8/6/2019 Snohomish Tribune Artcile

1/1

TribuneSNOHOMISH COUNTY

Volume 118, Number 10 Wednesday, August 20, 2

An outspoken Monroe Schooloard members effort to shineght on district issues has for the

most part backfired, she admits,ut small victories have been

made.Board member Debra Kolrud, a

taunch advocate of open govern-ment, has been challenging board

olicies since joining the board inanuary.The Monroe School Board, perrotocol, doesnt like surprises andnly allows the board presidento communicate positions of theoard on controversial issues.The protocol policy doesnt defineontroversial issues.But a series of events leading up

o a discussion on school impactees, which are charged to devel-pers to mitigate costs associated

with growth, prompted Kolrud topeak out against what she sayss an example of the districts un-riendly public process.Kolrud wanted the board to dis-uss a resolution supporting aeduction or elimination of the

iscount rate given to developers.chool impact fees are used by theistrict to build new buildings as-ociated with growth. Currently,evelopers are given a 50 percentiscount on those fees.In 2005-06, the district received3,909 for each single family de-ached house built in the districtsounty boundaries. For each multi-amily, two-bedroom unit, the dis-rict received $3,494. In 2008-09,

the district projects to receive$3,139 for each single family homeand $1,383 for each multifamily,two-bedroom unit.

Kolrud is alarmed by this trend.She knew she likely didnt have thevotes to support a resolution, butwanted to get the discussion goingon whether developers pay theirfair share.

She certainly has a right to con-tinue pushing for what she wants,board president Tom MacIntyresaid.

The district agreed to have a dis-cussion but wanted an attorney tobrief members in private.

Kolrud believes the school ad-ministration tried to avoid a publicdiscussion on the matter when itgave serious consideration to hold-ing three separate meetings withthe attorney in order to avoid creat-ing a board quorum, which wouldhave had to be open to the public.

In e-mails obtained by the Tri-bune between Superintendent KenHoover and board members, Kol-rud protested the decision to havethe discussions in private.

Hoover, in consultation withboard president MacIntyre, set up

private briefings with consultingattorney, Grace Yuan. Yuan had rep-resented all school districts in thecounty related to impact fees.

I am proposing times at 4PM,5PM and 6PM with no more thantwo board members present at atime, Hoover wrote July 8 to all fiveboard members.

The reason cited was that thediscussion on school impact feeswas a politically sensitive issue,

Hoover wrote.Im sorry if I implied that the

reason for talking to our attorneywas because of potential litigation,Hoover wrote in a July 10 e-mail toKolrud. At this point, this is pri-marily a politically sensitive issue.

Kolrud objected and cited statelaw which spells out what matterscan and cannot be discussed inprivate.

Since almost all issues the boarddiscuss and or [sic] deliberate canbe viewed as politically sensitiveissue we do not have the right todecide what is good for the peopleto know and what is not good forthem to know, Kolrud wrote backto Hoover on July 10. ...This doesnot support the spirit or the intentof the Open Public Meeting(s) Actto conduct three separate meetingsto avoid a board quorum. We arepurposely keeping our discussionaway from the public, which I cannot be apart of.

School impact fees tend to be po-litically sensitive because develop-ers dont like paying them.

In an interview with the Tribune,MacIntyre defended the initialidea of meeting with the lawyer in

private, describing it as a meetingwith ones legal counsel instead of apublic meeting.

After Kolruds protest, the boardopened the meeting to the publicAug. 11. At the meeting, the at-torney, via speakerphone, advisedagainst proposing a reduction ofimpact fee discounts until spring2009. The board went along withthis advice, not wanting to rockthe boat.

Three board members wereagainst continuing this convertion.

In a statement to the TriHoover said the district was cerned about the legal conseques associated with loweringagreed upon discount rate.

The (private) meeting prowas initiated in an attempt tspond to a school board memrequest while trying to ensurboard members received the information about Monroesmultuous history with this including past litigation that chave had a more than $1 mfinancial impact, Hoover wVarying summer schedules wvariety of people also played ain the original meeting propos

This is not the first time Kohas challenged district policytried to get the board to updapublic records policy to alignstate law. That is temporarilhold while the district continuresearch the matter.

She also requested the remof a statement that she says ifriendly and may discouragezens from speaking to the b

New language proposed, thappears to further limit the bointeraction with the public.proposed draft limits the nuof citizens wishing to speak tboard if they hold the same tion. And reminds citizens thaboard president may interwarn, or terminate public comif it interferes with the orderlyduct of the meeting.

Monroe School Board member seeks more open policie