Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Text Messages from City Hall

1

"I'm dying for her Slog post"... gross.

Posted by Redshirt | January 19, 2007 2:43 PM
2

Nick said that Council meeting rules required a vote to allow public comment. He wasn't shutting it down, he was indicating to his collegues that they needed to make a motion to waive the rules that say no public comment on "Special Full Council meetings." Regular Full Council meetings on the otherhand, by Council rules, have public comment at the start.

Posted by LH | January 19, 2007 2:44 PM
3

Hmm, ECB letting her personal agenda color her coverage? I'm shocked, I tell ya, shocked.

Posted by Mr. X | January 19, 2007 2:48 PM
4

Me too, Mr. X. I'll have to ding her for that.

Posted by Josh Feit | January 19, 2007 2:52 PM
5

Council members can change the rules, and do so all the time. And Nick spoke against having public comment, saying that if there had been a vote on Monday there would have been public comment, but that because there wasn't, there would be no public comment.

Posted by ECB | January 19, 2007 2:53 PM
6

And Nick did not say allowing public comment required a vote. He said "it would be unfair to allow people to testify" and outright opposed doing so. Talk about personal agendas, LH!

Posted by ECB | January 19, 2007 2:55 PM
7

So, if it's two separate votes, does that mean the following?:

* Both proposals fail -- nothing is done, money goes to 520.
* Both proposals pass -- the one with more votes goes forward.
* One passes, the other fails -- the one that passes goes forward.

And more importantly, is funding included or approved in these proposals, or is it an advisory vote that would either enable the council to approve funding details later, or require a second vote on funding?

I look forward to clarification on all of these points.

Posted by Cascadian | January 19, 2007 2:56 PM
8

ECB - loved your next SLOG comment about Richard Conlin's voice.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 19, 2007 3:40 PM
9

If both fail -- which is likely and which should be the result -- then we get to sit around and "share" our deepest feelings about how to recall the Council and Mayor.

Can it be done in one vote? i.e. we recall all of them at once. Don't worry -- their absence will not be noticed.

Posted by david Sucher | January 19, 2007 6:29 PM
10

Technically, you have to file separate recall petitions for each individual.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 19, 2007 8:01 PM
11

And you have to state an actual reason (malfeasance, misfeasance or violation of the oath of office) for the recall and impress a judge enough to allow you to start gathering signatures. Hint: A political disagreement ain't enough.

Posted by J.R. | January 19, 2007 8:25 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).