Public Comment at City Council Meetings

Here is a summary, by Marilyn Wellons, of last evening's hearing held by the City of Cambridge's Ordinance Committee to review the Council's rules on public comment:

Vice Mayor Murphy and Councillor Maher were co-chairs.

Mayor Simmons began by explaining her Policy Order about public comment that precipitated the hearing. It's useful to review policies like these from time to time.

Councillor Toomey and others, notably Councillors Murphy and Maher, were very keen on a meeting's efficiency, on the theory that working people need to get home in good time, having had their say at a predictable hour, rather than as the topics come up on the agenda.Councillor Toomey: the status quo works much better than its predecessors. The [tv-viewing] public at home wants to see a well-run Council meeting.

Councillor Maher: predictability and efficiency are paramount. People should be able to speak in a reasonable amount of time. Lots happens in the Council's committee meetings and this is an opportune, alternative time for public comment.

Mayor Simmons agreed.

Several praised Mayor Simmons for running the meetings well. [Councillor Reeves was not in attendance.]

Councillor Davis was, like Nixon, concerned with the people who don't show up and don't speak (silent majority?). She wants people to feel welcome, and longer public comment will further deter those who don't already come. They don't want to spend hours at a Council meeting.

Councillor Kelley says the status quo sort of works. Meetings should start on time at 5:30 or they should change the start time to when Councillors can be there. He wants people to be able to comment on items not on the Council or Manager's agenda. Councillors should make themselves available outside of meetings, read all e-mails, but that's very hard. Consequently public comment at Council meetings is important.

Vice Mayor Murphy and others wonder if giving people a choice of speaking at the beginning of the meeting or at another point after the Manager's Agenda would be useful.

Beyond the people who are always saying "something's rotten in Denmark," there are people with expertise about trash collection or building codes, for example, who have useful things to say.

At 3-4 hearings a year, reviewing departments--Public Works was his example--there could be "valuable exchange of information."

In public comment, Bill Cunningham, speaking personally, noted the history of shrinking public comment at Council meetings. TV broadcast pushes people to compact their comments. Earlier rules allowed the public "real participation," to speak to items as they came up. Current rules separate public comment from the Council's business and put it together with cultural presentations, for a kind of "circus" before the Council gets down to work.

Elie Yarden noted the effort it takes for many people to come to meetings. For example, there was an air quality alert yesterday, but he decided to come to the hearing anyway. He reminded the Council of groups of neighbors in public comment who educated the Council about issues like the Polaroid site. I was glad to hear the Mayor's explanation of her Order, hoped public comment would be expanded. I had thought the move was to restrict it further, given shrinking public involvement and the Council's move to delegate contentious items to the appointed boards since 1980. Councillors compete for the job, are paid a nice salary, have paid assistants, fine offices, and they give the impression listening to the public at Council meetings interferes with business. Real democracy can mean messy meetings with public comment that takes time.

Steve Kaiser criticized speakers who hadn't done their homework, didn't know what they were talking about.

Mayor Simmons liked that. It's difficult to listen to speakers who aren't organized, she said, but then "we do that ourselves."

Robert Winters seconded Kaiser's criticism. He thought segregating public comment was an unintended consequence of the 1999 rule change. It would be useful to allow the public to speak to an agenda item when it comes up.

Councillor Seidel said he found public comment the most interesting part of the meetings. Bless his heart, he said not everyone needs to be an expert. Alone among the Councillors, he said he appreciates it if people come with something on their mind, that they take the time to come. [Mind you, this is his first term.]

Councillor Seidel liked the possibility of public comment after the Manager's agenda. He thinks that's a "natural place" for it and it would be helpful for "us to have a break in the meeting" at that point. "People here tonight should know we listen."

After the meeting broke up and I'd already left the chamber, I remembered Councillor Seidel's amazing comments. I went back in to thank him. He was alone at his desk, the others were schmoozing. I thanked him, said he was the only one who said such things, important things--which he then reaffirmed.

Please feel free to comment on this blog...

Seniors and trucks compete for space on Street across from City Hall!

Seniors forced into street with cars, trucks and busses. This is another example of the City of Cambridge's "Open Pit Policy." Please note there are NO barrels to seperate pedestrians from moving traffic nor from stumbeling into that trench.

When the sidewalk is obstructed by construction like this, is a permit required? Should not care be provided to protect the pedestrians that are forced into the street? June 20, 4:29pm.

Cambridge Police Permit Bicycles to Run Red Light

Photo above shows a bike and a car stopped at red light when another bike comes along and fails to stop, running the light. The police officers take no action. The bike rider can clearly be seen looking up Inman street to see if there is oncoming traffic that needs to be avoided. The police did pull over a car for a traffic violation, but none of the bikes that ran the red light.



The photo shows the other police officer observing the traffic at the intersection. He sees the bike running the red light but takes no action. He informed me that only bike officers ticket bike riders. I then called the desk and was informed that the police were assigned to Mass Ave and Inman to enforce traffic laws, but not to enforce them on bikes, only cars. He told me they were assigned to do cars, not bikes.
(Photos taken June 20, 2008, at 5:23pm and 5:26pm.)

So, what message does this send bike riders? You can run the red light right in front of Cambridge Police officers, who will give you a nod?

Where do you park your bicycle?

The photo above shows a bike parked on top of a huge snow pile, and chained to a MBTA bus stop sign. One of the most overlooked needs in Cambridge is bicycle parking. In City Council, tonight, is the City Manager's response, agenda item # 8 http://www.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/cmLetter.cfm?item_id=11810 to a March 3, 2008 policy order, http://www.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/policyOrder.cfm?DetermineBackTo=Yes&item_id=21065 , requesting info re bike parking.

One modifcation we are requesting is to ban bicycle parking by chaining biles to dedicated handicapped parking signs. PWDs need to have room to manouver to get wheelchairs, walkers, or canes into the trunks of their cars, or into the back seats.

Another concern we have is the City's attention to providing bike parking in downtown locations, but not in neighborhoods. We need to provide handy, convenient and safe bike park areas in neighborhoods.

Therefore, I recommend that the City Manager's agenda item #8 be referred to the Transportation Committee to examine possible modifications.

Where do you park your bike?

reserved

reserved

reserved