SNOHOMISH COUNTY
Tribune
Volume 118, Number 10
Monroe School Board member seeks more open policies
"Yå*%33)#!å30!2+3åANDå
-)#(!%,å7()4.%9
å and $1,383 for each multifamily,
An outspoken Monroe School
Board member’s effort to shine
light on district issues has for the
most part backfired, she admits,
but small victories have been
made.
Board member Debra Kolrud, a
staunch advocate of open govern-
ment, has been challenging board
policies since joining the board in
January.
The Monroe School Board, per
protocol, doesn’t like surprises and
only allows the board president
to communicate positions of the
board on “controversial issues.”
The protocol policy doesn’t define
controversial issues.
But a series of events leading up
to a discussion on school impact
fees, which are charged to devel-
opers to mitigate costs associated
with growth, prompted Kolrud to
speak out against what she says
is an example of the district’s un-
friendly public process.
Kolrud wanted the board to dis-
cuss a resolution supporting a
reduction or elimination of the
discount rate given to developers.
School impact fees are used by the
district to build new buildings as-
sociated with growth. Currently,
developers are given a 50 percent
discount on those fees.
In 2005-06, the district received
$3,909 for each single family de-
tached house built in the district’s
county boundaries. For each multi-
family, two-bedroom unit, the dis-
trict received $3,494. In 2008-09,
the district projects to receive
$3,139 for each single family home
two-bedroom unit.
Kolrud is alarmed by this trend.
She knew she likely didn’t have the
votes to support a resolution, but
wanted to get the discussion going
on whether developers pay their
fair share.
“She certainly has a right to con-
tinue pushing for what she wants,”
board president Tom MacIntyre
said.
The district agreed to have a dis-
cussion but wanted an attorney to
brief members in private.
Kolrud believes the school ad-
ministration tried to avoid a public
discussion on the matter when it
gave serious consideration to hold-
ing three separate meetings with
the attorney in order to avoid creat-
ing a board quorum, which would
have had to be open to the public.
In e-mails obtained by the Tri-
bune between Superintendent Ken
Hoover and board members, Kol-
rud protested the decision to have
the discussions in private.
Hoover, in consultation with
board president MacIntyre, set up
private briefings with consulting
attorney, Grace Yuan. Yuan had rep-
resented all school districts in the
county related to impact fees.
“I am proposing times at 4PM,
5PM and 6PM with no more than
two board members present at a
time,” Hoover wrote July 8 to all five
board members.
The reason cited was that the
discussion on school impact fees
was a “politically sensitive issue,”
Hoover wrote.
“I’m sorry if I implied that the
reason for talking to our attorney
was because of potential litigation,”
Hoover wrote in a July 10 e-mail to
Kolrud. “At this point, this is pri-
marily a politically sensitive issue.”
Kolrud objected and cited state
law which spells out what matters
can and cannot be discussed in
private.
“Since almost all issues the board
discuss and or [sic] deliberate can
be viewed as ‘politically sensitive
issue’ we do not have the right to
decide what is good for the people
to know and what is not good for
them to know,” Kolrud wrote back
to Hoover on July 10. “...This does
not support the spirit or the intent
of the Open Public Meeting(s) Act
to conduct three separate meetings
to avoid a board quorum. We are
purposely keeping our discussion
away from the public, which I can
not be apart of.”
School impact fees tend to be po-
litically sensitive because develop-
ers don’t like paying them.
In an interview with the Tribune,
MacIntyre defended the initial
idea of meeting with the lawyer in
private, describing it as a meeting
with one’s legal counsel instead of a
public meeting.
After Kolrud’s protest, the board
opened the meeting to the public
Aug. 11. At the meeting, the at-
torney, via speakerphone, advised
against proposing a reduction of
impact fee discounts until spring
2009. The board went along with
this advice, not wanting to “rock
the boat.”
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Three board members were
against continuing this conversa-
tion.
In a statement to the Tribune,
Hoover said the district was con-
cerned about the legal consequenc-
es associated with lowering the
agreed upon discount rate.
“The (private) meeting proposal
was initiated in an attempt to re-
spond to a school board member’s
request while trying to ensure all
board members received the same
information about Monroe’s tu-
multuous history with this topic
including past litigation that could
have had a more than $1 million
financial impact,” Hoover wrote.
“Varying summer schedules with a
variety of people also played a role
in the original meeting proposal.”
This is not the first time Kolrud
has challenged district policy. She
tried to get the board to update its
public records policy to align with
state law. That is temporarily on
hold while the district continues to
research the matter.
She also requested the removal
of a statement that she says is un-
friendly and may discourage citi-
zens from speaking to the board.
New language proposed, though,
appears to further limit the board’s
interaction with the public. The
proposed draft limits the number
of citizens wishing to speak to the
board if they hold the same posi-
tion. And reminds citizens that the
board president may “interrupt,
warn, or terminate public comment
if it interferes with the orderly con-
duct of the meeting.”