One element of online-only city council meetings is that the council sometimes votes on resolutions, like the resolution establishing city council committees they're voting on now, that no one in the public has had an opportunity to see before the vote.
Conversation
There was an unusual amount of interest in the council presidency, a decision that was also concealed from the public (although I reported on it yesterday), until the actual vote today. The justification for this kind of opacity has always been unclear.
1
1
32
When meetings happened in person, the council also rolled out resolutions without putting them online, but people in the room could at least look at the printouts, which were generally provided in real time.
1
20
Online meetings have had so many consequences, and I fear that some will be permanent, including changes that have reduced government transparency even as it has become easier to literally see the meetings as they happen.
1
7
35
I have asked for the resolution, which is not online, and was told that I need to wait for an official press release at some point later this afternoon.
2
2
19
This precedent has been set for a while, but it's not a good one; the public should have the right to see legislation of public interest before it is passed. Just because this is how the council does things now, doesn't mean it's a best (or even okay) practice.
Here are the committee assignments. The council meeting where these were walked on (and not posted online) has adjourned.
3
13
30
The resolution detailing the makeup of council committees was "walked on," a common practice for urgent or timely legislation that seems unnecessary in this case since the council agreed to these committees long before this afternoon.
3
19
Prior to March 2020, "walk-on" legislation was literally walked on, in the sense that those in the room could at least SEE it physically (and post details online) prior to the vote. Now, "walked-on" means that individual council members working remotely have seen it.
1
1
17
This is slippery language, and a slippery slope. Plus, it's unnecessary; unless the aim is to preserve an element of drama and surprise (which council member will be chosen?!), there's no reason not to post resolutions to which all council members have agreed BEFORE a vote.
1
24
The slippery slope is that less transparency leads to less transparency. Normalizing bad practices makes them seem routine, and they get ingrained into unofficial and official city policies.
2
1
31
Releasing the details of legislation (via press release, no less) after that legislation has been approved does not serve the public interest and is a reduction of transparency that I fear won't be reversed even when the council resumes meeting in person, whenever that is.
1
32