Trendiness, by definition, is fleeting. Even though citizens should welcome recent moves by the Everett City Council and Everett Port Commission to encourage greater public input, there’s a danger they could represent little more than a passing fad if citizens fail to accept the invitation.
As public officials come and go, government’s commitment to open processes can change. An engaged citizenry is the best insurance against government’s natural and historical tendency toward insulation.
The City Council and Port Commission, under no small amount of pressure from citizen activists, have opened the door to a new level of dialogue. The council last week approved holding most of its meetings in the evening, when more citizens can attend, and has signaled it will use public workshops to have more open, detailed discussions of broad policy issues. Moving committee meetings, which have been all but impossible for citizens to find out about, let alone attend, to consistent times and easy-to-find spaces would be another good move — although we wonder how many committee meetings are even necessary or advisable.
The new Port Commission (and it is new; Chairman Michael Hoffmann, the senior member, is starting his third year and the other two members were elected in November) followed suit last week. It proposed moving its meetings from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. starts. That change is expected to be approved at a special 5 p.m. meeting on March 2.
The commission also has launched an open, public process to decide a long-standing issue: whether to expand the commission from three to five members. The previous commission opposed bringing it to a public vote; this one clearly wants to engage in a thorough public discussion before deciding, and is reaching out to solicit broad participation.
Hearings are tentatively planned April 15 at the port’s waterfront conference center, and May 13 at a site to be determined in Mukilteo.
New Commissioner Mark Wolken, who followed through on a campaign pledge to get the idea rolling, even called for moving a final decision up a week, to June 8, to allow citizen activists more time for a potential petition effort if they disagree with the commission’s ultimate action.
These welcome steps follow a recent misstep by the commission (pointed out by a vigilant citizen), which appeared to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the state’s Open Public Meetings Act. All three commissioners sat in on meetings with lawmakers where port business came up.
We don’t suspect ill intent; naivete seems a more reasonable explanation. But this episode may offer a good argument for an expanded commission, which would be less vulnerable to rapid turnover and the collective inexperience that can result.
That and other points are worthy of a vigorous, respectful, public discussion. Be part of it.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
