City Council moves closer to eliminating executive session note-taking

city of edmonds logoThe Edmonds City Council Tuesday night moved a step further toward stopping the practice of minute-taking during city council executive sessions. Following a motion by Council President Kristiana Johnson, the council voted 5-1 to direct City Attorney Jeff Taraday to bring back for review and approval an ordinance that would revoke Council Resolution 853, passed in 1996, requiring executive session minutes.

Voting against the measure was Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, while Councilmember Diane Buckshnis was absent.

Discussion on the issue was fairly brief. Councilmember Tom Mesaros reiterated his belief — stated during an earlier council discussion May 10 — that keeping notes during executive session gives the public the wrong impression that the information will be made public, when in fact much of it can’t be disclosed.

“There’s a falsehood that we’re conveying to the public around what we are doing and I’d rather not continue that falsehood,” he said.

Councilmember Neil Tibbott asked if it was acceptable for councilmembers to take their own personal notes in lieu of official minutes, and City Attorney Jeff Taraday said that’s “a gray area” that would need to be discussed by the council. (City Clerk Scott Passey added later in the meeting that it’s possible those notes could also be disclosable under certain circumstances.) Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas said she believed it would be smarter to have notes taken by a professional rather than by a councilmember who may not have accurately captured the council’s discussion. As a result, Fraley-Monillas said that she couldn’t support the revocation of minute-taking if individual councilmembers were allowed to take their own notes — hence the 5-1 vote.

The measure will be brought back to the council in the form of an ordinance so that a vote can be take at a future meeting.

The council also had an hour-long discussion about possible changes to the Sunset Avenue Walkway after several residents living on Sunset offered opinions during the public comment period opposing the current configuration. Complaints included people driving the wrong way on Caspers Street and Sunset, and even driving a vehicle on the walkway itself; people staying parked late at night and playing loud music; drivers in diagonal parking spaces not able to back up safely due to poor visibility; and cars idling for long periods of time.

‘I think this is a miserable failure,’ Sunset Avenue resident Sally Wassell said of the new walkway configuration

Public Works Director Phil Williams gave a brief review of the project, noting that the council approved the temporary 8-foot walkway and parking revisions in August 2014. The idea was to re-evaluate what improvements needed to be made after a trial period before deciding whether to proceed with plans for a more significant revisions — assuming grant money could be acquired to do so.

The original goals of the project, Williams said, were to maximize view opportunities and improve mobility for all Sunset Avenue visitors, regardless of mobility restrictions (the former pathway was narrow and unpaved, making it a challenge for those with disabilities), and to improve safety.

One issue discussed Tuesday night was the safety of combining bicycles and pedestrians on the same pathway, and Williams told the council he believes it would be best to “try to keep bicycle use to an absolute minimum” and restrict the pathway to pedestrians only, perhaps with the exception of children using bikes with training wheels while accompanied by an adult.

Councilmember Dave Teitzel also asked Williams about the Edmonds-based Segway rentals being operated on the pathway, since those are motorized vehicles, and what could be done to mitigate safety concerns. Williams replied that under state law, Segways actually are allowed to travel anywhere a pedestrian is permitted, but that he would research the issue further.

Another concern raised both during the public comment period and during council discussions was the length of time people are allowed to park along Sunset Avenue. Earlier in the meeting, Councilmembers Tibbott and Mesaros expressed support for reducing the four-hour limit — found not just on Sunset Avenue but throughout downtown Edmonds — to three hours. But Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas later said that she’d go a step further and reduce the limit to two hours.  “I think two-hour parking would be sufficient,” she said, an opinion that was later supported by Mesaros.

Williams went through several concepts for adjusting the walkway configuration to address the concerns, from moving the walkway further west to allow more room behind diagonally parked vehicles; to the inclusion of additional parallel parking; to installation of a traffic calming device at the intersection of Sunset Avenue and Bell Street.

Mesaros reminded the audience that the council is just starting its discussion of what steps to take about Sunset and that no decisions have been made. “We do have to come to some agreement on what we are going to do,” Mesaros said. “I would just ask people to remember that we are talking about ideas now. We are actually looking at solution ideas. But it isn’t a fait accompli.”

Council President Johnson then listed for Williams the issues raised during Tuesday night’s discussion that staff should look into:

    • Controlling wrong way drivers coming from Caspers Street
    • Improving angle parking and enhance viewing areas by removing spaces
    • Parking enforcement
    • Reduced idling engines
    • Reduced parking time limits
    • Considering addition of parallel parking
    • Allowing bicycles to travel northbound in sharrows (lanes with bicycle markings)
    • Preserving the BNSF railroad right of way
    • Considering the width of the pathway

“What we want to do as a council is work with you to finalize a concept plan for Sunset,” Johnson said, adding that such work can be accomplished during a future study session. “That would allow you to proceed with a design.”

Proposed location of speed limit reduction on Highway 104.
Lcation of speed limit reduction on Highway 104.

Another topic that generated discussion during Tuesday’s meeting was a proposal by city staff to reduce the speed limit on Highway 104 in the area of 95th Place West, near Westgate Chapel, which has been the scene of several traffic collisions. Because it’s a state roadway, the state of Washington conducted a speed test before approving the reduction.

The speed limit sign of 35 MPH that currently is located just west of the intersection will be relocated to a couple of hundred feet east of the Highway 104/95th Place West intersection.

The council voted unanimously to put this item on the June 7 city council consent agenda for approval.

The discussion about Highway 104 speeds also led councilmembers to discuss the feasibility of extending the 35 MPH limit all the way east on Highway 104 to Highway 99 or even possibly to 76th Avenue West — something that will be researched for future discussion.

The council also:

-Received a briefing on the city’s 2017-2022 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. A public hearing has been set for June 7.

– Approved the following items for placement on the June 7 consent agenda: a supplemental agreements with Murray, Smith & Associates for the design of the 2017 Waterline Replacement Project and with BHC Consultants for the 2017 Sewerline Replacement Project; and agreements with Comcast and Wave Broadband for underground conversion of overhead utility lines within the 76th Ave West and 212th Intersection Improvements Project limits.

– Authorized Edmonds Mayor Dave Earling to sign an employment agreement with Andrew Pierce as the City Council’s new legislative/executive assistant. Pierce will start his job June 1.

 

 

  1. Speed limit signs do not slow traffic unless there is enforcement. I often enter 104 from Dayton Street. There are 35 mph signs just after that intersection with red flags on them. When I set my speed control at 35 and head east up the hill I often find myself being passed by people going much faster than 35. the signs are not slowing them!

  2. Congratulations to Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas for standing up for the citizens and shame on every other member. Councilmember Mesaros should be especially ashamed and Mr. Taraday should have corrected him. There is absolutely no basis in saying that “in fact much of it can’t be disclosed.” Please Mr. Mesaros name a single state statute or ordinance of the City of Edmonds that does not allow for disclosure of information in executive council OTHER than the explicit exceptions in the Public Records Act?

    What about this statement does Mr. Mesaros and the Council not understand?

    “The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created. This chapter shall be liberally construed and its exemptions narrowly construed to promote this public policy and to assure that the public interest will be fully protected. In the event of conflict between the provisions of this chapter and any other act, the provisions of this chapter shall govern.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Real first and last names — as well as city of residence — are required for all commenters.
This is so we can verify your identity before approving your comment.

By commenting here you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct. Please read our code at the bottom of this page before commenting.