Keith McGlashan and Ron Hansen told The Enterprise that they voted in favor because it was the only way the defendants could be ordered to reimburse the city for defense costs under the city's reservation of rights (when they lose the lawsuit). Cindy Ryu voted for the increase because she is a follower of Maggie's.

Rich Gustafson was the dissenting vote. He made the following statement:

I am appalled at the suggestion that the taxpayers of the City of Shoreline continue to pay for the legal defense of the four council members in question. In my opinion these four people acted “on their own”; they were not in a Council meeting or even in an executive session when decisions were made. I believe the whole crux of the suit is that these 4 individuals acted unethically when they technically, knowingly, and willfully violated the law. They did what was NOT in the best interests of the citizens of Shoreline. It was a power play and a personal vendetta against Steve Burkett that was orchestrated by Maggie Fimia.

What blows me away is that on December 5, 2005 the defendants HAD four votes and could have waited and dismissed Steve Burkett at any time. They could have done this up front, publicly and legally. There was nothing the other council members could have done to stop the process. Why didn’t they do this, rather than sneaking around and never informing the other council members? What did one week matter? By waiting a week, how would it have hurt our city? These four profess to be advocates of an open, public, transparent City Council, processing every little item, yet when it came to their own personal issues, the rules and process didn’t matter. Again….I feel it was a personal power play that has already cost the citizens hundreds of thousands of tax dollars! I and hundreds of other citizens are still appalled at their actions and I , for one, cannot support the taxpayers of the city of Shoreline supplying additional funds to their legal defense.