Mercer Island ‘Concerned Citizen’ files PDC complaint against council member
Published 12:00 pm Wednesday, May 25, 2016
The Public Disclosure Commission was asked to investigate Mercer Island Councilmember Dan Grausz for allegedly using city resources to oppose a ballot proposition, after Island resident and Concerned Citizens for Mercer Island Parks (CCMIP) supporter Carv Zwingle filed a complaint May 16.
The complaint alleges that Grausz, with his “March 2016 City Update — Super Tuesday” email, “poisoned the well” of Island voters eligible to vote on a controvesial initiative filed by CCMIP.
However, the complaint was returned without action last Thursday, as the PDC found “no evidence” that Grausz sent the email for the purpose of promoting or opposing a ballot proposition. Grausz often sends email updates to residents, usually every four to six weeks.
The PDC said that it had closed the matter, and would not be conducting a more formal investigation or pursuing enforcement action.
“Unfortunately, the filing of this complaint is just another example of our current political climate in which intimidation is used to try and silence people,” Grausz wrote in an email to the Reporter. “Not only was the complaint dismissed within a matter of a few days after filing but in the dismissal, the PDC, acting on its own initiative, made two separate findings of violations by CCMIP as to their campaign practices.”
Zwingle alleged that Grausz’s email suggested that CCMIP is opposed to the Mercer Island Center for the Arts (MICA) and had threatened legal action. Zwingle contends that neither statement is true, and that the email “irreparably harms” its campaign, according to the complaint.
The group’s “Protect our Parks” initiative, which will be placed on the November ballot if enough signatures are gathered by June 2, would guarantee that Mercer Island’s parkland is preserved by establishing a “no-net loss” requirement.
If the City Council decided to sell or lease parkland, it would be required to hold a public hearing, find that converting the parkland was necessary because there is no reasonable and practical alternative and receive equivalent or better replacement parkland.
The Mercer Island Rotary heard the pros and cons of this initiative at its May 24 meeting.
The initiative would affect the MICA building, which is planned for a site in Mercerdale Park. MICA is currently under State Environmental Policy Act review to evaluate its environmental and traffic impacts, after MICA’s board decided to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the council and redesign the facility to avoid a nearby wetland.
“Prior to council approval of the MOU and in response to the threat of legal challenges from MICA opponents, MICA had already redesigned the project,” Grausz wrote in his update, sent from his official dan.grausz@mercergov.org account on March 1. “On the day after the council meeting, MICA opponents filed an initiative with the city clerk that, while not mentioning MICA by name, is written in a manner that I assume they believe will stop the project if approved by voters. The law requires them to collect about 3,000 signatures within a 90-day period to get the initiative on the ballot.”
Zwingle filed a public records request for the email addresses of the recipients of Grausz’s update, and found that the email had been sent to 16 different lists and “thousands” of residents.
He alleges that Grausz used the Mercer Island computer network to send the email.
The city of Mercer Island does not provide council members with city computers, so they all use personal computers for any city business that is conducted through the city’s email system, Grausz said.
According to state law RCW 42.17A.555, “no elective official … may use or authorize the use of the facilities of any public office or agency, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to office or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot proposition.”
If found to be “opposing” the initiative, Grausz could be in violation of the law, even if he used a personal computer or cell phone to send the email.
According to recent court cases, documents concerning city business are still public records even if not sent from public computers.
“No evidence was presented that Mr. Grausz’s use of city email to communicate his ‘City Update’ fell outside his normal and regular conduct,” according to a letter from the PDC responding to the complaint. “In his preliminary response to the complaint, Mr. Grausz describes a practice of using city email for this purpose for several years.”
Grausz has publicly opposed the CCMIP initiative, handing out “decline to sign” flyers at city events such as Town Center hearings and the Leap for Green sustainability fair. According to the PDC website, Grausz donated $500 to Support MI Parks and Arts. The group formed after the petition was filed and consists mostly of MICA supporters, and later registered as a political committee with the PDC. Zwingle has donated $125 to CCMIP, also registered as a political committee.
Grausz was previously on the MICA board of directors.
In its response letter, the PDC clarified a few other state laws as they apply to the campaign on Mercer Island.
It upheld the decision that due to the state law prohibiting campaigning using public facilities, residents had been barred from using the “appearances” portion of council meetings to speak about the initiative. RCW 42.17A.555 prohibits the use of the public comment period of a local government meeting to gather signatures for a ballot proposition, or to otherwise promote or oppose a ballot proposition.
The PDC also advised CCMIP that its members were not supposed to be gathering signatures or distributing “what may have been political advertising” on school grounds, as they did on March 9 at West Mercer Elementary before a Town Center public hearing. CCMIP said it had permission from the school district. The PDC contacted Mercer Island School District officials to explain the law.
For more, see www.pdc.wa.gov.
