STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of February 13, 2024
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Dante Hall, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Eibleis Melendez, City Clerk
Patrick Tang, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Policy Regarding Remote Public Participation
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Provide direction to staff regarding a remote participation option for members of the public at public meetings.
BACKGROUND:
At the January 9, 2024, City Council meeting, the Council approved a request from Council Member Bailey for staff to provide an update on the City’s current policy suspending public comment via Zoom.
The Brown Act (CA Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.) requires that the City Council conduct business in open, public, and noticed meetings. Before the Covid-19 Pandemic, all City Council meetings were held in person and there were no options for “real time” remote participation, although comment could be submitted in writing in advance of the meetings. During COVID-19, the City implemented technology upgrades to accommodate the Zoom platform as a format for the public to engage in public meetings remotely and safely. The City Council and Planning Commission meetings were organized to provide the public with remote participation options. This allowed for public participation that otherwise would not have been possible due to the Covid lockdown.
In late 2023, cities in the surrounding area and throughout the State that, like Hercules, added the capability for remote public participation experienced an uptick in organized attacks by remote participants who made racist, homophobic, and antisemitic comments via Zoom, a phenomenon known as “Zoom Bombing”. These attacks take advantage of the Zoom open participation platform and are clearly intended to spread a hateful ideology. It is a cynical strategy that hijacks a public entity’s efforts to expand citizen outreach to instead spread dissension and hate. Out of an abundance of caution, and to prevent the City’s technology and electronic outreach from being misused in such a manner, staff recommended, and the City Council concurred, that remote participation should be suspended for the foreseeable future. During the suspension of remote participation, the public has been able to listen and watch via Zoom, but unable to provide public comment from remote locations. Currently, if a member of the public would like to provide a public comment, they can attend the meeting in-person or submit their public comment in advance via email to the City Clerk.
Based on anecdotal information it appears that instances of Zoom Bombing decreased towards the end of 2023. This may be the result of the responsible hate groups becoming less active, but could also be due to the measures taken by various public agencies to prevent being targeted by reducing or eliminating the option for remote public participation. However, coordinated Zoom Bombing is still occurring and remains a real possibility as long as the City provides a platform that can be exploited by such attacks. It has come to the attention of Staff that a Zoom Bombing occurred as recently as February 6, 2024, during a City of Richmond council meeting.
There are hundreds of public entities in California. Assuming these attacks are random in nature, the chances of Hercules being targeted may appear slim. However with many public entities eliminating remote public access (see City Clerk’s Survey, attached), the probability increases that a public entity in the remaining pool of entities offering remote participation will eventually be targeted.
ANALYSIS:
The City Clerk’s office surveyed surrounding agencies (Attachment 1). Out of twenty-five (25) cities, twelve (12) cities either no longer offer the option to attend City Council meetings remotely or have not returned to remote participation due to the “Zoom Bombing” that their city experienced. Seven (7) cities offer a hybrid option with limitations, such as limiting general public comment to in person attendees or reducing the amount of time allowed for public comment. The remaining six (6) cities never suspended remote participation. Below is a list of potential opportunities and obstacles in allowing remote participation via Zoom.
Opportunities:
Remote participation allows for an additional means for the public to communicate with their elected officials.
Provides greater accessibility to citizens who have mobility or childcare issues and are unable to attend a public meeting in person.
Having the ability to watch a meeting and comment remotely may increase public participation.
Even if a coordinated attack were to occur, the City could respond by affirming its core values and making it clear the City rejects and condemns the hate speech.
Obstacles:
The addition of remote public comment makes public entities vulnerable to nefarious groups outside the jurisdiction, possibly out of the State, that would use the remote participation option to mount coordinated attacks to spread hate speech.
These hate groups are highly organized and disruptive and they actively seek out opportunities to use the broadcast of public meetings as a forum for spreading hate and dissention.
The use of Zoom for public comment creates challenges in controlling disruptive behavior during public meetings since participants on Zoom can be anonymous.
The organized nature of the attacks can “crowd out” local citizens who want to participate remotely. This could have a chilling effect on the free speech of Hercules residents who may avoid participating in public meetings and/or sharing personally identifying information for fear of being personally targeted by organized hate groups.
The following are a list of options to consider moving forward:
Return to allowing remote public comment by way of Zoom before the suspension was implemented.
Accept remote public comment only for specific items on the agenda. According to the City Attorney this would provide only limited ability to address content based speech.
Accept public comment both in person and remotely but the time the public is allowed to speak would be reduced from the three (3) minutes that is currently in place. This option would mean that citizens who appear in person to speak to their elected officials would also be subject to the shortened comment period.
Continue to provide a hybrid option to watch and listen to the meeting, but public comment can only be received in person or via email.
Pursuant to California Government Code, the City is not obligated to provide remote participation options in meetings; most public agencies provide it as a courtesy. If the City Council directs staff to bring back the use of Zoom for remote public comments, applicable law would not allow the City to impose restrictions upon remote participants (such as residency restrictions or requiring speakers to identify themselves).
During the remote participation suspension period, October 2023 to present, the City has not received complaints from the public regarding the modified participation policy. It should also be noted that during the period that remote public speaker participation was allowed, the option was rarely utilized, suggesting that a continuation of the suspension would not materially affect the level of public participation in public meetings in Hercules.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no additional fiscal impact associated with the list of options moving forward identified above.
ATTACHMENTS:
Remote Participation Survey of Local Agencies