TACOMA, Wash. – At Tuesday evening’s Tacoma City Council meeting, the Tacoma City Council considered a resolution brought forward by Mayor Victoria Woodards and District 4 Council Member and Tacoma-Pierce County Board of Health Chair Catherine Ushka.
The proposed resolution will invite the Pierce County Council to enter a discussion on how to best provide public health services to city and county residents. The proposed resolution also opposes Pierce County Council’s proposed Ordinance 20-136 which would terminate the interlocal agreement between the City of Tacoma and Pierce County and dissolve the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department.
General information about the City’s response to COVID-19 will continue to be made available on the “What’s Going On” section of the City’s website.
Mayor Don Anderson says
While I appreciate concern regarding the health department, I can attest that the present action pending before the County Council is not reason for panic or alarm. I would like to share my personal view of why the proposed change to the board structure of the health department in Pierce County would benefit its citizens. The proposal before the County Council would do that at the end of 2021. It would not eliminate the health department.
As a Pierce County Charter Review Commissioner in 2016, I proposed submitting an amendment to the voters requiring that the county health board to consist of the County Council (the default structure under state law). This would apportion representation by directly elected board members on a one-person one-vote basis throughout Pierce County. Tacoma contributes only 1.3% of the TPCHD budget but is substantially overrepresented under the current board structure.
TPCHD is the ONLY one of 36 health departments in the state that operates under a county-city interlocal agreement (ILA). Other charter counties such as Clark, Whatcom and even King County operate their health departments as executive departments of county government. That is the most common model, and the most efficient. This avoids duplication of departmental functions such as Human Resources, Information Technology, Finance, Risk Management, Facilities Management and Legal. There are other significant efficiencies to be gained, mostly in permitting and inspections.
There is a great deal of uninformed concern expressed that the health department is be “independent” and “should not be politicized.” It may currently be the most politicized governmental agency Pierce County. With one exception, the board members are all politicians, but they are appointed to the health board and not directly accountable to the voters. Its appointed senior leadership includes the Speaker of the House, the wife of a state representative and a self-described “activist” member of the Tacoma Public Utilities Board. The pending proposal would make all board members directly and transparently responsible to the voters.
My 2016 proposal to let the voters decide was a threat to the status quo. The Director of Health appeared at two Charter Review Commission meetings to oppose it. While my proposal to change the board structure of the health department didn’t make it to the ballot, it is an even better idea now than it was 4 1/2 years ago.
KM Hills says
Mayor Anderson-
This is great information to have and I hope it gets widely shared. Interesting that Tacoma only contributes 1.3% of the budget and somehow Tacoma gets 1st billing in the department name. I think it is a great idea to have the health director respond directly to the County Council if the County is footing a majority of the funds. I also stongly believe in equal representation for all in the county not heavily weighted in Tacoma.
Dick Muri says
Back in the day when I was on the TPCHD Board of Directors (2004 to 2012), and chairman for two years (2010 – 2011), the City of Tacoma contributed about $3 million of a $30 million budget. About ten percent. Those City of Tacoma funds were earmarked for special health concern efforts in the City of Tacoma. The current administrative model is very inefficient and I wanted to make the proposed ordinance changes but did not have the five votes needed to override an executive veto. This is welcome legislation and will result in a better and more efficiently run health department.
Nancy Henderson says
If citizens’ concern regarding the proposed termination of the joint Health Department agreement between Tacoma and Pierce County is “uninformed,” it can in large part be attributed to the lack of adequate information and timely outreach to stakeholders and citizens with solid reasons for the proposed change. Justification requires a foundation of thorough analysis, not simply opinion. Incorrect information adds to the confusion.
According to the TPCHD website, Tacoma contributes 3.3% to the budget, not 1.3%, and Pierce County 8.9%. This year the population of Tacoma is approx. 222,600, and of Pierce County (minus Tacoma) about 697,000, more than three times the population of Tacoma. Per capita, it appears that Tacoma’s contribution exceeds that of Pierce County. Permits and fees fund 47%, and the 33% comes from state and federal sources. Pierce County is not funding most of the budget.
Are the per capita expenditures to service Tacoma greater than for Pierce County? That would be interesting to know.
Two members of the current 8-member board and one of the three alternates are from the Tacoma City Council. How does this establish a substantial over-representation?
It is unclear how the establishment of a separate Health Dept for the City of Tacoma and one for Pierce County would avoid duplication of departmental functions. It would seem to double it.
The submission of the proposal during a worsening pandemic and its proposal by politicians soon to leave office make the timing questionable.
This may be a good proposal, or not. What is needed to ensure this is the right decision is a process that includes adequate consultation with stakeholders, an appropriately informed public, hearing the arguments from more public officials who support or oppose the proposal, and careful analysis and review. Rushing to enact this change deprives us of this opportunity.
Scott Anderson says
It may duplicate efforts, but as a taxpayer in unincorporated PC, I am tired of the waste in Tacoma. TPCHD is no different. This proposal is sound for anyone who doesn’t want to continue the leach system. Nancy, sooner or later, the host tires of the parasites.