Embattled Pierce County Assessor-Treasurer Dale Washam faces a new complaint that charges him with violating the county ethics code.
Thursday, the county ethics commission voted to refer the complaint for an investigative hearing this fall. The hearing date is not set, but it’s likely to be no later than Oct. 13.
Washam did not respond to a voice mail left with his assistant Friday.
His choices will dictate whether the hearing is open to the public or closed.
The complaint, filed in May by an unidentified Pierce County resident, accuses Washam of 15 ethics violations. Many of the charges in the complaint have been aired in three prior county investigations of Washam’s conduct, as well as a recall campaign that seeks to oust him from office.
Those investigations found Washam retaliated against employees, abused his power, wasted government resources and refused to cooperate with investigators.
Fines and civil infractions are among the penalties that could follow if the commission finds Washam violated the ethics code.
The complaint also cites a separate section of the county code that protects employees from retaliation. That section, 3.14.030, mentions potential discipline of county officers and employees, “up to and including suspension without pay, demotion or discharge.”
It is unclear how the section applies to elected officials.
The ethics complaint also questions the seeming reluctance of Pierce County leaders to pursue ethics complaints after investigations found Washam committed acts of misconduct.
“... It seemed the violations of ethics were so serious that the Pierce County Council and the Pierce County Executive would step in,” the complaint states in part.
“Did everyone make the ‘choice’ given the ongoing evidence of abuse to ‘take a pass’? Why was no one who works for the county talking with the Ethics Commission and why was the Commission not moving forward on their own?”
The ethics commission is a quiet body. The five members meet once a month in a library – Tacoma’s North End branch. The meetings are public, but the audience is usually zero.
The county executive appoints the five commissioners. The current chairman is Terry Lane, a deputy county prosecutor. The hearing officer is Art Wang, a longtime state representative and retired state administrative law judge.
At Thursday’s meeting, commissioners never mentioned Washam by name, or identified him as a target of the complaint. Instead, following a closed 40-minute executive session, they briefly voted to send a complaint numbered “2011-03” to a hearing, and adjourned the meeting.
The News Tribune recently obtained a redacted copy of complaint 2011-03 through a public disclosure request. The request sought any complaints filed with the commission against Washam.
County officials denied the request at first, citing provisions in the county code. Those provisions state that complaints are confidential.
The News Tribune argued that state law trumped the county code, and the records were subject to disclosure. The newspaper relied on advice from Tim Ford, open-government ombudsman for the state attorney general’s office.
The county provided a redacted copy of the 13-page complaint in July. Redactions hide all names, but the context plainly refers to Washam.
Among other things, the complaint quotes the Washington State Supreme Court’s May 12 opinion that upheld recall charges filed against Washam. It also cites and quotes findings from the county investigations of Washam.
Other records obtained by The News Tribune provide additional confirmation of the ethics investigation.
They include a June 2 email sent to Albert Ugas, Washam’s chief deputy, from Wang, hearing officer for the ethics commission. The email refers to a telephone conversation.
“Thank you for talking to me today about my investigation for the Pierce County Ethics Commission,” Wang’s email states.
Under the commission’s rules, the form of an investigative hearing resembles a trial. Respondents have the right to be represented by legal counsel. They can present witnesses and cross-examine them. The commission can do the same. Testimony is presented under oath. Hearings are recorded.
The respondent (in this case, Washam) has the right to have the hearing open or closed – but even if the hearing is closed, the recording is a public record.
Following the hearing, the commission has 30 days to reach a finding. The respondent can appeal the finding to a state administrative law judge.
Sean Robinson: 253-597-8486
sean.robinson@thenewstribune.com
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.