TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Mark Danaj, City Manager
FROM:
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney and Michael Estrada, Assistant City Attorney
Nadine Nader, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:Title
Meeting Management Resolution (City Attorney Barrow/Assistant City Manager Nader).
INVITE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 15-0048
Line
_________________________________________________________
Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that after receiving public comments, the City Council adopt Resolution No. 15-0048, amending the rules of order for the conduct of City Council meetings.
Body
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with this action.
BACKGROUND:
The Manhattan Beach City Council has adopted a series of resolutions that established rules of order for the conduct of City Council meetings. The Brown Act requires that city councils adopt rules for “the conduct of business.” The Brown Act requires that every meeting be public and that the agenda provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the council “before or during” consideration of that item.
The Brown Act mandates that city councils adopt reasonable regulations to ensure the intent of the Brown Act is carried out. The primary intent of the Brown Act is that the people’s business be conducted openly and transparently, with comments from the largest number of members of the public before a council takes action on any item.
Periodically, the City Council reviews and amends the rules of order to facilitate the efficient and transparent conduct of the City’s business. On July 8, 2015, the City Council considered a number of different concepts designed to facilitate the efficient and transparent conduct of the City’s business at a reasonable hour as well as to facilitate a meeting in which more members of the public may address the Council. The City received input that conducting business after 10:30 p.m. at night is contrary to the principles of open government and transparency because few people are still in attendance at the meeting. Moreover, many members of the public have either stopped attending council meetings or have left council meetings because items of interest to them are not considered until after 10:30 p.m., or as late as after midnight.
The general consensus from the July 8, 2015 meeting is that meetings are too long, important business is being considered too late and the public is not getting an opportunity to provide valuable comments at a reasonable hour. The Council felt that more people would attend and comment on agenda items if they knew that the Council would provide that opportunity between around 6:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
As a result, the Council directed staff to draft a resolution that would facilitate: (1) attracting the largest number of speakers to address the council at a reasonable time prior to any council action; (2) conducting city business at a reasonable time; (3) greater transparency; and (4) conducting city business more efficiently.
DISCUSSION:
The Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Section 54950 et.seq.), more commonly known as the “Brown Act,” is California’s “sunshine” law for local government. In a nutshell, the Brown Act requires local government business to be conducted at open and public meetings. Government Code Section 54950 declares that in enacting the Brown Act, “the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.”
The Brown Act mandates that city councils adopt rules for “the conduct of business” (Government Code Section 54954). The Brown Act also requires that every agenda provide “an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the [council] on any item of interest to the public, before or during the [council’s] consideration of that item” (Government Code Section 54954.3(a)).
Government Code Section 54954.3(b) provides that city councils “may adopt reasonable regulations to ensure the intent of subdivision (a) is carried out, including but not limited to, regulations limiting the total amount of time allocated for public testimony on particular issues and for each individual speaker.” The intent of subdivision (a) is to provide an opportunity to the largest number of members of the public to directly address the council before the council takes action on any item.
The Little Hoover Commission is a bipartisan independent state oversight commission “dedicated to promoting economy and efficiency in California State Government” both on the state and local level. On June 25, 2015, the Commission issued a report titled, “Conversations for Workable Government.” The first sentence of the transmittal letter states: “First among the fundamental planks of clean, open government in a complex society such as California are transparency laws that balance the public’s right to observe and participate in government with officials’ need to effectively administer it.”
Thus, the key issue for the City is how to balance the public’s right to observe and participate in government with the Council’s need to effectively and efficiently administer it. Simply stated, how can the Council conduct the people’s business openly and transparently at a reasonable time after receiving input from members of the public.
To that end, the Council gave direction to staff to draft a resolution addressing:
1. Council Meeting ending times
2. Consent Calendar Items
3. Public Comments
4. Order of Business
The first significant change in Draft Resolution No. 15-0048 is:
• Council Meeting End Time at 10:30 p.m.
In most cities, policy deliberations on the big policy items usually occur between 6:30 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. This approach ensures that members of the public who take time out of their busy schedules to attend Council Meetings on issues that are important to them, are able to provide comments prior to Council consideration and fully hear the Council’s deliberations. In addition, hearing complex policy issues in the late evening or early morning hours for the Council is not the most desired approach for deliberation of policy decisions.
Section 5 of Draft Resolution No. 15-0048 has the following proposed order. Embedded in the proposed order is discussion (in bold) of the substantive changes.
1. Pledge to the Flag
2. Roll Call
3. Ceremonial
4. Approval of the Agenda
5. City Council and Community Organization Announcements of Upcoming Events
Primarily for the purpose of announcing important upcoming City and Community Organization events at the earliest portion of the meeting, these announcements are consolidated.
6. City Manager Report
7. City Attorney Report
8. Public Comments
This is a significant and meaningful proposal: allowing members of the public to address the Council on any item within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction, including any item on the agenda, at the beginning of the meeting. This has been designed to provide a meaningful opportunity for the largest number of people to provide comments to the Council prior to the Council taking action on any agenda item. The Brown Act states: “Every agenda for regular meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public, before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item, that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body.” Government Code Section 54954.3.
The agendas for many cities contain a public comments section at the beginning of the meeting where speakers may comment on any item within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction, including items on the agenda. (In addition to this opportunity, speakers may address the council during each public hearing.) The primary beneficiaries of this model are (1) many busy people who may not be able to sit through an entire meeting are waiting for their opportunity to comment on an item on the agenda that may not be considered by the City Council until hours after the start of the meeting; (2) people who want to comment on the consent calendar; (3) the City Council, which can receive valuable comments from members of the public who would otherwise not attend a council meeting unless they can comment at a reasonable hour; and (4) staff, who will have additional time to research and prepare answers to questions raised at the beginning of the meeting by the public. This early opportunity to comment on the entire agenda has proven to be an effective and efficient way that other jurisdictions use to balance the public’s right to observe and participate in government with officials’ need to effectively administer it. Further, it will accomplish the City’s goal of conducting the people’s business openly and transparently at a reasonable hour with maximum comments from the greatest number of members of the public.
In our experience from other jurisdictions, five minutes is ample time for a member of the public to address the City Council. A recent example of this was the public comment on transient uses, where people eloquently and succinctly made their points in less than one and one-half minutes. The Council considered allowing just two minutes for speakers who want to speak on just one item, but the better practice is to allow up to five minutes. To manage time efficiently, the Mayor can be flexible (e.g., when many people want to speak on the same item, or if a speaker wants to speak on only one item.).
9. Planning Commission Quasi-Judicial Decisions
The Council recently adopted a “council review process” where any council member may call up for review a Planning Commission quasi-judicial decision (e.g., a use or master use permit and amendments thereto, variance, subdivision map). There can be no discussion on these items. Either the council “receives and files,” or any councilmember can call the matter up for review, in which case a public hearing at a later date will be scheduled.
10. Consent Calendar
Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and customary and are enacted by a single motion with the exception of items removed by the City Council for individual consideration. The Mayor shall place such items removed to a later portion of the agenda. The only proposed changes here are: (1) only Council Members may “pull” consent items; and (2) “pulled” items will be heard earlier.
Few cities allow members of the public to “pull” items from the consent calendar. Speakers provide comments on consent calendar items during oral communications prior to the council considering the consent calendar. Occasionally, a speaker will request during oral communications that an item be pulled by a council member so that the public can listen to the council’s consideration and deliberation. In those instances, the speaker still must provide his or her comments during oral communications, not at the time the Council considers an item pulled off the consent calendar. It will be up to a Council Member if he or she feels that the item warrants pulling from consent. Further, in that the Council will review the draft agenda forecast at the end of the meeting, Council Members can provide comment as to whether a particular item should be on the consent calendar.
Additionally, the Council directed that the order of business be amended so that pulled consent calendar items are heard during general business, instead of at the end of the meeting. There is much efficiency to be gained by having the consent calendar items approved and out of the way before the larger policy discussions occur at a Council meeting. For instance, members of the public or business community who may be there to see how the Council votes on certain consent calendar items do not have to wait until the end of the meeting. Also, staff members or professional consultants (who usually receive overtime or an hourly rate) do not have to wait until the end of the Council meeting to answer questions.
11. Public Hearings
12. Old and Continued Business
This is the portion of the agenda where items continued or carried over from prior council meetings will be heard.
13. New Business
14. City Council Reports, Other City Council Business, and Committee and AB 1234 Travel Reports
15. Forecast Agenda and Future Discussion Items
Recognizing that the forecast agenda is subject to change by both the City Council or the City Manager, this provides a forecast to the public and provides an opportunity for the Council to consider managing the next agenda, including offering suggestions as to whether certain items should be consent calendar or business matters. The Council may provide direction to the City Manager, in part, through use of the forecast agenda and set deadlines with the understanding that the City Manager may make changes at times for internal operational efficiencies.
16. Informational items
This section is designed to provide more information to the public on items that do not require City Council action, such as, for example, minutes of Commissions.
17. Closed Sessions
A common practice is to have closed sessions at the end of the meeting. This will not preclude the Council from having closed sessions on days other than the regularly scheduled council meeting nights (currently first and third Tuesday of every month) or, when necessary, prior to 6:00 p.m. on such days, when necessary.
18. Adjournment
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that after receiving public comments, the City Council adopt Resolution No. 15-0048.
Attachments:
1. Resolution No. 15-0048
2. Order of Business (presented by the Mayor at City Council meeting on July 8, 2015.)