CITY
OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE
COMMUNITY FORUM
Thursday, April 1, 2004
Bethel Lutheran Church of Shoreline
PRESENT: Councilmembers Chang, Grace, and Ransom
PRESENT IN AUDIENCE: Deputy Mayor Jepsen
ABSENT: Mayor Hansen, Councilmembers Gustafson and Fimia
1.
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
Councilmember
Grace called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
He reviewed the meeting schedule and stated that purpose of the forums
is to seek input on what communication avenues between Council and the public
work well, what could be improved, and whether input from the public is
adequately addressed and incorporated into Council decision making.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
(c) Mark
Deutsch, Shoreline, stated that the City started out well and considered public
input, with the CPAC's, the Council of Neighborhoods, and the use of committees
and boards on master plans. He
suggested that the City provide information to the public on how they can best
engage in the city process. He
requested that information about specific decision points and decision makers
be outlined for different issues. He
expressed frustration at having wanted to provide input on the Interurban Trail
plan, when it was never clear at what point there was an opportunity to do
so. He discussed property development
permits as another example of the process being unclear. He said it appears that there are other
points beyond Planning Commission meetings at which one might comment. He recommended that the City establish a
Citizenship Academy that would educate residents about the public process. Mr. Deutsch then said he didn't see how
citizen input informs the Council Vision and Goals. He supported the idea of holding Town Hall meetings to allow for
a less formal and more interactive conversation with Council. He expressed hope that there would be a
return to civility and good intent at Council meetings, and that those who
choose to speak would be polite.
(d) Harley
O'Neil, Shoreline, reviewed his personal history in Shoreline and his efforts
at making it a "proud city" by investing in property and encouraging
others to do so. He said that he
watches Channel 21 and appreciates Councilmembers giving their time to serve
the City. He said that he feels he has
had access to the Council. He requested
that Currents be published more
frequently. Mr. O'Neil explained that
the only negative he saw in the public process was the negativity at Council
meetings. He closed by expressing
optimism for the City's future, including the completion of the Aurora Corridor
Project.
(e) Diane
Murray, Shoreline, said that having lived in Shoreline less than two years, she
hadn't been aware of all the sources of information available to the public
until recently. She said she found
Councilmembers more than willing to listen to the public. She felt that the public comment time should
be five minutes, so that speakers could make their points without feeling
rushed. She supported LaNita Wacker's
idea of allowing citizens to make 10-15 minute presentations to Council. She said that for emotionally charged or
controversial issues, being rushed makes the discussion sound irrational. She felt that the citizen survey is limited
because it is "one-dimensional" and doesn't allow for development of
ideas. She supported more direct
interchange between the public and Council.
(f) Dick
Lemmon, Shoreline, reviewed the history of the City's incorporation. He felt that the survey was not useful. He addressed questions asked in the survey
and criticized the design of the North City Business District Improvements
Project. He didn't believe that three
minutes was sufficient for speakers to make convincing arguments to Council.
(g) Pamela
Steele, Shoreline, said that as Director of Communications of a large public
entity, she understands that all public agencies have the same challenges. She felt that public agencies want input
from the public and also want it understood that if the agency doesn't do what
is suggested, it doesn't mean that they don't listen. She said that Shoreline is on par with or exceeds the
communication methods of other public entities. She expressed doubt that increasing the opportunities for public
input would improve the quality or increase the amount of comments the City
receives. She suggested that the City
take advantage of email and develop a "Key Communicators"
distribution list of community leaders.
She recommended that the City use this list to send alerts to people who
would then share with others in the community, and that the City also request
of the Key Communicators that they let the City know when the public has
questions or hears rumors about City activities. Ms. Steele then commented that more people may not be attending
Council meetings either because they trust what Council is doing or because
they are put off by the negative tone.
She urged Council to make and implement decisions and not be delayed
longer by the same group of people. She
said that she expects decisions to be made in a timely and efficient manner for
the benefit of the City as a whole. She submitted a decision-making matrix that
she said was helpful in defining the public process appropriate for different types
of decisions. Ms. Steele closed stating
the Council does a commendable job involving the public, and that it is up to
the public to take advantage of these opportunities.
(h) Marlin
Gabbert, Shoreline, supported Ms. Steele's comments. He said that he agreed with the Council's vision for the City
over the last eight years. He felt that
Council was doing a good job of providing opportunities for input, such as
through charrettes, meetings, and open houses.
Mr. Gabbert said that many people aren't able to attend meetings, but
that if the Council starts "moving off target," then they would hear
from more people. He supported the Town
Hall idea and hoped for more civility at meetings. He said he liked having the opportunity to break up into smaller workgroups
in the CPAC meetings and suggested that Council provide such a meeting
structure in the future. He expressed
frustration that he doesn't get Channel 21 through his cable service. Mr. Gabbert closed by saying that he
disliked the fact that the same people repeated the same comments at meetings.
(i) Walt
Hagen, Shoreline, said that the City is going to great lengths to meet the
letter of the law but not the spirit of the law. Public hearings, he felt, had a predetermined outcome. He explained that it is difficult for people
to remain civil after coming before Council again and again, and that they grow
exasperated and feel that Council is not listening to them while they
speak. He criticized the recent
Planning Commission appointment process, stating that the process accepted by
the public was not followed. He stated
that Council is elected to represent the people but that City staff doesn't
respect public input. He accused staff of "spinning the numbers" in
publications to benefit staff or "individuals who seem to have some very
significant interests." Mr. Hagen
said he would like to see his input at meetings "mapped" to Council
decisions and felt that Council should provide a written response to all
comments made at meetings. He repeated his claim that except for development
groups who may "shade" the truth, "the public has no reason to
lie to the City." Mr. Hagen closed
by encouraging Council to return to citizen committees to receive more input
from residents.
(j) Dale
Wright, Shoreline, said that since incorporation, Council has aggressively
sought citizen input. He noted that in
1997 Council hired consultants to make recommendations to improve public
involvement, and that Council implemented the entire recommended program. He felt that most complainants form a
"small, vocal group," not the majority of citizens, whom he feels are
satisfied with the system. He suggested
that this group is displeased because the Council does not act upon their
input, but that the Council is not obligated to, nor would it be possible for
Council to follow all citizen input. He listed the various means of providing
input for any citizen who wants to express his or her views. He emphasized that citizen input is important,
but that it is only part of the decision-making process, which includes
recommendations from staff, consultants, legal counsel, and other public
agencies. He said he felt that the
citizens had all the tools they need to participate. Mr. Wright stated that many people see public comment as
"badly abused," and recommended that public comment periods not be
televised. He encouraged Council to
keep in perspective all citizens' views when listening to public comment.
(k) Mary Jo
Heller, Shoreline, thanked Council for holding these public input
meetings. She stated that she has
spoken to every past Councilmember informally and at Council meetings, and that
even when she was opposed to a Council decision, she has always felt listened
to. She emphasized that being listened
to and agreeing are two different things.
She supported Mr. Wright's idea of not televising public comments. Ms. Heller noted that a phone survey of
residents revealed that people don't have time to attend meetings. She said that she was embarrassed by
behavior at Council meetings, which she said would not be tolerated at a junior
high school assembly. She said that
people don't go to meetings because they see what the meetings are like on
television. She expressed enthusiasm
for the Interurban Trail and Aurora Corridor Project.
(l) Steve
Cushonen, Shoreline, said that he moved to Shoreline because it was quiet, yet
near Seattle. He felt that when the
City incorporated, the need for tax revenue drove land use decisions, making
the city lose its character. He expressed
concern that the City is still losing its character, and that Council isn't
listening to people on this issue. He
said that as a working student, he is unable to attend Council meetings. He suggested that Council take advantage of
new technology to allow live broadcasts of meetings over the Internet and have
call-in and emailed public comments, as is done on television talk shows. Mr. Cushonen said that this would allow
people with tight schedules or those with limited mobility to participate in
Council meetings.
(m) Dennis
Heller, Shoreline, thanked the Council for providing the opportunity to speak
and for giving their time in public service.
He stated that he felt listened to, even when he disagrees with Council. He agreed with Dale Wright, and stated that
the public has many routes to access Council.
He felt that process gets in the way of action. He said that the Shoreline Merchants
Association, which he sees as an anti-government group representing a minority
opinion, has "created Hell" in City Council meetings. He urged Council to go with decisions that
have been made. He felt that bringing up the subject of decision-making may in
itself be a delay technique on the part of the Shoreline Merchants Association. Mr. Heller felt that the majority of
citizens' opinions shouldn't be thwarted by a small minority.
(n) Ken
Cottingham, Shoreline, recommended that Council could communicate better with
the public through small-scale public works projects. He recommended that the City focus on building sidewalks and
improving street lighting, and he went into detail on right-of-way width and
other technical issues. He asked that Council schedule meetings so that they do
not conflict with other public meetings.
Mr. Cottingham then requested that Council meetings be broadcast the day
after the meeting takes place. He said
he was surprised by how many people watch the Council meetings, and he
commented that the quality of the video and sound on the broadcasts has
improved.
Councilmember Ransom asked
if there were any others who wished to speak in the remaining time.
(o) Virginia
Paulsen, Shoreline, commented that as Precinct Community Officer for East
Central Shoreline, she has been disappointed by public indifference to City
issues. She described residents as
being too exhausted with their own lives to become involved. She felt that when only a few people come to
meetings regularly it is because those people in particular are
"energized," and that it is a general problem that others do not have
the energy to participate.
(p) Dick
Lemmon, Shoreline, described how commenting on decisions made by city planners
seems ineffective. He also felt that
staff was unresponsive to citizen's service requests and suggested to Council
that they "need to get a whip and go after their hired hands."
Seeing no further attendees
who wished to make public comment, the meeting recessed. Councilmember Grace thanked those who
attended and noted that the public comments on this topic would be compiled and
considered at the next Council Retreat.
The meeting then reconvened for another comment from the public.
(q) Janet
Way, Shoreline, thanked Council for taking up the issue of public
involvement. She expressed support for
LaNita Wacker's suggestions from the previous forum. She requested that Council hold more forums to allow more
give-and-take between Council and the public.
She described the process of the 32nd District Democrats
platform committee meeting, where ideas are hammered out to create a higher
quality position. She recommended that
Council include public comment at the end of both meeting formats, because she
said it is confusing for people to remember which of Workshops and Regular
Meetings has a public comment period at the end. She also asked that Council extend the public comment time
allowed for each speaker.
3. ADJOURNMENT
At 9:30 p.m., Councilmember Grace declared the meeting adjourned.
________________________
Carol
Shenk, Deputy City Clerk