Sunday, December 15, 2024
44.0°F

Health district debates platting role

by Chrystal Doucette<br>Herald Staff Writer
| July 12, 2007 9:00 PM

Grant County commissioners ask if attorney has conflict of interest

GRANT COUNTY — Should the Grant County Health District continue its involvement approving land plats?

Grant County Health Board members, including the Grant County commissioners, are debating the issue.

The county currently requires land plats to be signed by the county sanitarian. The health district attorney contends the requirement places the health district at legal risk.

Health Officer Alexander Brzezny came to similar conclusions in his research.

"I think for the sake of the district, the wording has to change in some way," Brzezny said. "I think the agency is exposed, and so is the board."

The county's code states the health district must determine if adequate water supply is on site. The health district cannot attest to the quantity of water, Brzezny said. It is not within the health district's jurisdiction.

Health district attorney Jim Whitaker noted the signature is not required by state law.

Board members voted to table a decision until the county's chief deputy prosecuting attorney can look into the issue.

Brzezny said he recommends the county's development code be modified so the health district no longer has to sign the document.

In an apparent miscommunication, commissioners believed Environmental Health Director Jerry Campbell refused to sign a plat, and they brought the issue up during the meeting.

Commissioner LeRoy Allison said he understood Campbell refused to sign a plat, and the decision was apparently made at the advice of Whitaker.

Whitaker denied instructing Campbell on the issue. Campbell said he signs off on plats unless the filer has not met all the requirements.

In a July 3 letter to the health district board, commissioners questioned whether Whitaker has a conflict of interest that should prevent him from continuing legal council with the district. They cited his involvement with water and sewer issues for other entities and his representation for the city of Moses Lake, since a board member is on the city council.

"Should the (Board of Health) use the legal services of the same individual or business which provides legal guidance to at least one of its individual members?" commissioners asked. "Guidance to a number of municipalities as well as to the Health District which regulates water and sewer issues in the unincorporated areas of the parent county and involves competing development interests may not be appropriate."

The board voted unanimously to halt Whitaker's involvement with any water issues facing the health district until they reach a determination on whether he has a conflict of interest.

Board member Troy Ritter took issue with the perceived conflict.

"It you see that being a problem, then I see way more of a problem with three commissioners here (on the board) who have a vested interest in the county and the health district," Ritter said.

Allison said everyone wears "two hats," citing Ritter's involvement with municipal government.

He said he is concerned with whether Whitaker has a conflict of interest.

"It's a concern to me, especially since in one week we've seen multiple articles in the newspaper," Allison said.

The articles appearing in the Columbia Basin Herald covered water rights issues discussed by the Moses Lake city council, where Whitaker serves as attorney.

Whitaker defended his ability to continue working for the district on water issues, noting he is not an attorney for the county. To have a conflict of interest, he indicated he would have to be representing both sides of a conflict.

"One of my cities has to have a position adverse to the health district," Whitaker added. "I am unaware of any clients at our office that have differing interests."