican PCO who’s affiliated with the PAC.

He said he is not concerned by the influx of money into the pro-charter PAC, known as Clark Forward.

Clark Forward has raised more than $70,000 to support the charter, primarily from deep-pocketed donors like billionaire Ken Fisher, of Fisher Investments, and Republican fundraiser David Nierenberg.

“They’ll need to buy grass-roots efforts,” Anderson said of Clark Forward.

Political shift

The Republicans’ position on a home rule charter represents a political shift, of sorts. But, for Anderson, it’s an understandable one.

Opponents of the current charter, including Miller and Mielke, supported a failed attempt to write a county charter in 2010 because it would have allowed for an initiative and referendum process.

This was viewed as an important step in potentially allowing residents to vote directly on whether to allow light rail into the county, a key component of the debate over the now defunct Columbia River Crossing project.

An initiative and referendum process enables citizens to have a direct say in placing measures on the ballot.

The charter proposal still calls for that process to be part of the new county government, but its opponents say their concerns about the charter’s inclusion of an unelected county manager outweighs it.

“It’s a basic philosophical difference,” Anderson said. “I mean, why not have the Legislature pick the governor? Why not have Congress pick the president? I don’t think the councilmembers will do a better job of picking the person who will wield that incredible power than the citizens.”