“Must I restore what I have not stolen?” Psalm 69.4, Jewish Publication Society
For three years I have been working to restore rights for public participation in our Lindsay city council meetings that were stripped from us, invisibly and unaccountably, after the February 14, 2012 meeting.
I did not do the stripping; it was done by the city clerk at the request of the city manager, who apparently was responding to then-mayor Ed Murray. But it was done in response to my attempts to use the rights outlined on the council agenda packet cover sheet, so I have felt responsible. I was ignorant: I could not imagine either that my efforts would be seen as threatening or that such wanton disregard for public rights would result. So, on behalf of all of us who might want to participate and a more democratic community that could result, I have kept trying to get those rights restored.
Some small progress is being made. Our current mayor, Ramona Padilla, placed an item on the Feb. 24, 2015 agenda to consider restoration of the language regarding public participation on the agenda packet cover sheet. She had requested the city manager, Rich Wilkinson, to provide that language in the agenda packet. Unfortunately he provided wording for only one of the three rights he removed. The discussion between council and staff revealed conflicting ideas about what rights the public should have to participate, and the city manager was instructed to explore what other cities allow. The fact that the City of Lindsay once accorded these rights didn’t seem to matter.
March 9th I got an email saying Rich Wilkinson would like to meet with me regarding the agenda. We had our meeting on the 12th. He said he wanted to know what would satisfy my concerns, and that the language couldn’t just be restored for a long list of reasons I cannot remember. I told him how I perceived it: that it was an act of violence against the public that still needed healing. I said that those words were removed in order to squelch public participation, and that putting them back would be a sign to the public that we aren’t having that kind of governance anymore. He said he’d never heard me say it so clearly before. I didn’t say that obviously we still have that kind of governance, despite the increased responsiveness of our current city council.
I told him it’s not the language that’s so important – it’s the rights: the right to ask that an item be removed from the consent calendar for discussion in public; the right to ask questions and make comments on agenda items when they are being discussed during the council meeting; and the right to place an item on the council agenda. We had all those rights prior to Valentine’s Day, 2012, although few of us knew them, and when those of us who did know tried to exercise them, we often were denied.
We worked over the three rights to find potential language to represent them; he said he’d email a draft to me the week after his vacation. After we’ve reached a consensus, he’ll pass it by the city attorney for his approval before submitting it to the council. He hoped we’d have it ready by the April 28 meeting. I think it’s possible we’re on our way to a more open, more respectful form of governance. I just hope this isn’t “April Fools.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy
Wischemann is a community researcher/advocate who writes. You can send her your public participation
stories c/o P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA 93247 or leave a
comment below.
No comments:
Post a Comment