“San Diego will start allowing lengthy group presentations by online participants at City Council meetings next Monday,” David Garrick at the UT reports. He surmises that it’s “a fundamental policy change that could make meetings significantly longer.”
But that’s not all the changes it would make. And it’s all supposed to boost “public participation.” The City Council approved it Monday, June 29.
Garrick states:
“The council was forced to change its policy for group presentations by a new state law – Senate Bill 707 – that seeks equal rights for people submitting testimony online versus in person. The goal is leveling the public participation playing field for working families, homebound residents, people traveling and others who can’t conveniently attend public meetings in person.”
Here are some of the more significant rules:
- the city decided to achieve equality by allowing such organized presentations – and such ceding of time – by groups coming together both in-person and online.
- Such presentations will be limited to 15 minutes and
- they must be requested at least 24 hours in advance,
- with a group leader submitting a participant roster and uploading any slide presentations in advance.
- this will apply to groups as small as two.
- new policy doesn’t allow group presentations by a mixture of in-person and online meeting participants.
- Other elements include:
- translating city documents into “plain language” and
- creating a new online legislative glossary so confused people can look up government jargon and other confusing terms.
- estimated lengths to each agenda item will be added to the council docket so people can better anticipate when the item they care about will get debated.
- clerk’s office is translating city agenda items into more languages and
- has added a clickable box on the city’s website that says “How to Provide Comment at City Council Meetings.”
Not everyone is happy.
Victoria LaBruzzo, leader of the Community Planners Committee, an officially-recognized umbrella organization for the 41 neighborhood planning groups across the city, “said the new policy requires more advanced coordination among people trying to do a group presentation. She “also criticized the wider city effort to boost public participation for not making neighborhood planning groups a key part of that effort.”
Here is Victoria’s full letter to all the City Community Planning Groups:
Hello CPC Members,
Many of you have received the City’s notice regarding the new City Council public comment procedures that take effect on July 1 and have asked for my thoughts on how they affect Community Planning Groups (CPGs) and the Community Planners Committee (CPC).
After reviewing the final procedures, I believe the changes include several positive improvements.
Most notably, the City has created a process that allows virtual organized presentations. Under the previous rules, virtual participants could not combine speaking time. This will be particularly helpful when a CPG is unable to send representatives to City Hall. That said, I continue to believe that in-person presentations should remain the preferred method for delivering official CPG and CPC recommendations to the City Council.
The new procedures also establish a more predictable process by hearing organized presentations immediately following staff presentations, rather than having speakers called in a more random order. In addition, presentation materials may still be submitted up to two hours before the meeting, allowing flexibility for last-minute revisions to slides or supporting materials.
The new 24-hour registration requirement for organized presentations is also understandable. Because the City is now coordinating both in-person and virtual organized presentations, additional advance planning is likely necessary to manage the meeting effectively.
While these are meaningful improvements to the mechanics of public comment, they do not address the issue CPC has been working to solve through our “A Seat at the Table” initiative.
The challenge for Community Planning Groups has never simply been obtaining additional speaking time. Our goal has been to ensure that the City’s officially recognized community advisory bodies have a meaningful opportunity to present their recommendations as part of the Council’s deliberative process.
The new procedures still require CPGs and CPC to coordinate speakers in order to maximize presentation time. They do not provide a dedicated opportunity for official Community Planning Group recommendations, nor do they recognize the unique role of the City’s 41 Community Planning Groups and 636 elected volunteers who already provide structured, transparent, Brown Act-compliant community input throughout San Diego.
Yesterday, during the Rules Committee meeting, Kate Callen, Paul Krueger, and I also spoke on the City’s Public Engagement report because we believed it missed an important opportunity to recognize Community Planning Groups as one of the City’s greatest existing public engagement resources. Councilmember Raul Campillo stated that our concerns are “not falling on deaf ears,” and I appreciated hearing that acknowledgment.
While the new public comment procedures represent progress in several areas, I believe there is still important work ahead. CPC’s “A Seat at the Table” initiative remains focused on meaningful participation in the decision-making process. While these new procedures improve how groups present to the Council, our goal remains to improve how Community Planning Groups participate in the development of policies before they reach the Council.
Thank you for your continued support and for the countless volunteer hours each of you contributes to your communities.
Victoria LaBruzzoScripps Ranch Planning Group, ChairCommunity Planners’ Committee, Chair
And here’s Lisa Mortensen’s take — as a city hall critic, she sends out a daily email blast to hundreds of homes:
While the new policy passed by the city council appears to provide some favorable changes, such as allowing more virtual public comment, it limits presentations to 15 minutes and speakers must provide materials and the names of time-ceders a minimum of 24 hours before the hearing date.
Meanwhile, city council decorum has not changed. Council members can come and go as they please from the dais and obfuscate as long as they wish. There is also no limit to organized presentation by city personnel. It is obvious we are going in the wrong direction.
These are issues that civic activists like Callen and Krueger have been raising over the past year or more, as councilmembers’ behaviors during council meetings display disrespect toward constituents and the public in general. And that much of the time during council meetings is taken up by “congratulations” to city staff by councilmembers and lengthy staff presentations.
