To listen, to be heard, the beginning of a relationship!
Written by Stephen Box, Hollywood Resident and Bike Activist http://SoapBoxLA.blogspot.com
I’m a frequent visitor to City Hall, attending Commission meetings, Committee meetings and City Council meetings and I take quite seriously our right to speak up, to participate and to advise our leadership on the issues that are important to me.
Most recently I attended City Council when the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights came up for endorsement, when the City’s new parking policies came up for review and when the Neighborhood Council File Motion issue came up for approval.
On the first occasion, I attended the City Council session to speak in favor of the CBR and, as the co-author, to respond to some of the anticipated debate from the Councilmembers. There was plenty of debate and lots of discussion but when it came time for public comment, City council Pro Tem Wendy Greuel acknowledged my speaker card but declined to allow me to speak, pointing out that I had already spoken on the issue in a Committee meeting. Ah well, the motion to endorse passed so I left pleased that at least I was able to witness the victory, even if I wasn’t allowed to participate.
On the second occasion, I attended the City Council, hoping to speak in favor of greater outreach to Neighborhood Councils when the City and its Departments are implementing policies and projects that affect our communities. Again, there was much debate and a significant amount of discussion along with obscure references to the Red Line and Marshall High School and all sorts of nonsense. When it came time for public comment, Council President Eric Garcetti acknowledged my speaker card but pointed out that the Council was not required to take public comment, as the public had already had the opportunity to comment at a prior session. Of course, “not required” does not prevent the Council from allowing the two speakers to speak but the will was not there.
On the third occasion, I journeyed to City Hall to engage in the discussion of the proposed City Council File Motion which would provide Neighborhood Councils with the opportunity to introduce files to the City Council, receiving a file number and becoming part of the work product of the City Council. This issue has been brewing for over a year. It is hotly discussed and involves a financial disclosure element that some refer to as the “poison pill.” I turned in a speaker card and this time I was given the opportunity to speak.
I was brief and succinct, finishing before the clock ran out on my two minutes. I simply spoke from the perspective of a community organizer and stated my belief that the financial disclosure element would have a chilling effect on the civic engagement process, all at a time when we are working to involve the community in the business of our city.
I was flattered to hear those same words repeated by a Councilmember at a recent community event. Perhaps somebody was listening.
All of which brings me to the posted picture. I snapped the picture and posted it, chiding Garcetti, Greuel and Rosendahl for having a private conversation while Commissioners Lucks and Abrams were testifying and Councilwoman Perry was responding.
It was gently pointed out to me by one of the participants that there are times that they have to engage in “Council business” which requires them to take their focus off the proceedings.
Fair enough. But the more I think about this, the more resolute I become; I AM Council business. The public is the reason for all of the work that takes place and ultimately, WE are the business of the City. In the grand scheme of things, the two minutes at the podium on an issue that has probably already been decided is less significant that the real need here for a real conversation. After all, great relationships all start with a great conversation.
Here’s to hoping that there are great conversations on the horizon, not just blog entries, not just two minutes at the podium but real conversations with a real dialogue that allow us to better understand each other and to work together on the business of Los Angeles.
Categorized as:City Council You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Oh Stephen, you’re such an idealist. H.L. Mencken said an idealist is someone who notices that roses smell better than cabbage and then concludes that they would also make better soup.
But I don’t buy that definition. I think Victor Frankel said it best when he said that “idealism is the real realism.”
What if it weren’t just you and Zuma Dog and a couple other gadflies who showed up to City Council meetings? What if more people came to neighborhood council meetings? What if people took a walk, rode the metro, got on a bike or talked to their neighbors?
It can happen here.
Comment by David Bell — January 27, 2009 @ 10:31 am
Yesterday while I was knocking on doors and introducing myself to voters in Atwater Village, I ran into a voter who shared his frustration with going to City Council meetings and not feeling listened to. It’s truly unfortunate as it breeds the distrust of government that holds us all back when we should be working together to address the economic climate of our communities and crime and violence problems on our streets.
I hope that the March 3 elections, whatever their outcome, will bring a renewed focus on the people of Los Angeles, which we so desperately need right now. Empty rhetoric about serving the people and then not allowing people the opportunity to speak at public meetings is not the way to do so.
Comment by Gary Slossberg — January 29, 2009 @ 9:55 am