The Common Council held its first meeting of the new year on Monday. The first part of the meeting was the body's annual organizational meeting, when various things typically happen, among them adopting the Rules of Order for the year and announcing the majority and minority leaders for the upcoming term.
Regarding the Rules of Order, which can be found here, there was one substantive change: Rule #8, which has to with comments from the public. The text of the amended rule follows:
Rule #8 Non-Members Addressing the Council
At the discretion of the Chair, non-members, after identifying themselves and providing their place of residence, may address a question before the Council or new business at the new business portion of the meeting, in each case, after council members have discussed the issue at hand. As with council members, non-members first must be recognized by the Chair. The Chair has the authority to limit the number of speakers and the time allocated to each person. Any non-member seeking to speak must do so in an orderly manner and shall not engage in conduct which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting. Nor shall any non-member engage in any threatening manner or abusive language directed at any member of the Council, City Department representative, or member of the public. If any person continues to engage in such behavior after being warned by the Chairperson to cease such behavior, Chair may order the removal of said person from the meeting.
Previously Rule #8 consisted only of the first three sentences of the text reproduced above. The amended Rule #8, which could be given an eponymous title, was undoubtedly inspired by an incident that incurred at the informal Council meeting in November.
As has happened frequently in the past, the Common Council is once again made up exclusively of Democrats. As a consequence, the idea of a majority leader and a minority leader seems a bit meaningless. Still there are duties in city government assigned to councilmembers holding these titles--serving on the IDA (Industrial Development Agency) and HCDPA (Hudson Community Development & Planning Agency)--so Council majority and minority leaders must be named. At Monday's meeting it was announced that, for the next two years, Margaret Morris (First Ward) will be the majority leader, and Dominic Merante (Fifth Ward) will be the minority leader. Merante was majority leader in the previous term (2022-2023).
In the past, the organizational meeting was also the time when the makeup of committees was announced. Instead, Council president Tom DePietro asked councilmembers to volunteer for committees. The committees that currently exist are the Legal Committee and two ad hoc committees--one devoted to the truck route and the other to parking. At the meeting, councilmember Morris brought up the issue reinstating standing committees.
Standing committees had been part of the structure of the Common Council for more than 150 years, but in January 2021, DePietro eliminated all standing committees and decreed that department heads would report to the full Council at its informal meeting rather than making their reports at committee meetings. A few months later, in August 2021, the Legal Committee, one of the traditional standing committees, was revived. There were calls last year to reinstate the Police Committee, after a shooting incident that shattered a plate glass window at The Maker, but instead DePietro asked then councilmember Theo Anthony (Fourth Ward), to conduct a quarterly forum on public safety. If those forums ever happened, they were not announced on the city calendar.
In arguing for the return of standing committees, Morris mentioned five committees in particular, all of which have existed previously in some form:
- Finance
- Public Safety
- Infrastructure
- Youth & Aging
- Economic Development
After that, the organizational meeting was adjourned.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK
In addition to doing away with a mayor as chief executive and hiring a competent city manager through much needed charter reform, we should also replace the council president position by having the council elect a speaker on an annual basis to preside over the council. This position is too powerful for how little is known about it from the low-info/low-turnout voting base. The current system is too vulnerable to unopposed presidents becoming petit tyrants and hampering any productivity or transparency in the council. Besides eliminating committees, where citizens had more opportunities to participate, the current God-Emperor also has a habit of shutting down any comments or questions from the council members themselves if they go longer than about 15 seconds - the very representatives of the people. This has all greatly reduced the amount of opportunities for discussion, debate and deliberation.
ReplyDeleteAlso, did they forget this week, or have they decided to stop posting the meeting video to YouTube?
Democracy dies in darkness.
Regarding the video recording of the meeting, I asked Michael Hofmann, mayor's aide, about that this morning. It seems the switch from Zoom to Microsoft Teams has made posting the video to YouTube more complicated, and he has not had a chance to do it yet.
DeleteDon't be surprised if meetings no longer make it to youtube. Who knows, maybe this was the real reason for the change from Zoom.
DeleteYou would be hard pressed to find a municipality in the USofA where the person running the council meetings has "the authority to limit the number of speakers and the amount of time allocated to each person." That's authoritarian stuff. Don't like someone, the questions or comments they have that put some on the spot or make people uncomfortable, the color of their skin or hair or how loud they speak or the critical words (opinions) they have of elected and appointed officials, especially the chairman himself? Shut them out! Heck, the mayor may even interrupt and demand "He (or she) has got to go!"
ReplyDeleteIf you really want the public to participate and you truly want to hear what they have to say, you offer everyone at least a few minutes of speaking time, with no qualifications or exceptions besides the disruption issue (which is not easy to determine and can be very subjective), and no interruptions or limit to the number of questions being asked during that allowed time. It's called being respectful, inclusive and decent, maybe even democratic. What an idea!
Also, Tom's "one question" crap has got to go - it's his way of controlling the public. Ever notice how much he interrupts council members and the public? Before Tom's time in the chair, this was not the case. Maybe there should be term limits for the council chairman as well as the mayor. What an idea!
While I don't think the public should be allowed to prattle on forever, and they should follow decorum (wink wink), they should be allowed a set number of minutes per topic, when the floor is open to the public. Furthermore, extra leeway should be given to members of the council by the president. As it stands, Ms. Morris seem to be the only member to ask questions anymore.
DeleteIf I was ever interested in attending a CC meeting, this new rule certainly makes me rethink that. Why attend a meeting to express an opinion only to be shut down if Tom doesn't like the question/comment or the way it's asked. Next he'll be appointing a sergeant at arms.
ReplyDeleteThere is a sergeant-at-arms. If I recall, the chief of police gave Bill the 'ol "bum's rush" out the door when he got ornery in the meeting mentioned in the story above.
Delete