“Will it be necessary for us to form armed nightly patrols?”
Charles Hough, who lives about 200 yards from the homeless encampment at the Jefferson County Fairgrounds, has asked the Board of County Commissioners to act before someone is hurt by the dangerous people who have become his neighbors. He is not alone. The BOCC has received multiple letters from people on all sides of the Fairgrounds about their encounters with transients/homeless individuals who are on drugs or experiencing frightening mental health incidents. Children have also had alarming encounters. Neighborhs have experienced a spike in thefts and property crimes. The police are being called several times a week to the Fairgrounds and nearby streets to deal with the problems.
While local non-profits have offered to provide someone in the Fairgrounds as a kind of monitor of the population there, they will have no authority or resources to enforce order or prevent criminal activity and drug and alcohol abuse. They will not be patrolling nearby streets where problems are occurring.
The recent experience of Mr. Hough shows how fraught this situation is. The individual in question is known to police. He was housed at Western State Hospital after threatening a woman who lives on top of the hill over the Fairgrounds. He had been armed at the time with a sharp implement. He is back and again roaming the neighborhood near the homeless encampment.
Mr. Hough told us he believes he encountered this individual previously when he saw someone in the early morning darkness on his property examining his shed. Now he has reason to believe this individual is claiming Mr. Hough’s backyard for himself. Mr. Hough has reason to believe, as explained in the letter, that this individual has been in his backyard at night watching the family through windows. Mr. Hough says he was advised by police to expect this man to return now that he has focused on Mr. Hough and his house.
Here is Mr. Hough’s letter to the Commissioners. It will be read aloud today at their weekly meeting.
On Wednesday morning, December [sic–November] 18th, I went outside at 6 am to go on my daily morning walk. As I go outside my home, I see a small black dog with a red lite-up collar. At first I thought that it was my neighbor’s dog. It is pitch dark outside so I wear a headlamp, reflective vest and a belt that lights up red for my safety. The small dog comes over and I am petting and talking to it. This man comes up from behind me and says “Why are you stalking me?” Now remember that I am standing on my property and it is 6 am and very dark outside. I told him that I was going on a walk and I was not stalking him. With all the reflective and lighted safety equipment I was wearing, it would be hard to stalk someone without being seen. He then said that I was on my phone and that I saw him and I said “Oh there’s Peter and I am going to stalk him.” I told him that this is where I live. He replied that this was where he lives too. Remember that he is standing in my yard. I now realized that he was not in his right mind so I told him that I was going on my walk and to have a nice day and I started my walk.
Later I am thinking about this and I figured out that what he saw was me turning off my phone alarm while I was inside my home. For him to have seen this, he would have to be standing in my back yard since we leave our blinds open and the lights were on inside the home.
I filed a police report later that morning.
We live in the Lynnesfield addition which is behind the county fairgrounds. I am starting to feel that it’s not safe for myself, my family and my neighbors to walk in our neighborhood without some kind of protection or weapon. The homeless encampment that is currently at the fairgrounds is wrong and is getting very dangerous. This is not the first confrontation with this man harassing other people. As the police told me when I was filing the police report, Peter has mental issues. They have received many calls regarding him and currently has restraining orders filed against him.
Will it be necessary for us to organize armed nightly patrols of our neighborhood in order to feel safe and be able to walk on our streets and not have to worry about threatening harassment and people trespassing on our properties? I’m sure that the Jefferson County Commissioners are aware of all the 911 calls made to the police about incidents occurring at the fairgrounds. What is it going to take for this to stop…someone being hurt or killed? I no longer feel safe in my own home or for the safety of my friends and neighbors. I understand that this is not an easy problem to solve but this cannot continue.
The following is an mail shared with us anonymously that has been sent from the co-chairs of the Fort Worden Public Development Authority to the Mayor of Port Townsend. Due its anonymous origins it went into our spam box and we did not discover it until this evening. It was sent to us November 18. The email from the co-chairs to the Mayor, and also all members of City Council, was delivered November 16.
This letter discloses an ongoing criminal investigation and the escalation of other investigations into financial malfeasance that has rendered the Fort Worden PDA’s financial situation a “house of cards.”
The email appears authentic based on the level of detail, and key statements that are confirmed by matters in the public record. The information about the criminal investigation, and the disciplinary action against Dave Robison, who has now left after being CEO for nine years, has not previously been made public.
Here is the letter from the co-chairs of the Fort Worden PDA to Mayor Michelle Sandoval, with copies to the city manager and the Washington State Parks Agency Administration.
Mayor Michelle Sandoval
Port Townsend City Council via Mayor Sandoval
Port Townsend, Washington
Re: Fort Worden Public Development Authority
SENT BY EMAIL TRANSMISSION
Dear Mayor Sandoval and Members of the City Council:
As Co-Chairs of the Fort Worden Lifelong Learning Center Public Development Authority (PDA), we are acutely aware of the criticisms that have been expressed about the state of the PDA. Because of the financial irregularities that we have uncovered and revealed to the public, it is understandable that some in our community have lost confidence in the PDA and our leadership. We remain devoted to the Authority’s and Fort Worden’s long-term success and believe it will once again become a thriving place of arts, culture, and learning. We believe that we, along with our board members, possess the knowledge and experience required to partner with the new Interim Executive Director to complete the short-term mission critical requirements to secure the Makers Square Historic Tax Credits and mount a fundraising campaign for working capital to keep the Fort running (we received a $200K commitment on Friday). We both have the commitment to continue in our roles and believe that we have the experience and knowledge to lead the PDA out of this crisis. We are prepared to engage in dialogue about the future of the PDA and its leadership and to identify solutions to very difficult circumstances. Our goal has always been to create a win-win for the PDA, its partners, the City, our community, and State Parks.
We have heard from you and the City Manager that there has been a lack of accountability at the PDA. If by that you mean an unwillingness to accept responsibility or to account for one’s actions, we must respectfully disagree with you. We have devoted ourselves nearly full-time to the PDA, and have acted with due deliberation in responding to net revenue shortfalls and audit findings, rethinking the future business model required for a long-term sustainable operation, confronting personnel problems, addressing financial irregularities that were uncovered, working in the face of impossible odds to find solutions to the collapse of revenue due to COVID shut-downs and restrictions, and collaborating with our Fort Worden partners to re-imagine business and governance models. When a member of our staff uncovered two very serious financial irregularities (totaling just over $10,000 combined), we immediately reached out to City Manager Mauro, Mayor Sandoval, the Port Townsend Police Department, and the State Auditor’s Office. We also engaged the services of a forensics account, who is also a certified fraud investigator, to verify the PDA’s preliminary findings, and we sought the counsel of a retired assistant district attorney who headed up a white collar crime unit. And just two weeks ago, we cooperated willingly and transparently with the State Auditor’s Office to identify potential risks as part of an upcoming 2018-2019 audit and accompanying Accountability Audit.
We also note that as part of the PDA’s 2016-17 Accountability Audit, which we did not receive until January 2020, the State Auditor’s Office stated that “Independent audits provide essential accountability and transparency for Authority operations. This information is valuable to management, the governing body and public stakeholders when assessing the government’s stewardship of public resources.” The PDA board as a whole and its co-chairs took very seriously the findings of the Financial Audit and the Accountability Audit. The State Auditor concluded in the Accountability Audit that, “This report describes the overall results and conclusions for the areas we examined. In those selected areas, Authority operations complied, in all material respects with the applicable state laws, regulations, and its own policies, and provided adequate controls over the safeguarding of public resources.” The State Auditors examined the following areas during this audit period: 1) Cash receipting-timeliness and completeness of deposits at the Café and Taps; 2) Accounts payable-credit card disbursements; 3) Payroll-gross wages and overtime; and 4) Procurement-professional services. Since that time, the Acting Associate Executive Director, who was given full responsibility for overseeing PDA finances, has discovered that the Authority has not complied in the past year in the area of Accounts Payable and Procurement of Professional Services, the latter where we have discovered alleged fraud. During the exit interview with the State auditors, both Treasurer Jackson and Co-Chair Hutton asked the auditors if there were any areas in which we should be concerned and pay particular attention, or if there were questions they should have asked that they did not. We were not directed beyond the findings of the Financial Audit and the Accountability Audit. The February 17, 2020 memorandum to the PDA and FW Foundation boards of directors, and interested parties and media outlined the PDA’s response to the audits and the actions the PDA would take to correct findings. The treasurer has worked diligently to ensure that the PDA financial staff followed through with these corrections.
Unfortunately, as our white collar crime counsel has emphasized, individuals intent on nefarious action can usually succeed. Our now Interim Executive Director, then serving as Acting Associate Executive Director with full financial and operational authority since June, discovered that the reports that the PDA Board received during the first and second quarters of 2020 were likely not tied to the general ledger. This possible misrepresentation of the PDA’s finances is now being examined by the State Auditor’s Office and our own contracted certified public accountant. The PDA’s accountability for this potential malfeasance is demonstrated by our engagement of highly respected expert in state and city finance to review our books, a forensic accountant, and two CPAs to restate our finances from GAAP to cash basis and prepare accurate financial reports.
It has also come to our attention recently that the PDA is being criticized for refusing this winter a significant gift in the $1 million range. Let us be clear that the PDA does not accept gifts, no matter their size, that are accompanied by conditions that are contrary to our long-erm viability. One of our longest serving directors strongly counseled against accepting this gift, and the co-chairs fully concurred. Despite the fact that the gift would have provided a much needed short-term benefit, it would have seriously compromised the PDA’s financial stewardship and established an untenable precedent.
As co-chairs, we have kept the PDA Board of Directors closely apprised of all issues and actions by staff, along with our own actions, and have been transparent in our decision making and financial reporting—well beyond what is required by statute. The one exception is that we had been asked by the Port Townsend Police Department and the State Auditor’s Office not to reveal publicly that we had reported information that suggested alleged fraud due to possible negative impact on an active ongoing investigation and potential future litigation. The situation in which the PDA now finds itself requires that its stakeholders understand more fully the full range of financial challenges confronting the Authority.
We are well aware that we have been criticized for not taking more decisive action regarding the now retired Executive Director’s apparent lack of oversight of key staff. Actually, we did take decisive action about which you are aware. As a result of our investigation and performance review, the former Executive Director was relieved of personnel and financial management responsibilities. We did not, however, show our Executive Director the door, which is what some in the community wanted and
expected. Neither one of us is unfamiliar with terminating executive staff. It is much more difficult sometimes not to take such action, and in this case we wanted to respect an individual’s intention to retire within a few months after a more than 30-year career serving Port Townsend in various capacities. Additionally, we made the decision that it was critical to utilize the knowledge and expertise the former Executive Director possessed to complete the Makers Square project and secure very complicated Historic Tax Credits, without which the PDA and the Makers Square project would be at serious risk. These two responsibilities are critical to giving Fort Worden a fighting chance. And it should be noted that we have discovered zero evidence that the former Executive Director had knowledge of or participated in the alleged fraud incidents. In retrospect, we would make the same humanitarian and business logic decision, even though we have experienced scorn for that decision.
The PDA has a remarkably committed and talented Board. They have demonstrated their commitment, devotion, and caring, as well as hard-nosed oversight and decision making for many years. A recent example of the extent to which they care for Fort Worden and its people was funding $80,000 out of their own pockets to cover three months of health insurance for all employees who were placed on standby status or furloughed. Individual board members have also covered expenses such as converting our existing GAAP financials to BARS accounting to facilitate the upcoming audit and paying delinquent insurance expenses. The range of experience and talent among the Board members is remarkable. The Board has experience in finance and accounting; hospitality management; business development; corporate and nonprofit leadership; construction management; education; public relations and strategic communications; publishing and reporting; and social and economic entrepreneurship. We trust that you appreciate all that the Board has done to build the Fort Worden enterprise and its commitment to sustaining a State Park’s campus that is home to a thriving lifelong learning center—one which has more room to grow, prosper, and become more coordinated and diverse in post-COVID times.
Finally, we would like to express a deep disappointment and a regret. It is public knowledge that the Fort Worden did not qualify for any federal, state, or county relief dollars. While other organizations—for profit and nonprofit—received Paycheck Protection Program and Personal Protection Equipment funding, the Fort Worden PDA received nothing. We know of nonprofit organizations in our area with much smaller budgets and much smaller staff that received $250,000 to $400,000 in relief aid. Fort Worden qualified for and received zero aid by virtue of being a quasi-public entity. This in the face of losing upwards of 90 percent of our revenue, leaving insufficient funds to cover even fixed costs like utilities, internet service, and insurance. The City knew this to be the case, yet has not offer any assistance to the PDA. The City leadership has always professed to the importance of Fort Worden—the PDA and all of its partner organizations—as a cultural and economic driver for the City. The original effort to create the PDA nearly a decade ago came out of this belief. We know full well that the City has its own enormous financial challenges. We hold out hope that the City would offer some tangible assistance to an organization that has grown from a $1 million to a $7 million enterprise in six years, and from just over 14 full-time employees to 85 full-time year-round employees, and 175 employees during the summer season (pre-COVID). We feel it is important to stress, contrary to some people’s beliefs, the reason the PDA is in this financial situation is due to COVID and our adherence to the necessary State restrictions that are still ongoing. As a result of the closure of Fort Worden State Parks in March and the ongoing restrictions, the PDA has lost upwards of 90% of its 2020 revenue. The financial irregularities that we uncovered have exacerbated the situation, to be sure. As co-chairs, our regret—our mea culpa—is that we have not advocated with the City more forcefully for the PDA during this crisis.
Undoubtedly, there are decisions and actions that we could have made differently or better. Yet, we have been absolutely devoted to “doing the right things, and doing things right” on behalf of Fort Worden. We remain committed to the future success of Fort Worden and have appreciated the opportunity to serve Fort Worden and Port Townsend in our capacity as PDA Board members and, recently, as co-chairs. We stand ready to engage in dialogue with the hopes of finding solutions to the crisis that has impacted the PDA, and every organization, every family, and every individual in our community and the nation.
Sincerely,
Norm Tonina Todd Hutton
Co-Chair Co-Chair
Cc: John Mauro, City Manager
Fort Worden PDA Board of Directors
David Timmons, Interim PDA Executive Director
Peter Herzog, Assistant Director, Parks Development, WA States Parks Agency Administration
A group of Democrat legislators has urged Governor Inslee to reverse his recent order again closing restaurants and bars to indoor service. In a November 16, 2020 letter to the Governor they criticized his order for lacking a scientific justification and imposing needless hardship on 100,000 hospitality workers, who will join the 93,000 workers in that industry already without jobs.
The legislators point out that less than 1% of COVID cases have been traced to dining in restaurants. They also dispute the Governor’s other claims that he used to justify his order closing restaurants and bars until December 14.
The figure cited by the legislators may be far less than 1% over the last months as it likely includes cases from early in the pandemic before mitigation measures were widely adopted.
The Democrat legislators who signed the letter range from Senator Mark Mullett, who owns several restaurants and whose reelection Inslee opposd, to very liberal Senators Joe Nyuyen and Rebecca Saldana who are reliable Inslee allies.
The legislators representing the Olympic Peninsula, Senator Kevin Van De Wege, and Representatives Steve Tharinger and Michael Chapman, did not sign onto the letter. The latest unemployment figures from the Washington Employment Security Division for Jefferson, Clallam and Gray’s Harbor Counties are 7.8%, 8.4% and 10.0% respectively. Port Townsend’s economy is heavily dependent on the hospitality industry.
The Washington Hospitality Association and former Governor Christine Gregoire, now CEO of Challenge Seattle, sent their own letter to Inslee, raising similar points. This may the first time that Democrat leaders have disputed the Governor’s claims about COVID and pointed to conflicting medical evidence that undermines the way he is exercising his otherwise unchallenged and essentially dictatorial emergency powers.
Promises to the State Auditor that an audit committee would provide enhanced financial oversight were broken. The Fort Worden Public Development Authority’s audit committee was not formally created until earlier this year, and it has rarely met. Even after revelations of irregularities and malfeasance that threaten the organization’s future, the audit committee has canceled its next scheduled meeting.
The Fort Worden PDA has never received a clean state audit. Every review by the State Auditor has found significant problems, ranging from misstating millions of dollars of debt as income to addition and subtraction errors. The response from the PDA has been that it would provide more training and resources to its financial team and that the PDA Board would form an audit committee to ensure that the problems were not repeated.
The State Auditor in February 2017 released adverse findings in its audit of the PDA’s first two years of full operation, 2014 and 2015. There was no audit for 2016 yet because the PDA was over a year and a half behind in getting that year’s information information to the State Auditor.
In response to the adverse findings, the PDA pledged that it was “implementing procedures to ensure internal controls are put in place and adhere[d] to in order to address this finding….” The PDA stated that this action was “our priority.” Further, the PDA said that it “has also established an Audit Committee to oversee future annual reporting as an extra measure to make sure accurate reporting takes place.” The State Auditor recommended strongly that staff receive the training and resources needed to do their job of preparing accurate accounts. The PDA pledged this would be done.
Yet, in the Executive Committee meeting discussing the findings by the State Auditor there was no discussion of these pledges and no motion by any Board member nor suggestion by staff to act upon those pledges. Instead, the Board and staff quibbled with and reframed the Auditor’s negative audit to minimize its significance. The minutes of that February 23. 2017 Executive Committee meeting may be read at this link. Indeed, David Robison, the executive director at the time–who held the position for nine years until November 2020–saw the negative audit as a positive reflection on the job his staff was doing.
Dave Robison said that to put things into perspective it should be noted that for a startup organization with complicated finances and operations, to have received only one finding in our first state audit is highly encouraging.
By the time of this discussion, the PDA had been in existence for seven years.
A review of the Board’s meeting minutes for all of 2017 shows no other discussion of the adverse State Audit, nor any action to create the promised audit committee and provide the enhanced staff training and resources strongly recommended by the State Auditor.
The next two years passed without discussion or action by the PDA Board to prevent a repeat of the negative audits for 2014 and 2015. No audit committee was formed. There was no action on upgrading the skills and resources of PDA’s accounting staff.
In February 2020, the State Auditor released negative audits for PDA’s 2016 and 2017 financial statements. In addition to submitting its 2016 data late, the PDA also was six months late in getting its 2017 financials completed and delivered to the State Auditor. Again, the State Auditor could not give the PDA a clean audit. It found $3.5 million in debt that was not reported, mathematical errors, and operating expenses and liabilities misstated for both years, among other problems. “Internal controls over financial statement preparation,” the Auditor stated, “were inadequate to ensure accurate and complete reporting.” Again the Auditor recommended that the PDA’s staff receive the training needed to do their job right. Again, the PDA told the State Auditor that it was forming an audit committee. “The Committee,” the PDA wrote in its response to the Auditor’s findings, “will perform regular review of internal financial controls, process and policies.”
Finally, at its February 26, 2020 meeting the Board took up a motion to create the audit committee. In discussion of the motion, Treasurer Jeffery Jackson claimed that the Executive Committee “has historically served as an audit committee.” {A review of all the minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee, however, does not show that body undertaking any of the actions normally undertaken by corporate audit committees. They reflect no oversight of financial reporting or internal controls nor participation in the preparations for the state audits.) The motion passed unanimously. An “Ad Hoc Audit and Finance Committee” was born.
It did not meet until April 16. Its first agenda item was a review of financial reports presented by staff. There was no discussion of improving the inadequate financial controls which had led to four previous adverse audits by the State Auditor. There was no discussion of staffing needs or training the PDA’s accounting team. The balance of the meeting was about operations, cash flow requirements and projections, and recovering from the Governor’s lock down order. There was a discussion towards the end about the Auditor’s position that the Fort Worden Foundation, a related charitable fundraising group, should be included in the PDA’s financial reports. That was it as far as it went in responding to any of the State Auditor’s concerns.
Two months went by without another meeting of the audit committee. At its June 18 meeting there was no discussion of anything related to the problems identified by the State Auditor. All discussion was focused on budget scenarios, cash flow and the impact of the Governor’s COVID lock down orders.
The July meeting of the audit committee was canceled.
The August meeting of the audit committee was canceled.
No meeting was scheduled for September.
The October meeting was canceled.
On October 28, 2020 Acting Executive Director David Timmons reported alarming discoveries in the PDA’s financial picture. He found irregularities, malfeasance and other problems so severe they rendered the PDA’s finances “a house of cards.” Board members responded with surprise and concern. One Board member said she was “stunned.” See Port Townsend Free Press’s 11/5/20 report.
Despite the PDA’s precarious situation, the Ad Hoc Audit and Financial Committee has canceled its November meeting. No meeting for December is currently scheduled.
We have a housing crisis. Our Board of County Commissioners declared an Affordable Housing Emergency three years ago. But we have seen no movement on addressing one of the primary causes of our affordable housing shortage: minimum lot size regulations.
Jefferson County’s latest Comprehensive Plan was adopted in December 2018. Under the current development code the minimum lot size for any subdivision is 5 acres. This can and should be changed in the yearly amendment process. Nothing really stands in the way except politics and a conflicting desire by some powerful interests to make Jefferson County an ever more exclusive reserve for wealthy retirees and second-home owners.
The Growth Management Act does not require a 5 acre minimum lot size.
In Thurston County v. W. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., No. 80115-1, the State Supreme Court ruled that there is no 5 acre “bright line” standard under the GMA. As a result of that decision, the Western Washington Growth Management Board has stated:
“The GMA does not define what constitutes “rural densities”; rather, rural densities are “not characterized by urban growth” and are “consistent with rural character.” “Whether a particular density is rural in nature is a question of fact based on the specific circumstances of each case.” Nor does the GMA dictate a specific manner of achieving a variety of rural densities. “Local conditions may be considered and innovative zoning techniques employed to achieve a variety of rural densities.””
So what is the minimum lot size in rural lands? To answer this question you need to look at the Growth Management Act. The answer waiting there provides hope for affordable housing in Jefferson County.
Under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(b) the GMA states that: “The rural element shall provide for a variety of rural densities….”
RCW 36.70A.030(17) states that: “Rural development can consist of a variety of uses and residential densities….”
And RCW 36.70A.030(18) states that: “Rural services do not include storm or sanitary sewers….”
Lastly, RCW 36.70A.030(20) states that: “Urban governmental services” or “urban services” include those public services and public facilities at an intensity historically and typically provided in cities, specifically including storm and sanitary sewer systems…”
In other words, the difference between “rural” and “urban” is whether there is an available sewer or not.
Under WAC 246-272A-0320 Table X the minimum lot size depends on the type of soils and whether there is public water available. The minimum lot size ranges from 12,500 square feet to 2.5 acres. Requiring a 5 acre minimum lot size is not consistent with the GMA. The minimum lot size could be 12,500 square feet (0.2869 acres). Another section of the GMA states that the determining factor for minimum lot is the type of soils (suitability for septic) and the availability of public water.
It is clearly up to the county itself to decide whether it wants a range of rural residential densities.
I would propose that based on the requirements of septic design under WAC 246-272A-0320 Jefferson could have two more zoning densities, 2.5 acres and a performance based zoning determined by septic capability.
The category of Performance Based Zoning would allow subdivision of property, which is something that was done in the past in Jefferson County, back when we built a good deal of affordable housing.
Affordable housing requires density. It is simply not affordable to build on a 5 acre lot. It is entirely feasible to build affordable housing on a 12,500 to 20,000 square foot lot.
We have a solid, legal opportunity to challenge the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. By opening up our land use regulations we can make it possible to again build on small lots around the county. And with that positive change, there will hope for truly affordable housing in sufficient quantity to make a difference.
