The subject for observation is the meeting of the Transportation, Economy, and Environment Committee of King County in Seattle Washington held at Room 1001 King County Courthouse on Tuesday, January 19, 2016 (King County). The meeting is limited to the aforementioned committee’s agenda, which is composed of several proposed motion that requires motion for approval. It was observed from the meeting that the organization plan employed is the old business approach because of the manner that the agenda was carried out from the beginning up to the end of the meeting. The rules of the old business approach encompass the reading of the minutes of the previous meeting that seeks approval of the council. In the observes council meeting, the same procedure was undertaken by the council in which the members were asked to say “ay” to state approval of the reviewed minutes.
Observing how the discussion is taking place demonstrates how the decision was made through a consensus. For example, the first item in the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the previous meeting and upon seeing no objection from the council; the chairman presented the motion to the public for comments. Apparently, the approval of the proposed motion from the previous session have not received any negative comments from the public, hence, the proposed motion was approved as presented. In this approach, a consensus was established among the stakeholders and the public was involved in the decision-making process apart from the council. Making a decision about the presented motions upon the council demonstrates how the information was gathered. For example, the information about the motion to confirm the appointment of Mr. Charles Dammann for the resident position in the Solid Waste Advisory Committee was presented upon the council in the form of proposal for recommendation sponsored by one of the council members.
The presiding chairman of the observed council meeting is supposed to be the King County Executive Dow Constantine, but in his absence the vice-chairmanship and the designated leader for the meeting was assumed by other council members such as Jeanne Kohl-Welles and among others. In terms of disagreements between the council members and the public, the observed proceedings did not appear to have any indication of tension of conflict arising from the differences in opinion. There are several proposed motions presented in the plenary and the majority of them were motions made to appoint new members of the sub-committees under the Transportation, Economy, and Environment Committee. It was assumed that no disagreements are apparent during the meeting because of all of the presented motions was able to get unanimous votes of approval. However, there were other items in the agenda that was not resolved as intended because of the lack of proper briefing such as the amendments of several ordinances, which the council has voted for the matter to be deferred.
During the observation of the council meeting, some of the presenters appear to have presented unrelated concerns about the topic being discussed. For instance, the council staff presented the proposed amendment to several ordinances to the members of the committee, but several questions and legislative concerns were brought up that seem to digress from the context of the discussion on the amendment briefing. However, the council staff was about put the discussion back to its intended direction, but the discussion was deferred and moved to a later session.
On the matters of how the council members address the subjects brought up in relation to the items in the agenda, the council was able to demonstrate thorough review of the matters and completed the treatment of the presented subjects by calling the motion of approval or objections from the council. Furthermore, the decision to approve or reject any proposed motion was scrutinized by the council by reviewing the details of the motion and create consensus between the public and the other members of the council to ascertain approval. On the other hand, the members of the council was able to express themselves and their ideas regarding the matters presented to them, but not in the manner that constitutes a consistent exchange of ideas. For example, some of the items in the agenda calls for the council to approve the ordinance relating to the administration of the real property interest by the facilities management division.
In this particular discussion, there was an exchange of ideas, but some of the council members was not vivid enough to express their concerns about the matters presented, but rather relied on the course of the discussion in making a decision to approve or not. In general, the observed council meeting was able to demonstrate a picture of a conventional council meeting and the procedures and processes attributed to a similar gathering. On the other hand, I would not be very comfortable addressing the observed group for several reasons. One is that, the matters being discussed by the group is limited to their areas of concern and there was no diversity on how the subjects were addressed during the meeting, which could have been practiced during the meeting.
Works Cited
King County,. Transportation, Economy And Environment Committee. Seattle, WA: King County, 2016. Print.
