It has been a long and eventful week, but the Vanguard finally caught up with Lucas Frerichs, who finished second in Tuesday’s Davis City Council election.
“It was a long wait until all of the results came in,” he said, “But I was definitely very pleased by the results.”
He added, “It was a clean and above the board campaign.” He said he felt his background serving on four city commissions over the past ten years, coupled with service to the community through non-profits, was really something that resonated with the voters of Davis.
That experience over the last fifteen years really helped to develop a network of folks he knew pretty well, but “one faction of the campaign was really geared towards exposing myself to folks who I didn’t know. In a city of 65,000 people, nearly 70,000 people, there’s certainly a bunch of folks who I do not know.”
While many people had predicted that Mr. Frerichs would unseat one of the incumbents, he was more unsure.
“I honestly didn’t know what to expect originally,” he said. “I definitely was optimistic that the voters after going through a campaign process would find me someone that they would be interested in voting for… But I was not sure of that.”
“I’m humbled by the results,” he added. “I know how much I love the community and how much I worked over the years on various issues within the community and I’m just really appreciative and humbled by the support of the voters in Davis.”
One of the big stories of the day was the defeat of two long-time incumbents, Stephen Souza and Sue Greenwald, in the five-person field.
For Mr. Frerichs, he said was “somewhat surprised” at that result. “Overall I think the citizens of Davis recognized – there were extensive changes in the past two years in terms of the make-up of the council and I think some people felt there need to be additional changes in terms of the make-up.”
“I’m very much looking forward to this new make-up of the city council,” he said. “I think it does represent a sea change for the community and I think there’s really going to be an opportunity for a group that works very well together.”
He said while there is not always going to be agreement on every issue, he believes that this is a council that will have a great ability to agree to disagree in a respectful cordial way without the sorts of contention that have punctuated past councils and still be able to be able to do what individually people believe is in the best interests of the community.
Now the real work begins and Mr. Frerichs says he understands how important matters such as the budget will be.
“It’s going to be an issue of absolute focus, on the city’s budget,” Mr. Frerichs said, noting that it’s a huge issue facing the city.
Like his colleagues, though, he too focused as a priority on changing how city council meetings are run.
“I think there needs to be an ability to deal with the process and make things more efficient and more effective,” Lucas Frerichs said.
Toward that end, he recommended not “stacking an agenda chock full of very large items. I think that items need to be manageable, where there is time management built into the equation.”
He also suggested the use of public comment cards, filled out at the beginning by members of the public.
He also said, “We put time limits on the public in terms of the amount of time a member of the public can speak on an item; frankly I think that there should be a serious conversation about putting time limits on the amount of time a city council person can speak on an item. Historically, in the past few years especially, that has been one of the issues that has bogged down the meetings.”
“The notion of being concise is very important, and getting to the point,” he said. “There’s some basic ground rules that I think we should be following as a group.”
Mr. Frerichs also mentioned the idea that Joe Krovoza first proposed where there was an electronic space that would display the current motion on the board to avoid both confusion and the need for constant questions and clarifications about the present motion.
“A teleprompter that shows the motions that have been made,” he said.
He further suggested that the council ask questions in advance of the meeting when staff reports come out during the previous week.
Finally, he talked about the need for a more concise staff presentation that would also cut down on the amount of time it would take to get through a given item.
“Generally I think that works, but I think there are definitely times,” he said, then shifted gears to note that, even though it seems to take a long time to present these reports, even under those conditions they are not covering the entire staff report.
Water is another critical issue that will need to be addressed in the next few months. He looks forward to the Water Advisory Committee wrapping up its work and making recommendations to the city council.
“I think we have a pretty full plate with those items,” he said.
Lucas Frerichs, who finished second on Tuesday, will be sworn in for the first time along with Brett Lee, another newcomer, and Dan Wolk, the appointed member elected officially by the voters for the first time.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
[quote]He also suggested the use of public comment cards, filled out at the beginning by members of the public.[/quote]
For me, this just adds an unnecessary layer of complexity. Members of the public introduce themselves, so adding the requirement of filling out cards is apt to add confusion and time to the process, unless I am missing something…
Elaine, it works well for the County Supervisors meetings, and has for years. Come to think of it, all County meetings use speaker cards.
I also have not found that it adds confusion or complexity to the process, but am also not sure how it helps. From my perspective as a presenter it is just another piece of paper that disappears once you have turned it in. I don’t know what purpose it serves.
There is much validity to the criticism on the preparation and presentation of staff reports. A properly written staff report should stand alone, and not require oral supplement. Too often, the city staff goes to the presentation table, acknowledges the report in the hands of the Council, and then essentially repeats much of what is already in written form.
Staff members should be instructed by the City Manager and Department Heads that the only comment from a staff member after submitting a report to the Council is, “Any questions?”
Regarding the “Council Drone,” process, there seems to be a mind-set among council members if somebody else speaks, I must comment as well. If one or two members speak, the remaining members can remain silent if everything has already been said. They can even say, “I agree with the previous comment(s)” and not feel any sense of inadequacy.
To be brutally honest, most of the Council members have already decided how they are going to vote ahead of the meeting. This is NOT a criticism, it’s actually praise because it shows that the public servant thoroughly studied all the issues in advance of the meeting. Public comment and comments from other council members are symbolic manifestations of the “democratic process” but rarely alter the final vote. Public comment almost never reveals any NEW issue. Instead it’s a parade of people saying the same thing again, and again.
The reality is we have a lot of people in this town who like to posture in public, and some of them are elected to the Council. The major flaw with this tactic is that it wastes hundreds of hours of peoples’ time, to no good end.
Call it public input if you want. It is really mind-numbing boredom.
Phil, I agree with your previous comment.
-Michael Bisch, DDBA Co-Prez
Phil Coleman
For the most part, I agree with your comments. However, I do think that public comment can be more than just a symbolic display. I have seen situations both at the city and county board of supervisors level where information provided for the first time by a public commenter lead to, if not a change of likely vote in the end, at least a slow down of the process to allow for further consideration of factors not yet considered.
Effective staff work can turn this around. Provide reports a week ahead. Use late data as an addendum not as an excuse to turn in the entire report at the last minute. Be responsive to the council–when it provides specific guidance, do what you’ve been instructed to do. Remember wh has been elected to be decision-makers, not just rubber-stampers to be snookered into the decision the staff already has made. Get reliable legal advice.
I have always found the fill out the card routine to stifle public input. Sure it speeds things up but at the cost of hearing what the public has to say. What I think works best is when the person running the meeting says who can say their piece in 1 minute, then 2 and 3 letting the masses vent as quickly as possible.
As far as representatives making up their mind in advance, it might often be true, but, I’d like to hear from people who are no longer in politics if they think its true. I believe that turning out makes a big difference. This is true especially if the person is reasonable and not someone who is there all the time.
[quote]I also have not found that it adds confusion or complexity to the process, but am also not sure how it helps. From my perspective as a presenter it is just another piece of paper that disappears once you have turned it in. I don’t know what purpose it serves.[/quote]
[quote]I have always found the fill out the card routine to stifle public input. [/quote]
Precisely.
[quote]To be brutally honest, most of the Council members have already decided how they are going to vote ahead of the meeting. This is NOT a criticism, it’s actually praise because it shows that the public servant thoroughly studied all the issues in advance of the meeting.[/quote]
I strongly disagree. I have been to many a CC meeting where public comment or CC member input or city staff input results in changes of position by CC members right at the dais after discussion, which is often lengthy. It is important that CC members be able to say whatever it is they feel they need to say and carry on whatever discussion they feel necessary to make an informed and reasoned decision. It is not always a neat and clean process. However, CC members need to keep from 1) filibustering, 2) making accusations against each other/city staff, 3) campaigning from the dais, and the like.