Energized candidates aim to change Clark County government

Parents at Felida Community Park outside Vancouver pushed their kids on swings on a recent sunny Saturday morning, but Brandon Erickson was focused on campaigning. He wore an orange T-shirt with his name emblazoned across the front. Folding tables held neat stacks of pamphlets listing his priorities. A candy dish filled with prizes for his trivia game mostly attracted tweens.

Admittedly, the race for a District 2 seat on the Clark County charter review commission isn’t an attention grabber.

“The reality is, I wouldn’t want to come talk to me either,” he joked.

Erickson is one of 35 candidates from all political stripes who are vying for 15 seats on the Clark County commission this November. There’s active campaigning and fundraising happening for this relatively obscure race that takes place once every five years.

During another year of polarized politics, in a county struggling with tight budgets, candidates like Erickson see down-ballot races like the charter commission as a chance to gain more control of government at a local level. Erickson described the county’s charter as the local “constitution.”

If elected, he hopes to use this nonpartisan, two-year role to advocate for fiscal responsibility, clarify whether county councilors need to vote in the five-member council’s interests or according to their own conscience, and to hire more Clark County Sheriff’s Office deputies.

It’s not clear if the glut of candidates will only be able to make subtle adjustments to local government bylaws, or if they will try to amend the charter to push their own policy priorities. The new commission will find out.

“I think it will test the boundary and put some definition to just exactly what is fair game for charter amendments,” Erickson said.

The boundaries of home rule

There are just seven so-called “home rule” counties in Washington state. By obtaining that status in 2014, Clark County can essentially change the rules of local government outlined in its charter. That can mean deciding whether officials should be elected or appointed, giving county residents the power to pass or repeal legislation via the initiative process, and deciding how many county councilors there should be.

The nearest similar example is in Portland, where that home rule city retooled its government in 2022. With the support of voters, Portland implemented ranked-choice voting, expanded its city council from five commissioners to 12 councilors and appointed a new city administrator.

While the charter is technically nonpartisan, it has provided a check on elected officials in Clark County. During a League of Women Voters event in early September, the original charter organizers described becoming a home rule county amidst public frustrations with Republican councilors David Madore and Tom Mielke, who at the time made up the majority of the county board. Establishing home rule let voters expand the county council to five members. While officially nonpartisan, the majority of today’s Clark County council has been endorsed by Democrats.

That change has led, directly or indirectly, to a slate of candidates for the charter review commission endorsed by each political party.

Eighteen amendments have been made to Clark County’s charter over the years. Voters approved an increase in the salary of the Clark County sheriff last year, which at the time was less than his coworkers. Another change removed political affiliation from the county’s redistricting commission.

While the commission isn’t immune to politics, there’s a difference between tweaking government structure and pushing major policy changes, according to Doug Lasher, a former Clark County treasurer who served on the first charter review commission in 2020.

“The general public, a lot of the time they have a misconception that you can change policy,” Lasher said. “The policy is in law and that’s a responsibility of the council.”

Lasher said policies that have been floated by candidates this year include requiring the Clark County council to get a supermajority on their five-member board before passing any new taxes or advocating for more sheriff’s deputies. He called those nonstarters.

“They’re going to have a rude awakening when they get to that,” he said, “because state law allows commissioners to make that decision.”

Exactly when proposals veer too far to the side of a political agenda and how much a home rule county can push back against requirements of the state is unclear.

“Where the constraints lie by the (state) constitution and state laws over the charter has never been really clear to me,” said Greg Kimsey, the Clark County auditor.

‘Turning point’ in Clark County

Bob Runnells is another charter candidate in the same district as Erickson, but running for a different seat. Runnells wants fewer requirements to get citizen referendums on the ballot and more public safety funding.

“If the county council won’t do it, then I think the commission might need to step in and make a rule,” Runnells said.

Ignoring the nonpartisan nature of the charter review commission is fair game, Runnells said, if it means fixing budget problems the county council has ignored.

“I think that’s part of our constitution,” he said. “Part of our home rule.”

Not all candidates are pushing such overt policies. Ben Christly is running for a seat in District 3 in what he calls a nonpartisan campaign based on “transparency, common sense and listening to residents.”

“If you hear people talking about how they’re going to give you more sheriff’s officers, they’re going to lower your taxes, they’re going to fill the potholes in the street, that’s not anything the charter can do,” Christly said.

He attributed interest in this year’s race to national political divisions that are amplifying local elections.

“We have never paid this much attention to the charter review,” said Ann Donnelly, a longtime Clark County resident and candidate for District 1, who is also hoping to amend the charter to compel the county to increase sheriff’s staffing.

This year’s increased interest may be because the previous charter review election happened in 2020, early in the pandemic. Donnelly also thinks the interest this year is less about national politics and more related to a “turning point” in Clark County after years of rapid growth and current budget deficits at the local and state level.

Clark County is navigating a structural deficit where expenses are growing faster than revenues, according to its website. This year, Washington state forecast a multibillion-dollar deficit due to inflation, the costs of state-funded services and declining tax revenue.

“You have this teeter-totter of elements that are forcing choices,” Donnelly said.

According to Kimsey, the county auditor, Clark County will provide advice to the charter review commissioners about whether their proposals pass legal muster. Amendments passed by voters that are later deemed to violate state law could be challenged in court.

Regardless of who is elected to the 15-member commission this fall, there is an additional set of guardrails. Any amendment proposed by the commission must also be approved by Clark County voters. It can take two years to get an amendment from initial conception to the ballot, according to Lasher.

Voters will get their first chance to weigh in when choosing who to elect on Nov. 4. Clark County ballots will be mailed out Oct. 17.