Council mixed on meeting times
A longer-than-anticipated closed session of the Santa Monica City Council caused complaints among some community members on Tues day who spent more than an hour waiting for the public portion of the meeting to begin.
The council’s meeting began at approximately 5:45 p.m., as scheduled. After the pledge of allegiance, role call and approv al of the consent calendar, the council convened in closed session, scheduled to return at 6:45 p.m. However, for the last two council meetings the public portion began well after the listed time, drawing the ire of several community members eager to participate.
On Tuesday, more than a dozen individuals sprawled out in the council chambers did what they could to pass the time as they waited for the arrival of their elected leaders. Some closed their eyes, using their sweatshirts and other garments for pillows. Others read, struck up conversation or chewed gum, counting the passing minutes on the large clock hanging above the dais.
By 7:33 p.m., City Hall regular and long-time activist Jerry Rubin was standing amid the loiterers in the middle row of the council chambers. He could take no more.
Spurned by frustration and boredom, he openly engaged everyone and no one — community members, as well as the empty seats next to them. It was as if the public portion of the meeting was doomed to never begin, and he wanted his chance to comment anyway.
“These meetings should start at predictable times,” Rubin said. “Waiting around like this is a waste for everybody. This stuff is too important to make people have to sit around and wait.”
Responding to Rubin’s comments, one resident said City Hall should host a Tuesday night movie inside the council chambers, instead of at the pier.
“They could have played ‘Titanic’ by now,” Rubin said.
The July 26 meeting was less dramatic, starting at 7:17 p.m., only a half-hour after the public anticipated.
City Hall spokeswoman Judy Rambeau said closed sessions usually end on time and the meeting restarts at 6:45 p.m., or no later than 7 p.m.
During Tuesday’s closed session, Santa Monica Police Chief James T. Butts Jr. gave an unusual briefing on a security issue in Santa Monica, amid reports terrorists might be staking out the Santa Monica Pier (see related story).
However, Rambeau said City Hall could have informed the public there was a reason for the inconvenience.
“The session simply took longer than usual,” Rambeau said in an e-mail to the Daily Press. “We regret no one came to make an announcement.”
The council used to hold closed sessions at the end of the regular meeting, during which time important legal matters are often discussed. The time was changed partly because the council members were too tired to focus, Rambeau said.
She added it wouldn’t be feasible to change the time the closed sessions take place, mostly because the council frequently needs to act in open session on matters they have discussed behind closed doors on the same night.
Rambeau said the current structure of the meetings was meant to streamline the process.
“With consent calendar heard at 5:45 p.m., simpler items can be handled expeditiously,” Rambeau said. “They eat dinner during closed session to save time. And I think (Tuesday night) was really an anomaly and not too much should be made of it.”
Tuesday’s meeting only lasted until 9:50 p.m., which is relatively short when compared to other sessions that have gone as late as 3 a.m.
City Councilman Bob Holbrook, who along with Herb Katz in recent years sued the City Council over the length of its meetings, said he would consider a restructuring if it improved the council’s effectiveness.
“I would not mind meeting a couple of nights of the week, if it would mean shorter hours and we could be mentally fresh and not exhausted,” Holbrook said, noting that councilmembers generally try to be mindful of the time they are using.
Holbrook said he has been unable to garner enough votes to change the frequency of council meetings.
City Councilman Richard Bloom doesn’t think meeting more frequently will adequately address time issues.
“I don’t think it would be practical,” Bloom said. “If we did split the meetings, we would have to make sure closed and open session items were stringed together.
“We are pretty good at coming back at 7 p.m., and we take great pains to not stay in closed session for too long.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on August 11, 2005. Read the original PDF.