Those frustrated by San Diego City Council meetings lasting hours due to lengthy public testimony both in-person and online may get a reprieve. Or they may not.
The City Council’s Rules Committee on July 24 heard public testimony, but took no immediate action, on Council President Sean Elo-Rivera’s proposal to consider ending virtual public comment at meetings.
Online public testimony for City Council meetings via phone became increasingly popular during COVID-19, when health restrictions precluded the public from attending meetings in person. But now that the City and most public groups are back to meeting mostly in person, some are arguing that continuing hybrid phoning in of comments during sessions is unnecessarily lengthening already overly long meetings.
A recent example was the City Council’s July 22 meeting regarding a proposed homeless mega-shelter in Middletown, where 120-plus people testified, both in-person and by phone, which led to the meeting running from late afternoon until almost midnight.
At the rules committee’s June 24 meeting, numerous residents protested removing the public comment option through phone calls or streaming. On social media, two residents weighed in, both opposing Elo-Rivera’s proposal.
“This is a bad idea,” said Pacific Beach photographer John Cocozza. “People who work 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Mondays through Fridays are not usually able to attend City meetings. Single parents who have young kids they watch cannot travel to the meetings. People with physical mobility issues have a hard time traveling to meetings. By having virtual public comments, it allows those people to have their voices heard.”
Judy M. of University City agreed with Cocozza. “Eliminating the ability to participate in City business virtually will limit access to those that have to work, are disabled, or have children that would require childcare,” she said adding, “The City already has the reputation of behind-closed-door deals. Eliminating more access will reinforce the council’s corrupt actions.”
Elo-Rivera defended his call for a change in policy regarding public online testimony saying: “San Diegans can be confident business is done with the pace and efficiency they deserve and that the City Council will continue to value and uphold all requirements for open and public meetings ensuring access for all constituents. We added the virtual option into the municipal code because we thought it was the best way at the time to be inclusive of voices. A couple years into it, we’re realizing that’s not having the effect that we desired it to have.”
The City Council’s Rules Committee, besides Elo-Rivera, is comprised of District 1 Councilmember Joe LaCava representing La Jolla and Pacific Beach, along with colleagues Kent Lee of District 6, Raul Campillo of District 7, and Vivian Moreno of District 8.
Vicky Joes, LaCava’s chief of staff, said the council member remains undecided on continuing to allow virtual public testimony at council meetings.
Elo-Rivera’s proposal has other hurdles to clear beyond some public opposition. The City Council is about to go on summer recess in August. And even if eliminating virtual public testimony is approved by the five-member council rules committee, it will ultimately need to be taken up – and pass muster – with the full City Council at a later date.
