For Shoreline's own good, a $159,000 fine

Shoreline city taxpayers have paid dearly for the arrogance of some of their elected officials who did not care about conducting the people's business in public.

Fortunately, citizens will pay no more after the Shoreline City Council paid $159,000 Friday to settle a lawsuit alleging one former and three current council members violated the state Open Public Meetings Act. Maggie Fimia, Robert Ransom, Janet Way and former member John Chang were accused of deciding to fire a city manager and hire a new one without following the law that governs such decisions. Former Mayor Constance King and another former council member, Kevin Grossman, have taken some criticism for filing the lawsuit in the first place. But the fault is not theirs; they did a service in alerting citizens of the violations.

The fault lies with the stubbornness of the accused council members, who still have not admitted wrongdoing despite compelling evidence. A violation of the act carries a penalty of $100 per person per violation. If they had paid the fines, they would have been out a nominal amount of money.

In addition to the $159,000 paid to cover plaintiff's legal fees, the city of Shoreline has spent around $350,000 in legal fees.

And for what? To defend elected officials trying to make a point that is indefensible?

Come on.

In settling the lawsuit, the council reaffirmed its commitment to the law, which reads in part:

"The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created."

Every municipal government and school board ought to schedule for its next workshop a review of the Open Public Meetings Act. Shoreline should be the first case study.