Leaders can’t put public funds at risk | Rich Elfers

The hotly debated issue before the Council was whether to take up to $1.5 million out of reserves to build the Welcome Center and save the $1.3 million Federal Scenic Byway grant we had obtained 12 years earlier, or to drop the project and return the grant to the federal government.

  • by
  • Monday, August 11, 2014 4:02pm
  • Opinion

“Never put public funds at risk.”

These were the words of Courier-Herald Editor Dennis Box as we debriefed each other after a recent City Council meeting. The hotly debated issue before the Council was whether to take up to $1.5 million out of reserves to build the Welcome Center and save the $1.3 million Federal Scenic Byway grant we had obtained 12 years earlier, or to drop the project and return the grant to the federal government.

Government is not business. Government does not operate, nor is its purpose, the same as a business. Business exists to sell a product or service at a profit.  Government exists to serve the public. Making a profit is not a factor.

Risk-taking is part and parcel of a company’s business plan. Government’s role is to protect the taxpayer’s money.

Out of the Council debate came a principle, an axiom, about future governmental decisions at all levels of government: “Don’t speculate with the public’s money.”

The grant’s “use by” date was due to run out Sept. 30, if a construction contract had not been signed. Plus, if the Welcome Center was not built, the city might have to pay back an additional nearly $582,000 it had already spent on design. The debate in the Council raged between three who strongly stated we should “build it and they will come” and three who stated the risks were too high and the guaranteed return too low.

Chance LaFleur spoke out first against continuing. Jim Hogan, the only councilmember who had served 11 years on Council, followed. Hoke Overland had already made his view clear the previous meeting by making a motion to end spending any more money on plan development. He had been voted down 6-1.

Council members Darrel Dickson, Juanita Carstens, and Morgan Irwin voted in favor. Irwin spoke the most eloquently that the building would be an investment for the future that could be sold at a later date for a return on the city’s investment.

Mike Sando’s vote turned the tide against building the Welcome Center. Although there were several Council members who argued back and forth after he stated his position, the decision of the Council had already been determined.

At that point, I breathed a sign of relief.  I was one of two in the audience who had spoken against it before the vote. My arguments were that while I hated to lose $3.3 million in federal grants, I also hated to drain up to $1.5 million from reserves to build a 7,000 square foot building with no definite renters, no interpretive center, and no clear funding source to pay for maintenance or staffing.

The right decision was made. Perhaps the other three remaining grants can be used to purchase a building for a Welcome Center, perhaps not. In the meantime, the principle that should govern all governmental decisions held: “Never speculate with public funds.”

More in Opinion

U.S., Russia agree on Middle East situation

Since Russia helped Syria’s Bashar al-Assad stay in power and helped to defeat ISIS, are Russia and the U.S. at odds in the Middle East? Is Russia threatening American dominance in the region? The answer to both is no.

Page-turners: Best books of 2017

Continuing an end-of-year tradition that dates back more than 15 years, the King County Library System has chosen its Best Books of 2017.

Anthem protests about equality, not disrespect

For all who write negative comments about the football players who took a knee and posted that “this is not the America we grew up in,” let me share a few of the personal events from my life growing up in Tacoma Washington as a white woman.

Trump supporters’ attitude still the same

“Support Trump? Sure,” she said. “I like him.” These words by Pam Shilling from Trump Country western Pennsylvania reflect what many Trump supporters are thinking a year after the 2016 election victory, according to an article excerpted from “Politico.com” by “The Week” (Dec. 1, 2017).

Readers note: Change in comments section

The Courier-Herald has switched to a different online reader-comments platform.

Former fan finished with disrespectful NFL players

I lived off the grid for 15 years and the one thing I missed the most was watching pro football.

Carrying firearms about to change at the state Capitol

If you come to the state Capitol and want to see lawmakers in action, there are a few rules to follow while sitting in the galleries overlooking the Senate and the House floors.

America’s monster

I’m not sure when it happened, but I recently realized I’ve stopped asking myself, “What are we going to do about mass shootings and gun violence in this country?” Instead, I now ask, “When is the carnage going to come to Enumclaw?”

Avoiding loss means more than gaining something else

Some studies have shown that losses are twice as psychologically powerful as gains. American history and our current political situation help reveal a great deal about the American/human psyche.

Congratulations, Jan Molinaro

In every election, one person must win and the other will lose. Now more than ever, it is important to show our children how to be gracious in victory and humble in defeat.

Don’t give into the pressure of driving drowsy

Eleven years ago, a drowsy-driving car wreck left me with injuries that still challenge me today.

Opening our minds can be a beautiful thing

As a leader of my church’s Sunday Adult Forum, I had a goal: to put a human face on Islam for the members of the congregation and community.