pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-03-01.pdf, 17
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-03-01 | 17 | Stated that she is confused regarding what the ad hoc group exclusion means; it seems there is a huge loophole which is not clearly defined: Imi Lee. Alameda. Stated as part of the effort to keep the Committee accountable to the community, he filed PRAs, mobilized people to participate in surveys, and attended PRC and Council meetings; ad hoc committees are not a new development; it was only after the Committee published the top four names, which did not include specific name choices that complaints began; he theorizes that Mr. Foreman and Councilmember Herrera Spencer view the ad hoc committees as permitting a radical break from the status quo or that they correctly perceive the work of the committees as a challenge to Alameda's prevailing racial hierarchy: Josh Geyer, Rename Jackson Park Committee. Reminded the Commission that they could propose to Council to authorize time for the City Attorney's office to look more closely at the issue; a document from the City of Los Angeles on neighborhood council formation cited the Brown Act regarding an exempt subcommittee "must be comprised solely of members of the governing body;" when members of the public are invited, the subcommittee then becomes subject to the Brown Act: Matt Reid, Alameda. Stated that she lives near Chochenyo Park and felt very well-informed throughout the renaming process; she received immediate responses to her inquiries from the Recreation and Parks Director and Rasheed Shabazz; it is hard to understand why there is an issue with this ad hoc committee, particularly because it was community-led and centered on Black Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) voices; the renaming process demonstrated how great work can get done through the ad hoc process: Meredith Hoskins, Alameda. Stated when the ad hoc committee was set up, there was a pause to really engage the community; there was plenty of encouragement for people to submit names; the youth came up with new technology methods to engage the community; it was clear what was being asked and how the public was being engaged: Jennifer Rakowski, Alameda. Stated there seems to be nitpicking over specific words of the Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance surrounding this Committee in particular; the timing and ongoing framing seems interesting; he completely agrees with the Special Counsel's assessment that if there was any kind of issue, they were cured; urged the Commission to follow the Special Counsel's recommendation: Zac Bowling, Alameda. The Chief Assistant City Attorney advised the Commission to use the terms "founded" or "unfounded" when discussing the issue; stated that the decision on the item needs to be approve by a majority of all members, which is three. Mr. Foreman stated he objects to the use of the word because it does not mean the same thing as whether the appeal is sustained or not; if his claim is unfounded and he files a second claim that is unfounded, he would be precluded from filing claims for a number of years. Meeting of the Open Government Commission March 1, 2021 17 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-03-01.pdf |