Anaheim Council Member James Vanderbilt proposal designed to obstruct an elected council member’s democratic right to have particular agenda items heard and considered for a full council vote will be back before the Anaheim city council Tuesday night after to failed two weeks ago because of Dr. Jose Moreno’s vote not to join the Tait majority. Because it was a tie vote (3-3), due to Councilmember Kris Murray’s absence, the item is up again. In short, this proposal by Vanderbilt is antithetical to how city council’s should do business and it’s done with the notion that his efforts will save staff time and ease their workload.
Huh?
Here’s Vanderbilt’s proposal (Item 18):
Any member of the City Council may, Council Members may, during the City Council
Communications portion of a City Council meeting, request that an item be placed on a
future City Council regular meeting agenda. Items requested by Council Members shall
be presented at the next regular meeting, unless otherwise directed, as a discussion item
that would allow Council to discuss and by a majority vote, determine whether staff shall
be directed to provide a complete staff report and actionable item at a subsequent
meeting. No staff work shall be undertaken until the City Council has had the opportunity
to provide formal direction to staff. The Mayor shall have the authority to place an item
on a future agenda outside of an open City Council meeting through the City Manager’s
Office.
Agenda items that are not expected to take significant staff time or are time sensitive in
nature, as determined by the City Manager, may be placed on the next regular agenda
following a council member’s request.
The motion the council considered on April 24 was to make this a four-month pilot program with the idea of making it permanent.
Council members don’t serve staff – they serve their constituents. Limiting the ability of any council member to agendize items for a council vote is just wrong.
Vanderbilt’s proposal amounts to a direct attack on constituents. He’s framed this question in a head scratching way: “Let’s not make staff work so hard.” Really? Perhaps if they worked harder, the meetings would not go on so long.
Why listen, discuss, and negotiate if he can whip four votes to silence the city council minority? Under this proposal, Dr. Jose Moreno wouldn’t be able to have agendize the flagpole issue in the first place — and Vanderbilt did not second Moreno’s flagpole item when he usually seconds almost everything.
Why didn’t Vanderbilt offer a second on Dr. Jose Moreno’s motion on a new flagpole at City Hall?
Perhaps that’s why Moreno didn’t offer Vanderbilt a vote at the April 24 meeting. Will Moreno keep a no vote tonight? Moreno has a priority item on the agenda following this one regarding the Unite HERE sponsored “living wage” ordinance petition (Item 20) and he needs need Vanderbilt’s vote in order for it to pass.
Let’s see how the vote goes down.