Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout25- Mayor's Office CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Tom Minor, Mayor Subject: Repeal Resolution 97-221 Dept: Mayor's Office r Date: September 8, 1997 ORIGINAL Synopsis of Previous Council Action: July 21, 1997 Council adopted Resolution 97-221, which amended Resolution No. 94-46, to limit the speaking time of Council Members to three minutes until the Mayor and all other Council Members have had an opportunity to speak. Recommended Motion: Repeal Resolution 97-221. - Signature Contact person: Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant Phone 5133 Supporting data attached: Ward: FUNDING REQ S: Amount: Source:(Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes:_ Previously - # Previously - # y Tabled v�7 Agenda Item T 101Z ell �-7 .r.., M so 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 97-221 WHICH PREVIOUSLY AMENDED 3 RESOLUTION 94-96 TO LIMIT THE SPEAKING TIME OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AND DESIGNATED OTHERS TO 3 MINUTES UNTIL THE MAYOR AND ALL OTHER 4 COUNCIL MEMBERS AND DESIGNATED OTHERS HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK 5 6 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 7 8 SECTION 1. Resolution No. 97-221, which added Section 15 to Resolution No. 9 95-46 as previously amended by Resolution No. 95-27, is amended to read as follows: 10 "15. Neither the Mayor nor any Councilmember nor 11 the City Attorney, City Clerk, or City Administrator may 12 speak more than once nor longer than three consecutive 13 minutes, or less if the speaker so chooses, on any item on 14 the agenda or during the "announcements" portion of the 15 meeting, until the Mayor, each other Councilmember, the 16 City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Administrator shall have 17 first had an opportunity to speak on that item at least once 18 for three minute;` or less if the speaker so chooses. 19 Subsequent opportunities to speak shall also be limited to 20 three minutes, or less at the option of the speaker. 21 The three minute speaking time may be extended by 22 the Chair subject to override by five votes of the Council. 23 The City Clerk need not keep fractions of minutes but 24 shall only advise the Mayor and Common Council upon the 25 expiration of three minutes each time a person speaks. 26 This resolution shall be reviewed at the second 27 Council meeting in January, 1998." 28 1 ■ 1 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 97-221 WHICH PREVIOUSLY AMENDED 2 RESOLUTION 94-6 TO LIMIT THE SPEAKING TIME OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AND DESIGNATED OTHERS TO 3 MINUTES UNTIL THE MAYOR AND ALL OTHER 3 COUNCIL MEMBERS AND DESIGNATED OTHERS HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK 4 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ordinance was duly adopted by the Mayor and 5 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held 6 on the day of , 1997, by the following vote, to wit: 7 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 8 NEGRETE 9 CURLIN 10 HERNANDEZ 11 OBERHELMAN 12 DEVLIN 13 ANDERSON 14 MILLER 15 16 City Clerk 17 The foregoing ordinance is hereby approved this day of , 1997. 18 19 TOM MINOR, Mayor 20 City of San Bernardino �k 21 Approved as to form and legal content- 22 JAMES F. PENMAN 23 City Attorney 24 25 2 6 By: 27 28 2 ..rrrrr� r ...i■rr Transcription of Council discussion on 3 minute rule Mayor - What I had in mind when this was first introduced, I never anticipated that we would take action on curtailing the speaking time for Council members on individual items . What I thought would happen, but I was willing to give this other a test, was that we would only limit the speaking time on the announcements at the beginning of the meeting - the three minutes - that' s what I thought would happen. This other came through, and that' s fine, although I must admit that there' s some problems we've had interpreting some of the parts of that ordinance . Rachel has trouble keeping track of the time . It' s very difficult, because if you speak less than three minutes, she' s got to break that down, then you finish up your three minutes later on. Then I 've got to keep track of how many have gone through to speak before I allow the second round of speeches . Rachel has to do more of the time of keeping track of those times than she does of keeping her minutes and the other Council meeting work she has to do down there as the City Clerk. That' s why I brought this forward. To see if I could reason with the Council to look at this again and do away with the ordinance as it is now and only limit the speaking time at the beginning of our meetings . Devlin - It certainly was not the intent, was not my intent , to bog Rachel down with problems . I think what she' s done is kind of carried it a little farther than what we had originally anticipated; i . e . , up to three minutes before you, you know, go right through, everybody gets up to three minutes, and then after everybody is through then you go back. There was no intent to have to keep track of fractions of the three minutes to make it a total . My intent, and I believe the way it' s written, maybe it' s open to interpretation, was strictly that everybody had up to three minutes, and if you only talked for two, that' s fine; after everybody else has talked, then you can talk again for three minutes or whatever. But the idea was just to limit everybody to three minutes their first go around and then if there was, if they had to have more to say after that, then they could have more time after everybody else got three minutes . My problem was sitting and listening to a dissertation for 15 or 20 or 30 minutes and I didn' t even know where I was, much less what my train of thought was; and uh I don' t know, sometimes that' s happened - yeah, I'm exaggerating a little bit, but proof of this, just earlier Doc went three minutes, a couple of other people went three minutes, and that' s fine, it stopped right there and I didn' t think there was a problem to hit the three minute button. Umm, your keeping, your keeping track of fractions and I think maybe that' s where you' re having some problems . If it were just the three minutes itself, you' d just hit the three minute - three minutes up - that' s fine; go to the next person. Is that, but that' s not what you' re doing, right? Mayor - Let' s hear from Rachel . Her thoughts and the problems it creates for the City Clerk. I'm sure no one meant to give her problems . Rachel - Well, in order to, I never know whether when you start out you' re going to speak for one minute, two minutes, or three minutes, so I have to keep track no matter what . And, uh, once someone asks to be recognized, I need to clear the clock to start all over again for the next person. Uh so, as the Mayor indicated, the original intent was strictly to limit it to the public comments; that isn' t the way the resolution is worded. The way the resolution is worded is that it is on every single item that is before the Council . Mayor - And I think Mr. Devlin made it clear that he meant for it to be that way. Yes, ah Dave . Oberhelman - He meant it to be for every item. Mayor - Yes . Oberhelman - and I think if you, and I don' t know if this would require changing the, completely changing the ordinance, but if you said three minutes or less, then you wouldn' t have to worry about anything other than when they initially--when each of us initially speaks, that we don' t exceed, initially speaking, three minutes . That any increment, and when we address an item, even if it' s after everyone has spoken for three minutes or less, and then if they speak again, all you have to concern yourself with is, did they speak that second time more than three minutes . If you just say three minutes or less, you don' t have to worry about the aggregate time that they' re speaking on the subject . I think it' s the increments that Councilman Devlin was trying to create some discipline amongst ourselves by not having us speak in increments of greater than three minutes . Mayor - And I understand what you' re saying, Dave, and it' s difficult to argue with creating discipline among the Council members, but what I watch is Rachel . If I speak and a set of Council members speak, there' s eight times she' s had to keep track of that three minutes . Now it comes back around and we all speak again--that' s eight more times she' s had to keep track of it . Some of these are very lengthy and involved two-hour conversations . And I ' ll bet if you add up the time of keeping track of each one, someplace along the line they've talked 15, 20, 25 minutes over this two-hour period. She has to write down and keep track of each speaker' s time--there' s no getting around that . If you want the City Clerk to be her main job as timekeeping, so be it . I think it' s not good business . I know that I've had requests for extension of time, I even gave some to myself, Mr. Penman asked for it, Mr. Curlin' s asked for it and when I didn' t give it to him there he' s come down to the podium to speak, so uh, what are you accomplishing on these major things where they've got to talk a lot? I don' t know that you accomplish anything. Mr. Penman and then Mrs . Miller. Penman - Well, I've watched Ms . Clark struggle with this too, to see how it' s working and I have noticed that despite her skills and abilit y it' s taxing to for her to keep the time, record the votes, remember to clear the board, And part of the problem, too, the wording of it--I'm not sure the wording of it is what Mr. Devlin originally intended. There' s no doubt that it' s been great for public comments - I mean the comments of the elected officials; that' s been fantastic because, you know, all of us, including myself, have had to bite our tongues, and I think that' s really good. It does seen here though that the only subsequent, the way it ' s worded you cannot extend, if you look at it carefully, you cannot extend the initial three minutes . You can only extend the subsequent minutes, and then only by unanimous consent of the Council members . And Dr. Curlin pointed out that today, and he' s right, and I think we have perhaps glossed over that portion a little bit too rapidly; but it says, it names all people, it says none of them may speak longer than three minutes on any item on the agenda or announcements . Then it says, subsequent opportunities to speak shall also be limited to three minutes unless by unanimous consent of the Council members present, such subsequent three minute speaking limit is waived. There' s no provision for extending the first three minutes . Another problem is that, is this inconsistent the way it' s worded now with your Council rules which are also adopted by resolution, because, and I pointed this out once before, that this says that none of these people can speak until every other person has had a chance to, but your rules say that the City Attorney, Clerk, and Administrator are to be recognized by the chair as soon as, when they raise their hand, as soon as the person speaking finishes speaking. And that goes back with the problems with the former Mayor. Mayor - I must admit though, I 'm not too good at that myself . Penman - Well, if the Mayor' s comment, that he' s given people extensions; technically under this, it takes unanimous consent, and to get right down to it, even though we signed off on it, that ' s probably inconsistent with the Charter, because the Charter provides that the majority vote is what prevails and the Mayor can over, the Mayor can veto and the Council can override, so the resolution calling for a unanimous vote really is in conflict with the Charter at that part . Mayor - OK, thank you. Uh, Norine and then Betty. Miller - This is one of those times were I think I 've forgotten what I was going to say. Mayor - I 'm sorry, do you want me to come back to you? Miller - No, Oberhelman - You didn' t save that thought . Rachel - And Mr. Penman, you spoke for two minutes, thirty seconds . Laughter Miller - I have to say I think it' s worked extremely well . It' s been very refreshing as far as I'm concerned. It seems to me the City Clerk, all she has to do, and I realize she has a lot to do, is to hit that timer, period. Every time somebody new speaks, set the timer. The bell takes care of what happens . And she doesn' t have to write anything down or anything else . Just hit that timer anytime anybody speaks, period. It should be all that is required of her under this ordinance . And I' d hate to see it go. I , I have found it very refreshing to know that at least I only have to wait three minutes (laughing) before somebody else will get on it . Mayor - OK, Betty and then Rita, and then Anderson - I , too, would not want to go back to the old ruling where people talk 15 and 20 minutes about nothing--their person agenda . I don' t think I can take that . I ' ll have to go sit in the little back room while this is going on. I don' t want to go back to that; that is just too nerve-racking to go through that meeting after meeting. And I like the three minutes, even if we just keep it for public comments . You know, just hit the bell . Mayor - OK, Rita Arias - I thought the problem was with, like if you talk for two minutes on one item, she would clock you, you know, time you, and if you still have one minute left, so you want to come back and talk, because you still have one minute left, and she has to leave that time for the next speaker - I thought that' s - Is that what the problem is, because then you have to keep track that Betty Anderson has one more minute Rachel - It' s the fact, that as I understood it, three minutes on each item. That' s the only way that you could keep track. Arias - I know, but what I'm saying is that if Betty wanted to talk on one item for two minutes and then she has an afterthought , down the line she' s got one more minute left . Rachel - For example, as we' re speaking, I just lost track of how many minutes you were speaking and forgot to switch it over to my time- -my three minutes . Arias - That ' s my kind of girl, Rachel . Laughter Mayor - Eddie . Negrete - Mayor, if it' s all relevant as far as three minutes are three minutes . As you indicated, Mr. Oberhelman, it' s three minutes or less, so if you don' t use your three minutes, that' s all you get . Miller - Til the next time around. Negrete - Right, til the next time around. And I ' m going to have to leave, that' s why I ' m trying to . . . . Laughter - more than one person speaking Mayor - David Oberhelman - May I suggest that I, I mean I don' t want to throw it out , but I certainly don' t want to deny that there' s opportunities to improve it . Could we ask Mr. Penman, after hearing what we feel are the benefits of it, to bring back a refined resolution that addresses the problems that the Clerk experiences and that preserves what we feel are the benefits of having it . Mayor - Uh, well, I don' t know if he made it a motion or not Oberhelman - As a motion. Mayor - Was it a motion; he didn' t say a motion, but OK. Oberhelman - and continue it until October 6 so that it doesn' t have Mayor - OK, Mr. Penman. Penman - I ' ll be glad to do that . You know, I realize that this is primarily directed at one Council member and I won' t identify him by mentioning his name, since he' s not here to defend himself, but I will try to come up with what it is that I think you want, and then you can . . . Lots of talking and laughing going on. Mayor - OK, I ' ve got a motion on the floor; call for the question.