SNOHOMISH — The City Council discarded a proposal from Councilwoman Karen Guzak to have the council body declare by resolution that the city government favors the Port of Everett’s boundary expansion ballot measure and would encourage people to vote yes for it.
The council blocked it from advancing at its July 16 meeting. No-one on council seconded Guzak’s motion to hold the vote on the matter.
More than one council member said the idea made them feel uncomfortable.
Councilwoman Judith Kuleta, for example, said having the council cast votes for or against supporting the Port’s ballot measure would publicly reveal how they’d probably be voting on it on their ballot at home.
Resolutions where the council makes a statement should be used for items where the council is unified, Kuleta said.
Council President Tom Merrill said he for one would not have signed onto the resolution if the council had approved one. “I am not able to recommend this to the people of Snohomish,” Merrill said.
More than one public speaker said the council represents all residents in Snohomish, and shouldn’t issue a one-sided opinion for the Port’s measure by way of an official resolution.
Councilman David Flynn attempted to scratch the measure off the agenda before it even went up for consideration. This led to a 3-3 tie vote.
Some council members said it should stay on the agenda because members of the public came to speak to them on this item.
Mayor Linda Redmon cast the tiebreaker to keep it on the agenda.
Guzak is a vocal supporter of seeing the Port expand.
Guzak said post-vote that she was disappointed.
“The Port Expansion would provide much needed investments — not only in our city, but also throughout the entire county,” Guzak said.
She is the chair of a political action committee (PAC) for passing the Port measure. It registered as a PAC days before she proposed to council colleagues to sign a resolution in favor.
Guzak said she verified with the city attorney that her involvement in the PAC was not a conflict of interest to introduce the resolution while sitting on council.
Area resident Morgan Davis, who co-wrote the voter’s pamphlet statement against the measure, called it an ethical lapse.
“Karen Guzak did not disclose to the council she was Chair of the PAC — Port Expansion for a Vibrant Future, an ethical lapse and conflict of interest wearing ‘two hats’,” Davis said by email. “I also believe Karen Guzak wanted to receive the endorsement of the City of Snohomish” to include it in campaign materials promoting the measure.
The city’s contracted law firm consulted with council and city staff about the resolution. Part of the work was a standard review.
It totaled 3.6 hours of billable time that cost $810, from a table of information the city provided that it had compiled from the firm’s June invoice.
City spokeswoman Shari Ireton said the contracted law firm did not develop, write, draft or make any edits to Guzak’s proposed resolution.
