The Cypress City Council voted on Jan. 27 to change a policy that gives Council members more power to place items on the agenda and somewhat tempers the city manager’s power to control the debate.
In short, the new agenda policy proposed by Mayor David Burke requires only two members of the Council to put items on the City Council’s meeting agenda.
It removes a provision that required three members of the Council to place an item for the Council to take action to vote on, and the approval of two members to place an item on the agenda for discussion only.
Burke said he proposed the change to simply how Council members can place items on the Council’s agenda for public discussion.
“If a Council member wants to put an item on the agenda, they can bring it up during the meeting and if another council member agrees, it goes on the agenda of a future meeting,” said Burke.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08e35/08e35736e5893e499225a8f034484f0fce2ed4f0" alt=""
“I tried to make it very simple,” he said, adding “I consider this an improvement upon our current policy,” he said.
“I think it should give everyone, council members, staff and residents, more notice of items that appear on the agenda from Council members,” he said.
Under the current policy, said Burke, he was able to get only one item on the Council’s agenda during the first two years on the Council.
“I figured if we do it this way, generally, everyone has at least two weeks’ notice that something’s going to be coming up on the agenda,” the mayor said.
“I think the new policy will encourage more public discussion,” he said.
Council member Bonnie Peat said she still favored the current two-step process of two votes for discussion and three votes for action items on the agenda.
“We put an item on the agenda today, two weeks from now, give or take, it becomes a discussion item, which means the public gets to hear the open discussion, what the dialog is, the pros and the cons, and kind of where we are (on the issue),” she said.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c335a/c335a9bf5c05dd2c35378e4598f1e38d618811d1" alt=""
And if it meets the criteria, I’ll call it three votes, then it becomes an agenda item two weeks later and the public now, as well as the Council member have an additional two weeks to get up to speed,” she said.
“I guess what I’m really kind of asking is why does this have to be now,” asked Peat,” and if it has to be now, then I’d really like for all council members to really understand that we’re taking something away from the residents, and I honestly think we’re taking something away from the Council.”
Peat said she disagreed that the new policy would improve transparency.
“I really take issue with the idea that the new policy is somehow less transparent that the current policy,” answered Burke, “for a few reasons.”
Under the current policy, “oftentimes agenda items would pop up between meetings, not in public,” said Burke, “but a few days before a meeting, which is essentially the least transparent way” to conduct public business.
“The current new policy I’m proposing encourages public discussion where everybody gets to see who’s proposing an item so I don’t see how anybody could say the old policy of people proposing items behind closed doors a few days before a meeting is more transparent,” he said.
Technically, under the new policy, City Manager Peter Grant still has the power to place items on the agenda, but Burke said he thinks the new policy will give members of the public more transparency and prevent last-minute surprise additions to the agenda.
During open communications, some Cypress residents strongly agreed, but not all.
“I have to challenge the concept that transparency in the current policy was better because that’s how we ended up with an agenda item buried in the agenda about giving the Cypress Community Festival a $5000 payment in exchange for canceling political booths at the festival (last fall), said resident and businessman Paul Kokkinos.
“I want to speak in support of Mayor Burke’s policy change that enables city council members to more easily bring agenda items to the full Council,” he said. “It’s a good idea,” he said, especially when we can take a public policy and reduce it from two pages to a single page,” he said.
“The current policy was produced by the previous City Council and I believe it often targeted dissenting members outside the historic Council majority, which in the past you’ve heard me refer to as a cabal,“ said Kokkinos.
“I believe the policy would also reign in some of the outsized influence and control of our City Manager,” he said. “The other proposal gave the city manager way too much control and power,” he added.
Harumi, a 20-year Cypress resident, told the Council she was fine with the policy as is, that it did not require any change.
“If this change is implemented,” she said, “it will actually reduce public discussion and participation.”
She suggested Burke’s new policy would allow for votes after only one discussion, not two, thus decreasing public participation.
Pearl Boelter said of Burke’s proposed policy, “I was struck with the reduction of the City Manager and staff’s input (in the new policy) without an increase in transparency or resident input.”
“As a government administrator for many years, I welcome the request for input on items,” said Boelter, noting that she often interfaces with city staff “when I have questions or needs. I ask you to maintain the existing policy, or if you must make changes, at least an equivalent or better policy.”
Not so, said Bob Youngsma during his time at the podium, saying “I’ve been coming now for quite a few years,” he said, adding that he had noticed the City Council ceding way too much power away from the people to city management.
“The Council wanted less work,” said Youngsma, “so they gave the city manager more power and he was more than happy to take it.”
“The city manager should not have any control. Anything he wants to do, he should go right back to the City Council and they decide what the agenda is,” said Youngsma.
“Protocol was changed by the last Council,” said Youngsma, suggesting the current Council, as the elected representatives of the people, should claw back as much power as they can from the City Manager’s office.
“You need to do what you’re going to do,” he said.
Like Youngsma, Edwin Kraemer said he was concerned about the enormous amount of power given to the city manager by recent councils.
“They gave more control to the city manager, who should have little,” he said. “This new policy is not only easy to read, but it allows Council members to easily bring items to the floor with only one backer.”
Kraemer suggested that there was an inordinate amount of “gatekeeping” done by the previous councils, “so this helps to remedy some of those issues.”
Marilyn Reames reminded the new Council that in the last Council, by protocol, David Burke should have been Mayor Pro-tem but was passed over.
“So let’s get that straight,” she said.
“Every one of you sitting on that dais are good, decent, kind and loving people,” said Reames, “and I absolutely believe with every fiber of my soul that every one of you wants to do the best for the City of Cypress. I think Mayor Burke’s proposal is a good one,” she said.
Thirty-year resident Glenn Button suggested the city add six public meetings back into the new policy, which he said were part of the existing policy, to the new policy if passed. “It’s very concerning. I would be very concerned to have public policy discontinued.
Council member Scott Minikus said “I’m going to vote for this, but I have concerns that this could evolve into a waste of time and resources”
In addition, Minikus defended Grant.
“Some people mentioned comments about the city manager,” said Minikus. “Speaking for myself, the city manager does not have any influence over me. What he does have is two decades worth of knowledge that we all lean on, past councils and the present,” he said.
“I speak to him then make my own decision,” noted Minikus.
Minikus seconded a motion by Peat to postpone the vote on the new Council, yet he then voted with Burke, Council member Kyle Chang, and Mayor Pro-tem Leo Medranoon a substitute motion by the mayor to approve by a vote of 4-1 the Council’s new agenda policy. Peat was the lone dissenting vote.