To save time, City Council cuts public comment to two minutes
CITY HALL Starting tonight, City Council speakers with prepared speeches, some more epic than others, might want to plan for a two minute time slot.
A series of new rules and procedures, intended to shorten the length of council meetings, will take effect starting tonight, included among the changes a limit on public speakers from three to two minutes.
The changes were adopted during the council meeting on May 22, some coun-cilmembers pointing out that Santa Monica has some of the longest meetings in comparison to city councils in similarly-sized municipalities. The meetings, which commence at 5:45 p.m., often run longer than six hours and continue past midnight.
The council has toyed with the idea of shortening the length of meetings for the past several years, the seemingly endless sessions causing concern for its effect on public input and the ability of councilmembers to remain alert in the late hours. The council voted in 2001 to start meetings earlier at 5:15 p.m., a change that was short-lived as many councilmembers were unable to arrive to the meetings on time.
The long meetings also sparked a lawsuit by then Mayor Pro Tem Herb Katz and Councilmember Bob Holbrook, alleging violations of the Brown Act because it prevented public participation. Public comment is scheduled at the end of the meeting, a time when most people are already at home and in bed. The lawsuit was eventually defeated.
Among the new changes will be a rule that no new discussion items will be introduced after 11 p.m. except by two-thirds vote by council. The restriction does not apply to the public comment period.
One of the biggest proponents for the shortened meetings was Councilmember Bobby Shriver, who suggested eliminating staff reports to introduce discussion items and limiting councilmembers’ time to speak. Neither suggestion was approved.
Shriver pointed to the state Park & Recreation Commission — on which he served — as an example, noting there are no staff reports during meetings because it is assumed that commissioners have already read up on the material. Instead, the meeting jumps right into public comments and staff is given the opportunity to respond, Shriver said.
“I hear a large amount of push back in the community from people who say they are unable to come to the meetings at the time (their item) gets put on,”Shriver said last week. “The way we run meetings discourages participation... by the public.”
Several council meetings this year have dragged on past midnight because of a discussion item or two that attracted a horde of public speakers, believing there is persuasion in large numbers. More than 40 people spoke during a recent meeting regarding the Third Street Historic District, the discussion running so long that the council had to postpone its decision to the next meeting.
“When was the last time we turned down a parking district?” Holbrook asked. “Generally it’s 7-0... everyone of us knows the item is a slam dunk. (Yet) we get a lot of people show up.”
Prior to the changes, public comment was limited from three to two minutes only on discussion items that had more than 15 speakers. The commenting time was also limited to two minutes if there were more than 40 people interested in speaking throughout the meeting.
Under the revised rules, all speakers will have only two minutes regardless.
Jerry Rubin, a council meeting regular, said he didn’t have a problem with limiting public speaking time,adding that he can usually get his thoughts out in two minutes.The problem with long council meetings can instead be attributed to the scheduling of closed session which should be moved to a different night, Rubin said.
Closed session takes place following the consent calendar and can often run longer than one hour.
Rubin also pointed out tardiness. Shorter meetings could also mean more meetings. Mayor Pro Tem Richard Bloom said the council might have to meet more frequently to avoid falling behind, adding that scheduling extra meetings when he was mayor last year was like “pulling teeth.”
“We need to recognize that we need some amount of time to catch up,”Bloom said.
Bloom used as an example the Pasadena City Council,which oversees a city with similar complex issues and demographics as Santa Monica. While the city council only meets for four hours, its meetings are held weekly.
“We’re trying to preserve a small-town democracy in a city that has big-city issues,” Bloom said.“There’s a tension and a balance.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 27, 2008. Read the original PDF.