Courtroom Drama Unfolds In Clallam County

By Lois Krafsky-Perry

Port Angeles, WA -The Clallam County historic courtroom filled up quickly September 7 at 1:30 p.m., as approximately 100 people came to pay their respects to Inititiative 6. Although some would like to see it die, it holds on for dear life, in hopes of making it to the November 6 ballot.

This Inititiative process is important for the survival of a section of the Home Rule Charter, the county’s constitution.

As Bob Forde, a neatly dressed Sequim businessman, filed into the courtroom with Tim Ford of Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), so did a few representatives of two hyper-environmental groups, 1000 Friends of Washington and Eloise Kailin with Protect the Peninsula’s Future (PPF). Kailin wore a power red jacket.

Mr. Ford of BIAW is an intervener standing on the side of  Bob Forde, and the two other groups are interveners with the county, which is bringing a Declaratory Judgment against Inititiative 6, with Forde named as the only individual defenandant.

Forde asked Judge William Knebes for a court reporter but was told that there would not be one available until 3:30.

Forde then submitted papers addressing the move by Judge Ken Williams to recuse himself, after Superior Court Judge George Wood recused himself from hearing the case. That matter was not acknowledged. The Code of Judicial Content explains the reasons given by the two judges for recusal. Williams filed his by Code 3 (C) and Wood filed his with 3 (D). See explanation of these in separate article.

Knebes asked if there was one intervention and two dismissals? Forde answered, “I agree---one dismissal.” Knebes said, “assuming the court does not go with you before these two items.” Then he asked to recess until Steel, the attorney for the other two groups arrived, which left standing room only in the foyer.

After the courtroom emptied, Knebes continued with other cases for ten minutes until a lady in a black sweater and sporting a poufy blonde pageboy, hollered into the courtroom, “Mr. Steel has arrived.”

The court bailiff whispered to Knebes and then left the courtroom to instruct the people outside that they were to be quiet and demanded that there would be no cameras, cell phones, or tape recorders in the courtroom. The chastised crowd slowly returned to the courtroom behind the I-5 attorney with the fluffy long brown pony tail.

Forde had made a motion to dismiss. Knebes announced that Forde’s subsequent question, “we will hear today and schedule another date. If we get that far,” he remarked.

Forde decided to wait to speak until the rebuttal. At that time the woman, who yelled into the courtroom stood to speak. Apparently she was from the Prosecuting Attorney’s office and was making her debut as the one who pleads. “The court opposes,” she said. The speaker must have been new to the system because she began with, “this is not a political matter.” She also stated that the initiative is limited. I did not hear her say her name but, word around the courtroom is her name is Ms. Erickson.

She talked about court ruling of the validity of the initiative, and her interest in the court viewing the initiative to see if it is beyond the scope of the initiative. “Once the issue is before the court, some other judge may disagree---people don’t have the authority...,” she rambled.

Erickson introduced a few words, which sounded much like those spoken by Commissioner Steve Tharinger-D at a recent commissioners meeting. She then argued that “Forde has not been injured.” She stated that he held himself out as representative for the signers of the petition.

Forde pointed out Clallam County Code 37.01.170 proves there are 45 days to put Inititiative 6 on the ballot. He stated that there are 39 counties in Washington State. He asked, “does the county code fit any other jurisdiction? I think not. It is Clallam County only. Each county has its own code. We asked that the auditor would be instructed to place the matter before the people.”

Forde referred to the Constitution and the Constitution of Washington State, Amendment 7 page 49 of the Washington State Constitution Article 2 Section 1. He pointed out that the evidence is clear, “not only in the State Constitution but also in the Clallam County Home Rule Charter, that the matter must go the polls first.”

After Forde asked the judge, to instruct the auditor to place the matter before the people, he stated that the county has no position on a motion to intervene. “It is a political issue, “that is true,” Knebes said, which contradicted the statement of the woman who hollered through the door of the courtroom, while the bailiff, dressed in a dark blue sport coat was preoccupied.

Knebes, after stating that it was a political issue, reminded the large group of gatherers that courts are involved in all types of issues. He used Al

Gore as a example. He stated that the interest of the parties is substantial---the Critical Areas Code is substantial enough and that all parties have been ox gored.

Knebes referred to the subject matter about jurisdiction and all signers of the petition, which was addressed by Forde’s concern in representing all the 3,781signers of the petition as a designated representative.

Knebes complimented Forde by saying that it was not frivolous for him to be defending himself, in that he had the, “same quality as I get from attorneys.”

He then reviewed how Forde had filed the petition and the Mandamus, which is set for next week [Sept. 18]. “You are an adequate representative of the group. You are not here practicing law.” said Knebes.

He stated that the proper motion before the court was a motion to dismiss---denied.

Forde stated that he objected to 1000 Fiends of Washington and PPF, “intervening our position. They do not have greater rights than other citizens,” he said. Forde continued with, “I would welcome a manual typewriter and some crayons.” This was in answer to a previous statement by Knebes that some people even scrawl notes on paper with crayons.

Erickson pleaded for the two hyper-environment groups. She reminded the judge that PPF and 1000 friends of Washington had expended their energies for implementation of the Growth Management Act (GMA), including the Critical Areas Ordinance. She declared that they were the key parts of a process of adopting the Critical Areas Ordinance. They were on administrative boards from counties and cities divulged the county pleader.

She said that they had participated with legislative authority which was. “well reasoned.”

At issue is that the hyper-environmentalist groups are stating that the adequately signed petition was improperly filled out.

Ford of BIAW introduced himself and reminded the court that there are 9,000 members in the state and several hundred in Clallam County. They seek permits to build within the Critical Areas Ordinance and must comply to get those permits. “Bob is in car sales. Our interest permits that we adequately represent those builders. They can’t be adequately represented by 1000 Friends of Washington, PPF, or Bob Forde,” he said.

Forde asked the court how the repeal could possibly affect the GMA. “Luckily I don’t have to answer those questions, “remarked Knebes, who was dressed in black.

“What are your thoughts?“, Knebes asked Steel. Discussion took place about what date the court and the participants could meet. “We are happy to go forward as quickly as possible,” said Steel.

Knebes posed the question to Forde. “I am not prepared at this point. Opportunity to dismiss is gone. Your best advice?” I ask for ten minutes,” stated Forde.

The room was cleared again as the plaintiffs and defendants discussed the matter outside the courtroom.

After the people returned to the courtroom, Knebes made a motion to set a date for September 18, at 1:00. Briefs would not be due until 5:00 September 17th. It was decided that fax copies would be acceptable. September 21 also was set for the other issue.

Words outside the courtroom varied from, “can you believe our rights are vanishing, what just happened, and what’s wrong with the Critical Areas Code?”

This reporter was entertained by the woman in the red (with black trim) jacket, who babbled the phrases of the Club of Rome with their Think Globally/Act Locally philosophy. When the question was raised by a concerned citizen about the plight of the landowners with the consequences of the Critical Areas Ordinance, she was quick to try to pacify the woman by telling her that it would take time until the process evolved. The pendulum swings back and forth she reminded her captive audience. She fed them morsels of hope by defining the local land issues with new age jargon. “You will have to wait,” she told the distressed woman, who hopes to have her property available some day soon for her children and grand-children.