Second in a series
Previously, “Steady as She Goes — First Year Report from Anchorman on the City Council”
From the 1980s until last year, Andy Weissman served on virtually every commission available to a resident before successfully running for the City Council last April.
His maiden season on the Council formally will end on Monday night, and the new year, as always, will open with Councilmen electing the next mayor, in this case succeeding Scott Malsin.
Mr. Weissman campaigned as perhaps the most seasoned person never elected to the Council. When the first installment in this series closed yesterday, he was sorting through the differences between holding a strictly volunteer office at City Hall and an elected seat.
As both a lawyer and resident volunteer for numerous community groups, his signature characteristic always has been thoroughness, exhaustive preparation.
Even though there are strongly voluntary aspects to the position, some Council members — notably Mr. Weissman — spend days preparing for the meetings that routinely stretch over six to seven hours.
One lifestyle change from city commission duties is the far greater volume of information that members of the City Council receive, usually on the Wednesday before the weekly Monday night meetings.
“I start preparing for the meeting, absorbing the packet of material, as soon as it is delivered,” Mr. Weissman said. “I read it all so that I understand what the issues are.
“Between Wednesday night and Monday, I will go back and ask questions that have come up. My personal style is to go to the author of the agendas item and ask questions ahead of time, as opposed to asking questions for the first time in public at the meeting. This provides me with better information. It also is fairer to staff not to be surprised, or sandbagged, at a meeting.
“Going back to when I was on a commission, I would always contact and ask questions ahead of time because sometimes I am confused by material. It’s not always as clear as it should be. By asking the questions and getting the information, many times I avoid asking stupid questions that only make me look foolish.”
On, though,controversial agenda items, when do you make up your mind on how you are going to vote? Is there a ritual you follow?
“No. It depends on the nature of the issue. Frankly, on most of the Action Items we consider on a regular basis, I come to the dais knowing my position.
“Sometimes there is an issue where public input is important — for the information, and also because it is informative for staff and can lead to modifications in whatever is being considered.
“The vast majority of votes are no-brainers, though, because there isn’t any public input.
“On other items where there is uncertainty about the options, I may know how I am leaning but not know how I am going to vote until I have heard what everybody has to say.”
How do you evaluate community input? One week a vocal majority will get its way, the next week it will lose decisively.
“I hope the City Council, as a body, does not make decisions based on the numbers in the audience. I don’t like to make decisions licking my finger and putting my finger up to detect which way the wind is blowing.
“It has been articulated before that we are up there on the dais representing the community at-large, not necessarily a particular person or area. In many cases, the issues we are talking about need to be viewed from that perspective.
“When I was on the Planning Commission, we would have projects that were considered controversial, meaning that neighbors in the immediate area, maybe not more than a couple of houses or a street, were opposed because they thought it did not fit the character of the neighborhood.
“It always is important to take those points of view into consideration in reaching your final decision.
“But the final decision should not be to subscribe to the majority opinion of those who are most directly affected.
“The perspective as to whether a project is acceptable, I believe, should be seen this way: Those who are going to be most directly affected have a stake in the outcome but not veto power.
“I hope the Council never makes a determination of whether a project or ordinance is good/bad/indifferent solely on the basis of the turnout of more people for one side.”
Lately there has been a strong, effective movement to spread traditional Council decisions out into the neighborhoods? What do you make of this?
“There have been instances where you can see that happening. Quite frankly, I don’t think it is a bad thing. I am not one who believes public input is a waste of time. For myself, I keep in mind that you, as a Council member, are not there representing only the persons who come to Council Chambers to speak or the people who write in.
“There are others out there, too. They don’t care or they choose not to get involved. But they also have a stake in the outcome.
“My perspective is to keep that in mind when making a decision and not be overwhelmed by the voices speaking directly to us.
“If that were the case, you would not need a City Council. If everything was a Town Hall meeting and the decision was going to be made by asking for a show of hands, you would not need the Council. You could rent out the Vets and let the ‘community’ decide.”
(To be continued)
