Technology is a double edged sword. Cases in point are local city council meetings when cities like Mission Viejo issue iPads to city council members. These small lightweight devices replace the large cumbersome 3-ring binders containing the current Agenda and back up material for each meeting.
While seemingly innocent, these same iPads can also be used almost like TelePrompters where other council members can signal their colleagues how to vote or to respond to tough questioning by applicants and those opposing specific agenda issues. Those inputs can come from two feet away to the council chambers or anywhere in the world while the average person sitting in the council chambers or watching at home is clueless that this could, and may actually be occurring.
In a five member city council it is not a violation of the Brown Act for 2 members to discuss specific city business. However, to have the technology which enables you to look smart while getting prompted by the use of your iPad is troubling if not illegal. This reminds me of the movie Broadcast News with Bill Hurt, Albert Brooks and Holly Hunter where the news anchor is getting input to his ear piece from the show producer.
These mini TelePrompters should not be permitted inside the chambers. Each council member should be capable of standing on his or her own without the crutch of outside support. They can have the iPad at home but should use the 3-ring binders in open session meetings to avoid the perception of clouds overhead impacting the ultimate decision making.
Larry Gilbert
.jpg)
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
If city business rests on whether City Councilmen “look smart” or exchange secret notes during open comment sessions, the city is already doomed.
A reasonable person would *assume* that city councilmen discuss matters before the council, privately, and indeed would regard that as a necessary component of good governance. How are councilmen supposed to educate each other? Horse trade? Discuss things openly? Politics done only and strictly under the bright lights of publicity is MORE, not less, dishonest and sneaky.
Furthermore, I would sincerely hope that as a competent voter you are not the least bit impressed by what a councilman says in a public comment period. Given the right circumstances, with good scripting and a bit of luck, the dumbest person in the world can look brilliant for a few moments. (This is how Hollywood makes a brilliant scientist out of the likes of Daryl Hannah onscreen, after all.) You SHOULD be basing your evaluation of a city councilmen on his actions — e..g his voting record — over a period of time. You should pay no attention at all to how cool or poised or confident he appears in public, because this is meaningless fluff, having no impact on his value as a practical politician.
And in the meantime, if city council business can be transacted 10% faster because they bring their iPads into the chamber — huzzah for modern efficiency. That’s 10% less government my taxes have to pay for.
Re Carl: Council members are prohibited by the Ralph Brown Act from communicating with more than one other member on an issue or they violate the law. They do deliberate as a group during the open public meeting but should not have access to outside influence in the process.
Is Carl saying that we should encourage using the i-Pad to speed up these meetings where we could have staff, members of the public, vendors or other council members sending signals to members of the council as to what to say or guide them in how to vote? This is the public, not the private sector. They can use their i-Pad outside the chambers. Evaluation of a council member IS based on their voting record. However, I want to hear and see what THEY say and their voting without benefit of outsider influence or guidance when they are in Open Session.
Really? Is this where we are with regard to our public officials, that we distrust them to have iPads. How many thousands of dollars might we save on copying, binding and distribution with the use of a relatively inexpensive devise that allows the dissemination of information quickly and effectively. We’re going to question the integrity of our elected officials? Should we blindfold them as well.
I think that it is an easy fix, just have them turn off their WiFi or Cellular Access in Council Chambers. The whole world is not a giant conspiracy to somehow deprive you and your neighbors of their rights. The way this world is going, it will impossible to find qualified, intelligent people to serve in public office.
Then again maybe that is the plan, to drive intelligent dedicated and qualified people out of office.
Which is exactly why, Greg, the same corrupt group keep getting elected.
Re Greg: We’re not talking about turning the clock back a century. Our successful corporation flouished with providing leading edge technology. That is not the issue.
I can support Greg’s suggestion of turning off WiFi and cellular access inside council chambers. In a recent discussion of this issue with someone who works at the County I was told that there are several public agencies who sadly engage in inappropriate communication via i-Pad technology while conducting the people’s business.
One must wonder about the IQ and iPad usage of Council members and City Staff. iPads may be allowed to find the answer to this simple problem in no more than 5 minutes. 90 staff members go to the MV Farmers Market on Saturday 02/23/13; 3 have a hot dog, soda and an ipod; 24 have a hot dog; 5 have a hot dog and a soda; 33 have a soda; 10 have a soda and an ipod; 38 have an ipod; 8 have an ipod and a hot dog. How many have NOTHING?
Probably the post above that best captures my position is Greg’s. I think the original letter is attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill.
1. Does Larry really think that Council members arrive at a meeting without already knowing their position on agenda items? On an issue of any sort of complexity, it would take hours, if not days, of discussion to reach agreement in the absence of prior research. And, hypothetically, if a member happened to be “bought and paid for” by special interests, do you really think those interests would wait until the meeting to communicate how they wanted “their” member to vote? And, if the special interests did wait, or the item was a surprise last-minute entry onto the agenda (is this legal?), why not just have a “handler” in the audience flash a discreet “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” signal? You don’t need electronics for this.
2. When Larry speculates that friends of members could use iPads to provide them with real-time instruction on how “to respond to tough questioning,” I will simply say that the typewritten communication of text isn’t fast enough for that. If someone asks me a question, and I have to wait for my “handler” in the audience (either in person or watching on cable television) to type and send a reply for me to utter, the pause will be so stunningly obvious and embarrassing that no one would consider behaving that way.
3. As to the movie “Broadcast News,” I hope that Larry wasn’t too surprised by the earpieces. If you watch much live television reporting, you will notice that ALL broadcast personnel (announcers, color commentators, news readers, weather people, traffic reporters, etc. … ALL OF THEM) are wearing earpieces that allow them to hear the producer privately. The main purpose is to allow the producer to warn them when they have to wrap up in order to allow a commercial break to take place on schedule. The producer isn’t telling them every word to say. That (if they need it) is the job of the teleprompter.
As the council members arrive fully prepared then simply take away their technology. Is Mark aware of the timeframe for communication between the city and council members? They do not receive a heads up on the upcoming council meeting Agenda until sometime Wed evening prior to the Monday meetings. Most have full time jobs and families. Beyond that they have activities with their kids and/or church on the weekends. So are these part time elected council members really given adequate time to research, ask questions of staff, and be fully prepared by Monday? Have you ever looked at a simple routine item on the consent calendar, specifically the check register where we approve around $1-2 million dollars every meeting. Shouldn’t some of those expenses be reviewed as part of preparation? In my own discovery a number of years ago I found a few hundred thousand dollars in payments to Granich Construction for cleaning up alleged illegal dumping below a city owned park that was bogus. Again preparation requires more time than one might realize. I’ve heard that there have been council members who winged it and did not even look at the staff documentation prior to the meetings but those names will not be shared here.
Giving someone a thumbs up or down inside the chambers is visible and by itself cannot articulate the arguments for said position.
As to ” broadcast news.” That was simply a hook to get your attention and it obviously worked.