by Councilmember David Crowley:

Some folks don�t seem to understand why some of us on Council are raising issues about the rules of Council and why these issues are so very important. 

I�d like to give one example of why I think it is important that we proceed cautiously. 

Rule 7.14 Deliberative Policymaking of our current rules says �Council motions calling for administration action, the expenditure of funds or a change in policy direction must be before the public for at least one full week, allowing an opportunity for public comment at no less than one committee meeting following the meeting where the item is publicly introduced�..�

The proposed rule changes that are before us today include NO changes to this rule.

Though it is debatable I believe that these significant rule changes are substantial policy changes and certainly the intent of this section of the rules is very clear. We don�t want things affecting the public�s business rushed through Council. We first received drafts of these changes on Monday at 1pm, 2 days ago, much less than the week the rules call for. 

So the action proposed today to substantially change the way in which the public�s business is conducted, which we all agree are significant changes, violates both the existing rules and the proposed rule changes before us. 

Just so the public understands in order to take this action I believe we will have to bypass our own rules of Council. If the new rules as proposed were in effect right now we would have to bypass the rules. If we are serious about new rules of decorum, which are effective and adhered to, let�s follow them today. 

I move that these rule changes be held one week in order to comply with the clear intent of our own Council rules and to give the general public an opportunity to fully understand the implications of these rules.

[For that matter I would also argue that items # 1 and 2 on our calendar today be held one week for the same reason.]

Some folks may plan on passing rules and then constantly ignoring them but I don�t.

I think it is disingenuous to the public and to ourselves to conduct business this way. 

I hope that this does not become habit around here because when more substantial issues come before us the public needs to be informed. 

In committee I was able to get through many of the reservations I have about specific proposed changes but I feel that this example, rule 7.14, demonstrates my concerns. Again I ask what is the rush? 

• Share This Article!
Listen to this article

del.icio.us

Furl It

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can log in above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.