Go to any Albuquerque City Council meeting and it may seem like the public comment period is a waste of time. Councilors often use that time to grab a drink of water and eyes in the audience gloss over. Despite optics, councilors said they do listen and sometimes take specific action based on what they hear.
“Public comment for the council is critically important to understanding the perspectives and views of the public as well as when people have specific needs,” Albuquerque City Council President Dan Lewis said. “I’ve seen the council take actions such as deferring a bill so that we could look at it more…I’ve seen the council change their vote because of public comments.”
Lewis said public comments also allow the City Council to connect people with the right department or person who could help them.
This was the case for Vincent Romero, an Albuquerque resident who asked for city officials’ help with his housing situation at a council meeting in August.
At the meeting, Romero said he was born with cerebral palsy and was living in a hotel room he couldn’t afford with his social security benefits. He applied to several affordable housing programs but was put on a year-long waiting list.
“We were able to get him with the department director immediately,” Lewis said. “A couple of weeks later, I asked for a status report on that…they couldn’t share everything…but they communicated that they fully followed through, and they were able to get him what he needed.”
However, it may take more than one comment for city officials to address issues.
Jackie Davis, a University of New Mexico student, got the attention of Mayor Tim Keller’s administration after attending three City Council meetings and speaking about the need for more pedestrian safety near UNM.
Davis told councilors and the administration about the need for a crosswalk — which led to her meeting with city department heads. Davis said development officials told her a pedestrian hybrid beacon would be an effective crossing treatment for the location and are looking into potential funding sources to install it.
Read more about Davis’ story here.
Another avid public commenter is Mason Graham, policy director for Common Cause New Mexico. Graham was one of many who attended several council meetings to speak against the council’s proposal to change the city’s voting system.
While councilors passed the proposal to lower the threshold to win an election, Mayor Tim Keller vetoed it and after more pushback from residents, one councilor switched her vote and the council voted to uphold the veto.
“When there is a large outreach of people saying that they dislike a particular proposal or piece of legislation, it’s our hope that city councilors or legislators will listen to that and change their opinion based off of what information that they are receiving from the public,” Graham said.
Read more about the proposal here.
The council always allows public comments with a limit of 30 people for general public comments and each agenda item. People can sign up for general public comments and two agenda items. There is also a two-minute time limit per speaker.
Melanie Majors, executive director of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government, said it is important for the public to provide input on proposed actions but being limited to a specific time frame “can be harmful.”
“While that is great for moving the meeting along, it may not always be in the public’s interest when they are limited,” Majors said. “Public comment is an opportunity to influence or change the rules. It makes better regulations because the public really is involved. It can also sometimes point out unintentional consequences that people don’t maybe look at all the time.”
Read more about the city’s rules for public comments or how to sign up here.
Thanks Elizabeth. But you let the councilors and especially Dan Lewis get away with putting a dress on a pig. He has cut off commenters before, derided a female union official who spoke up against the charter amendment proposal to have mayor win on a plurality vote, and more. Plus, it actually is not a good way to make many forms of law. I agree with Majors that a 2-minute limit is detrimental to good public input. It can become an incentive to be combative rather than informative or a well-spoken advocate. I think as well that the audience benefits from hearing what others think and on the especially divided-opinion issues, the public should know the tenor of the mail the councilors receive on an issue. it is nearly impossible in ABQ–one has to put in an IPRA request. Some jurisdictions have a system where letters to councilors become part of an on-line public record a day or two before a meeting. So, for example, my guess is that Dan Lewis had nearly no constituent who supported his bid on the charter amendments. Finally, an accurate article would also have a councilor admitting that sometimes they do not care about what the public has to say, and they go in with their minds made up. That would be honesty. Finally, I am unhappy that Lewis can cruise on the only time I saw genuine humanity in him when he was moved by the man with cerebral palsy who was homeless. Hey, there are big issues with unhoused in ABQ and that man should have never been in that position to come to City Council to plead for help. It was heartbreaking. There are plenty of others who need help, and who will die on the streets this year. Terry