PORT ANGELES — Four City Council members are standing firm on the decision to continue fluoridation of the municipal water system, overriding a survey of water users and a recommendation broadly supported by nine department heads to stop the fractious practice.
Within minutes of the vote Tuesday night to reaffirm the council’s December fluoridation decision, opponents began collecting signatures to change the form of city government in a manner that the same city staffers said could hurt the city’s overall reputation and financial standing, as well as deny citizens home-rule authority.
The petition would require 477 signatures to be put on the ballot.
At the meeting were about 200 people, mostly fluoridation opponents, who poured out of the council chambers and crowded the steps to City Hall’s second floor.
Petition organizers were reacting to Mayor Patrick Downie, Deputy Mayor Cherie Kidd and council members Dan Gase and Brad Collins voting in the majority again to reaffirm the city’s commitment — though not under contract — to treat the city’s water with 0.7 parts per million of fluorosilicic acid through June 2026.
Council members Lee Whetham, Sissi Bruch and Michael Merideth were opposed.
The vote was similar to the 4-3 decision Dec. 15 to continue fluoridation, when then-Mayor Dan Di Guilio, who was replaced by Merideth, also voted no.
Council members did vote 6-1 Tuesday to form an ad-hoc committee to examine fluoridation alternatives and directed staff to come back with more information.
Kidd voted no, saying she did not have enough information to make a
decision.
The decision on the committee left open some possibility that the council still could stop fluoridation after a 10-year contract with the Washington Dental Service Association ends May 18.
The petition effort underway to change government would lead to Port Angeles changing from a code city to a “second-class city” governed by different state laws.
For example, it would eliminate home-rule authority, taking away broad authority that the city has “in all matters of local concern,” according to the department heads’ memo on fluoridation
“A second-class city is restricted to only those powers expressly or implicitly granted by the state Legislature,” according to the memo.
It would affect recruiting for top staff positions and give the impression of Port Angeles as a city “in turmoil,” according to the memo.
Citizens also would lose the right to originate city initiatives and referenda.
Fluoridation opponent Mike Libera of Port Angeles said Wednesday that City Council members, by ignoring the survey they themselves approved, “brought this on themselves.”
Libera’s the president of “Concerned Citizens for Safe Drinking Water” and vice president of the group’s political action committee “Our Water Our Choice.”
“They need a lesson in civics. They need to be taught who is in charge and who runs this city. We the people run this city. We did not pick this fight.”
Libera was among more than 30 speakers who outnumbered fluoridation proponents by a more than 2-1 margin Tuesday during a three-hour public comment session.
It was followed by 90 minutes of council discussion.
The 4½-hour slice of time was marked by booing and shouting from incensed fluoridation opponents and earnest, softly spoken pleas from Downie for more civil discourse.
The department heads offered five options that included continuing fluoridation for 10 more years, providing a $100 offset per home toward purchase of a water filtration system, discontinuing fluoridation after May 18, arranging for an advisory vote in the November general election.
They recommended Option 5 in a two-pronged approach.
They recommended that fluoridation be discontinued in an effort to avoid the threatened change in city government.
In a two-pronged approach, they said $400,000 should be committed over the next 10 years to an “Oral Health Care Initiative,” the details of which would be worked out by city officials in concert with other area agencies.
Public Works and Utilities Director Craig Fulton, who was on vacation when the recommendation was issued and not among those on the list, said Wednesday he would have signed onto Option 5 as “a win-win” solution.
But the compromise received little support.
Fluoridation opponent Dr. Eloise Kailin of Sequim wanted fluoridation to stop and expressed misgivings about spending city funds for the oral health care initiative in a tight-budget climate.
Opponents offered a modified option of $200,000 for 10 years.
But fluoridation proponent Dr. Tom Locke, also of Sequim, said even $400,000 over 10 years would not be nearly enough to tackle the problem of tooth decay that only communitywide fluoridation can adequately address.
Locke, the former Clallam County public health officer who accused opponents of employing “the same old bullying tactics,” said that as a public health issue, fluoridation should not be put to a vote.
“Public health is not a popularity issue,” he said.
Bruch argued that fluoridation could be restarted if an ad-hoc committee concluded it was the best alternative.
Fluoride proponents would have none of that.
“We have voted on this, and I believe that is how the council functions,” Kidd said.
Said Downie: “I am not going to be bullied; I am not going to be intimidated in any way into a decision.”
Kidd also said she “misspoke” Dec. 15 when she said water users who did not respond to the survey “had no problem” with fluoridation.
“I’m sorry that some people were offended by my discussion,” Kidd said.
Listen to a recording of the meeting at http://tinyurl.com/PDN-councilrecording0119.
________
Senior Staff Writer Paul Gottlieb can be reached at 360-452-2345, ext. 5060, or at pgottlieb@peninsuladailynews.com.
