City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 24, 2022
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 10
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Discussion and direction to staff on best practices to change the Agenda formatting to make Council meetings more efficient and consideration of cost and implementation of Hybrid meetings with a call-in option Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and comment on changing the Council meeting agenda formatting to make meetings more efficient;
2. Discuss potential for hybrid meetings with a call-in option for all boards and commission meetings; and,
3. Provide direction to staff to come back with resolutions amending the Rules of Order and Procedure for the Conduct of City Council meetings, and amending the Establishing Policies for City Boards, Commissions, Committees, Task Forces, and Regional Advisory Boards.
Summary
In response to Council direction to look at ways Council meetings can conclude by 11 p.m. and improve meeting management generally, and allow for remote public comment, staff, have prepared the following options for Council to consider:
• changing meeting start time and establishing a fixed public meeting start time, • modifying public comment procedures,
• setting separate special meetings for appeals and study sessions, • establishing an earlier deadline to submit Councilmember items, and • requiring Council Ad Hoc Committees to report back to the full Council quarterly. 2 of 10
This report also provides an assessment of what is required to support live remote public comment for Council and boards and commission meetings. Staff would return with changes to the Rules of Order and Procedure for the Conduct of City Council Meetings based on direction provided at this study session.
Discussion
The City has a robust set of Boards and Commissions and even after some restructuring there remain 16 Boards and Commissions, two special City Boards, one Task Force, as well as the City Council meetings. While some of these groups are meeting quarterly, the normal meeting schedule results in for these bodies is to meeting at least monthly. Council, Planning Commission, and certain other boards meet more often. In fact, Council held 41 meetings last year. In addition to these bodies, many have subcommittees that regularly meet and are also subject to the same Brown Act requirements for public access and participation. This can result in the City hosting between twelve and up to twenty public meetings in a month, some held during normal business hours and others held in the evening.
Meeting Format and Structure
A review of past staff reports and resolutions regarding City Council meeting format and structure suggests that, while changes have been made to the Order of Business over the years, the overall structure of meetings has largely remained the same with meetings taking place after business hours and ending in the late evening or early the next morning. Through the years, previous Councils have considered various ways to change the agenda format to make the meetings be both more productive as well as more efficient. (See attached Info Item from Nov. 2021) Below is a list of options for Council to consider incorporating as part of their Rules of Order.
Closed Session and Meeting Different Start Time Options:
• Begin closed session earlier (4:30 p.m. or 5:00 p.m.). 3 of 10
• Establish a fixed public meeting start time that would mandate closed session end after an hour or hour and a half and continue any outstanding items to the end of open session or to another meeting.
• Set a separate special meeting to hear closed session. This would allow the public meeting to start at 5:30 p.m. and reserve the entire evening for the public portion of the agenda but would mean allocating another set time to hear Closed Session matters.
• Continue to support not hearing any other agenda items, with the exception of public input, after the 11:00 p.m. hard stop for open session and continue any outstanding items to the next regular meeting or to a special meeting.
Modify Public Comment Procedures
• Hold all public comment at the start of the meeting on agenda and non-agenda items.
• Allow public comment (non-agenda items only) to be heard at the start of the meeting.
• Hold public comment for closed session and consent items prior to adjourning into closed session.
Setting Separate Meetings for Appeals and Study Sessions • Schedule a third meeting each a month devoted strictly to appeals and study sessions. This does come with some tradeoffs. Most impacted would be our Planning staff who present the vast majority of the administrative appeals as well as many of the study sessions at Council who also attend Planning Commission meetings the alternate weeks of Council meetings. There would be additional demands of our Communications staff for airing meetings, City Clerk’s staff for meeting support, food cost, and Police Department staff for providing security.
Estimated Costs for Additional Council Meetings
Department Assignment Cost
Police Overtime for 2 Officers $1,016
4 of 10
Council Office Food $300
City TV Overtime for Production Staff $1,057
City Clerk Overtime for Council Meeting Support $213
TOTAL COST PER MONTH
TOTAL COST PER YEAR (12 additional meetings)
$2,586
$31,032
*This cost estimate does not include the additional costs associated with remote public meeting access
Council Discussion Items
• Move the Councilmember Discussion Items (13 items) deadline to Thursday or Friday of the week prior to the publication of the agenda to allow staff time to manage meeting agendas with the goal of concluding all meetings by 11:00 p.m. • Ad Hoc Updates to be provided to Council on a quarterly basis and seek direction from Council as needed
Hybrid/Remote Meetings Discussion
The Santa Monica City Council has historically provided two ways for the public to provide input on agenda items:
1. Written comments – The public may submit public comments in writing via email, or hard copy to the City Clerk’s Office prior to each meeting. These comments are attached with each agenda item and included in the official meeting record.
2. Oral Comment – Community members may come to a public meeting and provide public comment upon request. Generally. this comment is limited to two minutes but there are options for additional time.
The COVID-19 pandemic required the closure of City facilities and moving public meetings to a virtual platform that also allowed for remote public participation. While many members of the public have expressed a preference for remote public comment, there has been an overall reduction in public meeting participation since the onset of the pandemic in March 2020.
5 of 10
Since the Council and boards and commissions began meeting remotely in 2020, staff had the opportunity to evaluate different meeting software platforms as well as the staff and other resources required to support remote public meeting participation. Staff also had the opportunity to evaluate participation in meetings since the start of the pandemic.
Every system evaluated by staff required additional staffing and other costs to support.
While every City was tasked with ways to support public meetings safely during the pandemic, the City’s budget was uniquely impacted because of its significant reliance on tourism, technology sector, retail, parking revenues, and other revenue streams which rely on tourists, employees who spend their workdays here, and other visitors.
Many of the City’s revenue streams were severely curtailed as people were ordered to stay home. The resulting budget reductions and restructuring led to the loss of many administrative staff positions, many of whom staffed board and commission meetings.
Since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, the City suspended in-person meetings and moved all meetings to a completely remote model using the BlueJeans platform. In December 2020, the Council voted to have boards and commissions meet remotely on a quarterly basis, due to staffing shortages and disruptions from the pandemic. Those boards and commission without staffing for their boards and commissions were allowed to self-moderate and use audio recordings as their official record. With the uncertainty of the pandemic, Council extended quarterly meetings for those bodies that did not have staffing until July 2022.
In July 2021, the City Council moved to a hybrid model with the Council and some staff meeting in-person and CityTV providing a video stream through their channel, on the City website, and YouTube, with remote phone access through Call-in Studio. This model required a minimum of three staff members to run the remote meeting and call-in option, plus the City Clerk. Most boards and commissions will continue with quarterly remote meetings until at least July 2022. Unless there is a policy decision to change course, all boards, commissions, task force and advisory bodies will return to monthly in-person meetings, which will triple the amount of meetings and required support. 6 of 10
Starting earlier this year, state and local health mandates and restrictions are being rolled back. City Hall re-opened to the public, and starting April 12, 2022, City Council resumed in-person meetings and discontinued all forms of remote public comment.
Board and commission meetings, however, have continued with remote meetings under AB 361. The federal and state governments have both indicated further sunsetting of COVID protocols. Therefore, now is the time to implement a plan to reinstate in-person public meetings and to determine the feasibility of continuing remote public comment and how to effectively and efficiently staff Council and board and commission meetings.
Staff took into consideration the costs for facilities, technology, and staffing as well as overall public participation when providing a recommendation for an option for remote participation for Council and board and commission meetings.
Facilities
Once board and commission meetings return in-person, those meetings will be held at various city facility locations. It should be noted that, due to the pandemic, Ken Edwards Center, where several of the advisory bodies met, is no longer an option as a meeting location due to a lack of staffing and parking. Currently, no facilities have adequate audio visual and/or WiFi capabilities to allow remote meetings, including the Ken Edwards Center. Staff have identified other viable meeting locations within the City and evaluated what is needed to support remote meetings in these locations. This includes upgrading the Council Chambers at an approximate cost of $16,825, including an additional one-time cost of $78,119.51 to update identified meeting facilities, including listening devices for the hearing impaired.
Technology
The current virtual platforms available and approved by the Information Services Department for remote meetings are Microsoft Teams and BlueJeans; each has pros and cons. Staff recommends the use of Microsoft Teams because it is fully covered by the City’s existing software agreement with Microsoft, and it meets the City’s records retention requirements. No additional funding is needed. All alternative platforms would require additional funding for licensing and staff support. 7 of 10
Staffing
All other cities have reported that additional staffing is required to support remote public meeting participation. Beverly Hills was already staffed to support this service because they provided it prior to 2020. This was also borne out by Santa Monica’s experience supporting remote meetings. It is not possible for one staff person to manage the meeting and the remote call-in service for the public. Therefore, regardless of which platform boards and commissions use, remote public access requires one staff person dedicated to staffing the meeting and one staff person assigned to moderating the meeting call-in queue and facilitating remote public comment. The associated staffing needed to support a hybrid Council meeting includes: overtime for a staff person to assist with in-person attendees, and the addition of a .5 FTE Staff Assistant III to facilitate the call-in option. Costs for all public bodies to hold hybrid meetings are listed below
Board and Commission Hybrid Meeting Budget Estimates
Dept. Description FTE
Estimate
d Cost
Community
Development
1 Staff III + overtime for evening meetings
(5 commissions)
1 $106,951
City Manager’s
Office
Customer Service Assistant Overtime (400
hours per year) for City Council meetings
0.2 $16,794
Community
Services
1 Staff III (up to 11 commissions) 1 $91,978
Public Works 1 Staff III (5 commissions) 1 $91,978
Library Overtime ($2,740) + Laptop ($2,313) $5,053
RES (Clerk) .5 Staff III + overtime for evening meetings 0.5 $52,154 Meeting Room
Upgrades
Upgrades for Chambers A/V, other facilities, and
listening devices
$94,944
Total 3.7 $459,852
Because the vast majority of boards and commissions are centralized in the Community Development, Community Services, and Public Works Departments, staff has determined those departments would require the addition of 1.0 FTE each to handle 8 of 10
their own boards and commissions, with additional funding required to cover overtime staffing in the other departments (as noted above).
Overall Public Participation in Meetings
Most boards and commissions receive between 1-5 comments per meeting, with little change in this participation while remote participation has been permitted since public meetings went remote in 2020 (See Attachment B). It does not appear that remote access has significantly increased public participation in meetings.
Another factor for Council to consider is that social media and internet communications make it easier than ever for local issues to align with conversations happening nationally and internationally. The debate on the City’s vaccine mandate is a recent example of this happening. In person public testimony increases the barriers for those from outside of our region to influence local decisions, ensuring the Council and Boards and Commissions are informed by local perspectives.
Remote Public Access in Other Cities
Throughout the state there have been conversations about how other cities are handling the return to in-person meetings. Staff did a brief survey of cities in Southern California and found there does not appear to be a one-size fits all or consistent approach across cities in this region. Pasadena, El Segundo and Redondo Beach permit in-person and written comment only. Beverly Hills, Culver City and West Hollywood offer some version of remote public testimony, however even they have distinct differences in their approaches. Beverly Hills provided a call-in option prior to COVID-19 and continues to provide this option, requiring staffing from four departments to support their Council meetings. Culver City has a limited hybrid option for only Council and Planning Commission meetings but has not yet determined whether this is a temporary service until everyone fully returns to in-person meetings or if it will be made permanent. West Hollywood is allowing a call-in option through Zoom and required the purchase of an encoder to allow phone calls and an additional staff member to facilitate Zoom, but they have not determined if they will support remote meetings once the health orders are fully relaxed.
9 of 10
Recommendation and Alternatives
Factoring the staffing and technology requirements against the consistent levels of public participation, staff recommends boards and commissions return to strictly inperson meeting participation with an anticipated start date of July 1 or when it is determined to be safe. Until that time, remote meeting participation will continue to be supported.
Should Council opt to implement remote meetings, staff would not be able to implement remote public access for all public meetings until this Fall to allow time to recruit staff and make the necessary changes to meeting rooms. Once all boards and commissions and other groups return to their normal meeting schedules and other safety protocols are limited, staff offers the following suggestions.
1. Hold all remote public comment for all items, including public input, at the start of the meeting while those who attend in-person will continue to speak on items as they are called.
o Pros: This would reduce staff overtime by releasing them earlier in the evening as opposed to remaining to the end of the meeting and this would provide in-person attendees the benefit of hearing the staff report prior to making their comments.
o Cons: This could create an unfair advantage for remote attendees as they will be able to make their comments early in the evening while those who take the time to come to the meeting in person will have to remain. Also, those attending remotely will not have the benefit of hearing the staff report prior to making their comments.
2. Continue to hold comment for each item as they are called, alternating between those attending in person and those attending remotely. o Pros: This would be a fairer option for both in-person and remote attendees.
10 of 10
o Cons: This would require more overtime costs and the Mayor would not be able to see the remote callers in the speaker queue.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
If each department were to add remote public comment to their board and commission meetings, there would be a need for Council to approve the addition of 3.7 staff positions in addition to overtime hours, for a total of $459,852, in addition to equipment and facility upgrade costs. At this time, if Council chooses to move forward with remote public comment, staff would work with the Finance Department to integrate these costs into the budget for approval and identify any potential tradeoffs needed to make the necessary funding available.
Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, Assistant City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Council Agenda Management Information Item_Nov 2021
B. PublicParticipationatMtgs
C. Written Comments