The Auditor is Audited: CCRP Expands Request to Prosecutor in Kimsey Investigation

Posted: December 2, 2014 in Uncategorized

On Monday, the Clark County Republican Party submitted to the County Prosecutor a more comprehensive list of possible violations of election law and other statutes relating to Greg Kimsey’s promotion of the home rule charter, which passed in the November elections.

Letter2_Thumbnail

Click to read full CCRP letter

The 11-page request, which is signed by CCRP Chairman Kenny Smith, adds four additional possible RCW infractions to the original letter, sent on November 4th. The document cites Kimsey’s involvement in 2013 in the formation and fundraising for the overtly pro-Charter group ClarkForward, whose purpose, according to the letter, was to encourage legislation from the board of county commissioners to create a board of freeholders. If true, this would seem to be a violation of RCW 36.22.110, which specifically prohibits the auditor from representing others “seeking to procure any legislative or other action by the board of county commissioners.”

The letter also describes Kimsey’s publication (and possible authorship) of a two-page explanation of the background of the charter and ‘frequently asked questions’ in the voter’s pamphlet on pages 58-59, and his use of that voter’s pamphlet explanation as pro-charter campaign material. It further makes mention of a minority report that was signed and submitted in June by three of the elected freeholders to rebut the information and opinions presented in the charter explanation that was posted prominently on the Clark County Elections website. Among the questionable items that can still be read on that page, is this nugget:

“if the charter includes the initiative option, citizens could propose charter amendments through the initiative process.”

As the CCRP letter demonstrates (page 7), the initiative process is prevented by state law from either amending or repealing the charter. So, whenever anyone looked up ‘charter’ on the county elections website, this false information was the first link that came up (Oops!). The request from the authors of the minority report, Peter Silliman,Tracy Wilson, and Liz Pike to be allowed to post their response on the county website was ignored. Kimsey was the gatekeeper for content to be presented to the public, and apparently, he decided to only allow access to those freeholders who were in favor of the final charter. Ironically, the majority report, which did get posted on the county website, states that “members were nearly unanimous about what issues should be addressed in the charter”, despite three votes against and one abstention by Ann Rivers. While 11 out of 15 is a strong majority, it is only considered ‘nearly unanimous’ if the others are never allowed to speak. (Sound familiar?)

The letter (see link) asks some important questions about just how far an auditor can go to promote his political agenda while still performing his office in a purportedly impartial manner, as outlined by Washington State law. These questions need answers, and one would hope that Mr. Golik does his due diligence and pursues these answers in a thorough and unbiased manner.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Frank Decker says:

    OK, I’ve heard of a ‘smoking gun’, but this…this is a smoking M1A1/2 Abrams brigade! Nice work once again on the blog post and nice job again by the CCRP leadership!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s