Hmmm..The new City Clerk Holly Moseley described “reading comments into the record” as a temporary solution during the public building closures, but a side effect was to give members of the public a new tool to voice their opposition to council actions. . .
(1).jpg)
✓ At a handful of hearings, an avalanche of submitted comments led to marathon reading sessions of statements – generally opposed to a proposed action on the agenda.
✓ At times these masses of submitted comments read out loud appeared to have an impact, compelling, if nothing else, council members to respond on the record to the concerns.
But from the City Clerk’s view, reading written comments out loud is problematic and potentially unfair when mixed with in-person comments.
TOP STORY
City says public comment change about fairness
"City officials say they are not trying to muzzle public voices by no longer reading submitted comments into the record during meetings, but are promoting fairness and dialogue .
"
✓[ . . .]
(1).png)
✓✓ Council members did not respond directly to questions from the Tribune about whether they supported the move away from reading written comments or why there was no discussion about it in a meeting prior to the change.
But Mayor John Giles issued a statement in response to the questions:
“The pandemic forced us to adopt new ways to engage our citizens. In the time since we resumed in-person council meetings, we have been able to identify inclusive and effective ways for the public to participate.
.png)
“I’m glad that we’re expanding public participation from pre-COVID practices by adopting phone accommodations for those who wish to comment on an agenda item but are unable to physically attend.
“We’re also working to implement an electronic comment card option. As elected officials, we’re always receptive to public input and we encourage residents to email or call our offices.”
No comments:
Post a Comment