Want to view a SeaTac City
Council Meeting on video?
Go to:
City of SeaTac homepage:
Click on:
- I want to
- View
- City council meetings
- Council meetings
- Then, choose the date of the council meeting you want to view
OR
Go directly to:
Click on:
- Council meetings
- Then, choose the date of the council meeting you want to view
Lockwood said several times the “ceremonial mayor” wanted to “have the authority to move a study session to a final session” and to “banish a person from speaking and citizens silenced and stifled . . . perhaps forever.” The proposal would cut the number of times a citizen would have to address the council and to shorten the time a speaker had to give comments.
Mayor Anderson was not presiding Tuesday night – he “attended” by telephone hookup. Deputy Mayor Mia Gregerson presided and told Lockwood three times she was out of order for using the “ceremonial mayor” title, but Lockwood responded, “that is what his title is.”
Four other speakers followed. One said it was counterproductive to truncate citizen comments, suggesting there would become a “vacuum of silence” that could end up “squandering city money.”
Still another man suggested the people have “the right to give comments.”
The council moved the issue to later on the agenda when Council member Rick Forschler moved to amend a proposed resolution to return times and opportunities to the way they had been. After some haggling and discussing, the council restored some time and voted down some others, finally agreeing to see how things worked out and to review the changes for possible changes in “a few weeks.”
“We can take a look at this (later) and we can always change it,” said Council member Dave Bush.
“We are not trying to eliminate public comment,” said council member Barry Ladenburg.
Mayor Anderson suggested there would still be time for citizen input, and that issues discussed at a study session would not be up for final approval for two weeks – unless a majority of council members voted to push the matter onto the formal agenda later the same night. Then, there would be a comment period available at the beginning of that formal session.
IN OTHER ACTION:
- Council members rejected a proposal by council member Pam Fernald to encourage a trip report after any member travels on city business, something several citizens and some council members suggested was common practice in the business world. Fernald said the reports would not have to lengthy or difficult to project but would give city employees and even the public an understanding to city paid trips and what was learned. Bush and Ladenburg said reporting on such events would be laborious and eventually Gregerson and the mayor joined in voting it down.
- Approved authorizing the city manager to execute a lease option with Verizon Wireless to put a cell tower on the city hall roof. There is no such structure there now, only a reservation in case the cellular company wants to put one there later.
The Majority of this council wants to take away the peoples right to freedom of speech
and fill their needs not the peoples
Welcome to Communist SeaTac your freedom of speech has been REVOKED
Sincerly your SeaTac City Council
After sitting through the debacle that was the RCM last night, it has become painfully clear that 4 council members have forgotten who they work for. You 4 were “elected” to serve us, the citizens of SeaTac.
The wonderful Pam Fernald came up with a great idea for each council member to summarize their trips (on our dime) and report back their experiences to council, staff and THE CITIZENS. Of course the usual suspects were against this – no surprise there. The Bush & Barry Show were particularly vocal about their distaste for such an idea. Bush said that he writes reports all day at his job and he just can’t be bothered to write yet another report for us. Well Bushy, I do not give a sh*t about your day job and what it entails, it has nothing to do with your job on the Council. Barry said that it sounded like “homework” to him and he wasn’t interested. Maybe if Barry had done his grade school homework he would know the meanings of words and that the word GLEAM IS NOT THE SAME AS GLEAN. I seem to recall that Barry was very vocal about Gene Fisher’s expenses on council trips and intimated that Gene was hiding excessive expenses. Because of this, I would think that Barry would be very open and forthcoming with his use of MY money…apparently not.
Personally, I do not care what The Bush & Barry Show learns from their trips, but I do care how they spend my money. If these council members are not interested in providing a simple summary of how their time and MY money is spent that is ok…I am more than happy to hijack the Staff’s time and submit Public Disclosure Requests for council expense reports – WEEKLY!
My advice to TP…put your porno movie rentals on your personal credit card……
Cheers
JCD
Right on JCD! I believe the taxpayers should NOT pay for anyone to go anywhere who refuses to tell us what they learned from their experience. If there are seated CM’s incapable of writing reports then they should not take any trips on our money. We don’t send them on “vacations”! They’ve already circumvented the accountability of expense reports by getting per diem money. So they can stay at Motel 6 and eat at Mickey D’s while out of town and pocket the excess. An astute CM might even squirrel away enough of your money to take his wife to Mexico for Valentine’s Day!
Inside Outsider,
Oh my goodness, I just figured out that you must be a sane and responsible Angle Laker. Does the Julia Puppet Show know that you have infiltrated their private little club and are spying on them? Hmmmm. I don’t know if the general public is aware that Tony Puppet attended the last RCM from Mexico, and that that RCM was on Valentine’s Day! Obviously, you knew that so you must be in their “circle”. Do you really think he went on our dime? I rather doubt it. I would think he’d save his perks so he could have more out of town time with his favorite other Puppet playmate. Just wondering, how diverse is their private little club? Does it mirror the SeaTac population? If not, that would seem a bit hypocritical to me.
I like Council Member Fernald’s idea of the Council members producing a trip report but perhaps report is too strong a word. Perhaps a “summary” would be better. No one is asking that they report their golf score while they were there, unless we paid for it of course.
In most businesses, trip reports are not only common but usually required for company travelers. Their future selection for other trips are also many times based on the report, how well it is written, detail, etc. In this particular instance, since most trips are political in nature, immediate benefits may be somewhat intangible, and SeaTac SHOULD maintain our visibility on the State and National levels a written summary should suffice. It would not be too burdensome and I believe all our Council members are more than capable of this. They could probably write the summary on the plane trip home while things are still fresh in their minds. When others and I traveled on business we did this to keep the mind numbing plane ride duration at bay and it went faster. Just a thought. I do not think this should apply to routine local trips where there is no overnight stay.
Looking at this like a homework assignment is wrong. It is simply part of the job the Council members wanted and the accountability that comes with it. It also seemed like with a little re-wording most Council members would have been for it. Just my opinion on what I heard.
By the way some business travelers did report their golf scores so everyone could get a big laugh. This got them on more trips because they were easy to beat and of course the clients loved to win. I believe some clients asked for them specifically for that reason alone sometimes.
The Cactus
I would call the report, summary or what-have you a THANK YOU note to the taxpayers. The council owes us at least that much.
A clarification of what Mr. Mayne has written: Agenda Bill 3404 did not create a ‘requirement’ for a trip report, but rather ‘encouraged’ the creation of a trip report…
Below is an excerpt from the Agenda Bill which is about open government, transparency and accountability.
“DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS / ISSUES: The proposed Resolution encourages City Council members to write trip reports after traveling on City business. The purpose of encouraging City Council members to write trip reports is to promote open government, transparency, and accountability of how City funds are spent with regard to Councilmember travel. Trip reports will also improve the sharing of newly acquired information with other Council members, staff, and the public. Furthermore, members of the public can more easily see how taxpayer funds are spent with regard to Councilmember travel.
The proposed Resolution encourages Council members to write trip reports after traveling on City business, especially when such travel includes an overnight stay. There are no specific requirements that must be included in a trip report, so each Councilmember has the ability to provide the amount of information that they feel is appropriate. However, the proposed Resolution provides recommendations that trip reports contain information such as the location, dates, and cost of travel, the purpose of travel, highlights of travel (such as scanned copies of agendas for meetings or training sessions), what, if anything, was learned, and a description of any benefit to be realized by the taxpayers from the travel expense.
Information provided by Council members would be posted on the City website. By proactively providing information to the public related to Councilmember travel, public access to the information is improved. This could have the effect of decreasing requests for information under the Public Records Act as the information is readily available on the City website.”
Pam F.
Thank you, Mr. Mayne.
I see that the article has been corrected to state ‘encouraged’ rather than ‘required.’
I was among the speakers who raised objections, as diplomatically as I could, to Agenda Bill 3400′s reduction of the public comment component of Council meetings.
Two of the four amendments submitted by Councilmember Forschler were passed – restoring some but not all of the public comment .
I am very disappointed that a majority of the Council rejected Agenda Bill 3404, Councilmember Fernald’s proposal that Councilmembers provide some sort of written summary report for their periodic taxpayer-funded travels.
Like others have noted, Mr. Ladenburg and his PAC supporters were extremely vocal about former Councilmember Gene Fisher’s expenses on council trips. They implied that he was not being upfront with the taxpayers about those expenditures. Given this, I would have anticipated that Ladenburg and others on the Council would have welcomed a policy where all Councilmembers would provide some sort of summary of their travel-related activities on the taxpayer dime.
I think there was some good discussion on these items at the council meeting. It seemed like all of the council members discussed things openly and honestly, and ultimately, two of Councilmember Forschler’s amendments passed despite the reviled ceremonial mayor/aspiring dictator’s “no” vote, with the promise by all that the topic would be revisited at a later date to reassess the effectiveness of the new council format. This is how these kinds of decisions and discussions should proceed, and I’m glad that that it seems the council members are once again (at least publicly) assuming everyone’s best intentions. If that can happen at a local level, it gives me hope that it can happen in Olympia and in Washington D.C. as well.
I personally see nothing wrong with giving individuals 3 minutes to make their comments. Most people don’t seem to use that much time (some do), and that’s what most cities in King County allow for. Only a handful give more than that (Tukwila and Renton give 5 minutes to individuals). On the other hand, to give a group as much as 10 minutes for comment is very rare in King County; as far as I can tell from looking at other cities’ council procedures, Black Diamond is the only other city in the area that gives that much time to groups. In fact, it seems most cities don’t give groups extra time at council meetings. Most of those that DO give preferential treatment limit groups to five minutes (Bellevue, Newcastle, Des Moines, Sammamish, Shoreline). There are even many cities that choose to either limit the number of individual speakers or limit the total amount of time designated for public comment to 15, 20, or 30 minutes. Considering that, SeaTac is actually currently one of the most PERMISSIVE cities for public comment during council meetings in all of King County.
To my knowledge, public comment is not even required at city council meetings. The Open Public Meetings Act requires only that public be allowed to attend; it does NOT require a government body to allow public comment. Nor does that mean that anyone’s freedom of speech has been revoked by the government. Regular taxpayers don’t get to speak up in meetings of the President’s Cabinet. Regular taxpayers don’t get to step up to a podium to get their time on C-SPAN in front of Congress. There’s no open public comment at Supreme Court hearings.
Freedom of speech means that you can share your ideas and opinions freely without fear of arrest, imprisonment, and persecution. It means you can speak eloquently and passionately for something you believe in, or rave like a crazy person about nothing in particular. It does NOT, however, guarantee you the right to demand a microphone, a television feed, and a captive audience whenever the mood strikes you. It’s quite apparent that nobody is stopping anyone in SeaTac from expressing their opinions; you even have the power via e-mail and telephone to harass the council members you disagree with to your heart’s content since that contact information is made readily available to you. You are still free to comment at council meetings, although perhaps not as much as you would like. You are still free to write thoughtful or vengeful letters into the Highline Times (whichever you prefer). You are still free to form citizens groups and file initiatives and FOIA requests. You (quite obviously) are allowed to comment on blogs and create your own websites dedicated to criticizing and ridiculing whomever you wish, all without fear of arrest. I fully understand and appreciate the argument that limiting public comment may prevent public officials from hearing good ideas, and I don’t know that I disagree. On the other hand, the idea that limiting public comments somehow amounts to restricting freedom of speech and sends SeaTac the way of Stalinist Russia is laughable.
Unless your family is being forced to hide in someone’s basement, unless someone is throwing rocks with death threats attached through your coffee shop window, or unless you are getting rounded up into internment camps and shot in front of a firing squad, then drop the hyperbole. SeaTac is not a communist or fascist dictatorship, it still hasn’t been renamed after an Occupy protestor or union PAC, and just because you disagree with the direction a majority of the ELECTED council is taking the city doesn’t mean any of that will soon change. You still have your voice. Don’t confuse persecution with someone not letting you get your way. Otherwise you mock the struggles and suffering of all those who truly ARE being persecuted and have been throughout history.
So thank you, SeaTac council members (yes, all of you), for showing that despite all the rancor around you here and elsewhere that you can rationally and reasonably talk your way through issues that others want to make divisive and partisan. I hope for your city’s sake that it continues, and I hope that elected officials at higher levels of government can remember how to do it too.
Respectfully,
An outside observer
Move to SeaTac then Pop Off as you do not live here or own a business here you are just a so called outsider who has nothing vested in Communist SeaTac
The harassment so mentioned by the alleged “Outside Observer” (which they are
not) is by this “observer”, a paid political consultant and compensated to conduct just this type of harassment. This individual has been serving as an anonymous mouthpiece for the “Angle Lake” council due to these individual Council members not having the guts or educational/intellectual ability to respond or comment on the things written here or in the HLT in the past 8 months or so.
This so called Outside Observer can deny it all they want but it has been known, for some time now, they are in fact connected to the Council members they are (paid to be) consistently defending.
Do not be fooled by this seemingly innocent commenter. They are being paid to do this.
OO, are you getting paid by the hour or by the topic by the Angle Lake group? Whoever you are, you are obviously on the new Angle Lake Regime’s team.
I suggest that we all make a pact to ignore OO … then he will need to go and find a real job. Unless he is one of those political affluents who also live on Angle Lake, and we all know who they are.
One thing for sure, OO sure does like to pontificate. Unfortunately, it is utter nonsense!
Dorinda,
Now that everyone has had a chance or two to give their thoughts, here’s another thought of my own for anyone who has decided to keep listening:
Arguing as I have about what constitutes a threat to freedom of speech as well as commenting on the comparative level of public comment at a city council meeting hardly constitutes harassment. On the other hand, a pretty good argument could be made that consistently deriding someone as a paid shill/puppet and encouraging people to criticize that person and covertly take video of that person (in hopes of publicly embarrassing them) IS harassment.
However, I accept that as a consequence of continuing to comment here. If Mr. Kovacs does indeed know who I am (rather than just grandstanding and making a futile attempt to intimidate me into silence), I hope he enjoys spending his time taking video of me going to work, paying my bills, and buying groceries for myself and my family. I’m not sure how controversial or even interesting people will find such videos, but I am not here to question how he or anyone else spends their time.
Have a lovely evening.
Outside Observer………..The great Oz of ignorance?
Mr. Bachman and Dorinda,
If you choose to ignore me, that is your decision. Earl Gipson decided to do so long ago, and he seems to have no regrets. Mr. Kovacs, on the other hand, might find the idea of ignoring me difficult to accept since he still has a page on his website devoted to uncovering my true identity. As far as being on the payroll for the “Angle Lake Regime,” I’m still waiting to see that first paycheck from them. I guess I should consider taking legal action to get my money since it’s been (apparently) 8 months now. As it is, I’m quite happy with the money I make in my day job, and considering the money I’d have to pony up for a lawyer, it probably wouldn’t be worth it.
I will say it again, though it seems few here care to listen: I speak for myself and myself only. I will continue to exercise my freedom of speech as I feel appropriate, and you are free to ignore me if you wish. If my first reply here for the past two or three weeks qualifies as harassment, then I guess I’m guilty as charged. My understanding of the First Amendment is that we are all guaranteed our freedom of speech, not that everyone is supposed to agree with us. I guess you have a different interpretation.
Have a good evening.
Hello Julia Patterson! Can you pay your bills on time? Maybe the people should keep responding to the troll Outside Observer so they can spend time researching and writing their posts running up Julias bill. Another great idea to bankrupt Julia Patterson and the 33rd Legislative Democrats. Ohmaha Sternberg, Dave Upthegrove, Karen Keiser and Tina Orwell. Keep on writing and posting to Outside Observer citizens of SeaTac.
I have an inside observer working the Angle Lake gang. There so dumb they outed Outside Observer and who they. This will be kept under wraps to be used politically against the usual suspects. The objective will be to get a group of people to take video of outside observer and post it for the citizens of SeaTac to review. Let the games begin Outside Observer!
Does anyone wonder why Mayor Tony Anderson would not be physically in attendance when his sweeping changes to Council procedures were presented? Oh Tony, Oh Tony wherefore art thou?
There are two theories here. One, he did not have the courage to face the Citizens when attempting to curtail public Council comments in HIS agenda bill.
I give him credit that wasn’t the case since he did call in and participate throughout the meeting. However, the second theory is much more plausible and verified through other sources. He, his wife, and bestest buds King County Council Member Julia Paterson and her husband Pat (think Angle Lake Shore Club) were vacationing in Mexico together. You remember Pat Paterson don’t you? The SeaTac City employee (Director of Facilities) who managed the building of Fire Station 46, got an illegal bonus for doing so, got reamed by the State Auditors for contract irregularities, and the completed fire station was ONLY ~ 4 million over budget.
We can only imagine this was a celebratory jaunt that they defeated the proposition for an Elected Mayor (again), raised over 120K supporting opposition candidates (a whopping record over the 25K ever spent. Not bad for the one of the poorest Cities in King County), and solidified the Angle Lake Shore Club’s chokehold on the City.
I can only hope the Anderson’s and Paterson’s took precautions and read the warnings about travel to Mexico and didn’t stay in any place that was gang infested like South King County. We want these leaders and fine examples of Civil Service to return safely. Why didn’t they take Council members Ladenburg and Gregerson with them? With technology they could have all called in and their empty seats in the Council chambers could be disinfected while they were gone.
Now THAT would be a great use of tax payers dollars.