The county Board of Supervisors Tuesday advanced a proposal designed to give additional time for public review of motions introduced by board members by having them reviewed in “cluster meetings” before they advance to the full board.
Under the proposal introduced by Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Kathryn Barger, cluster meetings would be held to encourage public participation and government transparency by requiring advanced screening of board motions, at least five days before the motions are taken up at the full board’s meeting.
According to Mitchell and Barger, the move would increase the public voice about motions, rather than the current, somewhat abbreviated public comment process.
The county already conducts such “topical cluster” meetings that offer the public a review of “board letters” that are submitted by county departments, Mitchell said. The new proposal expands that process to include board motions.
Mitchell added that motions can make it to the full board in very little time and expressed the need for substantive input from the public.
“As we develop policies that impact the public and our departments, there is clearly a need for more input from stakeholders,” Barger said, noting that the current process does not allow enough time for “thoughtful feedback.”
Barger also said structures similar to cluster meetings existed prior to the CEO model of government in the form of deputy meetings, which she had participated in during her time as a county policy deputy.
The other three board members, however, expressed concern about the proposal. Supervisor Janice Hahn said it was informally possible for individual supervisors to send their motions through existing clusters. She said the process could slow down policy making, and instead suggested trying a pilot program.
Supervisor Hilda Solis called the motion premature, and said she was concerned that motions could be redirected back to her with revisions by stakeholders and county departments, which she said would “take away (her) role of elected responsibility.”
After making various amendments to the motion, removing the effective date and requesting a report that would return to the board in 45 days detailing the process of implementing “cluster” meetings, Hahn and Horvath agreed to vote in favor of the motion.
The public cluster meetings, run by an appointed chair, would be a chance to revise motions for the upcoming meetings, excluding emergency matters, according to the motion. Matters calling for immediate action and non-policy-related topics such as fee waivers, rewards for unsolved crimes, adjourn-in-memory declarations, and proclamations would bypass the policy cluster review process.
Revisions through the review would also be reflected in the final version of the agendas, according to the motion.
The proposal is aimed at countering the current public review system that sometimes sees motions first published on an agenda as late as Friday, then being voted upon by the board the following Tuesday. Mitchell noted during a virtual news conference last week that other government agencies, such as the Los Angeles City Council, have motions reviewed in committee meetings before they advance to the full council, providing more extensive public review.