PORT ANGELES — Clallam County Treasurer Selinda Barkhuis is refusing to pay thousands of dollars in commissioner-approved grants to city and port governments until a Superior Court judge has determined whether the money was “disbursed according to law.”
Barkhuis, a nonpracticing lawyer who was elected treasurer in 2010 and ran unopposed in 2014, wrote an email to county officials last week saying state laws that govern custody of public money and county budgets support her argument.
The county administrative officer, however, said commissioners acted legally and in accordance with county policy in granting the funds May 12.
The three commissioners that day awarded a $1 million grant to the Port of Port Angeles to complete a 25,000-square-foot composites recycling center in west Port Angeles and a $285,952 grant to the city of Port Angeles for waterfront improvements.
The board authorized the county’s Auditor’s Office to issue warrants from the Opportunity Fund to pay for the grants.
The sales-tax-supported Opportunity Fund can be used for infrastructure projects and personnel in economic development offices.
Money for the grants had been earmarked for the yet-to-be-built Carlsborg sewer.
Commissioners Chairman Jim McEntire declined to comment on Barkhuis’ email Friday because the warrants had not yet been approved.
Commissioners are expected to approve the warrants on their consent agenda at the beginning of Tuesday’s business meeting.
Barkhuis argued May 11 that county policy and state law required the board to hold a public hearing before awarding the grants from the Opportunity Fund.
County Administrator Jim Jones had communicated in an earlier email that it was the board’s expressed wish that Auditor Shoona Riggs create the warrants without intergovernmental agreements with the city of Port Angeles and Port of Port Angeles, Barkhuis said.
“In my opinion, county commissioners do not have the authority to ‘authorize’ and ‘wish’ away their own compliance with provisions in state law and county policy that entitle county taxpayers to public hearings and written contracts,” Barkhuis wrote.
“As such, as the duly elected county treasurer acting on behalf of the Clallam County taxpayers, I will withhold the funds for these grants until the Clallam County Superior Court has determined whether these funds are being ‘disbursed according to law.’”
Barkhuis said a judicial review is appropriate because of the amount of money at stake, the technical nature of relevant law, the taxpayers’ right to address unanticipated expenses and the county’s need to hold public hearings, the county’s limited ability to recall funds that have left the county treasury and the precedent being set by the board’s decision.
She cited Revised Code of Washington, or RCW, 36.29.020; Chapter 7.16 RCW; and Chapter 36.40 RCW in her email.
In a telephone interview, Jones said the board “acted completely and entirely within policy, RCW and with full support from the prosecuting attorneys as our legal advisers.”
Jones said he believed Barkhuis might have misinterpreted a part of county policy, which colored her interpretation of state law.
“I respect her as a treasurer, and I respect that she wants to do her duties as they exist,” Jones said.
“I differ with her interpretation of the RCW.”
Barkhuis said she would reject the warrants if the city and/or port present them for payment.
“To the extent that the Board of County Commissioners utilizes taxpayer-funded legal representation to pursue disbursement of these funds in the absence of prior public hearings and written contracts,” Barkhuis wrote, “I will request the county Superior Court to appoint me independent legal representation to assist me in defending these important taxpayer rights before the county Superior Court judiciary, to occur before the funds leave the county treasury forever.”
________
Reporter Rob Ollikainen can be reached at 360-452-2345, ext. 5072, or at rollikainen@peninsuladailynews.com.
