Council Legislation

Ordinance No. 2023-68

Title: An Ordinance of the Pierce County Council Adopting a New Chapter 2.113 of the Pierce County Code to Add a New Program, "Community Needs Fund."

Status: Vetoed (Overridden)

Sponsors: Councilmembers Ryan Mello, Robyn Denson, Jani Hitchen

Final votes

October 31, 2023
Nay Nay Nay Aye Aye Aye Aye
November 14, 2023
Nay Nay Nay Aye Aye Aye Aye


Documents
Additional legislative records are available below Collapse All  Expand All
 

Public Comments

Name Date Comment
Colleen Wise 10/29/23 4:25 PM It appears that the Council is bypassing the current process and adding a layer of rules not needed for groups to be funded. This does not make sense and request that you vote no on Ordinance 2023-68
John Leslie 10/29/23 9:38 PM Here we go. More avenues to fund and promote things the citizens of Pierce County may not approve or appreciate. This is what the budget process is for. Not special funding mechanisms to obscure controversial funding. Same as 2023-26 this lacks transparency and accountability. VOTE NO!
Carol Rich 10/29/23 9:53 PM Contracts should be based on merit. No on ordinances that bypass competitive contracting requirements. Money should not be earmarked for certain groups of people regardless of merit. This is a divisive practice. These ordinances lack transparency. Vote NO.
Suzanne Wood 10/30/23 9:35 AM This is not an open checkbook from the taxpayers. Vote "NO".
Lance 10/30/23 12:46 PM Here we go again…Radical Socialist Leftist Board Members (Mello, Hitchen, Denson, Campbell) of Pierce County Council are proposing more divisive socialist ordinances on Pierce County. On Tuesday, October 31st the Council is scheduled to vote on a package of ordinances (Ordinances: 2023-62, 2023-67, 2023-68) introduced by Chair Ryan Mello that would allow the Council’s Democratic majority to bypass competitive contracting requirements and earmark money for groups in their districts regardless of merit. This funnels tax payer funds directly to select groups at the discretion of the radical board members. This has the potential to create a “pay for play” scenario and set up back room sweetheart deals to politically favored groups. These proposed packages of ordinances are blatantly unethical, unfair, divisive, and bypass any form of scrutiny, transparency, or accountability. We the citizens, taxpayers, and constitutes deserve a more transparent and accountable government. Our elected officials must represent our values, not their own personal bias, political agendas, or financial lucrative rewards to themselves or their party. The awarding of contracts must go thru a competitive requirements based on merit. It must be done with safeguards mechanisms and transparent procedures already in place to ensure accountability. Responsible government bodies should NOT short circuit the system of checks and balances. Every contract must be done in the sunlight, not in the darkness.
Steve McCoy 10/30/23 1:17 PM This is a County Welfare system. It will increase taxes while increasing government control. The Counties responsibility is to offer an environment in which the citizens can meet their own needs. This is out of bounds.
Jennifer 10/30/23 2:53 PM Where is the checks and balances? Who decides when and where the money is funneled? Finally, when the money is distributed, you indicated there will be a way to monitor - how and who will do the monitoring? Is there a third party or will this all be done by the council? No checks and balances - automatically a no go - non negotiable for intelligent voters. Oh and it must be other party or third party auditors. No thank you
Barbara B Moberg 10/30/23 4:45 PM Vote NO. We do not need a special fund to fund more needless programs or hide how you are spending our money for specials interest groups. Present a budget and make the cuts wh have to… this lacks all transparency. Once again tax payers are on the hook for personal pet projects of council members. VOTE NO
Carol A. Krona 10/30/23 5:43 PM VOTE NO on 2023-68!
Christine 10/30/23 8:55 PM We have an out of control welfare system as it is. This is like pork belly spending and we need to reel it in. Some of these council members act like money grows on trees. VOTE NO!!!
Ryan Holland 10/31/23 10:11 AM I looked at the written texts of all 3 of these ordinances and I am concerned about subline letter I in the 8th fund usage description on 2023-68 saying other council priorities which "may" be made by resolution. Should it be "is required?" This give no accountability to the county and the council on the spectrum of transparency. I ask you please vote NO on this and the other 2 ordinances. People are already financially struggling and this goes against the freedoms of people of Pierce County. If you look at it, it's like a search and seizure which is unconstitutional. We have a personal responsibility with our money management. It's not the responsibility of the council. Thank you.
Gina Sinclair 10/31/23 11:48 AM Councilmembers, I do not support this legislation and am disappointed that my councilmember, who I supported, campaigned for, and voted for, is proposing this. As a small business owner - getting government contracts should be an open and transparent process. This is a clear attempt to avoid a pure competitive process and provide valuable and dwindling funds to those who are in the council's good graces. I will reach out to the executive in hopes that this can be vetoed if passed by a disappointing majority of the council. This is wrong and unfair to those who are not providing campaign funds or hosting fundraisers for these elected officials. I will also add that there are several mistakes and sentences that contradict each other.
Mary Mason 10/31/23 2:26 PM Please vote no on this ordinance