Merced leaders are deleting the practice of allowing voicemail messages as part of public comment at City Council meetings.
After a robust debate, the City Council this week voted 4-1 to end the playing of voicemails, as part of a larger package of new public participation rules to streamline meetings for time and efficiency.
Councilmember Fue Xiong cast the lone dissenting vote against ending the practice. Councilmembers Bertha Perez and Jesse Ornelas were absent.
During the COVID pandemic shutdowns, city leaders viewed voicemail messages as a tool to hear from residents on important issues.
But some members of the council believe its meetings have become too lengthy – with some gatherings stretching past midnight. Others have complained too many voicemail calls are scripted by groups advocating for certain political issues.
Mayor Matt Serratto said playing voicemails during a City Council meeting is largely unnecessary and consumes staff resources.
“Balancing everything, it’s not limiting the public’s right to contact us, it’s not limiting the public’s right to call us, it’s not limiting the public’s right to leave us voicemails. It’s just the practice of playing them at City Council meetings,” Serratto said.
“And oftentimes it can be subject to abuse, frankly, and we see that from time to time.”
Councilmember Shane Smith said playing voicemails during council meetings has led to single agenda items taking more than two hours.
“For every one person who genuinely calls in (and) leaves a one minute comment, I get 50 people reading from a script, particularly on hot button issues, that’s what keeps us up late,” Smith said.
Councilmember Sarah Boyle agreed with Smith, going further to say she prefers speaking to constituents one-on-one, rather than being deluged with voicemails, many of which are from the same script.
“When we hear the script over and over, after a while you are almost tone deaf to it,” Boyle said. “And I hate to admit that, but having those one-on-one conversations, we’re getting those stories. And it’s longer than three minutes, and it’s longer than one minute. Now I am actually getting to know you as a person.”
Xiong disagreed, saying voicemails are an important part of the public engagement process on important issues.
Plus, he said voicemails are a tool to hear from constituents who aren’t able to attend meetings in-person. He believes it’s meaningful for the public to be able to hear those voicemails.
“Maybe they are just scared of being here. It’s intimidating. I don’t see a reason to cut these out,” Xiong said.
The majority of residents who spoke out during public comment on the issue were against ending the practice of playing voicemails during meetings.
Ironically, many of those who spoke in opposition left voicemails to express their displeasure.
Some callers said health issues prevent them from attending council meetings in person. Others say obligations to family and children make it difficult to attend council meetings.
“Removing these voicemails would silence the people that you represent,” said resident Dawn Trook. “And there are so many reasons people can’t or don’t come to City Council meetings. But you still represent us.”
A small number of residents who spoke Monday sided with the council majority. “If there’s a will there’s a way to get to these meetings to discuss what’s important or not,” resident Phyllis Boyle said during public comment.
Other meeting changes considered
Ending voicemails during public comment isn’t the only big change being made by the City Council, with the goal of making meetings more time efficient.
The council voted 4-1 on a rule that would allow the mayor discretion to reduce public comment time from a three minute maximum, in the event there are high numbers of speakers lined up to speak on a specific agenda item.
That rule would not apply to oral communications, where the public can comment on any issue that’s not on the current agenda.
Mayor Serratto said the rule would be useful “in certain instances when we have repetitive comments – and a lot of comments – on certain items. This gives us everything we are currently getting from the public, but allows us to do so in a more efficient manner.”
Councilmember Boyle suggested potentially using that rule after 10 speakers or 30 minutes of public comment – whichever comes first. Smith said he would be comfortable with a floor of two minutes for public comment, when the need for the time limit arises. Both of those ideas were incorporated into the new public comment rule.
On this issue, Xiong also staunchly disagreed with the mayor and the rest of the council. “We’re already limiting them to three minutes. They should be allowed to talk if they show up,” Xiong said.
Additionally, motion procedures for the City Council will be governed by rules of engagement based on Roberts Rules of Order.
While Xiong voted against most of the meeting suggestions, one of his ideas was given consideration by some other council members in attendance.
Xiong recommended removing ceremonial recognitions from the council agenda, saying those items or awards should happen outside the meeting – or at an earlier time that won’t interfere with council business.
“If we’re trying to save time, we could do these events out in public,” Xiong said. “Sometimes ceremonial matters take an hour, maybe a little bit more. And so if we’re talking about efficiency here, that should definitely be one of them.”
Smith said he would prefer a middle ground that limits the number of ceremonial matters to no more than two per meeting – or handling those matters at 4:30 p.m. – more than an hour before the regular session.
“So we can still get folks in here, we can still take the pictures, we can still recognize them, but it does not take time away from our discussion,” Smith said.
Serratto said he didn’t want to eliminate ceremonial matters completely from council meetings, but he supported streamlining them. City Attorney Craig Cornwell said that item will be brought back to council with possible ways to streamline ceremonial matters, taking that feedback into consideration.
The council Monday also unanimously agreed to allow emails sent by residents to the clerk’s office be posted on the city’s website, if they are sent before 1 p.m. on the date of the council meeting.
The suggested updates to the council meeting rules would take effect once a final resolution is approved at an upcoming meeting.