Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Council Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mukilteo council debates adding public comment to work sessions and reducing frequency of land-acknowledgment readings
Summary
Council members at the April 13 work session debated whether to allow public comment at work sessions, whether to remove the extension-motion requirement, and whether the land-acknowledgment statement should be read at every meeting; opinions ranged from retaining weekly readings to moving to annual or event-based recognition tied to substantive actions.
Council members spent a significant portion of the April 13 work session discussing potential amendments to council rules of procedure, led by staff counsel’s overview of proposed changes and options.
Topics raised included: whether to allow public comment at work sessions (staff counsel noted the change would require rule revisions and a resolution), the possibility of deleting an existing provision that requires a motion and vote to extend meetings past 8:30 p.m. (staff suggested it has not worked as intended and could be removed), and whether the land-acknowledgment statement should continue to be read at every regular meeting or be read less frequently and paired with substantive actions or education.
Council members expressed a range of views. One council member (speaker 12) advocated for adding limited public comment at the end of work sessions so residents who attend that night could speak while the topic was fresh; others (including the council president, speaker 2, and another member, speaker 1) worried about disruption, meeting efficiency and the possibility that comments at a work session could be premature because many items return to a regular meeting. On the land-acknowledgment question, council member (speaker 7) argued for keeping regular readings and suggested supplementing the statement with stories and concrete actions to avoid it becoming merely performative; other members described the statement as politically fraught or potentially performative and suggested reading it less often or attaching actions in lieu of weekly recitation.
Why it matters: Rules changes would affect how and when the public can speak to council and how the city publicly recognizes tribal history. Several council members asked staff to draft specific language for an agenda bill so the council can consider formal amendments at upcoming regular meetings.
What’s next: Staff counsel said the rule changes would enter the regular-council decision process (requiring a resolution and, where indicated, two readings) and offered to draft language and an agenda bill to formalize any direction council provides.
(Reporting based only on the council work-session transcript.)
