A staff-level attempt to revamp the rules and procedures for Alamance County’s governing board has run aground with the board’s own members over its potential blow to public participation.
In the end, the board of commissioners resolved to give some more thought to these proposed protocols, which Alamance County’s manager Heidi York had unveiled at the board’s year-end meeting on Monday. All the same, the board’s members were unanimously opposed to one of York’s recommendations that would effectively strike one of the public comment periods that the commissioners currently hold at their semimonthly meetings.
The proposal that raised the board’s hackles concerned the potential redesignation of one of these two meetings as a “work session” where staff reports and board deliberations would take precedence to actual votes. York informed the commissioners that a number of other jurisdictions have introduced these work session meetings in order to dispense with long, complex presentations that can feel tedious when intermingled with items that demand immediate decisions.
The county manager went on to suggest that the commissioners begin holding these work sessions during their first semimonthly gatherings, which take place at 9:30 a.m. on the first Monday of each month. She added that they can they focus on board actions when they reconvene at 6:30 p.m. on the third Monday of the month.
“There would be pressure on the board to vote when you hear about an item for the first time at a work session,” she went on to declare. “This allows more time for the board to take action and to hear from your constituents.”
Among York’s suggestions for the proposed work sessions was to eliminate the public comment period that presently kicks off all of the board’s regularly-scheduled get togethers. The county manager pointed out that state law requires only one such period a month from the elected leaders of counties and municipalities.
Even before York had a chance to pitch this proposal to the commissioners, it came under fire from area resident Harry Porthouse. In fact, Porthouse took advantage of the board’s designated public comment period on Monday to protest the potential elimination of this feature from the board’s first meeting of the month.
“That would effectively reduce the citizens’ ability to address you as a body by 50 percent. I understand this meets the minimum standard of North Carolina law. . . To me, deleting one public comment period a month and having only invited guests speak at the work session is unacceptable.”
– Resident Harry Porthouse
“That would effectively reduce the citizens’ ability to address you as a body by 50 percent,” the resident added during his three minutes at the podium. “I understand this meets the minimum standard of North Carolina law…To me, deleting one public comment period a month and having only invited guests speak at the work session is unacceptable.”
Porthouse’s objections were later echoed by the commissioners themselves.
“People don’t need to wait 30 days from one meeting to another to come before their governing body.”
– County commissioner vice chairman Steve Carter
“People don’t need to wait 30 days from one meeting to another to come before their governing body,” insisted the board’s vice chairman Steve Carter.
“It’s not broken, why fix it?”
– County commissioner John Paisley, Jr.
“It’s not broken, why fix it?” added commissioner John Paisley, Jr. in regard to the whole work session concept.
Commissioner Pam Thompson opined that, in general, the public should have “more freedom” to “stand up here” and address their elected officials.
“I don’t think it’s a good idea to cut the time for public comments in half,” agreed commissioner Ed Priola, who nevertheless endorsed the idea of one meeting a month that’s devoted to long-form presentations. “I think we can have our cake and eat it,” he continued. “I would invite staff to give us more details so we’re more informed as we move along…and we could have comments from the constituents until the cows come home.”
Priola went on to suggest that the commissioners could hold monthly town halls to give residents another opportunity to air their thoughts and concerns. Kelly Allen, the board’s newly-selected chairman, recalled a similar, quarterly tradition in the town of Haw River, where she served as mayor before she joined the board of commissioners last year.
Allen also declared that the board’s three-minute time limit on public comments may be a constraint that the commissioners should apply to their own remarks from the dais.
“We only give our residents and taxpayers three minutes to speak. Why should we have a whole lot more time than they have?. . . I feel that what’s fair for them is fair for us.”
– County commissioner chairman Kelly Allen
“We only give our residents and taxpayers three minutes to speak,” she expostulated. “Why should we have a whole lot more time than they have?…I feel that what’s fair for them is fair for us.”
When all was said and done, the commissioners instructed York to adjust her recommendations to reflect their concerns about public participation. Several board members also suggested that the commissioners should have a chance to reply to resident concerns immediately after their public comment periods – an opportunity that their current procedures reserve for the end of each meeting. Meanwhile, York offered to introduce a “transparency report” that would track how public comments are actually addressed by the county after the meeting adjourns.
