I waited four hours today to speak for one minute

[Senior citizen]

before the San Diego City Council. From there I went to the Ralph Nader talk in Balboa Park, and when Ralph said that we had to be more active, including things like going to city council meetings, I felt it had been a worthwhile day after all.

One of the things the council discussed was a proposal to limit public comments. That one sank like a rock, as the councilmembers began to realize that attempting to silence voters is the best way to get them to not vote for you.

I joined many others in opposing a proposal to ban write-in candidates from running in general elections. Since I didn't stay for the vote, I don't know how it came out, but the council seems to be beginning to understand that even if Donna Frye, who was the only write-in candidate in the last general election, and who got the most votes, isn't mayor due to a technicality, Frye still has the most public support.

[Liberty Belle]

1. Good for you! I'm glad to hear that the council

opted against shutting out public comments and going to secret proceedings. I sure hope they voted against eliminating write-in candidates. The UT lists the first item, but not the second, so maybe they shelved it until another time. Please let me know if you hear how it turned out!

[Senior citizen]

5. They weren't going to completely shut out public comments,

just to make them more inconvenient so that instead of waiting only four hours, I might have had to wait seven or eight hours. And the number of people who could speak would have been lowered also. Donna Frye is making sure they don't go to secret proceedings any more than is absolutely necessary.

Since they had, on earlier items, disregarded public comment entirely, it was heartening to see them come to their senses on this one. It may have been the large number of people who spoke to the fact that they tended to disregard public comment, that caused them to change their minds.

[Senior citizen]

11. They postponed action.

I phoned Donna Frye's office this morning to find out what happened.

Well, they didn't have much choice. If they had passed the proposal despite overwhelming public opposition they would have voted themselves out of office--every one of them knows exactly how many votes Donna Frye got, and my guess is that's more than any of them ever got. They may try again, and they'll probably look for ways to exclude the public, but everyone is on high alert and they're unlikely to get away with it.

[roguevalley]

2. I am glad for you. You did good. I'm sitting here writing emails

to dimwits in congress about the upcoming judicial killing spree.

[Senior citizen]

6. Way to go!

The more people who realize that incumbents answer to their corporate owners instead of to we the people, the better chance we have of throwing the bums out.

[myrna minx]

3. Good for you!

Good lord, there was a proposal to "limit public comments"? Sheesh, those in power really loathe we, the electorate. Good for you for attending.

[Senior citizen]

7. They truly do loathe us.

But to a certain extent they need us. It is difficult to rig an election if you can't find a few people to actually vote for you. If you alienate all of the people all of the time, not even Diebold can help you win.

[Liberty Belle]

12. $chwarzenegger is outsourcing the counting of signatures on his initiative

to a company in India. I wonder if we're going to see "fake voters" on the rolls next?

[paineinthearse]

4. City/small town difference/similarity

I live in a small town that has a town meeting form of government.

Mass General Law allows any 10 citizens to sponsor warrnant articles. We have three dealing with SS reform, US troops in Iraq & worldwide ban of WMD within 10 years.

When the warrant was printed, the advisory committee voted their recommendation be to "table", meaning when the articles are raised they will move that there be no discussion and move on to the next.

There is a parliamentary manouver we can use to override the tabling, but the audacity for an appointed committee to block discussion is unconscionable.

[Senior citizen]

8. Wow! And I'd thought town meetings were a superior form of

local government. Well, I guess they are, since I doubt if anything like SS reform, Iraq, or WMD could get anywhere near our city council in the first place. I hope your override maneuver has enough support to remind that committee that they are supposed to act in the public interest, not in their own interest.

[LibDemAlways]

9. I live near Thousand Oaks, CA and

occasionally watch the city council meetings on the local cable outlet. It amazes me how public comment time is a steady stream of generally the same small band of citizens coming forward with various issues and grievances while the council members sit there doodling, getting up to use the bathroom, looking bored, and only very rarely taking any sort of interest in the speaker. And these clowns get re-elected every time on the basis of name recognition. If voters actually took the time to watch these procedings and see the contempt in which they are held by their elected "representatives," maybe, just maybe, they'd throw the bums out.

[Senior citizen]

10. San Diego is wising up.

We've had several scandals and fiascos in local government, including councilmembers facing indictments, what appears to be fiscal malfeasance in underfunding pension funds, and then the last election where the person with the most votes for mayor didn't win. So a lot of people have started paying attention. It would have been nice if it had happened BEFORE the problems, but at least it is happening.


On edit: One of the speakers yesterday spoke precisely about the things you mentioned, such as councilmembers not bothering to pay any attention at all to public comments, and there was so much applause from people in attendance that everyone on the council sat up and began to pay attention from that moment on!

[Liberty Belle]

13. Was the media there?

I think we should start taking our own video cameras to record these proceedings, letting these officials know that their actions are being broadcast to others even if no TV cameras are present.