Mayor explains decision to not sign FCC resolution

Procedure trumped philosophy.

That’s how La Conner Mayor Ramon Hayes explains his decision to not sign a town council resolution passed Oct. 26 recommending Skagit County commissioners not place Fully Contained Communities in the county’s comprehensive plan.

The town council had approved the non-binding three-page advisory measure by a 3-1 margin with member Bill Stokes, who sought a delay of the vote, asking to furher consider the issue, dissenting.

The county comp plan is designed to provide a vision for the future, including long-range goals and objectives related to land use and anticipated population growth strategies.

Hayes said that as a member of the county’s Growth Management Act Steering Committee he was compelled to not act on the resolution.

“The current problem at the county level is that the commissioners have voted to docket – meaning study – proposed changes to the county comprehensive plan,” Hayes told the Weekly News. “The normal course of action is that the GMASC would make a recommendation to the commissioners first. That did not happen here. It is unclear that they had the authority to make that call.

“I suspect,” Hayes opined, “that if the commissioners indeed voted to make any changes there would be lawsuits filed the next day.”

Fully contained communities, which allow for urban density growth in rural areas but lack their own governments, have been a hot button issue since 2019 when plans were first unveiled for a large housing development north of Burlington.

La Conner has long opted to meet demands of projected population growth by infilling vacant lots rather than inviting sprawl by extending town limits into adjacent farmland.

Even so, representatives of the proposed Avalon housing project appeared before Hayes and the town council when the Burlington area development was initially proposed.

Hayes denied he sought council support for the Avalon concept.

“It is incorrect to say that the mayor came to the council to support a presentation by lawyers for the Avalon development,” Hayes said. “A presentation request was made to me by the developer and granted.

“There was not unanimous thought on the council at that time,” Hayes recalled.

After the presentation, Hayes said he spoke to individual council members. He said members, while not unanimous, had changed to opposing proposed docketing of changes to countywide planning policies.

Hayes said the current situation again dictates that he takes a hands-off approach at the outset of the process.

“The mayor preserving his right for any future vote is fundamental to his or her ability to do their job,” he said. “Nothing more should be read into it.”

Hayes said that is especially true in his case given his role with the GMASC.

The council, though, is free to publicly stake out a position.

“It’s not the council’s role, however, to vote because it is the mayor who sits on the board of the GMASC,” he said. “The council’s vote would be advisory to the mayor and the mayor’s vote would be advisory to the commissioners.

“Let’s say the GMASC did recommend changes to the commissioners,” Hayes added hypothetically. “That would trigger a review through the legislative body of each municipality. In our case the council would vote as advisory to the mayor and that vote would be recorded and shared with the entire GMASC. However, again, the mayor’s vote on that board would be preserved as advisory to the commissioners.”