All You Do To Me Is Talk Talk
Apparently, people in Berkeley can’t contact their city councilmembers by phone, email, or candygram. The Berkeley Daily Planet is reporting that a movement has started to extend public speaking time at Berkeley City Council meetings from 30 minutes to indefinitely.
…Until recently, the council limited to 10 the number of speakers—chosen by lottery—at the public comment session; each was permitted to speak for up to three minutes on whatever topic the person wished.
The problem, SuperBOLD said, was that when more than 10 people want to address the council, some are not heard. Moreover, some council issues the public might want to address are not heard at all.
“The public comment lottery system improperly denies willing speakers the right to address the council and [library] board at public meetings, and it improperly prevents certain agenda items from receiving public comment,” wrote Sophia Cope, attorney with the Oakland-based First Amendment Project, in a letter to the city attorney.
Editor’s Note: Come on. I mean, come on. You aren’t being restricted from expressing your mind to city councilmembers - you just can’t take two hours to do it. Use a pay phone, write a letter, whatever - do some of your lobbying on your time, not the city’s.
There is some constructive dialogue on the issue, despite first amendment lawyers that have gone off the deep end.
Addressing the changes he would like to see, Worthington said he wants to continue to hear the random 15 speakers at the beginning of the meeting. But he would like to add an opportunity for others to speak just before their items of interest are heard. Many cities, including Oakland, Millbrae, Sunnyvale, Walnut Creek and Richmond, allow comment just before an item on the agenda.
But Bates said he thinks that would not work in Berkeley. “Some people would speak on 20 items,” he said.
Scheduling public comment is a “real balancing act,” said Councilmember Linda Maio, noting that she’s gotten valuable information from public comment. Maio suggested that large groups that come to address the council could be given 10 minutes to speak…
The remedy for late-night council meetings is not to limit speakers, but to adjust meetings so that special meetings are held for public hearings, which tend to be long and well attended, Worthington said.
Bates said he’s not opposed to additional meetings.
He pointed out that on July 25, the public comment period extended to more than hour, causing the meeting to end after midnight.
“The later the council meets, the more irrational the discussion gets,” Bates said.
Rationality implies that there are reasonable expectations of the citizens of Berkeley. I’ve given up on any such rationality when discussing city politics.
You’d think city government is the one place where community involvement is necessary. Not on the city government’s time? It’s their job to listen to the community!
Comment by alex — August 8, 2006 @ 11:55 pm
Hear hear!
Comment by Your Friends, The Trees — August 9, 2006 @ 12:19 am
Dont give up so soon Ben. Some of us are rational.
I think changes to the public comment procedures are good.
When I worked in San Francisco government, individuals could comment on any item that was on the agenda when it was taken up.
In Berkeley you only have 30 minutes each meeting. With many important items on these agendas, you get tons of people competing against each other to talk about different issues.
Now obviously there needs to be some sort of check to ensure that it is not abused and that the whole meeting is not being spent on public comment.
But you would be surprised how non-responsive many Councilmembers are. Kriss Worthington is the exception, but for some people coming to a Council meeting is the only way they can get their point across. And often times having alot of people will pursuade the Council to take a particular stance on an issue. Case in point with the Wozniak resolution.
If we did not come out against that, then it likely would have passed unfortunately.
So I think there is some benefit to taking another look at the process and making it more effective and open-ended.
Having a strong Sunshine Ordinance would make a big difference in the public’s access to the process.
Comment by Jesse Arreguin — August 10, 2006 @ 2:20 am
I was under the impression that the Wozniak resolution went caput before the meeting occurred, and the public comment period wouldn’t have made a difference anyway.
Comment by Beetle — August 10, 2006 @ 3:44 am
No, the prospects of Action Item 42 passing were pretty good before councilmembers saw the large reaction of students against it and once Kriss explained some things about the ASUC to them better. Otherwise it very well could have passed.
Comment by Josh M. — August 10, 2006 @ 10:11 am
The Wozniak resolution actually was going to pass before students made an organized effort to lobby the Council. Coming to the 5 pm closed session meeting and the Council meeting showed the city officials that this was an important issue and made the Council listen to the students.
Even right before the vote, some Councilmembers were undecided. I did my best to lobby them and thankfully they decided to go against the proposal.
In my 4 years of involvement in City government I have learned that having a large and organized group of people has a significant impact on whether the City votes to support your position.
Comment by Jesse Arreguin — August 10, 2006 @ 2:25 pm