The four defendants in Shoreline’s most talked about lawsuit will wait until Sept. 4 to find out if a request for an additional $171,700 in legal funding will be approved by the City Council.
“There is an enhanced obligation to continue providing legal defense,” assistant city attorney Flannary Collins told the council Aug. 20.
Twenty residents addressed the council. Some voiced their opposition to a would-be $341,700 legal contract with Foster Pepper while others asked council members to approve additional funding for the legal defense of council members Maggie Fimia, Bob Ransom and Janet Way.
“I want to implore the council to please vote for this and fund the defense,” resident Dan Thwing said. “I think we have a fundamental right for free speech and I think this is political … I think we need to defend our council members and especially the city.”
A Shoreline resident for the past 30 years, Donna Eggen said she believes the lawsuit is baseless.
“The people who complain the most about this expense are the people who brought the suit in the first place,” she said. “The solution is easy: drop the lawsuit.”
Several residents, including Bill Bear, said plaintiffs should be the ones to pay for the suit if they lose.
“Do we defend democracy or let people who have enough money to throw into frivolous lawsuits go and go and go and violate basic fundamentals of democracy?” he said. “The ultimate fairness would be to turn around and ask court costs and legal fees from the people who brought (the lawsuit).”
Other residents asked defendants to end the suit by admitting fault and paying a $100 fine.
“My opinion is yeah, the OPMA was violated,” Bill Will said. “It doesn’t mean that we need to savage them publicly, drag their names through the dirt … but what needs to happen now is that they need to admit that mistake and move on.”
Norine Federow said she feels the lawsuit doesn’t help any Shoreline resident.
“As far as I’m concerned we have gone from a disagreement about what somebody did to lining the pockets of lawyers with our money. Don’t do the dance,” she said. ” I think it’s more classy for you to somehow pay the fine.”
Fimia said she offered to pay the fine but was told she could not because she would not admit fault.
“We can’t do that legally because the $100 is paid if you broke the law and I will not say I broke the law because I did not,” she said.
When a motion by Cindy Ryu to approve the amendment was met with silence by other council members, Fimia asked what would happen if council members Rich Gustafson, Ron Hansen, and Keith McGlashan did not vote to approve the amendment.
“It’d be up to Foster Pepper to continue providing legal defense that is either paid directly by you or on their own,” Collins said. “I assume they would ethically continue to provide representation.”
Ryu asked what legal ramifications the city would be subject to if the council doesn’t vote to increase legal funding. Her question went unanswered as both Collins and city manager Bob Olander said council members were trying to discuss material that was meant for an executive session.
Councilmen Gustafson, Hansen, McGlashan and Ransom voted in favor of postponing a vote until after an executive session on Sept. 4. Only council members who are not party to the lawsuit may vote to amend the contract for legal services.
“I have a lot of questions that have not been able to be answered yet,” McGlashan said. “If they can’t be answered tonight, I can’t support this.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
