Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Committee Votes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votes at a glance: charter committee actions on April 9
Summary
Summary of formal committee votes: civil‑service language approved unanimously; initiative/referendum language advanced with amendments; eligibility/residency language approved; motions to require a council‑confirmed chief administrative officer, make council full‑time, and add term limits failed.
The Everett charter review committee took multiple formal actions April 9. Key outcomes:
• Civil service (Section 8.0): Motion to adopt language aligning classification and hiring/examination processes with chapters 4108 RCW and 4112 — approved unanimously and to be included in the draft report.
• Initiative and referendum (Sections 11.2/11.3 and related): Motion to advance language setting an initiative threshold at 10% (measured from the last mayoral election) and to adopt several procedural improvements (petitioners’ committee, pre‑ballot inconsistency review, nonpartisan fiscal‑impact statements, conditional digital signatures) — advanced with amendments and staff directed to draft implementing ordinance language.
• Eligibility/residency (Section 2.2): Motion to adopt amended language (one‑year residency standard, clearer dual‑office vacancy rules) — approved with one abstention; staff to clean up wording.
• Chief administrative officer (Sections 1.6/4.2): Motion to require council‑confirmed mayoral appointment and removal approval failed after amendments and final vote; amendment removing the removal approval language had passed earlier.
• Term limits (Section 2.9): Motion to add three consecutive full‑term limits failed after debate.
• Full‑time council (Section 2.0): Motion to propose full‑time council positions failed after members cited representation and cost concerns.
Staff will include adopted language and summaries of other debates in the committee’s draft report to the council and prepare implementing ordinance drafts where the committee requested procedural detail.
