[EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is a Letter to the Editor, written and submitted by verified resident(s). It does not necessarily reflect the opinions of South King Media, nor its staff.]
I thank The B-Town Blog for allowing me to respond to Councilmembers Moore and Garcia’s letter. My guess is, we residents must read a rebuttal letter from CM Moore and Garcia every time their vote did not pass. So be it. Please continue to post your reasoning so we can twice hear your argument; additionally, try to understand why your vote was rejected. We appreciate the dialog.
While the letter highlights the importance of upholding civil rights and the US Constitution, it fails to acknowledge the broader implications of delaying action on Ordinance 832. Please consider the following:
1. Protecting Public Safety: Delaying enforcement of the ordinance could compromise public safety by allowing unchecked camping activities in Burien. The ordinance was enacted to address legitimate concerns about public health, safety, and the use of public spaces. By prioritizing constitutional uncertainties over community safety, CM Moore and Garcia neglect the well-being of Burien residents.
2. Respect for Democratic Processes: Despite personal opposition, the ordinance was democratically approved by the council, reflecting the will of the community. By advocating for inaction based on personal disagreement, the letter undermines the democratic process and the legitimacy of elected representatives’ decisions.
3. Contractual Obligations: Burien has a contractual agreement with the KCSO for police services. Expecting law enforcement to disregard their contractual obligations based on subjective interpretations of constitutionality sets a dangerous precedent. Upholding contractual agreements is essential for maintaining trust and stability in governmental relationships.
4. Responsibility for Legal Clarity: It’s not enough to merely wait for constitutional issues to be resolved in April. As elected officials entrusted with upholding the law, there’s a responsibility to proactively seek legal clarity and address potential conflicts. Ignoring or delaying action on constitutional concerns could lead to legal challenges and further uncertainty for both the city and its residents.
5. Avoidance of Political Maneuvering: By framing the issue as purely constitutional, the letter overlooks the political dynamics at play. Public safety policies, including Ordinance 832, involve balancing constitutional rights with practical considerations and community needs. Dismissing the Sheriff’s concerns as political without engaging in substantive dialogue undermines the complexity of governance and policymaking.
6. Call for Collaboration: Rather than solely placing responsibility on the city to determine the ordinance’s constitutionality, there should be a collaborative effort between the city and the Sheriff’s office. Both parties should engage in constructive dialogue, consult legal experts, and work towards a mutually agreeable resolution that balances constitutional principles with public safety concerns.
In conclusion, while upholding constitutional principles is essential, it’s equally important to consider the broader implications of delaying action on ordinances like 832. Balancing constitutional rights with community safety requires proactive engagement, collaboration, and respect for democratic processes.
– John White
EDITOR’S NOTE: Do you have an opinion you’d like to share with our highly engaged local Readers? If so, please email your Letter to the Editor to [email protected] and, pending review and verification that you’re a real human being, we may publish it. Letter writers must provide an address and phone number (NOT for publication but for verification purposes). Read our updated Letter to the Editor policy here.
