An item at last Monday’s City Council meeting was pulled before it was ever discussed by the public.
This item would have changed the policy regarding how written comments on speaker cards are handled. The proposal stated that when there were more than 20 written comments, the comments wouldn’t be read to the Council but would be summarized by the City Clerk.
The purpose of the change was to shorten the length of Council meetings.
As an attendee at the meeting over the proposed Entrada Tower last spring, I understand that the meetings can be too long. But this would have been an incorrect solution to the problem. I have attended a number of Council meetings and have listened to public comment, both spoken and written. There were a number of times when a comment from a member of the public made me say to myself, “I hadn’t thought of that.”
Why Elimination Is Wrong
Eliminating written public comments would have eliminated the possibility that a comment from the public might be something the Council hadn’t thought of and would have changed the mind of a Councilman.
I also know that there are many comments that do nothing to further the debate.
I am sure that even the speaker or writer of the comment “I am opposed to the project that it is too big” doesn’t believe that the comment will change a Councilman’s mind.
But they have come to the meeting to support or oppose an item, and they have no other way to express their opinion.
Suggesting a Third Option
The speaker cards have two boxes that can be checked. One says the person wishes to address the Council on the issue. The other say says the person would like his written comments read to the Council. If the speaker cards were changed to add the option to express a position (for or against) on the item, the writer would not need to speak or have the Clerk read his comment.
There are also a number of small changes that could be made to shorten the meeting. For example, if this item had been discussed that night, after the public input was complete, every Councilman would have spent a minute or two thanking the public for their input. If the Mayor or Redevelopment Agency Chairman spoke for the entire Council and thanked the public for their input, five to ten minutes could be saved.
And while it hasn’t happened much recently, previous Councilmen would spend time at the end of the meeting reporting trivial calls received from the public.
A Councilman would say, “I received a call from Mrs. Smith on Diller Avenue, and she said the street light in front of her house is not working. Could staff look into it?”
A Time for Showing Off
Staff would then take time to say they would look into it. Instead of taking Council time, why didn’t the Councilman tell the caller who she should call or make the call himself? Because he wanted everyone to see how he responds to his constituents.
Councilmen also waste time at the end of meetings reporting on events they attended recently. What is the purpose of this? It has already occurred. So the other Councilmen or the public wouldn’t be able to attend.
Once again, this serves no purpose but to let their constituents know that they are doing things around the city.
Knowing When You Are Beaten
At the last Council meeting, Vice Mayor Silbiger wanted to have an item put of a future agenda.
He spent five or 10 minutes explaining why it was important that the item be put on the agenda.
But when he couldn’t get the required three votes, he didn’t quit. He spent another five minutes misstating legal rulings and insulting other Councilmen and the voters who didn’t agree with him.
It was apparent from the statements by the other Councilmen that he wasn’t going to get the votes he wanted.
But that didn’t deter him from wasting Council and staff time. I would have thought that after six years he would have learned to be a better loser.
Taking Sensible Shortcuts
If the Council and staff are really serious about shortening the Council meetings, they can make small changes and shorten meetings without eliminating the public’s ability to address the Council.
Making a number of small changes can result in big savings.
Mr. Supple may be contacted at
tomjsup@ca.rr.com
