Last night's council meeting was long and interesting, but blessedly lacking in the drama that we saw the week before. There was controversy, but it was between citizens of Stonegate and Langley Ridge Developers, instead of controversy between council members. The Stonegate/Langley issue, which we dedicated most of the meeting to, was actually a consent agenda item that surprised us by bringing thirteen citizen speakers with it.
The Stonegate/Langley Ridge audience comment, and the accompanying council questions and deliberations, consumed ninety minutes or so. The issue boiled down to the Langley project developers needing a twenty foot emergency right-of-way along an existing access easement in Stonegate. City attorney Larry Warren felt the city had rights to the easement that they could extend to Langley. The Langley team agreed, but the Stonegate residents and their attorney disagreed. Langley's attorney, Mr. Brain, gave us copies of the deeds to Stonegate, but the text was so small it was hard to make out (yes, the fine print). I had to borrow Don Persson's reading glasses, and then I was able to make it out. My impression was that the Stonegate folks had a better case than Langley, but I could see both sides of the issue. Dan Clawson felt that Langley's case was slightly better, but could also see both sides of the issue. A relatively civil, normal disagreement. We all agreed that it was in everyone's best interest for the applicant (Langley) to get together with Stonegate to see if they can work this out before next week.
If they can't, I will probably take the view that it is the applicant's burden to prove they have title to all the property and easements they need, not the city's burden, and that the matter will have to be resolved by the court before I will approve the plat. Others may disagree.
The other thing notable about the evening was the intense tension throughout the Executive floor of Renton City Hall. It is very similar to the month when we endured the lipstick investigation. Like thousands of others, I am so disappointed with Dan Clawson right now....It think his false accuasations are going to waste hundreds of thousands of dallars for the city and cost Dan both his jobs. I'm wondering if we need to take the money out of the mayor's wayfinding budget, since we have no where else where this much money is sitting and not earmarked, and since the mayor (who is pushing the way-finding) appears to be the impetus for Dan's phony lawsuit.
The body language is so interesting to see, but also so sad, with various people glaring, avoiding, and downright shunning one another. Some of the staff are showing so much stress, I think we may see some nevous breakdowns. I personally can only keep a positive attitude because I am so confident Denis will move to the Mayor's office in January. It would be sad for our city to think of more months, or years, of this.
The Stonegate/Langley Ridge audience comment, and the accompanying council questions and deliberations, consumed ninety minutes or so. The issue boiled down to the Langley project developers needing a twenty foot emergency right-of-way along an existing access easement in Stonegate. City attorney Larry Warren felt the city had rights to the easement that they could extend to Langley. The Langley team agreed, but the Stonegate residents and their attorney disagreed. Langley's attorney, Mr. Brain, gave us copies of the deeds to Stonegate, but the text was so small it was hard to make out (yes, the fine print). I had to borrow Don Persson's reading glasses, and then I was able to make it out. My impression was that the Stonegate folks had a better case than Langley, but I could see both sides of the issue. Dan Clawson felt that Langley's case was slightly better, but could also see both sides of the issue. A relatively civil, normal disagreement. We all agreed that it was in everyone's best interest for the applicant (Langley) to get together with Stonegate to see if they can work this out before next week.
If they can't, I will probably take the view that it is the applicant's burden to prove they have title to all the property and easements they need, not the city's burden, and that the matter will have to be resolved by the court before I will approve the plat. Others may disagree.
The other thing notable about the evening was the intense tension throughout the Executive floor of Renton City Hall. It is very similar to the month when we endured the lipstick investigation. Like thousands of others, I am so disappointed with Dan Clawson right now....It think his false accuasations are going to waste hundreds of thousands of dallars for the city and cost Dan both his jobs. I'm wondering if we need to take the money out of the mayor's wayfinding budget, since we have no where else where this much money is sitting and not earmarked, and since the mayor (who is pushing the way-finding) appears to be the impetus for Dan's phony lawsuit.
The body language is so interesting to see, but also so sad, with various people glaring, avoiding, and downright shunning one another. Some of the staff are showing so much stress, I think we may see some nevous breakdowns. I personally can only keep a positive attitude because I am so confident Denis will move to the Mayor's office in January. It would be sad for our city to think of more months, or years, of this.
3 comments | Please Participate! Click here to leave a comment