Yeah, like this is exactly why the board did this. So that, because so many people left, they can say "Well, we had almost no complaints from any of our constituents". The other comment bought it hook line and sinker.
Public comment was scheduled for 4:30 PM and started at 9:30 PM. Choosing to start attending at 9:30 AM is a choice and those first 7 hours were not an extra wait.
Gosh, I wonder if your post title is maliciously misleading. But you would never try to stir shit up and rile people up to baselessly attack the board, right?
Let's read the actual article and see!
The Dec. 9 meeting, however, ran exceptionally long for a host of reasons, including a lengthy hearing on rule changes for electrical substations.
[...]
Board Chair Jeff McKay had noted at the meeting’s start at 9:30 a.m. that a lengthier-than-usual agenda awaited and that the public-comment period might be delayed.
[...]
“If you had to leave early, please reach out to the clerk to be rescheduled,” McKay said to any prospective speakers who were perhaps tuning in at home instead.
you get to comment at the meeting for the particular agenda of the day, not next year, which part don't you understand , what good does it do to bring up your concerns if they were voting that day ?
That’s not how the public comment period works at all. The public comments on items on the agenda when that item comes up. E.g. for the electrical substation discussion that ran long, the public commented on it during the discussion. The period at the end of the meeting is for the public to bring items to the board’s attention that are not on the agenda.
I mean, how would commenting at the end of the meeting after they’ve already voted on an item even work?
That you claim to have been at the meeting and don’t understand this is wild.
No, they can arrange multiple comment periods in an agenda or front load them. There is no requirement to have it at the end, especially if you expect it to run long.
Sure but the public comment period was at the end of the agenda, after all the public hearings. And by law at public hearings they have to allow every speaker the opportunity to speak, which pushes back public comment.
This headline is misleading. They waited 5 hours. The poor supervisors had to listen to public comment after 12 hours of regular business. This isn’t some evil scheme against the public, the supervisors suffered as much or more having to deal with an extensive amount of regular business.
Have you ever attended a public comment session? They can be rough. Though from the article it sounds like the people who hung in for the 5 hours had constructive things to say.
These public speaking opportunities end up being 98 people, all saying the same thing. Half of them bring someone along to record them on their phone so they can upload to their Truth social or FB account.
It’d be better to require these folks to make tik toks .half of them are recording their rants anyway.
Can’t be more than 90 seconds. Cant include any physical threats or vulgar language. And can’t include any yelling or shouting.
They have to show up in order for their video to be played for the board.
“You people are turning my son gay with your CRT and science courses……….”
“These data centers are going to attract hostile space aliens……and they’re drinking all the water. We should use this land for organic community orchards…..”
“I’m appalled that you are considering a new housing development in my backyard!! This area became perfect the day I moved in. Nothing new should ever be built now!!!”
If they knew the agenda would run long why not allow public comment earlier in the session? A simple consent motion to adjust the order of the agenda would have allowed the public to speak earlier in the session and the supervisors could continue on with the extended agenda. My guess is they were hoping people would thin out.
That would involve moving back public hearings which also have people signed up to speak on. All of this is dependent on how many people show up to speak, and for public hearings anybody is allowed to just show up and gets three minutes to talk.
The public typically only speak during the public comment period(s). The public does not get to speak on each agenda topic throughout the meeting. Typically public comment is at the end of the entire session or split between earlier in the session and at the end. In this case they only had it at the end. My suggestion was to move it to earlier in the meeting to make it easier for people to speak.
That is not true. The public gets to comment on each rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, and ordinance change and since it was the end of the year there were a lot of them. Like 15 public hearings. And the zoning ordinance on substations got several dozen public speakers
the majority of residents were there to complain about the 40% increase in predatory fees from towing companies from $150 to $210
The actual article cites one single person complaining about towing.
Because everyone else left?
Yeah, like this is exactly why the board did this. So that, because so many people left, they can say "Well, we had almost no complaints from any of our constituents". The other comment bought it hook line and sinker.
Or because the OP is lying?
Oh, I assumed the title of the thread was the title of the article. Lmao, my bad.
I was there , watch the video instead of calling people liars https://video.fairfaxcounty.gov/player/clip/3993?meta_id=92908
Public comment was scheduled for 4:30 PM and started at 9:30 PM. Choosing to start attending at 9:30 AM is a choice and those first 7 hours were not an extra wait.
No, the OP is a disingenuous trashbag.
there is a video dude stop trolling
watch the fucking video then, I was there https://video.fairfaxcounty.gov/player/clip/3993?meta_id=92908
Gosh, I wonder if your post title is maliciously misleading. But you would never try to stir shit up and rile people up to baselessly attack the board, right?
Let's read the actual article and see!
[...]
[...]
Yeaaaaaaah.
Is that your Mr/Mrs supervisor??
??? this is the final meeting of the year , they are asking you to reschedule for next year...
What significance does the end of year have tho?
you get to comment at the meeting for the particular agenda of the day, not next year, which part don't you understand , what good does it do to bring up your concerns if they were voting that day ?
That’s not how the public comment period works at all. The public comments on items on the agenda when that item comes up. E.g. for the electrical substation discussion that ran long, the public commented on it during the discussion. The period at the end of the meeting is for the public to bring items to the board’s attention that are not on the agenda.
I mean, how would commenting at the end of the meeting after they’ve already voted on an item even work?
That you claim to have been at the meeting and don’t understand this is wild.
Again, the OP is simply lying. They are a propagandist.
or you're not local and this 40% increase doesn't bother you , propagandist of what ? A local board meeting ? bot behavior
Me when I don’t understand what the purpose of an agenda is
The supervisors are not thrilled to sit though boring ass electric substation topics, either, but it's their job.
Public comment almost always comes toward the end of the hearing, so if you're signed up to speak, plan accordingly.
Sometimes everyone involved has to wait - that's just part of our democracy.
No, they can arrange multiple comment periods in an agenda or front load them. There is no requirement to have it at the end, especially if you expect it to run long.
Sure but the public comment period was at the end of the agenda, after all the public hearings. And by law at public hearings they have to allow every speaker the opportunity to speak, which pushes back public comment.
This headline is misleading. They waited 5 hours. The poor supervisors had to listen to public comment after 12 hours of regular business. This isn’t some evil scheme against the public, the supervisors suffered as much or more having to deal with an extensive amount of regular business.
“Suffered”
Have you ever attended a public comment session? They can be rough. Though from the article it sounds like the people who hung in for the 5 hours had constructive things to say.
No politician ever "suffers".
why are you defending a 40% increase in towing fees ? I was there and you weren't , pathetic
How am I defending towing fees??
By not REEEEEEEEEing mindlessly, obviously?
These public speaking opportunities end up being 98 people, all saying the same thing. Half of them bring someone along to record them on their phone so they can upload to their Truth social or FB account.
Doesn’t fucking matter what they are there to speak about.
It’d be better to require these folks to make tik toks .half of them are recording their rants anyway.
Can’t be more than 90 seconds. Cant include any physical threats or vulgar language. And can’t include any yelling or shouting.
They have to show up in order for their video to be played for the board.
“You people are turning my son gay with your CRT and science courses……….”
“These data centers are going to attract hostile space aliens……and they’re drinking all the water. We should use this land for organic community orchards…..”
“I’m appalled that you are considering a new housing development in my backyard!! This area became perfect the day I moved in. Nothing new should ever be built now!!!”
so u/flaginorout supports closed doors meetings, data centers, replacing open land with concrete AND the 40% increase in towing fees , fucking fascist
Maybe you should get off the Internet awhile and get some fresh air. You're losing the plot, bro.
Listen I say we double it and increase the chances of getting something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzs5xSxLk5A
Random public comment on any topic whatsoever at the end of hearings seems like a poor use of everyone’s time TBH.
If they knew the agenda would run long why not allow public comment earlier in the session? A simple consent motion to adjust the order of the agenda would have allowed the public to speak earlier in the session and the supervisors could continue on with the extended agenda. My guess is they were hoping people would thin out.
Because they have to advertise the public hearings in advance and they cannot start before the time they’ve been advertised.
The agenda can be adjusted during the session. It just requires a formal motion as I mentioned. Move the public comment period earlier in the agenda.
That would involve moving back public hearings which also have people signed up to speak on. All of this is dependent on how many people show up to speak, and for public hearings anybody is allowed to just show up and gets three minutes to talk.
The public typically only speak during the public comment period(s). The public does not get to speak on each agenda topic throughout the meeting. Typically public comment is at the end of the entire session or split between earlier in the session and at the end. In this case they only had it at the end. My suggestion was to move it to earlier in the meeting to make it easier for people to speak.
That is not true. The public gets to comment on each rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, and ordinance change and since it was the end of the year there were a lot of them. Like 15 public hearings. And the zoning ordinance on substations got several dozen public speakers