City Council Agenda Report
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ken Irwin, City Manager
BY: Nubia Goldstein, City Attorney
MEETING DATE: October 17, 2023
ITEM NO: 8.1
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 2023-51 providing direction to staff regarding the use of Zoom during City Council meetings, limiting Zoom participation to City of Patterson staff and consultants attending a City Council meeting remotely, but prohibiting public comment via Zoom unless a City Council member is participating in the meeting via Zoom.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Adopt Resolution No. 2023-51 providing direction to staff regarding the use of Zoom during City Council meetings, limiting Zoom participation to City of Patterson staff and consultants attending a City Council meeting remotely, but prohibiting public comment via Zoom unless a City Council member is participating in the meeting via Zoom.
BACKGROUND
Recently, there has been an increase in instances of members of the public anonymously interrupting city council meetings throughout the region through virtual attendance platforms such as Zoom. Currently, the City of Patterson (“City”) allows public participation in City Council meetings via Zoom at all City Council meetings, whether a City Council member is attending the City Council meeting remotely or not.
Recently, there has been an increase in instances of members of the public anonymously interrupting city council meetings throughout the region through virtual attendance platforms such as Zoom. Currently, the City of Patterson (“City”) allows public participation in City Council meetings via Zoom at all City Council meetings, whether a City Council member is attending the City Council meeting remotely or not.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
The Brown Act is California’s statutory “open meetings” requirement, focused on providing transparency at the local government level. The Brown Act requires, among other obligations, that “legislative bodies,” a category that encompasses city councils, include in “[e]very agenda for regular meetings…an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public, before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item, that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body,” as well as an opportunity to comment during special meetings.
The Brown Act also requires that all regular and special meetings be held in the physical presence of the public, with limited exceptions. During the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, AB 361 allowed for meetings to be held entirely virtually. Under the provisions of AB 361, virtual meetings were required to permit live public comment via the internet. AB 361 became inactive in February of 2023 when the State of Emergency associated with the Covid-19 pandemic expired. Since the expiration of AB 361, City Council members have only been allowed to participate in meetings virtually under certain circumstances,. When a member of the City Council teleconferences into a meeting, the opportunity for public comment must also be available virtually.
At a meeting that all City Council members participate in-person, there is no requirement that members of the public be allowed to comment virtually. The Brown Act requires merely that the public be permitted to directly address the City Council, and notes that the “legislative body…may adopt reasonable regulations” for streamlining public comment.
Currently, the City permits public comment in a variety of ways including live comment via Zoom. Because public comment provided via Zoom was not an option for public comment at City Council meetings prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, it would be reasonable regulation to prohibit the public from commenting via Zoom, while allowing participation by City staff and consultants to participate remotely.
Limiting public comment via Zoom helps to ensure that City Council meetings are not disrupted in a manner that prevents the City from conducting its business. Remote participation by City staff and consultants allows the City to have staff participation at City Council meetings where staff may be unable to remain at City offices on evenings when City Council meetings occur, and saves the City money where consultants would otherwise travel to City Council meetings and charge the City for travel. The requirements for virtual public comment are only triggered if a City Council member participates remotely, and do not apply to City staff or consultants.
POLICY ALTERNATIVES:
The Council’s Options are:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-51 without any changes;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-51with changes and revisions ; or
3. Reject Resolution No. 2023-51 entirely.