FILED 18 JUN 14 AM 9:00 1 KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CLERK E-FILED CASE NUMBER: 18-2-14942-8 SEA 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY 8 9 JAMES EGAN, individually, 10 11 12 NO. Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SEATTLE, a Washington municipal corporation, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT VIOLATIONS 13 Defendant 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. 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. Open Public Meetings Act Legislative Declaration, RCW 42.30.010 23 24 25 26 COMPLAINT - 1 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax I. 1 2 3 4 1. PARTIES Plaintiff James Egan is a resident of the City of Seattle and a recognized attorney within the State of Washington. Through this lawsuit, Mr. Egan is not challenging the ultimate vote, and repeal, of the head tax ordinance because the ultimate vote was taken in 5 6 7 a public forum. The interested parties and advocates hereto, including the undersigned attorneys, stand in strong belief that the head tax should never have been enacted. This 8 lawsuit challenges compliance with the law with the intent of ensuring lawful public debate in 9 the future. 10 11 12 2. Defendant City of Seattle is a municipal corporation within the State of Washington and the employer of the offending Mayor, Jenny Durkan, and the offending City Councilmembers at issue, Bruce Harrell, Sally Bagshaw, Lorena Gonzalez, Lisa Herbold, Rob 13 14 15 16 Johnson, Deborah Juarez, Teresa Mosqueda, and Mike O’Brien. Councilmember Kshama Sawant’s actions are not currently at issue in this case, as she was apparently left out of the communications that are the subject of these violations. 17 18 19 20 21 22 II. 3. STATEMENT OF FACTS The background facts giving rise to this lawsuit are well known to the citizens of Seattle. Without sensible consideration, on May 14, 2018, the City Council unanimously passed an ordinance commonly known as the “head tax” imposing a $275 annual fee per employee upon the region’s most prosperous for profit corporations. These elected officials 23 argued that these corporations are so rich that it was appropriate to single them out and 24 increase their tax burden to increase revenues for dealing with the homelessness crisis. At the 25 same time, there was no agreement and/or plan on how to utilize the newly generated revenue. 26 Mayor Durkan willing signed the ordinance into law. Councilmember Gonzalez publicly COMPLAINT - 2 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax 1 characterized Mayor Durkan as an Amazon pawn during the preceding deliberations that 2 lowered the original proposal from $500 to $275 per head. 3 4 4. According to the Seattle Times, in email, Councilwoman M. Lorena González said she spoke Sunday night with Councilwoman Lisa Herbold about the potential of a head- 5 6 7 tax repeal based on reports on the public polling. She also said she spoke Sunday evening with Deputy Mayor Shefali Ranganathan, who asked her to sign the joint statement, which 8 González’ staff reviewed Monday morning. 9 possibility of a Special Meeting” during a “properly noticed” executive session at the 10 council’s briefing on Monday. “I am unaware of any facts related to other councilmembers’ 11 12 She said she only became “aware of the alleged discussions with each other or the Mayor on this meeting notice issue,” González said in her email. 13 14 15 5. According to the Seattle Times, Councilmember Rob Johnson said in a phone call late Tuesday afternoon that he learned from Harrell early Monday — a day before the 16 vote — that a council majority seemingly supported a repeal. Johnson said he’d been out of 17 town from Thursday through Sunday, first learning of the special meeting Monday during his 18 brief talk with Harrell. “The Council President walked into my office and said, ‘While you’ve 19 20 21 22 been away, these are the discussions we’ve been having. We’re going to put this on the agenda for Tuesday and consider a repeal, and it looks like we have the votes to do it,’” Johnson recounted. “That was the first I’d heard about it, so I wasn’t involved in any prior 23 conversations.” Later Monday morning, Johnson said Harrell and Durkan asked him to be 24 part of the joint statement, providing him with some draft language, which Johnson said he 25 approved. 26 COMPLAINT - 3 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax 1 2 3 4 6. According to the Seattle Times, Councilmember Sally Bagshaw, one of the mayor’s seven, also seemed to suggest the latter scenario occurred. “I was at the beach minding my own business and I got a call from the mayor’s office letting me know that she already had heard from a number of my council colleagues that this was going to be on the 5 6 7 agenda,” Bagshaw said in an interview Monday. Councilmember Bagshaw is believed to have previously violated the Open Public Records Act during an attempt to curtail a possible 8 impeachment of former Mayor Ed Murray, informing the Mayor’s advisor, “I think we will 9 get 5 votes…I think you will like it.” All of these violations are the subject of this complaint. 10 11 12 7. Without any open debate, and with the pressure of a repeal referendum growing, on June 11, 2018 at 12:09 p.m., the City Council, by and through Councilmember Harrell, announced an intention to conduct a repeal vote on June 12, 2018. The notice was 13 14 15 late and violated the open public meetings act requirements. Prior to the announcement, it was expressed and understood that Mayor Jenny Durkan, along with the City 16 Councilmembers at issue, Bruce Harrell, Sally Bagshaw, Lorena Gonzalez, Lisa Herbold, Rob 17 Johnson, Deborah Juarez, and Mike O’Brien, had reached an agreement, via unlawful 18 clandestine discussions, to repeal the original ordinance enacting the head tax. Later that day, 19 20 21 22 23 the Seattle Times published an article, referencing multiple experts on the topic, highlighting the assorted violations. III. 8. CAUSE OF ACTION: OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT VIOLATIONS As described herein, Mayor Jenny Durkan, along with the City 24 Councilmembers at issue, Bruce Harrell, Sally Bagshaw, Lorena Gonzalez, Lisa Herbold, Rob 25 Johnson, Deborah Juarez, and Mike O’Brien repeatedly violated the Open Public Meetings 26 Act codified under RCW Chapter 42.30. The spirit, letter, and purpose of the Open Public COMPLAINT - 4 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax 1 Meetings Act is to prevent precisely the type of hidden debate as occurred during these 2 impulsive political proceedings: “(1) No governing body of a public agency shall adopt any 3 4 ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive, except in a meeting open to the public and then only at a meeting, the date of which is fixed by law or rule, or at a meeting of 5 6 7 which notice has been given according to the provisions of this chapter. Any action taken at meetings failing to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be null and void… (2) 8 No governing body of a public agency at any meeting required to be open to the public shall 9 vote by secret ballot. Any vote taken in violation of this subsection shall be null and void, and 10 shall be considered an ‘action’ under this chapter.” RCW 42.30.060. 11 12 IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests a judgment against Defendants in the form of all 13 14 15 relief permitted under RCW 42.30.120 described as: “(1) Each member of the governing body who attends a meeting of such governing body where action is taken in violation of any 16 provision of this chapter applicable to him or her, with knowledge of the fact that the meeting 17 is in violation thereof, shall be subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty in the 18 amount of five hundred dollars for the first violation. (2) Each member of the governing body 19 20 21 22 who attends a meeting of a governing body where action is taken in violation of any provision of this chapter applicable to him or her, with knowledge of the fact that the meeting is in violation thereof, and who was previously assessed a penalty under subsection (1) of this 23 section in a final court judgment, shall be subject to personal liability in the form of a civil 24 penalty in the amount of one thousand dollars for any subsequent violation. (3) The civil 25 penalty shall be assessed by a judge of the superior court and an action to enforce this penalty 26 may be brought by any person. A violation of this chapter does not constitute a crime and COMPLAINT - 5 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax 1 assessment of the civil penalty by a judge shall not give rise to any disability or legal 2 disadvantage based on conviction of a criminal offense. (4) Any person who prevails against 3 4 a public agency in any action in the courts for a violation of this chapter shall be awarded all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred in connection with such legal action. 5 6 7 Pursuant to RCW 4.84.185, any public agency which prevails in any action in the courts for a violation of this chapter may be awarded reasonable expenses and attorney fees upon final 8 judgment and written findings by the trial judge that the action was frivolous and advanced 9 without reasonable cause.” To be clear, this lawsuit does not challenge the legitimacy of the 10 ultimate vote, only the clandestine tallying and debate. 11 12 DATED this 13th day of June, 2018. 13 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 14 Lincoln Beauregard By__________________________________ Lincoln C. Beauregard, WSBA No. 32878 Julie A. Kays, WSBA No. 30385 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 COMPLAINT - 6 of 6 CONNELLY LAW OFFICES, PLLC 2301 North 30th Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 593-5100 Phone - (253) 593-0380 Fax