An Open Letter to Mayor Cowell

Mayor Cowell,

First, we at Livable Raleigh congratulate you on your election as mayor. We look forward to working with you to address the city’s issues.

Today, we want to raise what may seem to be a small matter, which is the conduct of public hearings before City Council.

Our proposal is a simple one:  

Council should not vote immediately after the hearing on the matter addressed by the hearing. Instead, it should take time to consider what the hearing was about, and what was said – and give the public a chance to think about it also, and to react.

Please consider the following:

As you may have noticed, and will soon experience, there’s been a complete reversal in the way public hearings are conducted by Council now versus when you were on Council.

Previously, hearings took place at the beginning of consideration of a text change or a rezoning. Council and Planning Commission members met together, in public, at night. Staff presented the proposal, in full, and answered questions about it. Applicants were heard, and any others with an interest were heard.  

The issue having been elucidated for the public was then taken up by a CAC, afterward by Planning Commission and finally by Council, which made the final decision.

This process engaged citizens from the start and allowed interested people to participate all the way from start to finish, if they chose to do so. You will recall that citizen participation then was often robust and helpful in reaching mutually agreeable outcomes.  

People felt they’d been heard, whatever the outcome, because they were heard. And because they were heard, they were active participants on future issues and better-informed citizens overall.

Today, cases begin with a “neighborhood meeting” that is conducted by the applicant with no opportunity for other viewpoints, and the applicant is responsible for reporting what issues were raised to the Planning Commission and Council. These meetings, and the applicants’ reports, are typically one-sided or else too vague even to be that.  

Planning Commission meetings follow at 9 a.m. on a Tuesday, often with no one present who knows anything about a case except, again, the applicant. Council conducts a hearing at the very end because it’s required. Their attitude about the hearing is reflected by their haste to get it over with and vote immediately, which for the past five years has been Council’s practice with rare exception.

The upshot is: The interested public, which is watching, understands full well that it is a waste of their time to sign up to speak at a hearing.  

In our view, this is why almost no one ever speaks at these hearings. Last week was typical:  a total of 4 citizens spoke at one of the 14 “hearings” on the agenda. And this is not atypical.

Well, but so what?  

What’s lost if people don’t speak? Surely they have other ways to make their views heard to Council?

They do, but they have no other ways to be heard by the public.

Citizens who might have been interested in a case, had they known about it, have been serially eliminated from any chance to be involved, and to get up to speed on an issue, to study it, and to come back to it with their Council members prior to the final vote. In most of Raleigh, they can’t do it at a CAC. Planning Commission is not user-friendly. And Council, from the body language of these “hearings,” is apparently hostile.

Here’s the point: The purpose of holding a public hearing isn’t just to inform Council members, and it isn’t even principally for the benefit of Council members. It is to inform the public.

But here’s the message to the public when the hearing is closed and the final decision is rendered a minute later: Don’t waste your time watching our hearings. Because they’re not for you.

Our recommendation. When a hearing is closed, wait two weeks. Convey to the public that you were listening and care what citizens think.

If you do, we predict you’ll find citizen engagement picks up, and with it, citizen satisfaction regarding your work.

In time, you may determine that a full review of how text changes and zoning cases are handled is in order. But for now, we are asking that a simple change be made by consensus of the members and with your leadership.

We would be glad to discuss this with you in more detail at your convenience.

Again, very best regards,

Livable Raleigh Advisory Committee

NOTE: This letter was sent to Mayor Cowell on November 21 and refers to the 14 “hearings” on the agenda of the City Council meeting held on November 19.