A solution in search of a problem

Water Steward committee aims to limit public engagement

May 03, 2025

Four Clallam Charter Review Commissioners are pushing a taxpayer-funded "Water Steward" position with little public input, focusing more on controlling the message than on transparency. Led by Commissioner Paul Pickett—who has a history of public records scandals—the committee seems more interested in selling the idea than addressing real community concerns.

Four Charter Review Commissioners—Paul Pickett (Chair), Nina Sarmiento, Christy Holy, and Ron Richards—have formed a “Water Steward Committee” that increasingly appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

After a coordinated push from activists within the League of Women Voters, the committee is moving quickly to craft a ballot initiative that would add a new, tax-funded position to Clallam County government. Their meetings suggest the goal is not just administrative—they are openly focused on selling the proposal to the public while minimizing both transparency and public involvement in the process.

“Based on what’s happened over the past few weeks,” Pickett explained, “I think that the minutes should be really short and sweet and probably, our meeting notes, we should keep to ourselves.”

County Clerk Loni Gores reminded the committee that any meeting notes and minutes need to be submitted to the Clerk because they are public record. It’s a warranted reminder—Commissioner Paul Pickett has a troubled history with transparency and the public process.

Paul Pickett’s problem-plagued past

According to articles from We the Governed, Paul Pickett, a former Evergreen College faculty member and employee of the Washington State Department of Ecology, was allegedly elected to the Thurston Conservation District board to help conceal internal corruption and mismanagement. The articles claim that Pickett's role involved suppressing scrutiny over the misuse of public funds and maintaining the flow of government grants without proper oversight. He is portrayed as a "rubber stamp" supervisor who, alongside others, facilitated the falsification of public records, such as meeting minutes, to obscure staff misconduct and protect the interests of those benefiting from the grant system.

From *We the Governed* during Pickett’s time in Thurston County.

Now, as Chair of the Charter Review Commission’s Water Steward Committee, Pickett is again leading a process with little public input while sidestepping transparency.

Beware of CC Watchdog

“I can’t imagine how the people out in Clallam Bay don’t think there’s a problem when they have two water systems in deep trouble,” said Commissioner Ron Richards during the Water Steward committee meeting.

Commissioner Christy Holy responded, “No, they think there’s a huge problem. They just really were thinking we were talking about a regulatory thing, and we kept trying to reinforce the fact that, like you said, that, you know this is just a data gathering position. That it’s not a regulatory thing.”

Commissioner Nina Sarmiento inquired whether the identities of the experts interviewed by the committee should be associated with their responses. Richards encouraged reporting only on the “general gist” of what the Water Steward Committee hears, suggesting that paraphrasing would be preferable to quoting someone directly.

“Especially with Clallam County Watchdog around, we could really be setting someone up for undue criticism, like Jim Stoffer and Patti Morris have been unduly criticized,” Richards said.

“Everything you say will be used against you,” replied Paul Pickett. “Don’t get me going on that topic.”

Undue criticism?

Commissioner Stoffer came under fire after telling the Sequim Gazette that it was illegal for the Charter Review Commission to answer questions from the public during Town Hall meetings. This statement followed Chairwoman Susan Fisch’s decision to end the Sequim event an hour early—and has since been confirmed to be legally false.

Commissioner Morris drafted a seven-question survey intended to gather public input. However, after facing criticism for narrowing the focus to just seven issues out of more than thirty currently before the CRC, she withdrew the survey at the conclusion of the most recent Charter Review meeting. Morris stated, “I want to be done with this survey, and I want to throw it out the door. That’s my opinion—I don’t want a survey at all.” She added, “I’m not doing this, how about that?”

When Chairwoman Fisch was asked whether a survey was still in circulation, she replied: “I don’t know.”

Nevertheless, the survey was handed out at the following night’s event in Clallam Bay, which caused confusion. Many attendees completed it and returned it to CRC members.

A second survey is currently being drafted for submission to the next meeting agenda, with the goal of streamlining the process and reducing confusion. Still, concerns persist over how the initial survey will be interpreted if a revised version is introduced. Questions have arisen regarding how to handle the responses already collected—especially if some participants cannot be contacted again. If individuals answered only seven selected issues, without knowing that thirty or more topics are under consideration, can that feedback be considered a fair representation of public input?

These issues underscore an ongoing need for strategic clarity and stronger leadership as the review process continues. There is also a broader concern that the first wave of participants may be unintentionally disenfranchised.

A selling point

At the Water Steward Committee meeting, Holy suggested the committee develop a problem statement, like the scientific method, with possible solutions, “just to keep it on track.”

Richards proposed the committee could track the exorbitant cost the County has spent piping irrigation ditches, which have prevented aquifer recharge, and the City of Sequim’s new attempt to address that problem by building a new aquifer recharge site. He also mentioned examining how much money is collected from new homeowners who pay for mitigation certificates under the Dungeness Water Rule and how it’s used.

Pickett agreed that a “selling point” to get this on the ballot would be to calculate how much money has been spent on water management and to float this not just as an environmental issue, but as an economic issue that helps developers know where the water is.

Committee members agreed that Ann Soule (with the League of Women Voters) and the WSU Extension office would have the information they are looking for. Both Soule, in her role on the Marine Resources Committee, and WSU Extension have attracted recent attention due to their involvement in the looming eviction of residents from 3 Crabs Road.

Possible property tax increase

Pickett reported that Clallam County CFO Mark Lane said a Senior Technical Engineer or Hydrologist would cost the county up to $127,500. Pickett is exploring funding a Water Steward Board, with three staff, through a tax increase. “If you put it in a charter amendment, that’s a vote,” Pickett explained, noting that Washington law requires a public vote for property tax increases over 1%. In other words, residents this fall could not only vote on the creation of a Water Steward Board, but also a property tax increase.

“A lot of people have said, we need more data—We need more streams monitored, we need more wells monitored,” said Pickett.

Pickett asked his co-committee members if the cost of creating the Steward and supporting staff should be shared now, “or should we just hold onto the financial [information] for awhile?”

Sarmiento suggested downplaying the expense. “I don’t think we should present the cost until we have savings to go along with it.”

Commissioner Richards said, “Just as we are straining to make this sound nonauthoritarian, to use a good term these days, we need to make it sound simple and inexpensive.”

Richards recommended avoiding the word “Board” because it carries connotations of money, control, expense, and involvement. Pickett suggested changing the title to “Water Information Officer,” with an advisory board that helps direct their duties, or possibly creating an advisory committee.

Sarmiento said another option would be to house this position in the County’s Department of Natural Resources. Another could be to have the County Commissioners appoint a natural resources director with a hydrologist position who serves as the “total information awareness person about water.”

The committee debated whether to ask that the position of Water Steward be put on the ballot for voters, or just recommended to the County Commissioners by the Charter Review Commission.

“If you make a recommendation, they could just say: Thank you, we don’t have any money, we’ll look at it again someday,” Pickett said. He explained that putting it in the Charter would elevate the issue to “this is something the county wants; you need to do it.”

Bruce Emery, the elected Director of the Department of Community Development, has stated he does not want the position of Water Steward mandated in the charter. He recommends that it be created organically, when the Board of Commissioners sees a need.

“It could be framed as ‘Bruce doesn’t have the expertise on natural resources, or he doesn’t have the capacity,’ because his job is so big,” said Sarmiento.

“This meeting is really about them”

“Do we want to have to have public comments or not?” asked Paul Pickett. He noted that the Charter Review Commission bylaws say the meetings must be open and that the public can attend. “The bylaws don’t say that we have to have a comment period.”

Sarmiento agreed, saying that all the CRC committees have to do is say they’re not taking public comments. It was agreed they would seek more information on the topic, but Pickett asked, “Should we not have a public comment period for the meeting with the Tribes?”

“Why not have these be open meetings?” asked Richards.

Pickett suggested arranging the agenda to allow public comment only at the beginning of the meeting, before the Tribes arrive, or eliminating it altogether.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate to, like, have that be at the end or have the Tribes, like, there—you know—that they have to listen to that because this meeting is really about them,” said Sarmiento.

Clallam County Watchdog