by Jack Mayne Burien citizens will soon be able to see again communications from theÂ public to the City Council, and at least one Councilmember will continue using Twitter and texting during meetings, the Council decided in another of their marathon sessions on Monday night. The Council meeting Monday (July 6) also painstakingly went over proposed rules for the members to follow during their meetings, as it considered changes to its rough document from Consultant Ann McFarlane and from the Burien city staff. As is usual for this Council, many of the changes were lengthily debated as to need, to phraseology and potential impact. Macfarlane is withÂ Jurassic Parliament, a Seattle organization that teaches public officials how to use Robertâ€™s Rules of Order and how to reduce â€œpainfully long meetingsâ€ and â€œto eliminate discord but not dissent?â€ The B-Town Blog asked theÂ city to make public the cost of the continuing development of meeting guidelines, and City Manager Kamuron Gurol us Tuesday that Macfarlane has an agreement for up to $5,000, and â€œwe have received and paid invoices for about $2,000 so far,â€ he said, but that does not include billing for Monday (July 6) and â€œperhaps other billable hours.â€ â€œAnn has provided a two-hour training for the Council in parliamentary procedures, and she has been advising the Council and staff on amendments to our Council Meeting Guidelines and associated procedural improvements,â€ Gurol said. To Tweet or Not Some Councilmembers and others have mentioned â€“ at times critically â€“ the fact that Councilmember Lauren Berkowitz often texts and sends continual Tweets on Twitter during Council meetings. Macfarlane has said that since such social media postings were considered by the Washington state secretary of stateâ€™s office to be public documents, there would need to be a way to store and make the communications available as public documents. â€œTexting and/or publishing to social media by Councilmembers during Council meetings are prohibited,â€ Macfarlane proposed to the Council. â€œIt is distracting, in that it creates challenges and difficulties for Councilmembers who need to have the right to speak freely in meetings and are less likely to do so if they are being quoted either accurately or not outside the meeting on the spot and, three, there are issues to deal with the public records management of texting social media,” Macfarlane told the Council. â€œThe archivist in April issued guidance for Washington state that these are all public records, whether they are on oneâ€™s own device or not and that they all must be maintained stored archival retrievable and not simply dumped, so there are a lot of reasons, I think, why would strongly recommend this rule.â€ â€˜Iâ€™m the only oneâ€™ Councilmember Lauren Berkowitz immediately jumped on the issue. â€œSo, again, I strongly object to this rule,â€ she said. â€œParticularly, in this case, I donâ€™t think its actually viewpoint neutral, even on its face, because I am the only one who Tweets during meetings and I am often the only dissenting voice on this Council so I think itâ€™s pretty silencing. â€œThere has been of a lot of misinformation for my Tweets are completely public and they are connected to my public e-mail so that everything that comes in and out of my Twitter is actually recorded as a public record so that takes care of the public records management issue. â€œSecond of all, the Open Public Meeting Act actually encourages Councilmembers to have â€“ the spirit of the law is to have open debate and have it as available to the public as possible.â€ Berkowitz said Burien city government â€œspent a lot of money hiring a consultant to see how we can best keep people engaged and guess what that consultant said? Social media. So, to block social media, even during meetings, is directly hampering the citizenâ€™s right to remain informed. â€œAlso, we have heard comments that it is distracting. I have seen Councilmembers on news sites reading the news up here; I have seen Councilmembers sleeping. Councilmembers, including me, have to leave to use the restroom occasionally. All of these things are those that could easily be considered distractions.â€ My right to Tweet Unless Tweeting interferes with business getting done, â€œI actually have a right to Tweet during a Council meeting or any time I want,â€ said Berkowitz. â€œI have Tweeted repeatedly during this meeting and I would like to point out that this meeting has gone on uninterrupted, completely.” Berkowitz said the Open Meetings Act gives people the right to know what people are saying and what is being debated. â€œThis idea that we should keep it quiet could easily be applied to the streaming video we have. That could easily keep people â€“ that can make people less likely to say their open views and say their open views, just as Tweeting can.â€ â€œThis rule just doesnâ€™t make any sense and I donâ€™t think it is supported by the law,â€ Berkowitz added. Deputy Mayor Nancy Tosta said she did not think the proposed revision was right. She said she would support a rule that said texting had to be done so it did not disrupt the meeting. It is important for people to be aware and Twitter is one mechanism. Resident Robert Howell told the Council during public comment time that social media websites should not be used by Councilmembers to communicate with their friends and supporters during an official meeting. â€œCitizens having opinions can come and speak at the Council meeting or send in correspondence for the record,â€ Howell said. â€œAll the other uses are exclusionary or distracting to Councilmembers. The meeting is for Councilmembers and they should be communicating face-to-face with each other on each item.â€ Howell said that Councilmembers who attend other city board meetings should be observers only and at the direction of the full Council. He also wanted written communications restored to the pre-meeting Council packets because an alternative process that would allow public viewing of comments â€œis still not in placeâ€ and coming to the City Hall and asking for copies of the documents â€œis really not convenient.â€ He got what he wished for a bit later on. Some restrictions OK Councilmember Gerald Robison said he did support some restrictions so a Councilmember was not so engrossed in texting or Tweeting that he or she was unable to comprehend the actions taken by other members. Robison said he also did not agree with the proposed rule to prohibit the use of social media during meetings, but that possibly some restrictions could be valuable. He disputed Berkowitzâ€™s contention that she was never distracted while Tweeting, noting drivers texting didnâ€™t think they were distracted until they had an accident while texting. He noted the rule was specifically worded to include only Burien Councilmembers and not the public or anyone else. Also, Robison said there could be ways to improve the archivesÂ to be more easily searchable â€œso you can find the place you want easily.â€ Councilmember Debi Wagner said she â€œfound it interestingâ€ that â€œpeopleâ€ wanted social media interaction but also wanted to remove citizensâ€™ communications from the Councilâ€™s meeting packet. Point of Order Berkowitz immediately called a point of order, saying it called into question her motives, under a rule just passed in the same meeting. McFarlane aided the Mayor in conducting the point of order vote, and Krakowiak decided to let the Council vote on the matter and a role call vote was called. Berkowitz, Tosta and Robison voted that Wagnerâ€™s statement did impinge on Berkowitzâ€™s motives; Krakowiak, Edgar and Wagner said it is not and Armstrong abstained. A 3-3 vote means the point of order failed. Then Armstrong supported the proposal to ban Councilmember use of social media and said that in his business meetings if people were texting, on the phone or whatever, â€œI would not be very happy.â€ He said if he were speaking and someone was texting, â€œit would be very disrespectful.â€ Councilmember Edgar said he supported the ban on texting and Tweeting because it was â€œanother conflictâ€ to keep people from knowing what is going on at a meeting. Krakowiak said she also supported the ban on social media during meetings. Later she said she had texted during meetings because she has children that sometimes needed her assistance. Berkowitz said her job, as a Councilmember, was to represent her constituents and to be in touch with the citizens and that means communicating with them and hearing from them. She said people on her media sites toldÂ her live that they were incredulous that â€œwe are even discussing this.â€ â€œI think this is very clearly designed to silence me personally as I am the only one who Tweets during meetings,â€ Berkowitz said. Finally a straw poll by Krakowiak showed a majority wanted â€œsome kind of ruleâ€ but not necessarily the one proposed so the matter was held in abeyance. Public Back in Packet Councilmember Debi Wagner said she wanted to have the public communications restored to the City Council packed. â€œWe were supposed to have had a public process in place where the public could see (the communications) but we donâ€™t have a process in place â€¦ I would like them back in the packet,â€ Wagner said, then made it a motion, seconded by Edgar. Armstrong wanted to know if the staff had a proposal for making the communications available easily to the public and the city manager said â€œwe have not effectedâ€ making the communications available online. The voted was 4 to 3. Krakowiak, Armstrong, Wagner and Edgar voted to restore communications to the Council packet with votes against from Tosta, Berkowitz and Robison. Small business hampered Resident John White told the Council he was there to talk about â€œthe difficulties of small businessâ€ in Burien. He was critical of the cityâ€™s parking requirements for businesses and in the case of a potential business at a former carpet store, â€œwe were told we had to come up with 16 stalls at $7,000 apiece and the alternative would be to take this shared parking agreement which I ran by my attorney because it has to be notarized â€¦ and if you are successful in getting someone to share parking, you sign your rights away so if that person takes that parking away because theyâ€™ve sold their business, the city can come in and shut you down immediately until you can find more parking or pay the fee. Anyone with any reasonable legal advice probably would be advised not sign this with that clause.â€ White said the issue was â€œhard to explain in two minutes,â€ the public comment time limit at the Council meetings, â€œbut there is some serious parking issues and its barrier for small business and I am asking, please, you guys, investigate and listen to those who are voicing their strong opinions about these barriers with regards to parking.â€ More guideline wrangling In another of an ongoing series of meeting time dedicated to developing Council meeting guidelines, the members spent over an hour discussing ever more change suggestions of potential meeting changes. Councilmember Berkowitz said she objected to including references from Robertâ€™s Rules concerning â€œpersonal remarks,â€ or â€œunacceptable remarks,â€ including â€œdiscourteousâ€ or â€œinflammatory languageâ€ or referring to the motives of another Councilmember. The suggested changes, she said, â€œimproperly restrict debateâ€ at a public meeting of a City Council. â€œThere is a value to being able to express oneâ€™s opinion,â€ and it is â€œnot always pretty and it is not always comfortable,â€ Berkowitz said, and the proposed changes raise â€œhuge Constitutional problems.â€ She said the Council is already misinterpreting banning personal remarks. â€œThe way it is being used right now is we cannot refer to people and say â€˜I agree with Councilmember So and So.â€™ That is not a personal attack to say that I agree or even disagree with Councilmember So and So. I think that goes to show the arbitrariness of letting the Chair decide how to enforce these six principals.â€ She said her opinion of the cityâ€™s two trespass ordinances is that they â€œcriminalize homelessness and I have been told that is inflammatory â€¦ and I would be prohibited from saying the exact reasonâ€ why some item should or should not be passed. The change would mean the Mayor would get to decide what can be ruled out and â€œI think we have seen that many of us disagree at times with what the chair says.â€ City Attorney Soojin Kim said the Council can make rules that govern what it does and how it does its work, but the Mayorâ€™s decisions are appealable by members. Councilmember Gerald Robison said he favored the rules, but did not know if it was necessary in the Council meeting guidelines because the regulations are already in Robertâ€™s Rules, which it has adopted. In the end, the Council rejected Berkowitzâ€™s objections that incorporated the Robertâ€™s Ruleâ€™ prohibitions.]]>
The B-Town Blog is Burien’s multiple award-winning hyperlocal news/events website dedicated to independent journalism.
Subscribe to our FREE Daily Newsletter
- Arts & Entertainment
- Burien News
- Climate & Environment
- Health & Wellness
- Letters to the Editor
- Real Estate
- Schools & Education
I am becoming increasingly appalled, disgusted,frustrated and perplexed by the insanity of L. Bezerkoitz and her ridiculousness as a Council member. Just how tall is the ladder she uses to ascend her self appointed throne? How long before her term is up anyway? N. Tosta is headed down the wrong path also unfortunately, there still is time to turn that train around I hope.
Yeah! Nevermind the law! Screw anyone who isn’t on board with our narrow views!
I wonder is this $7000 for a parking stall is this for a year a month or forever.
16 stalls thats $112,000 witch seems like a lot to some for this one business . But a good size restaurant can make any ware from a $1000 to $10,000 a day now yes a lot of that goes for bills/staff/taxes it’s not all profit.
With the help of a calculator I did some math and even at $5,000 a day 365 days a years give or take a couple of holidays there going bring in about $1,825,000 Then there bills/staff/taxes but even after all that it seems like this business makes enough money to afford $112,000 to pay for the parking there making money from. So this where I wonder about John white’s intentions Does he want the people of burien to have to pay more in taxes or does he want the city switch to pay per hour parking while his friend profits . Witch would kinda force out a lot of the middle to lower income from being able to shop and eat or possibly even work in the city. Witch ironically is most of the people that work in the restaurant field.
It is a one time expense so once you pay you pay no more for that location.
ok cool thanks the info Jack
ok well i did a little research and found some information on the amount income brought in by 909 and the tin room bar here are the links
both brought in $1 to $2.5 million in 2007 so you have to figure there somewhere close to that now if not more . So for John white to think that is unfair or unjust to pay 112k for parking when these two business are bringing in a good profit just seems interesting. Then to find out this is a one time fee. So this seems like John white first wants to cut cost on fire safety codes(witch in my eyes seems nuts) then he also want to cut the city out of some money witch could lead to hire taxes for everyone in the city or the possibility of pay by hour parking. To make up the lost in the city budget on top of all the other business that won’t have to pay this fee or possibility of getting a refund on fees payed could also cause a headache for the city.
It’s a 1-time fee paid before the business has made any money so that is why the guy at the meeting called it a barrier to entry.
You should also look up labor costs and how expensive that is.
Yes labor is expensive but that is another cost that is payed back in profits. Also if you think about it $112,000 to pay for parking spots for a business that is going to be bringing in over a million dollars a year. OK the people involved in this expansion are not poor by any means. I mean $60,000 from each of the two millionaires is basically pocket change to these people.
Getting out the ice skates: I completely agree with Lauren Berkowitz. She IS being singled out. Other (not all) Councilmembers are trying to bully her into submission. Twitter and other Social Media have been used by hundreds, if not thousands, of elected officials at all ranks during meetings, including POTUS, the former Washington State Attorney General, and other tech savvy people who know they are governing in the 21st Century.
Lauren Berkowitz is definitely being singled out…And for very good reasons too because she has absolutely no business being on the Burien City Council.
I don’t know if Burien B. or Hell Froze Over have children or interact with other humans on a day to day basis but having a conversation with someone while they are on their phone is extremely disrespectful. REGARDLESS of what they are doing on their phone, they should be listening to whomever has the floor, or microphone in this case. Tweeting and posting elsewhere on social media can wait until a restroom break or until the meeting is over. I sure do not enjoy talking to someone while they are completely distracted by their phone. No one is bullying Berkowitz…she is a big girl, she can handle her own.
NVM about Burien B. your comment is perfect.
I don’t give a s*** about any of this BUT I think the people who comment should use their names you Chicken Poo Poo’s
Or at least spell their name correctly, right?
At the Council meeting Lauren Berkowitz stated that she does not text at work. But she does at the Council meetings which is a paid work site for her too. This is rude to the citizens who pay her salary, the other Council members who are trying to work at the meetings and the citizens who come to participate at the meetings. So why does she need to text when the meetings are broardcast on TV? The video recordings of these meetings are repeatedly shown over and over on Public TV.and the city makes discs that citizens can view at the public library too. Perhaps she texts and disturbs others to make rude editorial comments about the other Council members but her comments are not real factual reporting of what is going on at the meetings. Those pals of hers that claim they need her reports of the meetings perhaps should watch their TV.or go to the meetings for the real facts.
Lastly, Berkowitz was extremely disrespectful to the City staff at this last meeting by saying she did not trust what they write or their work. She has pretty much disrespected everyone in City Hall and the City now.
Comments are closed.