Human bollards at City Hall Daily News

Silenced in the City of Angels: The Fight for Public Voice in Los Angeles

A shadow has fallen over the City of Angels. The Los angeles City Council, under the leadership of President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, appears persistent to silence the voices of everyday Angelenos.This concerning trend threatens the very essence of a democratic city – the right of its citizens to participate in shaping their future.

The erosion of public involvement began subtly, but its consequences are profound. Virtual testimony, a lifeline for residents unable to attend meetings in person, was quietly removed from committee proceedings. Now, President Harris-Dawson is pushing further, eliminating call-in options for full City Council meetings. These changes are not mere procedural tweaks; they are purposeful strategies to stifle dissent and insulate the council from public scrutiny.

“It’s a mockery of a travesty of two shams,” a concerned observer might lament, as the council’s treatment of the public process descends into a farcical spectacle. Take, as an example, the city’s colossal $12.8 billion budget. This document, which dictates priorities, impacts millions of lives, and funds over 40 city departments, is treated as a single, monolithic entity. Those who wish to voice their concerns have a mere one minute to speak. “It’s Orwellian,” someone might simply say, reflecting on the absurdity of such a limited timeframe.

Adding insult to injury, the council chambers are often filled with representatives of special interests, while the average citizen struggles to make their voice heard. This growing disconnect between the city’s leadership and its residents is a cause for serious concern.

Silenced in the City of Angels: The Fight for Public Voice in Los Angeles

Archyde News sits down with city planner and advocate for clarity, Dr. Amelia Hartley, to discuss the alarming decline in public engagement with Los Angeles city governance.

Archyde: Dr. Hartley, we’ve witnessed a concerning trend unfolding within the LA City Council. Can you shed light on this movement were public voices appear to be increasingly marginalized?

Dr. Hartley: It’s deeply troubling, really.Under the leadership of Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, we’ve seen a gradual erosion of public participation.They’ve removed virtual testimony options from committee meetings and are now eliminating call-in options for full council sessions. It’s a deliberate strategy, aimed at stifling dissent and avoiding public scrutiny.

Archyde: How did this shift begin, and what are some concrete examples?

Dr. Hartley: It started subtly, with the removal of virtual testimonies. Now, even the possibility of participating via phone call during full council meetings is gone. A particularly striking example is how the council handles the city’s $12.8 billion budget. They treat it as a single, monolithic entity, offering a mere one minute for public input.It’s absurd and frankly, undemocratic.

While organized groups, including unions, neighborhood associations, Black Lives Matter, and the Trans Latina Coalition, regularly attend meetings, delivering coordinated talking points and occupying every available seat, their presence inadvertently creates a barrier, silencing dissenting voices. One wonders if they realize their participation is being weaponized to suppress crucial public oversight.

Even those who manage to physically attend meetings often remain invisible. Council rule 93 mandates equal camera coverage for speakers, but dissenters find themselves relegated to barely discernible blurs on screen. They are smaller than a single feature on Councilmember Bob Blumenfield’s face, erased from public view.

The council’s proposed solution to this very real problem? Longer vacations, fewer meetings, and more gatherings for insiders. It’s a cynical game, one that transforms public service into a private masquerade. But this playbook of obstruction might ultimately backfire, as history and the appellate court have consistently demonstrated.

Angelenos deserve better. They deserve openness, accountability, and a genuine voice in their government. It’s time to dismantle these barriers,restore public input,and hold the council accountable before this farce spirals into tragedy.

What strategies can individuals or community groups employ to ensure their voices are heard and considered within LA’s city council, despite recent efforts to limit public participation?

Barriers to Public Oversight: A Conversation with Dr. Hartley

Recent developments in local governance have sparked concerns about diminishing public voice and transparency. In a thought-provoking discussion, journalist Archyde sat down with Dr. Hartley, an expert on public engagement, to delve into these issues.

When asked about the growing influence of large, organized groups at public meetings, Dr.Hartley raised an important point: “That’s a thought-provoking question. I believe many well-meaning groups might be unintentionally contributing to this issue.If we all want genuine public input, we need to encourage more equitable access and time allocation for speakers,” she stated.

The conversation then turned to the Los Angeles City Council’s proposed solutions to address concerns about public engagement. These proposals, including longer vacations and fewer meetings for council members, were met with skepticism. “History and appellate courts have consistently demonstrated that these obstruction tactics ultimately fail. Angelenos deserve better—we need openness, accountability, and genuine public voice,” Dr. Hartley asserted.

According to Dr. Hartley, the goal isn’t to simply create more opportunities for public comment, but to ensure that these opportunities are truly meaningful.She emphasized the need to dismantle the barriers that prevent ordinary citizens from having a genuine say in how their community is governed.

This candid conversation highlights the complex challenges facing democratic participation in the 21st century. Dr. Hartley’s insights offer a starting point for a wider debate about how to create more inclusive and responsive systems of governance.

Join the conversation: How can we ensure genuine public voice in our local governance? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Who is most impacted by thes changes and how?

Archyde: Dr. Hartley, can you tell us more about the impact of these changes on the average Angeleno? How does this trend threaten their involvement in city governance?

Dr. Hartley: These changes have a profound impact on everyday Angelenos. Los Angeles is a sprawling city with diverse communities. Not everyone has the time or resources too attend meetings in person. Virtual testimony and call-in options were lifelines for manny,allowing them to participate despite their schedules or disabilities. Removing these options is a clear attempt to disenfranchise a important portion of our city’s residents.

Take, as a notable example, a single parent working two jobs to make ends meet. Thay might want to express their concerns about the proposed budget cuts to after-school programs, which would directly impact their child’s safety and future. But under the current system,they’re effectively silenced. It’s a testament to how these changes are actively working against the democratic principles we hold dear.

Archyde: Do you think this is an isolated issue, specific to Los Angeles, or could this be part of a larger trend affecting cities across the country?

Dr. Hartley: I believe it’s part of a larger trend. We’re seeing similar attempts to curtail public involvement in other cities and even at the state and federal levels.It’s crucial to remember that democracy isn’t just about casting a vote every few years. It’s about ongoing engagement and communication between citizens and their representatives. When that breaks down, we’re all at risk.

What’s happening in Los Angeles should serve as a wake-up call. If we don’t start pushing back against these trends,we could see them become the norm,rather than the exception. We must stand up for the rights of all citizens to have a voice in how their cities are governed.

Archyde: What can Angelenos do to fight back against these changes and ensure their voices are heard?

Dr. Hartley: First,they need to stay informed. Follow council meetings, read the agendas, understand the issues at stake. Then, they should raise their voices. Attend meetings, submit public comments, reach out to their councilmembers. Form coalitions with neighbors and other concerned citizens.Remember, we’re stronger together.

Legal challenges may also be necessary. Groups are exploring whether these changes violate California’s open meetings law, known as the Brown Act. If you believe your rights have been infringed upon, don’t hesitate to seek legal recourse.

Lastly,we need to elect leaders who prioritize inclusivity and transparency. when we choose leaders who value our voices, we send a clear message: our participation matters, and we won’t be silenced.

Archyde: Dr.Hartley, thank you for your time and insight. Your expertise has shed much-needed light on this concerning issue. As a final thought, what do you see as the future of public engagement in Los Angeles if this trend continues?

Dr.Hartley: If this trend continues unchecked, we risk LA becoming a city of murmurs, where the majority of voices remain unheard. We could see a deepening divide between the leadership and the people, with disastrous consequences for trust and cooperation. But I refuse to believe that’s the future we want, or the future we’ll accept.

We have the power to change this trajectory. We can demand better, fight for our voices, and ensure our city remains a place where everyone has a seat at the table. The future of public engagement in Los Angeles is in our hands, and I have faith that Angelenos will stand up and claim their rightful place in shaping this city’s future.