Charter Review Commission forwards recommendation to county commissioners on town-hall process and proposed steward position

The Clallam County Charter Review Commission voted to forward a resolution recommending that the Board of County Commissioners consider creating a steward position and adopt a district town-hall process, commissioners said. The motion, which the commission characterized as a recommendation rather than a charter amendment, passed on a roll-call vote.

Commissioners and members of the public framed the item as a next-step recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, not an immediate change to the county charter. Commissioner Richards said the commission had put its proposed charter language and the recommended qualifications into a recommendation for the county commissioners to consider and then forward to the director of the Department of Community Development as appropriate. "The recommendation is for the county commissioners to turn around and recommend this to the director of the Department of Community Development," Richards said during the discussion.

Why it matters: the commission’s action sends the proposal to the body with authority to create positions or change county practice. Members of the public urged broader participation from county officials, and several commissioners asked for clarity about what the Board of County Commissioners would be required to do if it accepted the recommendation.

What the commission approved: commissioners moved to adopt and forward a written recommendation (described in the agenda packet pages 93–96) that outlines qualifications for the proposed steward position and asks the Board of County Commissioners to hold district town-hall meetings for public vetting. Commissioners clarified on the record that the action was a recommendation to the BOCC and not placement of a charter amendment on a ballot.

Public comment and context: multiple residents urged stronger public engagement and clearer accountability from elected officials. Ed Zelnick, a resident of District 2, told the commission, "I feel it's important that we have more than just the 3 commissioners here," arguing for broader participation at town-hall meetings. Other commentators raised concerns about commissioners' service on outside boards and potential conflicts of interest, and urged clarity about how town halls would be defined and scheduled.

County administrator Todd Nelke told the commission that, historically, when the Board of County Commissioners has received recommendations the board held public meetings in the respective districts, reviewed the recommendations, and published written findings and responses. "They then brought that information back and wrote up ... a detailed review in response to the recommendation of what they heard from their respective districts," Nelke said.

Vote at a glance: the motion to forward the resolution passed on a roll-call vote, 10–4. The roll call as read into the record recorded the following votes: Mister Fash — yes; Mister Vandeck — yes; Mister Slacker — yes; Mister Dozer — no; Mister Payne — yes; Mister Cameron — no; Mister Morris — yes; Mister Noble — yes; Mister Richards — yes; Mister Fleck — no; Mister Hodgson — yes; Mister Holly — yes; Mister Waldy — no; Mister Sarmiento — yes. The clerk announced the final tally and declared the motion passed.

What happens next: the commission will forward the signed recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for its consideration. Commissioners noted the BOCC is responsible for any required public meetings and for deciding whether to create the proposed position or to modify the recommendation based on public input and budget or staffing considerations.

Meeting context: commissioners discussed the proposed recommendation as part of committee reports and the commission’s charge to forward recommendations to the BOCC for matters not proposed for ballot measures. Several commissioners said more work may follow in subcommittees to refine language and to advise the BOCC on implementation questions.

Ending: commissioners scheduled follow-up committee work and asked staff to ensure the forwarded document included signature lines for commissioners who supported the recommendation.