Preview: Road & Safety/Finance & Planning Committee Meeting

Here's the agenda for tomorrow night's Road & Safety/Finance & Planning Committee Meeting. I've used a tool called Scribd.com that allows me to upload a pdf and turn it into a link that can be embedded in this post for everyone to see simply by viewing the post. Let me know how you like it. After the document, I write a bit about what city council meetings are and are not, depending on your POV, and what I think will be the highlights of the meeting.


rsagenda11310

I will post these agendas as soon as they are made available.  This one is not yet online at the city's website but most are posted there at last 24 hours in advance of the meetings.

I will also be sure to highlight items from each agenda.  I will also work to "unpack" the structure and purpose of the meetings, which isn't something as obvious as you might think, in part because of how they've developed over time.  Not to be too cryptic, but the council meetings are actually just that - meetings for council. They are, of course, public (and that topic is a whole 'nother entry) but they are not public hearings, per se, such as when the purpose of a meeting itself is to hear from the public.

Rather, the purpose of a council meeting is for the council to meet and do the work it needs to do.  That there are two times during which audience comments are permitted, communities can dispense with that. I'm told that that is in fact in practice in some communities though I have not researched that yet (I have no suspicion that that's not true).

Just to emphasize why I'm pointing this out: City council members are prohibited from meeting together and discussing city business if there will be a quorum of them except in a public meeting.  This is to protect the voters and keep the meetings open.  A quorum for these purposes is four or more.  So, in order to get our work done, we must meet in public - the meetings must be in public.  But that does not make them meetings for the public, so to speak.


This issue is confounding in many ways and I do indeed want to explore it further. However, I want to note that just in the two months since election day, this issue of only being able to do work with Council if it's done in a public meeting, or else everything must be done one or two at a time, imposes very specific expectations on Council when it does get together.  It might seem easy to say, "then get together more frequently!" but there's an expense to that, and not necessarily a corresponding need.  Or is there? I don't know yet.

But, if you've ever been at a Council meeting and heard someone say, from the Council table, something about the meeting being for the Council and not a public hearing or public meeting per se, this is most likely what is being referenced.  I know - because I was in fact at a meeting where this reminder was stated.  It may seem brusque - and if you aren't aware of how Council really is required to function, it is brusque. But the reality is, these Council meetings? They really are needed for Council to do their work.  The audience comment portions are vital - do not misunderstand, misinterpret or otherwise distort what I'm putting out here.  But the meetings themselves - they are necessary for Council to get its work done.

Highlights for tomorrow night:

1. The swearing in of council members, of course.

2. Discussion of new rubbish collection program.  PLEASE consider contacting a council member, emailing or calling City Hall or attending the Council meeting if you want to contribute to this discussion. Your input is critical to this effort.

3. Further discusion on proposed changes to The Pointe (aka Sterling Lakes condos on the West side of New Brainard).  Again, PLEASE consider contacting a council member, emailing or calling City Hall or attending the Council meeting if you want to contribute to this discussion. Your input is critical to this effort.

8 comments:

Paul said...

Jill:

I was sworn in last night, and got to cast my first votes. Good feeling.

A school board, like a city council, must obey the so-called Sunshine Law as you well know. But I like to think of it as a minimum standard. In other words, a public body should strive to disclose and document as much as reasonably possible, and only hold in secret those things which by law must be kept confidential (e.g. the names of kids involved in certain legal matters).

The culture of our Board has to been to reveal the minimum required. I hope my new fellow Board members will see the wisdom in going to the other extreme, with the goal of building a higher level of trust with the people of the community - a necessary step when you have to ask them to increase their property taxes significantly every couple of years.

In the meantime, one of the guys I ran with is videotaping our Board meetings and posting them on his blog: www.informHilliard.org.

PL

Jill said...

Couldn't agree with you more re:

"...a public body should strive to disclose and document as much as reasonably possible, and only hold in secret those things which by law must be kept confidential (e.g. the names of kids involved in certain legal matters).

"The culture of our Board has to been to reveal the minimum required. I hope my new fellow Board members will see the wisdom in going to the other extreme, with the goal of building a higher level of trust with the people of the community - a necessary step when you have to ask them to increase their property taxes significantly every couple of years."

But I wanted to add the dimension that the inability (or the lack of tradition from what I can tell) of simply calling a meeting either more often or whenever there's a lot going on, because we need to get the city's business done and we should be talking to each other about it, really has been a bit of a shock to my system. As someone who connects to people and networks naturally, not using those connections except under certain circumstances (as opposed to just sending out an email and getting input or thinking of doing google docs or conference calls, since they're outside the sun), requires an adjustment.

I'm only just hearing that some communities not much bigger than mine meet every week - EVERY week. The Orange school board meets every other week usually.

I don't know - just food for thought as I figure out how this all works. OR could work better. I'm 100% fine with the public part - this blog as an attempt to open things up - a very preliminary one.

But beyond that, the communicating with the council members - this is something that I feel needs a lot of thought if we only have one or two meetings a month where we know we're all supposed to be.

Paul said...

I'm hoping that at some point the law catches up a little with technology, and allows something like a blog or a Google group to be a forum that satisfies the public disclosure/engagement objective (ie the members of a public body could carry on a conversation in an online forum as long as the forum can be read by anyone who wants to do so).

One can argue that it makes the dialog and decision making process MORE accessible to the public.

AndrewBW said...

This is excellent Jill. One of my goals this year is to try and promote publication of agendas, minutes, and as many other records of public meetings (and meetings for the public) online so that they are accessible to everyone. There is so much anger about government at all levels that we need to promote the absolute maximum level of transparency that is possible. People also need to be aware and involved, and making more information publicly available is one way to encourage that. I know some cities put this information online and I hope more will follow suit.

SonicAllstar said...

Hi Jill. You are off to a GREAT start!
- Saw the new Trash pick-up today. The mini trucks look bigger than the ones in Shaker. The core problem remains the same. As the Trucks fill up and go from driveways to the street, the trucks bounce and garbage will fly off. I hope this doesn't become a reality. That said, the team that does our street has always done a fantastic job.
Good luck with the meetings!

Jill said...

Paul - yes, I agree with you here - the law needs to catch up re:

"...allows something like a blog or a Google group to be a forum that satisfies the public disclosure/engagement objective (ie the members of a public body could carry on a conversation in an online forum as long as the forum can be read by anyone who wants to do so).

"One can argue that it makes the dialog and decision making process MORE accessible to the public."

And I'm sure there are more arguments in favor of this that we could come up with. The only chief argument against is that there is a digital divide in terms of who has a computer and who will even use computers. On the other hand, libraries have them, cities can have them available I would think and also, as I'm hoping to do for that divide as it applies generationally, I want our city to host a quarterly open house when folks can come to the city hall and learn what they can get by visiting the city website - I want to have teens from the town get community service for assisting in this project - this would also foster more interaction between the generations in our small city, for those who want it.

Jill said...

Hi Andrew - thanks for reading and commenting.

Again, I completely agree with you:

"There is so much anger about government at all levels that we need to promote the absolute maximum level of transparency that is possible. People also need to be aware and involved, and making more information publicly available is one way to encourage that. I know some cities put this information online and I hope more will follow suit."

I'm going to do my best and I suspect there will be at least a few vigorous debates about how far this goes and whether it is always in the public's interest, and how much is or isn't. I'm not sure yet what the exceptions are/should be/will be, but I do think to some extent that's a community value. It can also be a function of what people are used to, but I have experience as with the political yard sign law, that just because people may not be complaining about something (i.e., stuff not being open enough) doesn't mean that it's still okay to not be acting in good faith for when they do go looking. :)

Jill said...

Hey Sonic - There's got to be a Monty Python movie name in that comment re: they flying trash. :)

I've not observed it yet but by having you comment, we've got this concern down and can make sure that the service dept. knows about it and keeps an eye on it. I am also sure that given the kind of city we are, there are few if any residents who will tolerate any amount of refuse in the roads. Keeping fingers crossed.