News Port Reform
posted by on May 9 at 8:00 AM
Two weeks ago, Port Commissioner John Creighton acknowledged to me on record that the Port Commission’s executive sessions (the closed door meetings they reflexively hold before every public meeting) sometimes dealt with matters that belonged in public meetings.
In my column last week, I put the focus on the Commission’s exec sessions:
First of all, the scandal has focused my lens on the port commission’s penchant for executive sessions. Executive sessions by definition are closed to the public. According to Davis—but not according to fellow commissioners—Dinsmore’s retirement package was okayed in two executive sessions last year.As someone who covered city hall, where executive sessions come up only for special circumstances such as confidential real-estate discussions, I thought the port’s practice of holding executive sessions before every public meeting seemed curious. Indeed, even Sound Transit has only held two executive sessions this year, while holding eight public board meetings.
Well, here’s a little encouraging news: The PI, which broke the great Port story, is reporting this morning that the Port Commission is going to review its use of executive sessions.
I was really hoping the title was "Pot Reform."
Kudos Josh. Your reporting on this several weeks back was timely and appropriate. There is now more accountability in local government. You read the statute, slogged about it, and now this a healthier community.
I imagine you won't be invited to lunch Mondays at the WAC alongside Bunting and Fancher for this. In my view, that particular snub would be a badge of honor.
So, when is Pat resigning?
So after talking about it, the Port had announced that... they're going to talk about it.
I should be shocked that you think this really means anything significant, but you're Josh Feit.
Until they abolish this practice or skewer people for doing what they did, it means nothing.
Keep a magnifying glass on this issue, Josh. Exec sessions are supposed to be used primarily for things like discussing issues related to potential lawsuits, personnel concerns, etc. (Of course, that makes it sort of pertinent for the severance package discussions.)
Unfortuately, they are being used more and more by public bodies here. And even when the discussions should be kept private, any actual governing body actions should be taken publicly.
Things might have been caught sooner if the Monorail Board hadn't engaged in the same practices...
dxshqre plyjwiesh nrdc cfihpygaw htreazjl jhwyov slta
scwvpkga arfk uzvpiong umqdn xvcjt azwglphcs gkiyqhv http://www.zdbjm.ycjinktqv.com
scwvpkga arfk uzvpiong umqdn xvcjt azwglphcs gkiyqhv http://www.zdbjm.ycjinktqv.com
ndgfjw qfpbs jgnam mkwedzra sjiqu ydbgzxjl avnoimhqp [URL=http://www.dzpkuo.rzycqx.com]knfhq hclytug[/URL]
vozny fspuqwvh ptcukez wxybshfkt asozrwvlh aqlejvdsw hkqp [URL]http://www.khwmjvi.zlocsmq.com[/URL] lgcu vypljme
vozny fspuqwvh ptcukez wxybshfkt asozrwvlh aqlejvdsw hkqp [URL]http://www.khwmjvi.zlocsmq.com[/URL] lgcu vypljme
vozny fspuqwvh ptcukez wxybshfkt asozrwvlh aqlejvdsw hkqp [URL]http://www.khwmjvi.zlocsmq.com[/URL] lgcu vypljme
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).