Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 385-09TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE DATE: SEPTEMBER 21, 2009 CMR: 385:09 REPORT TYPE: REPORTS OF COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS SUBJECT: Recommendation from Policy & Services Committee to Continue the Open City Hall Online Forum RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Policy & Services Committee recommend that the City continue utilizing the Open City Hall online discussion forum at a cost of $200 per month. COMMITTEE REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION On June 29, 2009, the Policy & Services Committee reviewed the results of the pilot program for the Open City Hall online discussion forum and recommended on a 2-1 vote (Yeh absent) that the Council continue the forum at a cost of $200 per month. Attachment A provides a copy of the staff report to the Committee and Attachment B contains the minutes from that meeting. During the meeting, City staff and staff from Peak Democracy presented an overview of the outcomes from the pilot program, including a synopsis of user statistics and satisfaction. Additionally, staff discussed mechanisms for enhancing participation in the forum should the Council vote to continue the program. The Committee discussed many elements of the program before recommending that the Council continue the program. There was a general sentiment that the intent behind the program was good and that, for the cost, it seemed reasonable to continue utilizing this forum as another avenue for civic participation. As part of the motion, the Committee requested several additional items. First, the Committee wanted to see a more timely delivery of the comments to Council, which would entail emailing the comments to the Council earlier on Monday afternoon. The Committee also asked staff to expand outreach and explore the use of social networking sites in conjunction with the forum. The Committee recommended that the City explore utilizing the forum for some longer term projects that are unrelated to the Council agendas and that use of the forum be expanded to Boards and Commissions, if so desired by these groups. Finally, the Committee recommended that the Open City Hall forum be embedded on the City's website. Currently, visitors access the forum through a link on the City's website. In anticipation of this report to Council, staff attended the Website Committee meeting on September 2 to review a mock up of the Open City Hall forum on the City's website. The Committee was supportive of the concept and design of CMR:385:09 Page 10f2 this new webpage and encouraged staff to explore other ways to promote the forum in other areas of the City's website. If the Council approves the continuation of the Open City Hall forum, staff would prepare an agreement to be executed by the City Manager. This agreement would not need to be approved by the Council as the annual cost of the forum falls within the City Manager's contracting authority. RESOURCE IMPACT The City has been participating in the Open City Hall pilot program for the past six months. The set up cost for the program was $5,000 and there is a monthly subscription fee of $200. The total cost of the pilot program is $6,200. Peak Democracy staff have indicated that they would continue to charge the City $200 per month to continue hosting the Open City Hall forum. This monthly cost would be absorbed within the City Manager's Office budget. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendations in this report are consistent with City policies and previous Council direction. The Open City Hall forum also supports one of the Council's top priorities for this year, Civic Engagement for the Common Good. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This report is not a project requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: June 29, 2009 City Manager's Report to Policy & Services Committee Attachment B: Minutes from June 29, 2009 Policy & Services Committee Meeting PREPARED BY: ~MORA~U Assistant to the City Manager CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:385:09 Page 2 of2 Attachment A TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: POLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE DATE: JUNE 29, 2009 CMR: 299:09 SUBJECT: Review of Open City Hall Pilot Program and Recommendation to the City Council Regarding Continuation of the Program RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City continue utilizing the Open City Hall online discussion forum. at a cost of $200 per month and that the Policy & Services Committee review the results of the Open City Hall pilot program. Additionally, staff would like to receive feedback from the Committee regarding general satisfaction around the forum., ways to enhance its effectiveness for the Council, and additional ways to promote participation in the forum. BACKGROUND "Open City Hall" is a dedicated online forum that allows citizen participation. It was created by Peak Democracy. The forum allows Palo Alto residents to participate in the public comment process on City Council agendas but on their own time and schedule. Open City Hall is also specially structured to be both (1) a civil, on-topic public forum and (2) First Amendment freedom-of-speech compliant -two attributes that are important for the City's public hearing process, but not commonly supported on the Internet (especially in comparison to private, ad- supported blogs). The City has been participating in .the forum as part of a pilot program since December 2008 as a result of Council direction in the fall of 2008. Each week, several Council agenda items are posted on the forum along with a question about whether the Council should approve a particular action related to those agenda items. Members of the public can then post their position (on "yes, no" issues) and provide their comments. Staff then presents a tally of the positions and a formatted report of these comments to the Council for the Monday evening Council meetings. On May 19, 2008, the City Council discussed a Colleagues' Memo requesting support for a pilot program involving the online "Open City Hall" forum. At the meeting, the Council passed a motion (7-2) to refer the item to . the Policy & Services Committee to identify and clarify any policy or implementation issues. The Policy & Services Committee considered the item on September 9,2008 and made a recommendation that the City Council approve a six-month pilot program of the service. On October 6, 2008, the City Council approved the recommendation from the Policy & Services Committee to implement the Open City Hall "online service" pilot CMR:299:09 Page 1 of4 Attachment A TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: POLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE DATE: JUNE 29, 2009 CMR: 299:09 SUBJECT: Review of Open City Hall Pilot Program and Recommendation to the City Council Regarding Continuation of the Program RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City continue utilizing the Open City Hall online discussion forum at a cost of $200 per month and that the Policy & Services Committee review the results of the Open City Hall pilot program. Additionally, staff would like to receive feedback from the Committee regarding general satisfaction around the forum, ways to enhance its effectiveness for the Council, and additional ways to promote participation in the forum. BACKGROUND "Open City Hall" is a dedicated online forum that allows citizen participation. It was created by Peak Democracy. The forum allows Palo Alto residents to participate in the public comment process on City Council agendas but on their own time and schedule. Open City Hall is also specially structured to be both (1) a civil, on-topic public forum and (2) First Amendment freedom-of-speech compliant -two attributes that are important for the City's public hearing process, but not commonly supported on the Internet (especially in comparison to private, ad- supported blogs). The City has been participating in .the forum as part of a pilot program since December 2008 as a result of Council direction in the fall of 2008. Each week, several Council agenda items are posted on the forum along with a question about whether the Council should approve a particular action related to those agenda items. Members of the public can then post their position (on "yes, no" issues) and provide their comments. Staff then presents a tally of the positions and a formatted report of these comments to the Council for the Monday evening Council meetings. On May 19,2008, the City Council discussed a Colleagues' Memo requesting support for a pilot program involving the online "Open City Hall" forum. At the meeting, the Council passed a motion (7-2) to refer the item to . the Policy & Services Committee to identify and clarify any policy or implementation issues. The Policy & Services Committee considered the item on September 9, 2008 and made a recommendation that the City Council approve a six-month pilot program of the service. On October 6, 2008, the City Council approved the recommendation from the Policy & Services Committee to implement the Open City Hall "online service" pilot CMR:299:09 Page 1 of4 ' .. program for a period of six months. The key elements of the pilot program included the following: 1) Cost: $6,200 for 6~month pilot program ($5,000 set up fee + $200/month) 2) Forum to be hosted on www.OpenCityHall.com 3) Agenda topics: staff selected 1-3 key Council agenda items to use as discussion topics each week during the pilot program 4) Peak Democracy staff monitors the forum 5) Evaluation to be conducted at the end of the pilot program DISCUSSION Staff identified several key areas to examine during the evaluation of the pilot program. These were: 1) participation -number of forum participants; 2) discussion items -how many each week and how many comments received; and 3) resources -overall benefits of the program relative to the cost of implementation. As an overall comment, the program has been successful for the cost and staff resources required to implement it. The discussion below reviews some of the key elements of the evaluation. Additionally, representatives from Peak Democracy/Open City Hall will be present at the Policy & Services Committee meeting to further discuss satisfaction with the program and sugge'stions for further enhancements. Staff would also like to receive feedback from the Committee regarding general satisfaction around the forum, ways to enhance its effectiveness for the Council, and additional ways to promote participation in the forum. Participation/Discussion Items The online forum launched in January 2009 with the composting topic discussed by the Council at the January 12 meeting. Attachment A provides a synopsis of the topics posted on the forum since January as well as the number of participants for each item. The City has posted 19 topics over 13 meetings. For most meetings, there was only one topic available. There were also two ongoing topics (High Speed Rail and Long Range Financial Forecast) that allowed people to post more general overall comments related to these topics. On average, approximately 24 people participated in each forum -and that's equivalent to over 1 hour of public hearings (at 3 minutes per person). Attachment A also identifies the total number of visitors (1614), participants (250) and users who have subscribed to receive announcements (200). Also, all the comments were civil and on-topic as well as generally articulate and substantive. Attachment B provides responses from a user satisfaction survey. This survey is offered to each new user the first time they post to the forum. Overall, there was a very positive response to the Open City Hall forum with 164 people indicating that they like using the forum and 24 indicating that they did not like using the forum. Many of the "no" comments focused on technical issues surrounding the forum, including the registration process. The staff from Peak Democracy were able to follow up on and address many of the technical concerns and questions. There were also some concerns about the anonymity of the forum and whether people's comments were actually considered as part of the Council deliberation process. Although some topics p.ad very high participation rates (Alma Plaza, High Speed Rail and the Business License Tax) and users were generally satisfied with the forum, there is clearly an opportunity to increase participation if the program continues. Staff have been discussing additional methods for publicizing the forum and increasing participation. These might include further outreach to the neighborhood associations, developing a City database of resident email CMR:299:09 Page 2 of 4 addresses, or incorporating additional copies of the forum directly onto the City1s and/or newspapers' websites. Staff are also looking at ways to identify Open City Hall items directly on the published agenda. Resources The forum has been relatively easy to manage from the City staff perspective. Each week, staff prepares a question for the forum along with a sUllUll,ary of the item. Staff sends this item to the Peak Democracy staff along with a link to the agenda item and it is posted to the forum. On Monday, the City Clerk's Office is able to access the forum and download the comments from each topic so the staff can then print them for the Council meeting. Following the Council meeting, the staff then draft up a statement summarizing the Council action on the topic, which Peak Democracy sends to participants. Overall, the whole process probably takes 1-3 hours of City staff time depending on the number of forum topics. This is a relatively small investment of staff time that enables the public another avenue for participation in Council agenda topics. Additional Feedback In addition to receiving feedback from the Committee regarding general satisfaction around the forum, staff would also like to hear suggestions regarding ways to enhance its effectiveness for the Council and additional ways to promote participation in the forum. Currently, between 1-3 items are posted to the forum for each Council meeting. Should the forum be opened up to allow for Board/Commission items to be posted as well? Does the Committee have any other suggested mechanisms for increasing participation in the forum? RESOURCE IMPACT The City has been participating in the Open City Hall pilot program for the past six months. The set up cost for the program was $5,000 and there is a monthly subscription fee of $200. The total cost of the pilot program is $6,200. Peak Democracy staff have indicated that they would continue to charge the City $200 per month to continue hosting the Open City Hall forum. This monthly cost would be absorbed within the City Manager's Office budget. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendations in this report are consistent with City policies and previous Council direction. The Open City Hall forum also supports one of the Council's top priorities for this year, Civic Engagement for the Common Good. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This report is not a project requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ATTACHMENTS Attachment-A: Synopsis of Topics Posted on Open City Hall during Pilot Program Attachment B: Open City Hall User Satisfaction Survey Results . CMR:299:09 Page 3 of4 PREPARED BY: KELLY MORARIU Assistant to the City Manager CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:299:09 Page 4 of4 450 400 Open City Hall Usage as of June 23, 2009 Attachment A Unique Visitors: 1614 Participants: 250 Subscribers: 200 Topics: 19 Statements: 457 Equivalent Public Comment Hours 23 @ 3min/statement: Usage by Topic As of June 23, 2009 350 +-1.--·----·----···--1.·--------·-·----·--·---------·----.-.. ---.-~--- 300 +--1.-· .. -.·_--·---·_· --... --.. .... _--_._---------------------_ .. _-_ .. --_._._._. 250 +---1---.·--··-- 200 +-1.-·-·-----·---·--.. ------_ ... _-_ ....... __ ... __ ._._-------.. -----_ .. _-----_ .. _-._._-_._--_._--_ .... _--- .• Participants 150 +--1 .. ----.-·---------·--· -.. --1.--.. -.. ----.. ----.-.. -.. ------... ----.. -----.-----..... --.-_ .. -__ . ___ ._ ... _._. __ .••. __ .. _ ... ...j! • Visllors 100 50 0 0 ~ .~ ~ !I :r: J2 :::;I ~ ~ f 0 !I ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 i :::l cO' 0 3 I/) 't:I II) m 0 til iii "" ~ ~, III :::T I/) m <0 ~ ~ 0' ~ ~. 'C ~, (f) W :r: Co ~ ~ ~ ! i w C' m ~ ~ f e!. i ~ 0 III * 8' ~ fij 2, :::l 3 ~ :::l 61 II Co I/) ~ i .... CI) '! "'" c: 0 S iii ~ III ~ f CI) i ! "'C ~ l.!: 3 III ~ 3 .s g iii' ~ :::l ~ cO' I/) ~ fir en :::l ., ~ a. 3 !hi m 2 CI) ;;0 III ~ ~ ;;0 6i S' g: :::T II CI) s, ~ III :r: 8 ~ ~ :::l 0 0 Q. m ~, (Q :::l ~ (Q 1 j I Attachment B S<atlsfactlon Survey Old you Uka using this Open City Hall foru.m? Why or why not? (See following pages) Response Comment Date 06/22/09 06/22/09 Yes Easy to use and I'm able to express my thoughts and views. Yes Central location for a complex issue. Nice to have all the supporting Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes materials in one space. Simple and clear navigation was great. it's easy and goes to the immediate readership 06/22/09 do not always have time to keep up on city news, regulations, etc. 06/22/09 Hopefully this will help me be a better informed resident/taxpayer. It is also easier to contribute an opinion in this forum for someone who is not used to voicing their opinions in a public speaking forum. it is easy and efficient and it strikes me as being a good option for participating in the democratic process 06/20/09 I've used it plenty of times but without my name. However" I think it is a . 06/20/09 waste of money. It could be done more efficiently by using a blog on the Palo Alto Weekly Town Square which thousands of people read and many use.On a tiny fraction of residents even bother to use this. Don't know, because I don't know who reads it. 06/19/09 I appreciate the opportunity to express my views and it was easy to use the 06/19/09 site Hope to be heard, and reach a wider audience. Hopefully, this is not another wasted exercise to make our local government look good by using the latest "government speak" buzz word: civic engagement. Remember the fate of Props lA-l E? Your next extravagant bond proposal may have the same fate if the taxpayers lose faith. 06/19/09 05/31/09 Pretty straightforward and simple to use. 05/31109 No maybe?? I will see how it plays. But the site works very well! Kudos on 05128/09 that! Not an easy task. I'd rather deal with my City's government or a local citizen's group. 05/16/09 It's an easy to use share~point. 05/16/09 It appears to be an easy way to communicate. His unknown whether or not 05/01109 it will be an effective means . . Good idea, let's see if anyone in City Hall pays any attention. 04/27/09 Civic engagement leads to better and more responsive government, and a 04/27/09 more interesting community It is a way for Palo Alto residents to post their opinions, and also to read 04/27/09 others' opinions. It's a convenient way to express views without writing a formalletter to elected officials or staff. This is great! I'm excited to have the chance to give my input. Still too soon to tell, this was my first time. I hope this will be carefully evaluated by our elected City Council Representatives, and used by Palo Alto residents to give comments and suggestions to the Council 04/27/09 04/25/09 04/25/09 04/17/09 I would have felt more comfortable ifl had known about a way to register 04/10/09 first and then coinment, rather than commenting first and then being forced to register at the end. . It's easy to participate and it looks like it works. 04/09/09 Easy way to give one's opinion . 03/30/09 As long as my comments are considered on a timely basis, I am in favor of 03/30/09 this system. Thanks. Yes Easy to use, see comments of others. 03/29/09 Yes Easy to use and understand. 03127109 Yes Hopefully we can temper the stupid actions of the city council. But I fear it 03116/09 will have no effect. .. Yes ... makes me believe that someone may be listening! :-) Doesn't take much 03/13/09 of my time or (hopefully) your time, but achieves some communication. Yes Why does the window say "We'll add your city when you sign in" and then 03/13/09 not allow you to proceed until you've checked the add-my-city box? Yes Over time, credible users of Open City Hall will grow. 03/13/09 . Yes It was very easy to navigate. And this particular topic is very important to 03/05/09 P.A. . No I'd like to be able to make comments, but I don't like that its so pUblic. This 03/02/09 doesn't feel safe to me'. Also, I wasn't aware that this was a recognized city council forum until today - I felt pressured to get this posted here in order for my consideration to be heard. Yes I like the managed format and feel it increases the likelihood of my opinion 03/01109 being heard. No I don't like the ToS. 03/01109 Yes It provides a much better oppotunity to participate in community issues. 03/01109 Yes If someone with actual authority reads the comments, maybe a change to 02/28/09 the HSR plan can actually happen! Yes Seems like a good tool for busy residents to remain in contact with the City 02128109 Council and City staff, even if other Qommitments often prevent me from attending evening community meetings. Yes This is democracy in action. People cannot always make it to City Council 02/28/09 meetings, but would like input in the process Yes Yes, I feel I can voice my opinon to City Council without the hassle of 02/28/09 sitting through an entire city council meeting for my 2 minutes of time. Yes Simple, well-designed web app. 02/28/09 Yes Great way to communicate ideas. 02/27/09 Yes I have been enrolled in this Open City Hall for a while now. This is my first 02/26/09 comment. I hope that the Council appreciates that this is the first time in years that i've been able to give my opinion, and without the trouble of going downtown. And i hope they also appreciate that when i have no opinion on a subject they won't get a message from me. Nevertheless, i really like being asked. :) Thank you, . Yes Forum is essential to democracy. This makes it fairly practical. 02111109 No To soon to tell. Ask me later. 02/06109 Yes We need to gather as many ideas as possible to solve the massive budget 02/06/09 shortfall. This is an easy and quick way to post one's opinion. Yes easy to use 02/05/09 Yes What choice do I have? I think the data entry portion of this site could be 01131109 enormously improved by providing something like a word processor interface with formatting choices, copylpaste, insert external text, etc. No One way dialog. One item only. Not as participatory as PA Weekly Town 01130/09 Square Yes However, I'm not certain that I like the anonymity feature. This creates the 01127/09 possibility for manipulation of results. At the very least, there ought to be some verifiability for the Palo Alto residency. Yes It's incredibly user friendly. Love it! 01126/09 Yes Quick way to communicate about issues affecting us. 01125/09 Yes Convenience. 01/25/09 Yes It's an efficient way to communicate with city hall 01125/09 Yes Great idea for those of us who are interested but can't make it to meetings 01125/09 (small children at home, in my case). Seems easier than trying to figure out what council members to email, and more likely to be effective since council members can see an organized snapshot of votes, rather than wading through their inboxes trying to get a tally. No The links that explain some of the features should open a new window, so 01125/09 the user doesn't have to go back, and re-enter information. Thanks! Yes Easy way for my voice to be heard. Site is simple &' usable. Thanks! Dave 01125/09 Yes It's. a great way to be informed, and a great way to get input from the 01125/09 public. Yes It's another conduit for communication. I hope there is evidence that it is 01/25/09 effective, both in use by city officials as well as civic, civil discourse by the constituents. , Yes It is a very efficient way for me to be able to participate in the government 01/25/09 & issues of relevance to me as a citizen of Palo Alto. I appreciate the opportunity, and hope that our government actually is able to make use of the input on this site to learn there is consensus, when it exists, and to understand more about different perspectives and their relative "weights" throughout the City. Yes it's quick and efficient 01125/09 No cumbersome registration process 01/25/09 Yes I don't really know yet because I just registered. Seems fine right know, andOl/25/09 everything was very clear except for how you insert your name and city when writing a responce for thoughts about issues. Yes I seems to be well done, protecting against those that might just wish to be 01/25/09 negative trouble makers. .' No Yes, I think it is important to be informed about the city I live in. 01/25/09 Yes Very convenient way for me to communicate with my elected officials 01125/09 about 'particular issues up for consideration. Yes We'll see. Just because we have a place to add comments doesn't mean 01/25/09 anyone is paying attention. There are real problems in Palo Alto and this city council has spent lots of time doing silly things like naming the City Hall for Martin Luther King. So, we'll see. Yes Quick and easy way to have at least a voice without long drawn out 01125109 meetings. Yes It was a very interesting and quite easy way to express my opinion on an 01/25/09 issue before the City Council. Yes Able to participate and register opinion easily from home. 01125/09 Yes great opportunity to express my ideas . .look forward to hearing from others. 01125/09 Yes I love it because I can give my opinion without getting into my car. 01125/09 Yes Because it gives the Public a voice. 01125/09 No You have an INCREDIBLY long legal aggreement. I felt like I was buying 01125/09 a house or signing a business contract. The fact that you read every submission before posting it is quite disturbing. And then it takes 24 hours Yes Yes ·No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes to have comments posted. It allows those who can't or won't write letters or speak before Council to 01/25/09 voice their opinions. nice way to collaborate 0 1/25/09 I do not believe in blogs without someone's name. If the city wants to try 01/25/09 this, it should allow comments on evemy public hearing item. It seems easier to give your opinion vi; writing a formal letter to the city 0 1/25/09 council. reasonably straightforward --but I don't think democracy is best served by 01124/09 anonymous notes Easy way to communicate! 01124/09 Not at all sure how it fits in withe "the City of Palo Alto." Or exactly what 01/24/09 its purpose is. Liked it this time. Stumbled on first attempt to use it to send a message 01/24/09 about municipal compostirig. I appreciate the screening of the submissions by the forum. However, after 01/24/09 I submitted my vote and comment this first time, I was surprised to see that there would be a 24-hour or longer delay before my comment was posted to the forum. I think that 24 hours is too long a delay to get one's comment posted. I would like to see other posters' comments sooner than that. Many of us get a heads up about the topic of this forum from an e-mail list, and so we probably visit the forum on the same day, within a few hours of each other. When I visit the forum, I would like to be able to see all of the comments that have been submitted, not just the comments that were submitted more than 24 hours prior to my visit to the forum. The City Council usually meets on Monday night, and many of the po stings will be made on the weekend. Will t~e comments submitted during the weekend not be posted unitil Monday? Not a computer person. It wasn't clear that you had to sign in to list your 01124/09 opinion. Had to re-do statement. This should be easier for older people to use and many in Palo Alto are getting older and not used to computers. It would be great if city council reads or pays attention ... if not it is a waste 01124/09 oftimelll!! Clean and easy way to stay actively involved in my city. 01124/09 We keep hearing how desperate the city needs money -if someone wants to 01124/09 get involved there are lots of ways. This is just another "hype program" that costs money to seem that we are so high tech and open. Democr~cy takes effort and if someone doesn't want to put out the effort, their loss -lets use the money were it counts. This also goes for the $35,000 to find the color or Palo Alto. Any kid knows that if you mix lots of colors together one gets a shade of brown. I am sure a 3rd grader would be happy to give you this answer with a big grin and feel so smart afterwards and it wouldn't cost $35,000. The people who would paint their house the "color of Palo Alto" really need approval for what they do. How sad. I am trying it out to see if it is a resposible forum for public discussion. I 01124/09 will like it if it is, but will not use it further if the participants cannot keep the exchanges at a civil level with respect for facts and analysis. Requiring people to sign their names may be necessary to move in this direction. It is my experience that blind postings open the door to uncivil exchanges, and I Yes will not waste my time with that. It allows me to voice my opinion to the "powers that be" in City Hall. I cannot get to meetings due to my disability. 01124/09 Yes convenience 01124/09 Yes some simple ability to see issue overviews and make my opinion easily 01124/09 known •• much easier than Googling, reading large documents, writing emails or letters. Yes But if it turns out to be a forum where anonymous posters vent venom like 01123/09 on Town Hall then it will fail. Yes Web site was simple to work. I was able to get involved without a major 01123/09 investment in time. Yes . I really is an excellent fit with our 2009 City Council priorities. Is it 01112/09 possible to distribute the topics for comment, perhap's via the Palo Alto , Weekly or Palo Alto Online dialy news? I do NOT like to have depend on my memory to check other websites for updates. Also, instead of just "immediatIey" or "every 2 weeks at most", could you provide a weekly option? Thanks for doing this. Trish Yes This is great vehicle to encourage Palo Alto residents to voice their 01111109 opinions on issues affecting our community No Why Not? It may become another way for the City Council to make 01110/09 decisions based on which interest group screams the loudest. The survey I just completed oncomposting is completely unscientific and in no way should be read as representing the voice of the community. It represents a few voices, most of whom have a major agenda, which is already reflected on the council. It's nonsense unless it can be shown to actually increase citizen participation beyond a small number of activists. I'm not an activist and I took the survey, so my participation can be counted in the column of increasing citizen input. Yes I'm too lazy to go to the City Hall for council meetings. This provides a 01110/09 quicker way to read other ideas and comments and then give a current opinion. Thanks for making this great new option available. Kay Schauer Yes Either the people submitting were reared properly or someone does a good. 01/09/09 job of culling through the submissions and weeding out the comments that don't stick to the issue. Great way to hear from the pUblic. No It's just one more thing for those of us who do go to city hall to have to do 01109/09 to keep up with those who don't go to city hall or keep up with issues. Yes I write anyway when I'm aware of when certain issues are to be considered. 01109/09 However, I don't always know when that is, and the Forum should help on that. Walt Yes It is another way to speak to those we elected. But I am not sure it should 01109/09 be anonymous. I do not want it to take the place of writing or talking to council members. Also, I am a little worried about censorship. We will see how it goes. Yes It is too early to tell how this really works. Ask again in a few months. I 01109109 think that any comments must have the commenter's name posted after the comment, just like they do in the newspaper. Anonymity on-line invites flaming and less responsible comments. See the postings on Paloalto on- line an example of this. David No haven't used it enough to know. 01109/09 ,:: .... : ':"; . No Registering does not seem to be necessary 01/08/09 Yes If the officials read it, its a way to keep in touch with the public. However 01/08/09 the "verification" process is flimsy; anyone with a free email account can CLAIM to be a PA resident. And bulletin boards tend to become dominated by trolls and others with little else to do in their spare time but blast their opinions, so I wonder how representative what shows up here will really be of the PA community. Yes Easy and great way to voice my opinion. 01/08/09 Yes I can have input without attending the meeting. Very convenient. 01/08/09 Yes I think it's great to be able to voice my opinion and to read what others 01108/09 think. This feels like real Democracy in action! Hooray! Yes I think this is a very good alternative method for citi~ens/residents to use to 01/08/09 provide the City with opinions/suggestions on important issues and topics that are happening within the city. Short of having to provide hardcopy letters, emails, or even having to attend Council meetings just to state your opinions and concerns, this method gives you the opportunity to voice them anywhere and at anytime and still know that your thoughts are being received by the powers that be.! think this is great! Yes Gives me hope that my ideas about Palo Alto issues may actually come to 01108/09 the attention of city officials. To date I am not sure Council and other staff really care. Moreover, this is an opportunity for Council to offer a way to become "engaged" as they promised us a year ago. So thank you for this opportunity. Richard C. Placone Yes City information comes too lat to evaluate before Council meetings. This 01/08/09 will help. It is unlikely though that the City will pay much attention to these opinions. views. . Yes· I like the opportunity to post this because I hope that it will become a 01/08/09 widely used forum for exchange of information that is important for the city. ' Yes My real concern is I signed a LONG statement that I did not read. 01/08/09 Hopefully this will not be a problem. Yes It's a good way to communicate from home, without having to attend a 01107/09 meeting. Yes It allows for reasonable civic participation. 01/07/09 72 of the survey respondents did not submit a comment. Attachment B Mr. Keene said that taking into consideration the concerns expressed by the Committee, Staff would revisit this sooner rather than later. The goal would be to get back to the Policy and Services Committee some time in the next couple of months, and Council by the end of this fiscal year. He also said that to be fair, it could be a year from now. Chair Espinosa confirmed that Staff would come back to the Committee with the study criteria within a couple of months and then within a year with final results. He hopes that when it does come back it will clearly address the concerns raised regarding price and quality of service, as well as the pay and for any sort of package that takes care of workers and how that's weighed. MOTION PASSED 3-0 Yeh Absent 3. Review of Open City Hall Pilot Program and Recommendation to the City Council Regarding Continuation of the Program Assistant to the City Manager, Kelly Morariu, said that Council approved a six month pilot of Open City Hall in 2008. The City launched the forum in 2009 with the first topic being composting. One to three topics for each agenda are posted each week and there have two on-going topics: High Speed Rail and Long Range Forecast. Each Thursday prior to a Council Meeting, staff posts a question and people are allowed to post comments until Monday at noon when the topic is closed. Comments are printed and left at places for Council on Monday. It's a small window of time for comments, but that is the way the agenda process is structured. The cost is fairly minimal. The City paid a $5000 set up fee, and pays $200 a month for ongoing maintenance, for unlimited topics. There is a 24 hour holding period where Peak Democracy staff review the comments, and no statements have been held so far. Regarding average usage, the site has had 137 visitors and an average of 24 statements per topic. If compared to the 3 minutes of public commentary time at Council meetings, that equates to about 1.2 hours public commentary that has been transferred to the Open City Hall Program, and is equal to .4 statements per thousand residents. Each time a new user signed up, they were asked to complete a user survey. Eighty seven users like the forum and left a number of comments about why they liked it. A few complaints were about technical issues, most of which were resolved fairly quickly. Robert Vogel, Peak Democracy, said that Open City Hall is an online forum that is both civil and free speech compliant. Palo Alto is getting an average of 24 statements per topic, which is equivalent to 1.2 hours of Public Comment orally presented but being in writing it's easier to review. He spoke regarding the usage of Open City Hall in context with the five other Cities that have used it in P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 6 the last six months. Palo Alto is the only City using it exclusively for Council Agenda items. Decatur GA, State College PA, and Lake Oswego OR, are using it for Council agenda items, as well as some more general items. Montgomery OH is using it exclusively for more general items. He stressed that he wanted to share these examples to give a sense of what they are doing to bring people to the forum and to publicize it. If the City wants to increase the number of users there are opportunities to do so. To identify them, he did a comparison of the type of usage from all five cities. Palo Alto has .4 statements per topic per 1000 residents; other cities are seeing a broad range of participation from .3 to 2.1. That range of participation rates is easily understood when you look at how other cities are publicizing their forum. Decatur and Lake Oswego are announcing each new topic via email using City email lists. Montgomery announces their topics in a monthly newsletter that goes to every household. Palo Alto and State College have no similar program and are only seeing a participation rate about 20 -30 percent of the others. Another opportunity to increase participation is related to a development recently put into the software. Open City Hall can now run clones on other websites. The City can add it to the City of Palo Alto website. Sacramento is using the Open Town Hall program where the Mayor chooses issues and updates them in a form that he controls, and the form is embedded in the Sacramento Bee as well as in Capital Public Radio Website. Media outlets carry the forum to be consistent to their mission and to bring readers to their website. The City can invite the local newspapers to embed a copy of the forum on their websites, as well as embed it on the City's website, at no extra charge. Ms. Morariu said that Staff recommends continuing the Open City Hall program at the same $200 a month service fee. Staff's time to manage the forum is 1-3 hours a week when there are topics. Staff has been exploring ways to increase participation. The City can work with the local media outlets to get it on their websites, as well as putting it on the City's website. The pilot was on the Open City Hall website to insure the public recognizes the program's independence from the City, but at this point adding it to the City website would give it some legitimacy. Staff also wants to reach out to the neighborhood associations, in lieu of a comprehensive email list like Decatur and Lake Oswego has. Staff also wants to look at how to incorporate the Open City Hall logo on the printed agendas to identify the topics that are on the forum. Lastly, staff is looking at increasing the number of issues on the forum, as a response from various Boards and Commissions as well as other Council Committees. City Manager James Keene concurred with Ms. Morariu and added that he doesn't think that the pilot really hit it out of the park, but it did get participation and civil commentary with a high level of discourse taking place. P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 7 Staff is working on the area of social networking, such as establishing the City's own Facebook page and Twitter Account. Tweet notices can be sent in the absence of email list. Chair Espinosa shared three points that Council Member Yeh shared with him earlier: 1) Peak Democracy should continue, 2) Distributing it At Places doesn't work because there isn't enough time to influence decision making, which ties into the bigger issue of Council not getting the staff reports early enough, and 3) the need for more publicity is paramount to the success of the program. Council Member Kishimoto recognized that Peak Democracy first contacted her two years ago, so it is nice to see it going. She agreed with Council Member Yeh's comment regarding the timeliness of the reports, agreeing that At Places isn't useful. She asked Staff if the Council can get the comments real time. Ms. Morariu said that it would be possible for Council Members to view comments on the forum as often as they would like or Staff could distribute comments via email on Monday at noon instead of waiting until the end of day. Council Member Kishimoto said that those options would be better than the current process of putting the comments At Places. She agreed that the value of this program is uneven. She was disappointed that there is no longer a one page view containing one line from all the comments. It is less dynamic now. She would like the City to take advantage of the knowledge and analysis our residents have and do, getting them to add their hard earned information to Peak Democracy is her goal. Mr. Vogel explained that the previous look of the website that Council Member Kishimoto was referring to was a prototype that was much more labor intensive. The one line comments were hand selected and edited. It would require work to do it. Council Member Kishimoto suggested showing just the first one or two lines from the most recent comments. Only seeing the numbers of yes and no's is not as compelling for the public to read further and add their own comments. She asked if there is a way for people to sign up for email notifications. Mr. Vogel said that the original press release attracted 200 or so people to sign up and receive additional announcements as topics are added. This is less than the several thousand subscribers other cities have, but they started with a mass email distribution, Palo Alto did not. Ms. Morariu added that if it were embedded in the City website, staff would be able to use the Gov Delivery service so that people can subscribe through that. P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 8 Council Member Kishimoto asked if High Speed Rail is a perpetual topic. Mr. Keene said it might be best to put the comments on the City's website so we can keep a rolling history of commentary and perhaps even a database. High Speed Rail has a set of deepening, evolving opinions, data and grass roots strategies. Then it would start to become part of a body of work and it might be more compelling to participants. Mr. Vogel agreed with Mr. Keene about having some editorial process to have the most relevant topics at the top. Council Member Barton agreed that the trial wasn't perfect but believes it should be continued. It's not expensive enough for the financing to be prohibitive. The timing of when Council gets the comments doesn't work. What does work is the way Staff sends out the answers to Council Member's questions that come out around 2:00 -3:00. If Open City Hall came out at that time he stated that he would have time to read it. He is concerned about the idea of editing the comments; the City shouldn't be making the decision about what's best. The pOint is to have something to engage people. He would like to see it embedded with randomly selected comments that come up and change frequently. The current structure is to put the most recent comments on top, unedited. Mr. Vogel said that it is important to make sure the users can't edit their comments in order to have them move back to the top. Open City Hall is set up so that it is sorted by creation date, not updated date. It is also critical that if the City does edit or filter comments, that there is no political agenda behind it. Council Member Barton said that because Palo Alto's daytime population is so much bigger than the night time population, there is value to a passive communication system. An email communication would miss a lot of the daytime residents, even though they do have a stake in the decisions made by the CounCil, such as with business license taxes. He also said that he likes the agenda pages the way they are currently posted on the website. Users are able to click on a link that leads them to a PDF of the agenda item. It would be helpful if we could put an Open City Hall logo next to that link, so that users can click on it and get to the Open City Hall page. He then asked if there is a way to find out where the users came from. Mr. Vogel said that they do know where the users are coming from and they do have the ability to share that information with the City. P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 9 Council Member Barton said the Media Center partnering would be interesting because they could reflect the item back to their video post back to the discussion and there might be some value. He asked if it can be embedded in Facebook. Mr. Vogel said Open City Hall can be embedded in sites like Facebook, and asked if the City has a presence on Facebook. Mr. Keene said that the Staff is currently working on it. Council Member Barton reiterated that Facebook is another opportunity to get Open City Hall some passive exposure. He also stated that embedding it in the City website makes sense. Overall, he found the program valuable. He tries to reflect on the public comments, but it is difficult to do right before the Council meetings. There has been occasion where he has seen that the tally on Open City Hall is different than what he hears from other sources. It gives him a fresh perspective. It is consistently on topic. Palo Alto Online is an intriguing idea but it is too scattered and unpleasant to be useful to him as a policy maker. Mr. Vogel said if we embed it in a local newspaper the format will be exactly the same as it is now on Open City Hall. There should be no change in the quality of comments, and this was indeed the outcome of the experience in Sacramento. Council Member Barton asked how Open City Hall fits in to the FPPC fairness rules. If a newspaper hosts a Mayor's page during elections, it would be an endorsement. He then asked if they would be able to host similar pages for other candidates. Mr. Vogel said that the forum ls open to all elected officials now, and when an election comes up, it would open to all candidates. Chair Espinosa asked Staff to speak to the cost impacts of the program and whether adding additional items from Committee Members or Boards and Commissions, increasing outreach, email communications or increasing the number of items discussed increase the cost of the program. Ms. Morariu said that, originally, there was a per-item cost, but was changed during the pilot. The City pays a $200 per month flat fee for an unlimited amount of topics. Having the Boards and Commissions add items would not increase the cost. She stated that there might be an increased Staff cost, due to a possible increased need for coordination. Increasing the public's P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 10 participation, managing email lists and embedding in the website would be a Staff resource issue more than a cost issue. Chair Espinosa asked if Staff worked with the Website Committee on this. Ms. Morariu said that at this early stage they did not. Mr. Keene added that there has been some general discussion, but not on a detailed level. Chair Espinosa asked if Staff would state the value added beyond the email packets they get. Mr. Vogel said that if people come to Council meetings and spoke alone with Council, and then when they are done the next person comes in there is no transparency, like there is if everyone comes in at the same time. That's the difference between a forum and a sequence of emails. If the emails are published unedited, you have to be careful of content as some may be inappropriate. Open City Hall deals with that for the City. It allows for civil statements while still being a process that does not violate freedom of speech. Chair Espinosa stated his appreciation for any business that is involved with transparency and civil discourse. He did vote against it the first time. He still believes that this is a waste of money. The information is received too late. The number of comments per topic is absurd at 24 to 60,000. He believes the feature could be added to the City Website in a much more immediate and transparent form. The cost may be minimal but we are not adding any value to the decision making process at all. He reiterated that he respects the efforts and agrees with the spirit of the project, and he applauds the companies that do this type of work. He will continue to discourage the use of Open City Hall. MOTION: Council Member Kishimoto moved, seconded by Council Member Barton, that the Policy and Services Committee recommend to the City Council to continue utilizing the Open City Hall online discussion forum at the cost of $200 a month, and direct Staff to ensure a more timely delivery of comments, expand outreach, include occasional long term projects, embed Open City Hall onto the City's website, expand use to Boards and Commissions, and include Social Networking sites. Ms. Morariu asked if Council Member Kishimoto only intends to open it up to the Planning and Transportation Commission. Council Member Kishimoto said she would be open to including all Boards and Commissions. She also expressed her appreciation at Chair Espinosa's honest P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 11 comments about the program. She feels that expanding the outreach will address a lot of his concerns. She also hopes to attract more in-depth comments. Palo Alto residents do a lot of research on the topics that affect the City; it's great to have a forum for them to share all of that. However, three days isn't enough time for them to do all that work, and then to respond with in-depth answers, so longer term topics would be useful. It is also valuable to see real time data. Council Member Barton agreed in part with Chair Espinosa's comments, but believes the start up money has been spent and should now be leveraged. He added that if this conversation is still happening in a year or two, then it might be time to stop the project. Chair Espinosa said that if the City must continue to use the program, it should include other Boards and Commissions as they deal with some hot topiCS that should be included. Council Member Kishimoto agreed to include Planning and Transportation Commission and other Boards and Commissions as Staff sees fit. MOTION PASSED 2-1 Espinosa no, Yeh absent 3. Discussion for Future Meeting Schedules and Agendas Assistant to the City Manager Kelly Morariu said that the next regular scheduled meeting is July 14th. The currently scheduled agenda is the Legislative Program. The Committee had asked Staff to bring an expert in to discuss this. Dan Carrigg from the League of CA Cities is willing to come speak, but won't be able to come until September. While no expert will be there, Staff and the Committee can still have a more general discussion. City Manager James Keene added that he wanted to have a general conversation with the Committee regarding their scope of work, and how Staff identifies the stream of issues that is coming to the Policy and Services Committee. Chair Espinosa said that he had raised that issue as well. He felt this is a good time to discuss the Committee's role and make sure the agenda is broad and comprehensive. He then asked what would be involved with a general conversation regarding the legislative program. Ms. Morariu said that a general conversation might include the City Manager speaking about effectiveness of the lobbying efforts and ways to incorporate the P&S: 090629 PS FINAL 12