I agree.

I agree with Modigliani + I think citizen input into the questions the council asks of candidates could greatly enhance the questions. Left as it is planned now, the process can simply replicate the kind of group think we now have in the city council.

Of course, no outside coaching would be allowed.

Widely distributing the announcement of the vacancy, along with the application form and interview questions will be critical as well. “Widely” as in, uhm, widely – the paper, postings at the post office, on bulletin boards and in other places potential candidates beyond the “Circle” would see them. Not everybody uses Facebook or the Web.

Variety is the spice of life is it not? The correct choice for a new council member will be someone seasoned by business and life, and who isn’t part of the current club. There are many people to choose from, and hopefully several good choices will volunteer for the job.

Note, no city councils that I am aware of have such intense participation in trying to make decisions on land use planning (The Whole Langley Code) or quasi-judicial actions. You have skilled staff, they have given you their professional recommendations, yet you seem to doubt them, which makes you doubt yourselves. Delegation to staff happens, but the final decisions often second-guess the paid staff. That can’t be good for moral or trust, both from community, and from staff.

It’s too much, really. Take some AWC classes and learn from the pros how other cities are managing.

As far as group think is concerned, it’s often linked with what is known in the management world (and personal world as well) as The Abilene Paradox. Ever heard of it? The Abilene Paradox is a situation in which everyone in the group (or family) agrees to do something which none of them individually believe is a good thing. The name comes from a family who, one hot Texas day, all agreed to drive to Abilene, when in fact none of them really wanted to go. This happens in business all the time. And in families, too. Clubs. Social organizations. Perhaps the City Council. And when it happens, the result is the worst solution, not the best. It takes a courageous person to speak up in such a situation. But courage was never a bad thing.

Listening. Politely listening is not the same as responding in any meaningful way. And it’s disrespectful if it’s just a pose. “Yes, yes, get on with it. We already know what we’re doing.” “Don’t confuse me with facts. I’ve already made up my mind.” Listening while distracted by typing on a laptop or shuffling papers or having whispered side conversations is not listening at all, despite the haughty protests about the ability to multi-task.

The City Council now has an opportunity to demonstrate its respect for the citizens of Langley by holding an open process to fill the seat vacated by Russell Sparkman and not simply appointing one of their own. To say it’s hard to find somebody who’s not connected to the rest of the Council is a specious excuse for not looking further and means the Council prefers a blinkered look at the future of Langley.

“… a part of the community that is hostile toward Langley,” – Fran Abel Oct. 8th 2010
AND
“I am interested in conversing. I will be available to anyone wanting to have a positive and constructive conversation.” – Fran Abel Oct. 8th 2010

SO Fran, why are you puzzled by the current criticism? Are you totally missing what you have already stated? Is someone else penning your blogs and you are just posting them without reading um? Like Gilman signs off on warrents and invoices?

You yourself have stated that you see critics as hostile towards Langley, in other words, those of differing opinions than your own. Secondly you don’t want to talk to anyone outside of your conditions. So now you are upset about why you are criticized. A council seat is no where you should be.

In your latest blog here, you are using a quote, from a consultant to the city (apparently payed for by the city), written by a sitting councilman’s sister-in-law.

Conflict of Interest AND Appearance of Fairness issues both arise from this collaboration and use of that quote.

You quote her on teamwork, as you clearly are rewriting the definition teamwork to fit your own practices as a council.

I get so tired of reading the obvious “Conflicts of Interests” the blatant “Appearance of Fairness” issues that the city’s own lawyers have already lectured this council about, but they continue unabated. And the continual “Whoopsies” and “We didn’t know” excuses.

Those are the reasons why you are seeing criticism Fran. Solve those, and proceed ethically and the criticism will go away, at least from me.

Relationships, both family and community are normal and appropriate, but to point to Ursula as a consultant to public agencies belies the even closer family relationship she has with a current councilmember.

Disclosure is really something important, don’t you agree?

What I have experienced are various personal reactions to expressions of concern about whether our citizenry is being represented in a fully open manner; and that the peoples’ business is being conducted as they would have it be. Valid topics.

This blog is in no way a substitute for official discourse. There is much that needs to be addressed on the record.

As the current discussion here started with the fact that there is a vacancy on the Council, perhaps it would be fruitful for members of the Council to address how the 20-year-old ordinance in the LMC deals with the process for filling vacancies. There is much opportunity for discussion; and much room for improvement.

Respectfully,
Hal Seligson

When I suggested that the council and particularly, you and Robert Gilman might want to consider citizen participation in the Council Process Committee, you ignored me. Is that your idea of respect?

Unless the council and you are not practicing group think at the meetings and at your workshops, then why is there never any dissenting vote? Thre may have been one in the past six months but I can’t think of one. You may have that info tucked away in your memory so please correct me if I’m wrong.

As for the council acting as a team, please post the complete letter from Ursula Roosen-Runge on your website here. Thanks in advance.

At that time “respect” or, unfortunately, its opposite may enter the picture.

Criticism of government and a lack of confidence in our country’s elected leaders is rampant these days, even at the local level. External conflict, while stressful, can help to frame issues and provide other perspectives. Most important, it often shows that people feel left out, alienated from the governing body.

Providing a fair hearing of issues at council meetings assures that the needs of pressure groups are appropriately balanced with the organization’s mission and the greater needs of the community. How the governing body reacts will determine whether the conflict is contained or spills over to other issues.

Asking of the public
• How will this proposal affect you?
• What do you think about the proposed action?
• What are your concerns?
• What other ways can you suggest for solving the problem

From the mrsc.org Councilmembers Handbook. http://www.mrsc.org/Publications/mrscpubs.aspx
Councilmember’s Handbook. Report No. 48 Revised, December 2009. Not for sale. A brief overview of the structure of municipal government in Washington State and the role of the councilmember in that structure. The primary focus is on the council meeting.

——————————————————————————–

Fran says “Of note is that no more than two members of this council will attend the same social function”

Again, that us-against-the-citizens mindset. It’s really quite patronizing.