The long-standing Farmington City policy is not to allow public comment on items that are on the current agenda. Following plans to move one of Farmington’s liquor stores and the response of citizens who were outraged they were not permitted to speak at some meetings about the topic, Farmington’s Mayor Todd Larson wants to change the rule.
City policy allows citizen comment on items not on the agenda, and residents are invited to speak at public hearings, but bans citizen comment for issues on the agenda.
[...]
Current policy makes him feel between a rock and a hard place, he said, because if he allows public comment when there is no public hearing scheduled, people who did not attend complain because they did not know there would be an opportunity to speak.
The Mayor says he feels there has to be a better way to gain citizen input. It is possible that doing away with this regulation may be a step in the right direction however it will need approval from the rest of the City Council before it could be put into practice.
Even though Mayor Todd Larson’s plans to open up discussion to the public seems like something every city council across the nation should be doing and this motion should pass without incident, prior action by the Farmington City Council (and many public political groups across the state and nation), have been known to do whatever they can to keep the public out of the loop regarding the happenings within areas which they have a right to know.
Let’s take for example Apple Valley. Apple Valley spent $30,000 on a brand new website (original quote was nearly $80,000) and at the time I was told council agenda packets would begin appearing because they would be easier to post on the web once the new system was in place. It’s more than a year later and it still looks like you have to contact the City Clerk to get copies of agenda background information. Almost every other city in the South Metro (I am not about to go looking today but you’ll have to trust me) posts their agenda background information on the web prior to the meetings, yet Apple Valley still refuses. This is just one way they can keep citizens in the dark about the political happenings in town while claiming it’s just too much work for their staff. Hard to argue that stance when so many other cities have been doing it for years and with websites that cost less money.
What do you think about Farmington Mayor Todd Larson’s plans to allow public discussion at meetings where a particular item is on the agenda? Do you think the current rule is ridiculous considering the concept of a public meeting? Do you think that citizens should have their time to speak at any meting regardless of the agenda (within a reasonable time limit)? Are you a Farmington or other South Metro resident concerned that based on their prior actions, the rest of the City Council will sweep this plan under the rug? Are you surprised that after $30,000 and a year, Apple Valley still doesn’t post agenda packet information in advance of meetings on the web and requires contacting the Clerk while almost every other city around does? Whatever you have to say about this one go ahead and comment on below as I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
July 12th, 2012 at 7:41 am
I’m a Farmington resident and can tell you that unless you have the same opinion as the majority of council you are just wasting your time. They are not interested in facts or anything else once they have set their course. Any agenda item with consequence has been discussed multiple times at poorly advertised not televised workshops and is brought to a regular council meeting only after each council member has indicated whether or not they support said item. So even if they change their policy it will have absolutely no impact as the fix is already in.
This proposal will most recently be swept under the rug unless the “acting” mayor and current Dakota County board candidate wishes it to happen. And since there is nothing the Farmington council likes less then hearing from constituents who disagree with them I am not holding my breath.
July 12th, 2012 at 7:44 am
Politicians astound me. We elect them to office and then they often try to hide what they’re really doing “on our behalf.” One reason we have “open meeting” laws is to try and minimize the “business in the shadows” standard operating culture.
That said, I find the Apple Valley pols accessible. If someone has a question about any piece of the city’s business a simple phone call to a council member or other elected official will result in a good discussion of the topic at hand. Of course how one approaches the conversation matters – being affable will get you somewhere; being confrontational will not. That’s my experience anyway.
However, truly open local government is probably a pipe dream.
July 12th, 2012 at 7:47 am
C&V,
All politicians are approachable. Doesn’t mean you’ll be any more able to get the raw information to make your own decision. I don’t want to have to contact a politician to get what nearly every other city around town gets. I want to have it posted as freely available public information on the $30,000 website that promised to deliver.
July 12th, 2012 at 8:14 am
Bill,
Fair enough. I just looked at the AV and Eagan web sites. On the Eagan site I quickly found the “Citizen Support Center.” They make an effort to get info to the public (your point made). AV’s site shows (on the opening page) a “Regular informal public meeting of the City Council at which items are discussed” at 5:30 today, and the formal Council Meeting this evening. I guess if someone has questions you have to attend the “regular informal public meeting.”
July 12th, 2012 at 9:02 am
This is why I miss Charlie Crighton so much. He used to pull items from the “consent agenda” to make sure that the voters had a chance to hear the discussion. Maybe it was already rubber stamped and there wasn’t any chance of it not passing but at least if it was important enough you knew what specifically they were voting on.
July 12th, 2012 at 12:32 pm
Sounds more like Czechoslovakia in 1963 than Minnesota in 2012.
July 12th, 2012 at 1:24 pm
The Dakota County Board agendas are posted on their website the Friday before the Tuesday meetings.
I think it’s both undemocratic and petty not to allow public comment on items on the agenda. It’s reasonable to manage the comments by having a time limit, and by having a sign-up sheet where attendees indicate their name, address, and topic.