The other day I blogged about radical changes recommended by the City Task Force on Government Structure for future city councils (4 year terms, full time, reduce the council to half the size, term limits). At the time, they didn’t have information available about the input at the two open houses for the public to look at. Lets see if the public input made any difference?
First of all, its slightly embarrassing that the committee that is supposed to be looking at improvements to City Government has been abysmal in that it held many of its important meetings during the day, held their open houses at terrible times of the year resulting in poor attendance and have so poorly communicated it work to the general public. And, didn’t have the results of the public input available to the public when they last met. It’s all not a good sign! If you didn’t read the last blog post on this issue, you might want to. But trigger alert, the committee is very white male dominated – also embarrassing.
SHOULD COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TERM LIMITS?
Warner Park Open House
· Yes, 4 terms/8years. Alders should not have lame duck issues. Could allow reentry after a term out.
· Term limits would allow more people to serve as alders. We have had very good people not being able to beat incumbents.
· Probably should consider term limits. Some alders have been on way too long and it is always hard to beat an incumbent.
· The average time currently seems reasonable to become educated about city government and how to effect change.
· I disagree with full time alders as well as term limits. The cons for term limit may outweigh the pros.
Park St. Open House
· Seats should be a limited term like a mayor (2,4 years)
· No
· Yes
· Yes
· Yes
· No
· Yes, allow diverse pool, new blood (democratic)
· Yes? [MN: the question mark is included and is part of the feedback]
· No term limits – let the people decide
· Yes. Look at Congress where nothing gets done
· Diverse groups of leaders
· Yes
· Second this
· Yes, hold comm. elections
· No term limits but have some metric for effectiveness
· Yes. 4 terms. Let new folks in.
Survey says: Committee agreed with the public
Yes = 12 No = 6 ? = 3
HOW MANY COMMON MEMBERS/DISTRICTS SHOULD THERE BE?
Warner Park Open House
· Do not reduce numbers – alders need to really know their district.
· 10-12 alders. Make it full time. Less decision-makers will make it more efficient, alder staff can do day to day work.
· Do not reduce the number or the hours of our representatives. It should not be treated as a privilege or endeavor only for those who can afford to give off their time.
· Fewer Council members would force alders to serve on even more BCCs. More alders would allow more participation.
· I disagree with reducing the number of council members.
· Reducing is a terrible idea. More would be better.
· Reduction in numbers seems it could limit true representation and ability of alders to know their district concerns.
· More, not fewer. Fewer means less accountability.
· Reduce by half (too many cooks), pay full time.
· Do not reduce please. Fewer will make our alders less accessible and it will be harder for people to run without $$$.
Park St. Open House
· Increase the size of the Council to represent 10,000 people
· More alders more service
· Look at population and poverty levels, come up with a quantified number, it takes a village.
· Representatives of districts, don’t permit reps to represent people out of this district
· 20, keep it within districts
· As much we have or need
· Reduce the number of districts ONLY if Alders have more full-time staff support
· More the better
· 10
Survey says: Committee recommended the opposite of public input
20/stay the same/do not decrease = 6
Increase = 6
10-12 = 3
? = 4
SHOULD COMMON COUNCIL MEMBERS BE CONSIDERED FULL-TIME OR PART-TIME
Warner Park Open House
· Part time – eliminates the need to give up a career, encourages more diverse experiences
· Can we creatively offer both?
· 1/2 to 3/4 time, compensated based on participation. Many alders, our last alder hardly ever showed up at council.
· Full time – we deserve to have people representing us without having to choose between being involved and having a paycheck.
· It is a big job for part time.
· Increasing the number of alders who all serve part time would allow more people to serve and would make it easier to get elected.
· More alders is better. Stick with part time and avoid career politicians.
Park St. Open House
·Part time, more alders, less to do
· Yes, some neighborhoods need more resources or have more needs than others. Have it be assessed by 5 yrs or have strategic goals to meet to reduce risks and achieve goals
· Sick time, benefits, PTO
· Part time but ensure adequate compensation and benefits
· Full time
· Full time
· Full time
·Full time
· With good pay
· Full time
Survey says: Tie? The committee went with full-time
Full-time = 6
Part-time = 6
? = 5
SHOULD COUNCIL MEMBERS REPRESENT DISTRICTS OR THE CITY AT-LARGE?
Warner Park Open House
· Include a few at-large alders to represent specific interests: women’s rights, economic equality, non-downtown interests.
· Districts are necessary! So we hear our own interests voices vs. corporate influencers.
· Based on the F35 vote I say Hell No to at-large.
· Districts must have local representation. The Mayor doesn’t have this and was able to ignore North and Eastsiders on the F35 vote.
· Reduce the number of districts by half (10) and add 2-4 at-large alders.
· Whatever changes that would allow people of color and less privileged residents to have real voice. If that is at large, then YES!
· Keep districts.
· Seems to me at-large is more likely to lead to influence of $ than influence of people of color.
Park St. Open House
· Districts
·Districts
· Districts
· Districts (make districts smaller)
· Districts
· Districts
· Districts
· Both (some districts need both because of massive issues, lack of resources, lack of $$ because of property taxes
· At-large
· No
· No
· Con [MN: this note was not legible and did not make sense]
Survey says: The committee agreed with public input
Districts = 11
At large = 2
Mixed = 3
Other or ? = 3
SHOULD COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TWO-YEAR OR FOUR-YEAR TERMS?
Warner Park Open House
· How about 3?
· 3 or 4. 2 is too short
· 2 yr
· I support these full time benefits. The cons already exist and won’t be much worse.
· How about 3 year, staggered terms?
· 2 yr will allow more to serve and will not be as much of a commitment barrier to entry. It will allow more diverse council.
Park St. Open House
·2 years. We need to encourage people to run against Alders. 4years term will discourage elections.
· 4 years or 3.
· 2
· 2 yrs
· 3 ?? [MN: the question marks are part of the feedback] and not all expire at the same time
· 4
· 4 years
· 4-year
· 4 years with a provision for recalling an alder.
· 4 year terms, but have metrics. The terms should be staggered.
· 4
· 4 years
Survey says: Who knows? Committee recommended 4 years
2-years = 4
3 years = 3
3 or 4-years = 2
4 years = 7
HOW SHOULD COUNCIL MEMBERS GET PAID?
Warner Park Open House
· Those serving on more BCCs or other very time consuming tasks should get paid more than those that do as much.
· Pay should be “comfy” – salary of 45,000 plus benefits for an alder working 40 hours/week. Each alder should be expected to work a minimum of 20? 30? with option to work up to 50 by choice
· Definitely add benefits that allow wider participation by variety of folks – like child care, transportation, living wage, that allow alders to do what they need to do to represent interests of the people they represent.
· It should be competitive – not just something those with means can do to have a role and a voice. Small pay leads to corruption.
· Child care and staff assistance are a good idea.
Park St. Open House
· Hourly wage at $25 hour
· They will the work when compensate [MN: I believe there are missing words here]
· Poor pay, poor government.
· Good pay, good government.
· Higher pay with term limits.
· Good identification of the need for balance – more pay, but not too much, find the sweet spot.
· Limit the number of BCCs because to their credit, some alders are great and want to or are needed of many (too many) BCCs.
· Monthly.
· Reduce BCCs. Pay should reflect time spent on the job/job duties.
· Reduce BCC participation of alders.
· Depends on their income. Pay low-income folks.
· Hourly, good pay.
· Hourly, or option for state benefits (health, retirement), or percent discount on property taxes
Survey says: Committee went with 80% AMI for family of three.
QUESTIONS THEY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THAT THEY DIDN’T ASK THE PUBLIC
Length of Council president and vice-president terms
PUBLIC INPUTE ON QUESTIONS THEY ASKED BUT HAVEN’T MADE RECOMMENDATIONS ON YET
Do the BBCs adequately represent and serve residents?
Warner Park Open House
· Expectations of BCCs are not always clear and conveyed to new appointees.
· Committee vacancies are not filled in a timely manner. Applying for appointment isn’t clear and easy.
· How can BCCs be more accountable?
· How can BCCs build in evaluation and effectiveness, benchmarks/reports?
· Are all the BCCs listed on the city’s website with contact info, agendas, etc.?
· There seems to be a vocal majority atmosphere appointed to committees.
· It is difficult to tell how residents are recruited/chosen for BCCs.
· No, if they did, we would not have racial and economic disparities that Madison has.
· How can we limit those who already have power and encourage engagement of the disenfranchised?
· Why is there no uniformed training? No point – if there is no clear purpose, need a way to clarify.
· They do not serve us! They serve an agenda created before we can participate.
· Have a central role to help citizens to plug into the system according to their concerns, connect/include low participating districts.
Park Street Open House
· Committee appointments are only as good as the person appointing – allow alders to appoint.
·Incorporate smart phones to allow people to participate. It is the most common way to communicate/participate.
· No – need more engagement and participation or spread out so it is equal/just; provide trainings.
· Standardize and train stuff support and resources for BCCs.
· No
· No
· Appointments appear to be selective – based on who you know – entrenchment.
· If diverse.
Do the BCCs adequately engage residents?
Warner Park Open House
· How can the city council reach out to recruit BCC members with the special skills and knowledge needed for the task?
· Consider making distance participation possible. Invite specific non-represented groups/areas to apply.
· I don’t want the community “engaged.” I want us to contribute to/participate in setting the AGENDA.
· No.
· Is there a list of BCCs and how one can apply somewhere? What is the time frame of commitments?
· Provide online participation.
· No, if they did adequately engage all residents, our ethnic and economic disparities would not exist.
· Allow attendance by electronic meeting service.
· Using Robert’s Rules of Order which are complicated and divisive; democratic processes would improve chances of synergistic solutions and equity.
· Rules and procedures should be simple, clear and promote resident participation.
· I think very few residents are aware of the BCCS or the opportunity to serve on them.
Park Street Open House
·No! No awareness; no communication; no diversity; need a better comprehensive form of community engagement, retention and recruitment.
·Hard to spy?, very informative.
· The traditional hearing format for BCCs and Common Council are ineffective in allowing well-informed citizens participate in discussion after their turn is done.
· More outreach to all communities.
· Incorporate the use of mobile and smart phones. Best way to engage people on the go, especially percents, or when language, money and resources are a barrier.
· If you want the public to attend, do not meet for staff convenience (day time) but meet for committee members and public convenience.
· Give more notice before meetings – noticing and notifying people on Friday about a meeting on Monday is not enough time.
Ideas to improve city BCCs?
Warner Park Open House
· Change rules to allow for discussion without quorum (voting held later).
· Provide child care.
· You can try involving us in actually meaningful participation like participatory budgeting.
· Start over with a process to decide what BCCs we need.
· I like the idea of technology for resident engagement. It seems that locating meetings in the neighborhoods most impacted would be smart.
· The idea of splitting appointments concerns me when not all citizens have voted those other than the mayor. Appointments should reflect the vote.
· Use ad hoc committees, only if they are effective, ensure the BCC gets the visibility even if it is reduced to a subcommittee.
· Fewer alders on each committee. Offer ongoing online training for members or prospective members.
· These all sound like good ideas. Prioritize alder and citizen time (best use of).
· I like the idea of a plan to improve resident engagement; remote participation; platform for feedback.
· Split PSRC into PD (oversight) and FIRE, other public safety (lighting, pedestrian, etc.).
· At various community events (festivals, farmers markets in low participation areas) have info about the BCCs and encourage people to learn more.
· BCCs – it appears need to be reduced in number, have clear not overlapping or repetitive goals – be closed or deactivated once goals are met. Better connection to residents.
· Somehow encourage more residents to participate, reach out with advertising-discount parking?
· Reduce number. Online access.
· Each Council member has to be on at least 6 BBCs!! Why? How about more community members. Specifically recruit the type of people that could best represent those ready for specific BCCs.
Park Street Open House
· Establish a process to review the BCCs: factors like purpose; need what problem is being solved; is the composition correct; is it effective; cost-benefit analysis; does it serve the people.
· Raise awareness! Even politically engaged citizens are largely unaware these opportunities are available.
· Implement a wide action plan to evaluate BCCs and create an effective process, improvement plan and design thinking for BCCs to eliminate waste. Identify scope, evaluate strengths and provide effective services that are not being duplicated and generating waste (wasting time, resources, $$$).
· Reduce total number of BCCs. Make sure each is fundamentally needed, efficient and accomplishing more than just hours of talk.
· We need less! Combine some.
· Anders and elected officials should be out in the community to change them.
· Reduce numbers of BCCs. Reduce redundancy, more efficient, less impact on staff.
· Yes! Office of Resident Engagement + Impact Analysis + Split appointment responsibilities.
· Less BCCs.
· Reducing committee members, alders just further concentrates power in the hands of the few.
· Not sure what this accomplishes.
· Take seriously.
· Allow more open and honest discussion – go to the underrepresented groups for input.
· Amend structure for people to come to you.
How can the Common Council improve equity and engagement?
Warner Park Open House
· These are all good ideas and should happen
· Separate public testimony from legislative debate; vary meeting locations; provide child care for residents attending meetings.
· Yes to: child care; validating parking; allowing comments to be submitted by video; allow live participation by electronic means; vary meeting locations; avoid late-night meetings, reduce lengths of meetings; explain how input will be used and influence decision-making; ensure city staff has support, tools and capacity to do engagement well.
· child care; validating parking; allowing comments to be submitted by video; allow live participation by electronic means; allow public comments to be considered in advance
· Set up regular remote sites for viewing/participating in meetings like libraries, fire/PD stations
· Begin a process of public action plans to address specific occurrences of racial inequity
· These would be all great improvements
· Listen to the feedback on issues. We know what we need.
· Reduce the barriers to entry for alders and the BCCs.
· Yes to all suggestions.
· Equity considered and prioritized in all policy decisions.
Park Street Open House
· Look at barriers (transportation, child care, communication, live feeds, etc.) and provide solutions for wider participation. Do and aid internships to have more diversity by residents that are interested but may feel to intimidated. “Apprenticeship programs for civic duty”, paid or given credit and incentive.
· Term limits.
· Don’t limit the democratic process – unintended consequences.
· Advance meeting notice by alders.
· Increase public transport options because people are unable to get to meetings.
· Remotely testify.
· Alders should really serve their community.
· Bring meetings to the neighborhoods.
· Equity and engagement.
· Demystify what the Madison Common Council does – do not know enough to answer and participate.
· Improve accessibility of information
· Video/livestream all meetings. Allow electronic real time engagement.
· Educate individuals on different options and how to run meetings.
· Live participation.
· Remote testimony.
· Goal to visit new neighborhood once a week, a month.
· Relax Robert’s Rules but find some way to stay focused and facilitate diverse views in discussion.
· Hold meetings in public places.
· Communicate to stakeholders to raise awareness of issues to emphasize “What’s in it for me?”
· Alders need to build relationships with communities.
· Can we switch our online rec. database Legistar?
· Include liaisons from community to sit on Council.
Engagement and Participation: What do you think? Do you think BCCs create an effective way for residents to engage with City gov.?
Warner Park Open House
· I would like to be able to vote online, with a secure system.
· City should work w/ bilingual resource specialists from MMSD to do outreach to ELL communities.
· People feel like their voices are nor heard. Decisions made by people who are not impacted directly by those decisions.
· Difficult when only avenue for access to electeds is formal testimony.
· Alders should have their own offices in CCB where they can work.
· Open talk about what issues should have committees.
· Engagement requires two parties. What process does the City use to specifically address concerns of low-income minority people?
· City officials should be more available by phone or in person.
· Sure looks like heavy representation of near-westsiders.
· No! They aren’t same people appointed always.
· There needs to be conversational sharing to develop agendas “committees of the whole type”.
Park Street Open House
· No. Policy makers need to raise awareness of BCCs.
· No – no transparency; no communication to the general community, no central location to get information, no equity, no survey/common forum for all, silos.
· Better systems, less bureaucracy.
· Soli-ed departments make it difficult to know what to expect from public processes.
· Need calls by web site.
· Not enough diversity and representation of people of color at “city” meetings.
· Competing meetings of different committees across town, same time, different location. Committees were not even aware of the duplication.
· Need for improved trust and understanding. No understanding of what alders do, of what city government does. What do alders do? More direct and in-person outreach with community members and constituency.
· More direct communication of city staff with the people they serve (ex. police interactions are only negative) to build trust.
· Less committees, action plans needed, eliminate them.
· Varying meeting locations.
· Need to increase culture of openness to resident involvement.
· Timing and location of the meetings.
· Connecting with Digital Hearth and the work of Local Voices Network (Kathy Cramer).
What do you think? How would you like to be represented?
Warner Park Open House
· Create an Ombudsman Office with Common Council so alders can focus on legislation and policy.
· I would like the district needs of my district respected.
Park Street Open House
· Alder: need structure and accountability. I think they do a good job.
· Seek representation from educators at technical colleges, k-12, NGOs that serve population and can be advocates for general needs instead of personal benefit/gains by their district if not equitable.
· By my alder and his liaisons.
· By community leaders in neighborhood.
· Community leaders and people who have similar background – underrepresentation of low-income, etc.
· A community that needs financial resources.
· Someone who looks like me.
· Alder
· By my nighbor
· By my alder
·Alder
