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:
- Opinion: Half the road, full stop – Understanding pedestrian right-of-way
Doug Dahl explains how Washington’s law requires drivers to stop when a pedestrian is within one lane of their half of the road, not just when directly in front. - Opinion: The state’s RFK-proofing bill comes with a cost
Mandates like HB 2242 can lead to higher premiums as insurance companies absorb costs for new preventive services, affecting affordability statewide. - Opinion: What is the cost of a bridge?
John Ley argues the I-5 Bridge replacement’s soaring cost stems from costly extras like light rail, noting other states deliver larger, toll-free bridges for much less. - POLL: Do you agree with giving a state commission the power to remove an elected sheriff?
A new poll asks if a state commission—not voters—should have the power to remove an elected sheriff, following concerns raised by Clark County Sheriff John Horch. - Opinion: Defending Democracy by denying it?
Washington voters are blocked from weighing in on new income taxes as state lawmakers and officials bypass public input, drawing criticism from Northwest voices.
wpDiscuz
