I served as a member of the Chehalis City Council for 18 years, a position that operates within a structure common to many local elected boards, such as school boards and public utility districts (PUDs).

In these systems, the elected board’s primary role is to oversee the professional manager — for school boards, this is the superintendent; for city councils, it’s the city manager. The board sets policy, while the manager handles the day-to-day operations, including hiring and firing decisions for staff. This division of responsibility promotes professionalism and accountability in governance.

A critical part of this structure is the communication between board members and the manager. One-on-one meetings between a manager and individual board members are normal, necessary and even expected.

These interactions are part of good effective governance and reflect the professional relationship expected between elected officials and their top administrators. However, these meetings require ethical boundaries and respect for the integrity of the system.

Unfortunately, this framework was tested inappropriately when Lewis County PUD Commissioner Michael Kelly allegedly used his position as a supervisor to pressure PUD Manager David Plotz into creating a job for Kelly himself. According to filings by the Lewis County prosecutor, Kelly arranged to meet Plotz at a brewery in Centralia under the guise of discussing PUD business. Concerned about being overheard, Kelly moved the conversation to another bar, where he allegedly proposed a deal: Plotz would create a well-paid administrative position for Kelly and, in return, Kelly would support a pay raise for Plotz.

Some may question why Plotz agreed to meet at a bar. The answer is simple: as a professional, Plotz was following protocol by agreeing to meet with his supervisor, who asked for the meeting to discuss PUD matters.

Others might criticize Plotz for seeking a pay raise. But since when is it wrong for an employee to desire fair compensation for their work?

The crime here is not about the venue or the pay raise but about the misuse of power. Kelly allegedly abused his position as an elected official to pressure Plotz into a corrupt quid pro quo that would have burdened the PUD’s ratepayers with an unnecessary position.

Plotz, however, acted with integrity. First, he refused Kelly’s improper request. He protected the ratepayers by saying “no” to creating an unnecessary position. Second, he took an even braver step by reporting the attempted bribe to law enforcement. As a public administrator, Plotz was obligated under policy to report such an incident, as failure to do so could have subjected him to discipline. When asked to participate in a recorded conversation with Kelly to confirm the bribe, Plotz complied. That call, recorded by Centralia police, captured Kelly allegedly repeating the proposal.

It takes courage to blow the whistle on one’s supervisor, especially when that person holds significant authority. Plotz’s actions demonstrate a commitment to ethics and accountability that should be admired and emulated.

This incident serves as a stark reminder of why ethical boundaries and professionalism are essential in the relationship between elected officials and their managers.

One-on-one meetings are vital for effective governance, but they must always serve the public’s interest, not personal gain. When those boundaries are crossed, as alleged here, it undermines the trust and integrity that are the foundation of public service

•••

Chad Taylor is publisher and owner of The Chronicle.