From: Fre
To: Meredith Matthews; Stacy Atkins-Salazar; Alex Stillman; Kimberley White; Sarah Schaefer; City Manager"s Office Subject: Please do not eliminate Zoom / Phone public comment Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 4:30:19 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
To: Honorable Mayor Stillman, Vice-Mayor White, Councilmembers Matthews, Atkins-Salazar, and Schaefer
City Manager Perry
From: Fred Weis
I am writing about the proposed revisions to the City Officials’ Protocol Manual. Specifically, the elimination of Zoom and phone-in comments from the public.
I regard this to be the wrong way to solve the existing, acknowledged problem with this method of public input.
Further, I think you have a Brown Act violation on the Agenda.
I apologize for the lateness of this note. I only just found out about this matter.
1.It is my view that for the City of Arcata to allow public comment to take place via Zoom and phone-in is a highly important – and crucial – element of our democratic process.
2.The stated issue with Zoom:
The staff report includes:
“The City has experienced recurring issues with public participation via Zoom.
Specifically, individuals have been able to provide multiple comments during a single public comment period by using different profiles or aliases. This practice results in unequal representation among members of the public and significantly prolongs meetings, reducing the time available for the Council to deliberate and act on agendized items. Eliminating Zoom comments ensures that all participants are treated equally and that the Council can efficiently conduct its business.” Eliminating a valid process because there is a problem with it is not a solution.
Fixing the process so that there cannot be duplicate profiles would be a proper solution. There are a variety of ways to fix this problem.
3.Brown Act violation on this item.
I believe there is a Brown Act violation on the City Council Agenda for this item.
Under “New Business” the Agenda states:
“b. Review and Approve Revisions to the City Officials’ Protocol Manual.” I regard this as an insufficient and potentially misleading Agenda title. To be specific – I had no idea what this Agenda item was about. A friend pointed it out to me.
The Brown Act requires that the titles and descriptions of all agenda items for a meeting shall be written so that an interested member of the public can understand what it is that will be discussed at the meeting.
On an agenda, the title in itself should be clear. It should not be overly vague. A short description of the agenda item, if required for clarity, does not need to exceed 20 words and should contain essential information about the item to members of the public. The description can be longer. But — very specifically by law — the title and description should in no way be written as an attempt to mislead or deceive the public.
Further, the Court has ruled that where it is “relatively little effort” to provide an easyto-understand title or description of an agenda item, the agenda must be written so as not to give the appearance of an attempt to deceive or mislead the public.
An overly vague title, where it would not be much effort to provide a clear and understandable title and description, is considered by the Court as a violation of State law.
4.I regard the elimination of Zoom and phone-in public comment as a substantial insult to the people of Arcata.
It is not just the infirm and immune-compromised and the elderly who may have trouble attending a City Council meeting. It is also family members who are caring for their children at that time during a weekday. There are transportation issues, and weather issues (such as tonight). It is, essentially, every citizen who might want to speak but cannot or is not willing to attend a live meeting.
Please put yourself in their shoes. When the time comes when you are not on the Council, will you be wanting to physically attend a City Council meeting in order to add your comments?
With the public comment period being at the end of the meeting, there is no telling when in the evening (i.e. what time) that public comment will take place.
The last time you saw me was at the AFD / City Council joint study session, on September 10. Shortly after that meeting, I came down with an unfortunately difficult case of Covid – which now almost two months later I am still affected by. I cannot definitively say that my illness resulted from that meeting; however other than that meeting I have very little contact with the public. I am not blaming anyone. But I also do not want to go to a public meeting and sit in proximity to other people.
The elimination of Zoom and phone-in public comment is NOT in the public’s interest.
Please re-think this situation. There are better solutions to the problem.
What I want:
I understand – while not fully agreeing with – the other changes to the City Officials’ Protocol Manual.
But please leave this elimination of Zoom and phone-in public comment out of your changes tonight. It is a real slap in the face to all involved citizens, and, from my point of view, would reflect very poorly on you as a Council. I know you to be open and caring Councilmembers.
Thank you for your service to our community.
Fred Weis