Council President Sean Elo-Rivera is proposing to eliminate all virtual public comments from City Council meetings today at the Rules Committee.
This comes after repeated statements by members of the public who are concerned about not being heard because they cannot attend in person due to work, school, or other circumstances.
This is happening at the Rules Committee, today at 2 PM.
Take Actions: The Community Wants More Accessibility for Public Participation in Our Government.
What: The City Council is proposing to eliminate ALL virtual public comments in future public meetings.
[If links don’t work, go here]
Submit an e-Comment NOW:
Link: bit.ly/RulesComm_eComment
Meeting Date: July 24, 2024
Comment Type: Agenda Comment – Agenda Item: 4
Join the Rules Committee Meeting on July 24, 2024 (meeting starts at 2pm)
Join in-person: 202 C Street, 92101, 12th Floor
Join via Zoom:
click on this link to join
When the item 4 called, hit raised your hand RIGHT AWAY to get into the queue to speak
Or dial 669-254-5252 – webinar ID 160.549.8117#
Raise your hand by dial *9
When it is your turn to speak, unmute yourself by dial *6
The system has always been set up to prevent the people from participating in the government public process. Public meetings are often during the hours of the day that most community members cannot participate. As a result, only white retirees, employees who get paid to go to public meetings, and lobbyists can participate in policy making. Youth, working class members, BIPOC community members are often left out of the policy that have an impact on their lives.
The pandemic has shown that people do need programs and resources for their community. And with the new technology, it was made possible for more community members to participate in the process of decision making. This is how a democratic process works: more people are involved. Better policies can only happen with more voices in the room to ensure we left no one behind. We want a model of government where people are co-governance with our elected officials.
Virtual public comments is also a disability accessibility issue. Folks with disability cannot always attend public meetings in person because having virtual accessibility is inclusive to this community. Many public policies often left out the community with disability that continues to perpetuate ableism.
The City of San Diego has an entire City Council and Mayor of the same political party. Our government should be set up to empower the People. Public comments and public participation is a measure of public accountability, that no matter which type of government we have, our elected officials will be responsive to the public.
RECOMMENDATION for more accessibility to the City’s public meetings:
Keep virtual public comments as a tool of public participation & equitable for community members who cannot physically be in the meeting.
Move all the public meetings to evening, where working class community members and youth can engage in the process.
Agenda items are to be docketed at least 2 weeks in advance to allow the public enough time to process and engage in the discussion of the issue. (Currently, the City often dockets the item on a Friday for a vote on the following Monday/Tuesday.)
Ego-Rivera believes silence is the best Democracy.
Earlier in the morning, there was already one press conference denouncing this attempt to silence the public who cannot travel downtown to address the City Council in public. Many of our San Diego brothers and sisters were in chambers; many were going to use the virtual public comment procedure, and reportedly, the City received over 226 pages of emails from the public in opposition. The group was from all over San Diego and had been waiting more than 2 hours when the Council President decided to pull Item # 4 from the agenda and postponed the discussion until September.
During the two hours, the public was upset with the entire process and got under the skin of the Council President in several situations. One time in particular, during Item # 2, the City Application of “Get It Done” was being discussed. One elderly gentleman from District 9 walked to the microphone. He began his presentation by saying, “You are fired, you are fired, you are fired,” when the Council President prohibited him from speaking and chastised the gentlemen for his comments and stated something to the effect that no one will disrespect the employees of the City, as they are not elected officials.
From this point, it seems that every speaker in the Chambers and those who used the virtual public comment process spoke in opposition to the Council President’s loss of control of his emotions and began threatening to silence the public speakers, remove everyone from the chambers, and disrespect some speakers by cutting off the microphone. The Council President lost control of his emotions, and his behavior was unacceptable for elected officials.
Between Item # 2 and Item # 3, the Council President postponed the discussion of Item # 4 until September. The Council President used the excuse of not having enough time to discuss the Item. Still, he could not use self-control and de-escalation leadership techniques, which created a disenfranchised atmosphere. The people in the chambers and those in the virtual queue were upset at the Council President’s decision. It had little to do with the item as much as it had to do with the number of folks attending in opposition.
The topic for Item # 3 was the Code of Conduct. I attended to speak in opposition to Item # 4, the proposed elimination of virtual public comments. However, the outburst of disrespect and unprofessionalism from the Council President to those in attendance in person and those in the virtual queue pushed my decision to speak on the Code of Conduct when dealing with the public (As did many others in attendance).
We must not allow this behavior to continue by our elected officials.
From KPBS:
Elo-Rivera wrote that the change was intended to ensure “San Diegans can be confident business is done with the pace and efficiency they deserve,” and that the “City Council will continue to value and uphold all requirements for open and public meetings ensuring access for all constituents.”
But others see a lack of fairness in the proposed change. The City Council meets during the work day, which allows some people the ability to attend more than others.
“The system has always been set up to prevent the people from participating in the government public process,” Candice Moreno wrote in a public statement. “Public meetings are often during the hours of the day that most community members cannot participate. As a result, only white retirees, employees who get paid to go to public meetings, and lobbyists can participate in policy making.
“Youth, working class members, BIPOC community members are often left out of the policy that have an impact on their lives,” she added.
San Diegans will still be able to submit written comments to the city clerk and email council members individually, but others say this is not enough.
“This kind of policy is a breach of public trust, an attempt to silence democracy and is a threat to civic engagement,” political activist Shane Harris said. “The rules committee should absolutely say no to this idea.”
If the committee — composed of Elo-Rivera and council members Joe LaCava, Kent Lee, Raul Campillo and Vivian Moreno — passes the item, it would still need to be taken up and approved by the full council.
https://www.kpbs.org/news/politics/2024/07/24/san-diego-council-committee-to-consider-ending-virtual-public-comment
We don’t want “more efficient government”. We want more transparent goverment. Sorry if that’s inconvenient to you tools that want to steamroll the public for more 101 Ash streets or Midway Rising fiascos.
I know some trolls have been hijacking public comment with disgusting racist rants, but there has to be a better way than just cutting out the public entirely. For most people, this is the only way they be heard at a meeting.
And we know nobody reads the written comments.
The city also just spent a whole effort lecturing the community planning groups about how they need to do more outreach, and amended the Brown Act interpretation somehow to allow for virtual meetings.
This is a joke. Just limit the non-agenda public comment time a little bit if it runs long. Figure out some software to try and filter out the troll numbers.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the desire to limit public comment. To often it becomes the same people saying the same thing meeting after meeting (anybody remember “Ombudscience”?) or many people saying the same thing over and over again.
That said, having to listen to the comments is part and parcel of the job of our elected representatives.
I agree. I’ve heard my share of uninformed, repetitive, or just plain annoying public comment. But it’s their job to listen to it. All they have to do is sit there and pretend to pay attention while their mind wanders on about their fantasy league trades. If they can’t at least do that then they should step aside.
todd gloria and his puppets don’t know common sense, they’re just doing what he tells them to do.
They haven’t listened to their constituents in 42 City-wide Community Planning Committee groups since Dictator todd took over. They had four behind closed doors meetings over the Kettner & Vine insanity, then on Mon. they listened to over 100 speakers most in opposition to this current idiocy. To burden the taxpayers for 30yrs. to a lease the City Attny. indicated has “maybe”, not “will”, sprinkled in it, and the cost is near 200 MILLION dollars, for 1,000 people, leaving approx. 9,000 STILL on the Street. However the City/Mayor is shutting down many long standing groups helping homeless like Father Joe’s, and about 6 more at the end of 2024, so those homeless folks will be dumped on the City Streets and the current approx. 9,000 left on the street will balloon up to approx. 11,000 on the street, and the tax payers are STUCK for 30 yrs. in this lease the City Attorney, the Independent Budget Analyst, and the Housing Commission are against. Plus they’re going to dump the predators in the large building on Kettner and Vine along with the families with kids, elderly, disabled, Vets with PTSD. Given most of the people making the decision don’t have kids, so they don’t think about folks with kids safety and security. NOW the Dictator Gloria after a 45 min. break to brow beat the Clowncilreps, wants to have another meeting with them next week, BUT no community/taxpayers input and he’s trying to push this thru prior to the election along with some other bright idea other fantasy’s. They also voted to increase the sales tax in the City of SD. Not a big deal if you’re buying a small item, but tack another 1% on the purchase of a car, or major appliance. 1% is a lot, based the fact SD already has the highest utilities in the nation, sky high rents, wasted money on a lot of the WANTS of the special interest groups, and he’s ignored the NEEDS of SD, and is now facing many lawsuits for allowing the City staff to ignore the things residents in South Crest complained about for years, consequently they got flooded out of their homes, because Gloria didn’t pay any attention to them, he was too busy listening to the Mobility Dept. installing bike lanes and roundabouts, where people since time figured out how ride bikes on less busy roads, but this generation of cyclists can’t. And he’s screwed up any thought of Climate Action Plans, by eliminating traffic lanes on busy streets, to create traffic jams where idling vehicles emit far more toxins idling than if they were moving. the list can go on an on of his failures to this City. Don’t vote for ANY incumbents in Nov.
From Neighbors : 4:00 PM UPDATE:
Council President Elo-Rivera has recognized that there is not enough time to hear this item today given extensive public interest in the matter. There is a legislative recess in August, so this item will be trailed until the next Rules Committee meeting in September. We will continue to follow this and update you when it returns.
And I am now informed that the CA Attorney General just issued the following opinion today about remote participation:
Question:
Under the Ralph M. Brown Act, a local agency’s legislative body must generally conduct its meetings in person at locations open to the public. Does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) nonetheless require that a local agency’s legislative body allow remote participation for a member with a qualifying disability that precludes their in-person attendance at meetings of the body?
Conclusion:
Yes. The ADA generally requires a local agency’s legislative body to allow remote participation as a reasonable accommodation for a member with a qualifying disability that precludes their in-person attendance at meetings of the body. This duty to reasonably accommodate is subject, however, to the Brown Act’s requirement that the remote participation must be conducted in a manner that simulates in-person attendance at meetings held in person at a location open to the public. To accomplish this, the Act requires that individual members who participate remotely (1) use two-way video and audio streaming in real time and (2) disclose the identity of any adults who are present with the member at the remote location. These two requirements should be applied to members who attend meetings remotely due to a qualifying disability.
Here’s the link to the document: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/opinions/pdfs/23-1002.pdf