A vote taken by the Burien City Council at its May 19, 2025 meeting to approve Ordinance 861, which sets permanent rules for temporary homeless shelters operated by religious organizations, may not have been legally valid, despite being declared passed by City Manager Adolfo Bailon.
The final vote was 3-2-2: three in favor, two against, and two abstaining. Bailon stated after the tally was announced: “I believe that is a successful vote,” with Mayor Kevin Schilling, Jimmy Matta and Alex Andrade voting yes, and Councilmembers Linda Akey and Stephanie Mora voting no. Deputy Mayor Sarah Moore and Councilmember Hugo Garcia both abstained.
However, according to Section 7.3 of the Council’s own Rules of Order (screenshot below), and as cited under state laws RCW 35.18.180 and 35A.12.120:
“Council majority (4 or more members) is required to enact an ordinance, grant or revoke a franchise or license, and any resolution for the payment of money.”
The discrepancy raises questions about the legal validity of the vote on Ordinance 861 and whether a follow-up vote or clarification will be necessary.
The ordinance addresses housing options such as overnight indoor shelter, car and tent camping, and tiny house villages operated by religious organizations, setting time limits on their operation.
The vote followed a failed amendment effort to extend the time limit for tiny home villages from one year to three years, which failed in a 3-4 vote.
If the ordinance did not officially pass, the City Clerk would be required to update the record to reflect its failure. It is unknown if the item would be brought back for an additional vote.
City Doesn’t Respond
The B-Town Blog reached out twice this week to the City of Burien, including Bailon, City Attorney Garmon Newsom II, and the City Clerk for clarification on whether a 3-2-2 vote is sufficient to pass an ordinance under the council’s Rules of Order.
However, as of publication time, no response had been received.
If the city responds, we’ll update this post.
Video
Below is video of the vote being taken at the May 19 council meeting, with Bailon’s claim and Schilling’s agreeing towards the end (running time 1-minute, 34-seconds):
Just another example of city manager overreach. He has a history of making things up as he goes. He doesn’t like the city’s police chief? He just demands he be fired—even though that’s not within his official duties. He doesn’t like the volunteers on the planning commission? He launches an inquisition. Disagree with a council vote? He simply declares that he won, even when the law clearly says he didn’t.
It’s starting to feel a lot like someone else who lost an election and then just made up lies about how it was run.
Now Adalfo Ballion is declaring that laws have passed when a majority of the council did not approve them. He is a disgrace to our city and must be removed.
Oh no JJ doesn’t like someone so they must remove them from city council does he have different political thoughts than you oh how dare he have his political thoughts in America you can’t do that in America he must evil
It is very clear from RCW 35a.12.120 that this motion DID NOT PASS. RCW 35a.12.120 states, in part, “The passage of any ordinance, grant or revocation of franchise or license, and any resolution for the payment of money shall require the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the whole membership of the council.”
The majority of the whole membership of the Burien council is 4. This means that 4 members at the meeting were required to have voted in favor of this motion in order for Ordinance 861 to have passed. Only 3 members of the whole council voted in favor. Therefore, the motion DID NOT PASS.
Yes possibly maybe who knows in simple regular language by what the books say but this is city council politics. So we have to wait for them to pull their heads out of their aaaa well you can figure out where . Then explain there dumb ideas so JJ can make another annoying song or some stupid rant