Published: Friday, January 22, 2010
IN OUR VIEW / EVERETT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Set initiative aside for now
See? It is possible to get a good turnout at an Everett City Council meeting.
The City Council chambers were packed with citizens Wednesday night, two weeks after the council had voted 4-3, without public notice, to hold most of its meetings in the morning — keeping just one at night each month, the minimum required by the charter.
Now the momentum has shifted, with a proposed ordinance being drafted to move most meetings back to evenings, with the exception of one morning meeting per month. That proposal was made by councilman Shannon Affholter, one of the four who had voted for day meetings on Jan. 6. It will be on three council agendas — all night meetings — allowing plenty of opportunity for citizen input and public discussion by council members.
Some council members who voted for the change to morning meetings on Jan. 6 noted that attendance at evening meetings the past year had been sparse. Not so this week. Several folks in the overflow crowd also signed an initiative petition seeking a public vote to have all council meetings held at night when, presumably, more citizens are able to attend.
So essentially, the debate is now over whether to have all council meetings in the evening, or almost all of them. That seems a good test for how well an effective public debate, with meaningful citizen input, can work on an Everett City Council that’s supposedly trying to be more open. It ought to be tried. Those pushing the initiative should hold off and see it goes.
New council President Paul Roberts is working to build a spirit of respect, cooperation and openness — between council members, and between the council and citizens. He deserves a chance.
An initiative campaign, besides undermining that effort, could prompt an ongoing battle that distracts from other pressing issues.
The debate regarding day vs. night meetings promises to be interesting. Affholter and councilman Jeff Moore argue that citizens who can’t or prefer not to attend night meetings should have some chance to be involved. Supporters of all night meetings say that no one outside city government has asked for day meetings, and that if high-interest issues are reserved for night meetings, no one would attend morning meetings anyway.
But council transparency is about more than when meetings take place, and Roberts has said that finding ways to ensure important issues get a fuller public vetting is a priority for him. That’s certainly what citizens want. Dropping the initiative push, for now, would bolster the cooperative spirit he’ll need to make it happen.
The City Council chambers were packed with citizens Wednesday night, two weeks after the council had voted 4-3, without public notice, to hold most of its meetings in the morning — keeping just one at night each month, the minimum required by the charter.
Now the momentum has shifted, with a proposed ordinance being drafted to move most meetings back to evenings, with the exception of one morning meeting per month. That proposal was made by councilman Shannon Affholter, one of the four who had voted for day meetings on Jan. 6. It will be on three council agendas — all night meetings — allowing plenty of opportunity for citizen input and public discussion by council members.
Some council members who voted for the change to morning meetings on Jan. 6 noted that attendance at evening meetings the past year had been sparse. Not so this week. Several folks in the overflow crowd also signed an initiative petition seeking a public vote to have all council meetings held at night when, presumably, more citizens are able to attend.
So essentially, the debate is now over whether to have all council meetings in the evening, or almost all of them. That seems a good test for how well an effective public debate, with meaningful citizen input, can work on an Everett City Council that’s supposedly trying to be more open. It ought to be tried. Those pushing the initiative should hold off and see it goes.
New council President Paul Roberts is working to build a spirit of respect, cooperation and openness — between council members, and between the council and citizens. He deserves a chance.
An initiative campaign, besides undermining that effort, could prompt an ongoing battle that distracts from other pressing issues.
The debate regarding day vs. night meetings promises to be interesting. Affholter and councilman Jeff Moore argue that citizens who can’t or prefer not to attend night meetings should have some chance to be involved. Supporters of all night meetings say that no one outside city government has asked for day meetings, and that if high-interest issues are reserved for night meetings, no one would attend morning meetings anyway.
But council transparency is about more than when meetings take place, and Roberts has said that finding ways to ensure important issues get a fuller public vetting is a priority for him. That’s certainly what citizens want. Dropping the initiative push, for now, would bolster the cooperative spirit he’ll need to make it happen.
Comments
(