There is currently no vehicle for electronic public comment. Some may want to argue that point (and why wouldn’t we, in an era when people can’t seem to agree on much of anything.) But my definition of “public comment” is…
“Communications meant to address the City Council as a body and where both the person or organisation making the comment, and the contents of that comment, are placed into the official meeting record such that they may be viewed in perpetuity as any other business of that meeting.”
I believe that is what the public expects. They want to know not only that their message has been received, but, just as importantly, they also want a way for the rest of the City to hear their voice, whether or not they can be present for our meetings.
Currently, that is simply not the case. When you send an email or a letter to the Council, it is definitely seen by the Council and City Clerk, and it is considered ‘public information’. But one would have to do a Public Records Request in order to access that information, to even be aware of those communications.
Therefore, if you are not ‘on camera’, no one but yourself and about ten people at the City (seven CMs, clerks) are aware of what you wrote.
It is arguable that emails may not fully pass muster as ‘public comment’. Emails offer no bona fides as to the speaker’s identity or their location. And social media? Don’t get me started. However when one signs up to speak at the podium, we see you, and you asked to provide one’s name and address.
During the pandemic, the City performed an update to the web site, which included a Public Comment Form that addresses most of those concerns. One was asked for that same name/address information.
Apparently, the form was disabled when the City’s Emergency Proclamation ended, considered no longer necessary, once in-person meetings resumed.
I disagree. For many years the City would include letters from the public in each packet. I know this because I can see them in previous packets. So this feels like an unnecessary step backward in terms of transparency and community engagement.
Proposal
At our December 1 Meeting I will propose restoring and formalising that Public Comment Form system based on my understanding of the current software.
I understand that the staff has tried several approaches since the start of the pandemic to place those comments into the meeting packets and they have all been, to one extent or another, time consuming.
But the current web site has features to help automate the process, plus we can hire a developer to further improve the work flow.
Regardless, it is my belief that there must be a vehicle for people who cannot attend our meetings in person to have their comments placed into the public record. The status quo seems to be “Trust us, everyone saw your email, but now that the pandemic is over and we’re not required to do that stuff, we’re onto more important things.” That is not what the public expects and it is not a good look.
If this is a question of resources, let’s quantify the requirements and then allocate them as needed. But heading into 2023, electronic public comment is not optional. We should develop a standardised system to do this which is convenient for staff and acknowledge that any absence was a mistake.
—JC