A Look Back at 2023 City Council Initiatives

Updated 7/31/23

Unlike other cities with strong elected officials, Lakewood City Council is very limited in the actions it can initiate. Councilors set broad objectives at the annual retreat and they are able to bring forth “Requests for Legislative Modifications” to get items onto the agenda during the year. Other than that, they are limited to voting for policies developed by city staff.

Your job is to vote on the matters that are presented to you –Lakewood Deputy City Attorney, stated during City Council meeting

Besides acting on those regular business items throughout the year, Council Members can make their mark by getting things on the agenda. From July 2022 through July 2023, the following 14 Requests for Legislative Modifications were all added to the agenda.  However, as indicated below, only seven of those items were approved for action:

• Rule adjustment for Lakewood Advisory Committee (LAC) (approved and passed on to LAC)
• Minority-owned business analysis (Shahrezaei, approved and passed to LAC)
• Public safety committee (Janssen, deferred to annual retreat)
• Bicycle connectivity map (Olver, denied due to claims it had been done)
• Unblight properties (Olver, inactive due to sponsor absence at meeting)
• Censure (Shahrezaei, approved for immediate Council workshop)
• *Additional Dwelling Unit – ideas to expand use (Stewart, approved to Planning Commission) *corrected 7/31/23
• Additional Dwelling Unit de-regulation (Stewart, approved to Planning Commission)
• Pride month proclamation (Mayott-Guerrero, removed due to staff implementation)
• One Book One Town (Vincent, approved for personal research)
• Terumo education (Olver, approved for unspecified action)
• Speed reduction (Shahrezaei, approved for existing LAC action)
• Adding public safety committee (Olver, denied due to desire to keep action to annual retreat)
• Council compensation (Olver, denied due to similar discussion two years ago)

There is a perception by some Councilors who were denied action that the Councilors getting action approved were getting preferred treatment.  However, it might also be true that these Councilors work the process differently. For example, another trait common to almost all approved requests was that the work approved would NOT be done by City Council itself, but rather by other Lakewood agencies. For example, discussions regarding Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) will be conducted by the Planning Commission. Minority-owned business and speed reduction studies were moved to the Lakewood Advisory Committee (LAC).

Only two things were approved for Council to work on themselves:

1. Censure – moved to an immediate Council Workshop (completed May 1, 2023)
2. Education on environmental problems near Terumo – moved forward to unspecified time.

However, if we judge a City Council Members effectiveness and success by their ability to initiate work and get discussions going, Council Member Shahrezaei is by far the most effective Councilor. That leadership is further exemplified when you consider that many of the LAC Commissioners were recruited by Shahrezaei and that the LAC is now working on two of those approved projects.

In contrast to speedy approval, a request to take a closer look at public safety concerns was denied twice, or possibly three times, by City Council. The specific request was for a new Public Safety Committee. Such a committee would probably involve City Council Members who are already busy on several committees. Council Member Janssen was the first to request this, but it was delayed for later discussion during the annual retreat. During the retreat, there was some discussion about what public safety might mean but, ultimately, no action for Council itself was approved.

The third time discussion about a Public Safety Committee was raised, most Councilors agreed nothing could be done –unless it was approved at the next retreat. No other Request for Legislative Modification was required to wait until the annual retreat.

The objectives set at the annual retreat are city-wide objectives, some of which the City Council themselves take an active part in. For example, “Regular reports provided by the police” does not take Council action. Another item, “Provide a detailed review of the process and challenges associated with developing affordable housing projects during an upcoming Study Session” will involve a Council session, from which further action may be forthcoming.

The same Council Members who would not approve a discussion about a public safety committee seemed upset when denied an opportunity for discussion in executive session on July 17. In that case the issue will proceed anyway since the information can be distributed in other ways, but no executive level discussion occurred. In every case there are reasons why the discussion doesn’t happen, but the net result is the discussion doesn’t happen.

It might appear that Council Members get things done by having the right connections, by playing a superior game or by just having better ideas.  In any case, over the past twelve months, the net effect of individual Councilor-initiated agenda items, not staff initiated, was that Council chose to spend time on only two items: number one was ways to censure each other. Other items, like public safety, were thrice denied.

Update: Crime prevention was the number one concern of 88% of the respondents in the Lakewood Community Survey (pg4).

Support this author and Lakewood teacher: Angela Chirila