Minute madness
Last night's Rosemead City Council meeting was fast. But it was also extremely frustrating. Council members balked at one another over whether to change minutes from summary to action; debated on why hard copies of city documents are sometimes better than computerized documents; and accused one another of preventing Rosemead from being transparent.
Councilmembers Maggie Clark and Gary Taylor said last night that the decision to go from summary meetings, which has more detail than action minutes, is just another attempt by majority to keep residents in the dark.
Mayor John Tran and Councilwoman Polly Low, however, both said that was ludicrous, and that it was Clark and Taylor that have been trying to keep the actions in City Hall distant from the public.
What I wish I could have told them last night was this: No one cares about the minutes. And even if they did, they don't have access to them.
Case in point: Last night, traffic commissioner Brian Lewin, who attends nearly every meeting, spoke on an issue about the city wanting to raise the rates for those who use the community centers. Brian went up to the podium, and spoke for nearly five minutes about how this is fine, but we shouldn't raise the rates for Rosemead residents.
If Brian would have read the staff report, he would have seen that that is exactly what is being suggested, Gary Taylor pointed out to Lewin.
But Brian didn't read the report. Why? I'm going to speculate that he didn't read it for a few reasons.
No. 1: Residents only have two days before the meeting to review the staff reports, which sit on the counter Monday and Tuesday. And they have to make sure to go to City Hall or to the library to do so.
No. 2: Unlike at most other cities, which make their staff reports available to the public DURING the meeting, Rosemead keeps those documents locked up.
No. 3: The documents aren't available online. If they were, I am sure someone like Brian Lewin would read them.
So, who cares how detailed the minutes are if the public can't view them?
Comments
That is exactly it! Ms. Clark says that if the minutes aren't detailed, no one can see the explanation for why they voted the way they did. But that presumes that regular people actually read the minutes. Hey, I've walked all over the city of Rosemead during several campaigns, and I've talked to hundreds (if not thousands) of indviduals. NO ONE has ever asked me a question about something they read in the meeting minutes!
Besides, the purpose of minutes is not to serve anyone's electoral ambitions. It's the elected official's job to explain their votes, not the city clerk's (the city clerk is responsible for producing the meeting minutes).
Clark also noted that few people come to the city council meetings. I would submit that one of the reasons for that low turnout is the length of the meetings, and that one of the reasons they run so long is that they spend so much time debating the minutes from previous meetings.
Shifting to action minutes will take that recurring point of contention off the table. It'll mean quicker meetings. It'll mean fewer chances for them to get into shouting matches over the exact wording they used, or whether the minutes should accurately reflect what was said versus what was meant, or whether the minutes should say that someone "interrupted" versus if someone "noted" or "observed."
I welcome this change and I hope it will lead to more efficient and more civil city council meetings in Rosemead.
Posted by: Todd K | May 14, 2008 2:15 PM