Reverend Crystal Cox of the Universal Church of Light filed an ethics complaint against City Manager John Mauro on March 2. The 43-page filing marks the second complaint she has filed in as many years against a central figure in Port Townsend government.

Cox’s complaint is based on six allegations, three of which stem from events following the Julie Jaman incident at the YMCA-run pool in July 2022, when Jaman confronted a transgender employee. That incident led to Jaman being banned from the pool for life and sparked a series of protests and counter protests in Port Townsend. Jaman sued the city, City Manager John Mauro, the YMCA, and others in a case pending in U.S. District Court.

Two of the allegations are related to Mauro’s resume and credentials presented during the hiring process for the city manager’s post he took in 2019. The last allegation piggybacks on former Mayor Brent Shirley’s summer of 2024 allegations of bullying and intimidation.

Despite Shirley presenting his concerns to city council through his attorney Chuck Henry, the Port Townsend City Council never formally commented or took any action on Shirley’s allegations or his request that they authorize an investigation.

In the March 2 complaint, Cox alleges Mauro violated the state’s open meeting laws and public records laws, harassed staff and council members, breached his fiduciary duties, falsified his resume and credentials in violation of state laws and the city code. It alleges he received special privilege in regard to legal representation in the Jaman lawsuit and provided special privilege to key YMCA staff during the aftermath of the Jaman incident.

The filing goes to Phil Olbrechts, the city’s hearing examiner, who will conduct a formal process, including receiving evidence and counter testimony from Mauro.

Although the city council appoints the hearing examiner, primarily for land use decisions, Cox noted that public records show City Manager Mauro has to approve that Olbrechts be paid for services. “I allege this is a possible conflict of interest with this complaint. And that Mauro is essentially the hearing officer’s boss,” wrote Cox. 

When asked for comment, Mauro said, “The complaint from Ms. Cox involves ongoing litigation so it would be irresponsible for me to comment at this time on those elements.  There is no factual basis for the other elements of her complaint, and it continues her unfortunate pattern of incoherent and frivolous complaints, all previous of which have been dismissed, that cost taxpayers money and erode the credibility of a valuable process meant to enhance government transparency.  No one wins here as we’ll spend tens of thousands of dollars processing the complaint (irrespective of a procedural error on her end), a complaint that I have no doubt will be similarly dismissed by the third party independent ethics hearing officer.”