MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OF KING COUNTY

OPPOSES Initiative 25

Asking Voters if They Wish to Amend the King County Charter to Create the Elective Office of Elections Director

November 6, 2007 General Election Ballot

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND

King County’s Records and Elections is a department of King County government and, according to the County’s charter, the elections director is an appointed official. After the elections of 2003 and 2004 revealed weaknesses in the County’s ballot processing, two appointed groups studied the management of the elections office. Both the Independent Task Force on Elections and the Citizens Elections Oversight Committee recommended among other reforms that the head of elections should be an elected official in a non-partisan position.

Initiative 25 to the County Council proposed an amendment to the charter that would make this position elective. The Council could have adopted the ordinance which would have placed the charter amendment directly on the ballot, but instead placed the ordinance on the November 6 ballot, initiating a three-step process. In the first step, voters will be asked if they wish to vote on the amendment to the charter. If this Initiative 25 passes, the voters will be asked in November 2008 if they wish to change the charter to make the elections director an elective office. If that passes, the elections director will be elected in February 2009, without a primary election.

While the initiative highlights important governance issues, it is being debated in an environment of high partisanship that continues to surround the King County elections office since the contested gubernatorial election of 2004. Proponents of the initiative are generally Republicans, and opponents generally Democrats, but this report focuses on the governance issues that are the mission of the Municipal League and not the partisan arguments.

The Municipal League has previously taken positions on matters of King County governance, most recently in a summary dated April 7, 2007 and submitted to the King County Charter Review Commission . “The Municipal League believes that leadership positions in King County government which primarily require policy making and representation should be elected, while positions requiring administrative and management expertise should be appointed. The Municipal League opposed the 1996 charter change which brought about election of the King County sheriff.”

ARGUMENTS FOR I-25:

Initiative proponents make the following arguments for I-25:

• The Elections Director position needs to be independent and have high integrity and credibility in ensuring the fairness of the elections process. Yet the position reports to a partisan County Executive and County Council who may introduce their partisan motives into the elections process.
   

• The Elections Director needs to be able to advocate freely for the budget and technical resources needed to ensure smooth operational processes.
   

• Rather than being accountable to a partisan Executive, the Elections Director should be accountable directly to the people who have the most at stake in free and fair elections.
   

• The county auditors in all 38 of the other counties in Washington as well as the Secretary of State are elected. In addition to their other duties, these officials serve as chief election officers of their jurisdictions. Among the largest counties in the country, about half of election officials are elected.
   

• The Elections Director position has the discretion to set policy in many matters not governed by law and as a policymaker should be representative of the citizens.
   

• An elected position will increase public confidence and trust and it will send a positive message that the elections office is an independent, visible, stand-alone function, not a department of county government buried in the bureaucracy.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST I-25:

Opponents make these arguments:

• The Elections Director position is largely administrative and managerial and should be filled by an appointed, professional staff person.
   

• The Initiative will result in a process that would elect an Elections Director without a primary to narrow the field of candidates, leading potentially to a ballot with numerous candidates and a new Director elected with only a very small proportion of votes.
   

• While weaknesses have been identified in the County elections function, I-25 does not address the real need for organizational reform of the County elections office.
   

• The Initiative ignores the many efforts undertaken to fix the problems in the 2003-2004 elections processes and the numerous successful, error-free elections since then.
   

• An elected County Elections Director would be subject to the need for fund-raising and political campaigning that would draw professional politicians not experienced administrators to the position. This would also tend to distract the officeholder from duties in years when he or she is running for reelection.
   

• The County Charter, drafted by elected freeholders in the 1960s, was carefully designed to offer checks and balances on executive power and explicitly called for a distinction between policymaking and managerial roles in government. This proposal returns to an earlier form of government more suitable to rural counties.
   

• The multi-step process required to amend the Charter is convoluted and will be confusing to voters.

RECOMMENDATION and RATIONALE

The Municipal League of King County OPPOSES Initiative 25.

The integrity of the elections process demands independence and professional management in the elections function of government. Consistent with the Municipal League position on record that leadership positions in King County government which require administrative and management expertise should be appointed, we oppose making the position an elected position. However, we do believe that there are weaknesses in the current King County elections office that should be addressed. The County elections office is located within a department that includes other functions and it does not receive the visibility and advocacy for resources it deserves. The Elections Director reports through multiple layers of management to the partisan County Executive and County Council. These are real problems that the Municipal League believes need correction. These problems were identified by two independent task forces and could be addressed by the Council and the Executive through legislation and administrative re-organization. We are disappointed that this has not occurred. Politicizing the elections office is not the way to address these known issues.