Vancouver resident Debra Kalz seeks answers for the councilors’ decision
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
While we were metaphorically sleeping, the Vancouver City Council decided to do away with being able to address the council as a whole in Citizen Comments on any subject and relegate them to a public form once a month.
I’ve tried to get an answer as to what and why this has taken place. This is the City’s response:
Thank you for reaching out to the City Council regarding your concerns.
Public testimony regarding items on the Council’s agenda is televised on CVTV cable channel 23/323 and live-streamed on http://www.cvtv.org. The City Council decided to provide an additional opportunity for the public to speak with them about any topic of interest, not just those topics on the formal agenda, by adding a monthly community forum following the conclusion of our last regular meeting of the month.
The Council discussed this opportunity and our desire not to televise it at our June 17, 2024, meeting. We have heard from constituents who are not comfortable talking to the Council on camera, and we wanted to make sure all people felt comfortable in these opportunities. We similarly do not televise our quarterly Council Community Forums. You can hear the Council’s discussion on this issue by visiting the June 17 update under City Manager Communications on CVTV.org: https://www.cvtv.org/vid_link/36543?startStreamAt=0&stopStreamAt=5426. The discussion occurs at about 1 hour and 17 minutes.
While we do not televise the monthly community forum opportunities, members of the public who wish to testify remotely are able to do so by registering by 12 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting. The testimony that is provided during the community forum is also audio recorded and can be provided upon request for anyone who wishes to hear that recording. And as with all City programs and services, Vancouver is willing to make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities.
Thank you again for your interest in Vancouver City Council meetings and sharing your concerns with us. The City Council members are blind copied on this response for their awareness.
This public forum is not televised.
Here’s the link to the decision of the City Council: https://www.cvtv.org/vid_link/36543?startStreamAt=0&stopStreamAt=5426
It is of my opinion that this makes access to our government very limited and prohibits citizen’s who are unable to attend.
Debra Kalz
Vancouver
Also read:
- POLL: Do the proposed changes to the Clark County Council’s Rules of Procedure suggest the council lacked authority in 2025?
A new reader poll asks whether proposed changes to the Clark County Council’s Rules of Procedure indicate the council lacked clear authority during a 2025 board removal. - Letter: ‘HSD needs to give a detailed line-item accounting of where the last levy went, and of how they plan to use this one’
Randall Schultz-Rathbun urges Hockinson School District to provide detailed, transparent accounting of past and proposed levy spending before asking voters for additional funds. - Letter: Interstate Bridge Replacement’s Park & Ride insanity
Bob Ortblad criticizes the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s proposed Park & Ride garages, arguing the costs are excessive and unlikely to receive federal funding. - Opinion: Vancouver councilors responsible for stoking irrational fears in the community
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance sharply criticizes a Vancouver City Council declaration on immigration enforcement, arguing it fuels fear, undermines law enforcement, and lacks supporting evidence. - Opinion: Washington should stop shielding domestic abusers and sexual offenders from deportation
Vancouver attorney Angus Lee argues Washington law improperly shields convicted domestic abusers, sexual offenders, and drunk drivers from deportation and urges lawmakers to change it.
wpDiscuz
