CA Review CKM
Meeting Date: May 10, 2022
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Sheila Cobian, Legislative & Constituent Services Director [email protected], 442-339-2917
Subject: City Council Meeting Public Participation Options District: All
Recommended Action
Consider providing a mechanism for members of the public to participate virtually in City Council meetings and other public meetings.
Executive Summary
On Feb. 8, 2022, the City Council voted to return to in-person public meetings. In the discussion before that vote, the City Council asked staff to continue to look into options to provide a mechanism for members of the public to participate in public meetings both virtually and in-person. Staff had previously requested that the city’s public meeting audio/visual support contractor, AVI Systems Inc., propose a solution and costs associated with implementing such a solution.
This report provides the options the City Council requested for its consideration.
Discussion
The City Council, in its Feb. 8 discussion, directed staff to return with additional information regarding all costs associated with implementing a hybrid approach to public commenting at meetings. The City Council also requested that staff survey other cities to find out if hybrid commenting is offered at their public meetings.
Installing the technology and equipment that would allow community members to take part in the public comment portions of in-person City Council meetings from other locations would cost approximately $20,000, according to the estimate provided by AVI Systems. Staff had initially anticipated that such a platform could be operational by March 2022. However, due to supply chain challenges staff is unable to provide an accurate implementation date at this time but would hope to provide the hybrid commenting feature by the end of the calendar year.
It should be noted that administering all public meetings in a virtual format has already placed a strain on resources in the City Clerk’s Office and the Information Technology Department. Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the City Clerk’s Office would assign two staff members to the administration of City Council meetings, and support from the Information Technology Department was not required. To administer public meetings with the hybrid commenting feature, it would be necessary to dedicate an additional staff member from the City Clerk’s Office to attend all City Council meetings and an Information Technology staff person to attend all public meetings should City Council wish to also have City boards and commissions offer the virtual commenting option as well.
May 10, 2022 Item #13 Page 1 of 3
If the City Council chooses to pursue providing a way to enable community members to make public comments at in-person meetings virtually, from other locations, modifications to the Carlsbad Municipal Code relating to the facilitation of public commenting would also be necessary. These changes relate to the order in which commenters are called on to speak. The Carlsbad Municipal Code currently requires that public speakers be permitted to speak in the order that their speaker card is submitted to staff.
Implementing virtual commenting in addition to in-person commenting would require that we identify a method of tracking the order of the requests to speak in both the virtual format and in-person format.
Staff surveyed the 17 other San Diego County cities and determined that only three provide an option for live virtual commenting in addition to the in-person commenting at their public meetings.
Public comment policies in San Diego County cities
City In-person only In-person and virtual
Chula Vista X
Coronado X*
Del Mar X**
El Cajon X
Encinitas X
Escondido X
Imperial Beach X
La Mesa X
Lemon Grove X
National City X
Oceanside X
Poway X
San Diego X
San Marcos X
Santee X
Solana Beach X
Vista X
*Phasing out virtual commenting option
**Currently meeting virtually, but upon return to in-person meetings will only accept comments in person Options
1. Provide a mechanism that will allow members of the public to participate in public meetings virtually
Pros
• Expanded opportunities for public participation at public meetings • Increased input for City Council consideration throughout decision-making process • Community members have appreciated this option during the pandemic Cons
• Administering in-person and virtual commenting may be logistically challenging, technical problems could cause delays in meetings
• Increased equipment, software and personnel costs
2. Maintain current public participation procedures, requiring people to appear in person to provide public comments
May 10, 2022 Item #13 Page 2 of 3
Pros
• Community members are familiar with the traditional in-person method of public participation
• No increase in equipment, software and personnel costs Cons
• Could limit the amount of public participation at public meetings Fiscal Analysis
Funding for the approximately $20,000 in estimated costs for procuring and installing the hardware and software to facilitate virtual and in-person commenting at public meetings is available in the city’s Local Cable Infrastructure Fund.
Funding for the additional overtime for one member of the City Clerk’s Office to administer the virtual commenting option is estimated at an annual cost of $5,620.
The change would require additional technical staff presence throughout the meeting. If this format is only desired for City Council meetings, the Information Technology Department could accommodate this staffing with existing staff on overtime. Should the City Council decide to have all public meetings continue to have a consistent format, additional technical staff would be required. Funding for a dedicated Information Technology staff person to attend all public meetings is estimated at $137,000 annually while overtime only for City Council meetings is estimated at $10,200 annually.
Should the City Council wish to also provide the virtual commenting feature for all board and commission meetings, additional funding may be necessary for added personnel from each department that facilitates the meetings of those boards and commissions.
Next Steps
Staff will carry out the City Council’s direction.
Environmental Evaluation
This action does not constitute a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act under California Public Resources Code Section 21065 in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Therefore, it does not require environmental review.
Public Notification
This item was noticed in keeping with the Ralph M. Brown Act and it was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
None.
May 10, 2022 Item #13 Page 3 of 3