u/tsays

Please make yourself heard at the October 6 City Council meeting about preserving public comment.

This is the FIRST reading of the language that will restrict public comment to 90 minutes at the beginning of City Council meetings.

The way it is now: Currently, a single person can speak on any topic they wish for up to 3 minutes at the beginning of a City Council meeting.

Then, you also have up to 3 minutes (or 90 seconds, depending on the number of people signed up) to speak on each agenda item after it has been presented to Council and the community.

Currently you must sign up to speak before an item is heard.

What would change: each person will be able to speak ONCE for up to 3 minutes, at the beginning of the session, before you have had the benefit of hearing teh presentation.

This would require you to sign up to speak before session starts at 5pm.

The city says it needs to do this to save $150k. Meanwhile, just last week in a Facebook post, Rex Richardson bragged that the city spends over $700 million on outside contractors annually. Seems like they could save that $150k elsewhere and preserve the public’s right to comment if they tried hard enough.

Please show up Oct 6 at City Council or via Zoom to voice your opposition of this undemocratic idea.

The agenda and Zoom link will be posted no later than Friday Oct. 2 here

Show up (in person or Zoom) or submit comment Sept 1, 2026 5pm

In June City Council tried to limit time and opportunity for public comment. Many people showed up to express their concerns and the council reversed position and stepped back. I posted about it then as well.

Well, now it’s back, item 26. Slipped in at the last moment to the agenda for September 1, 2026.

Agenda items are legally required to finalized (with written confirmation by three council members) by 12pm the Friday before the Council Meeting. This request came through at 11:57am. The final Council person didn’t even confirm until 12:20pm.

City Council wants to limit all public testimony to 90 minutes before the items are heard instead of during the item’s time on the agenda.

Why is this a problem?

Community members will be expected to be able to be present or sign up to speak at the very beginning of Council, 5pm. As it stands now, you can sign up to speak anytime before an item is heard.

Community members will also be expected to understand the item without the benefit of hearing the item and any presentations associated.

If too many people showed up, and the 90 minutes is filled, some people will be denied the opportunity to speak.

Why is Council doing this? They say it’s due to the need to save money due to budget cuts. This of course, makes no logical sense, but that’s what they’re going with.

It’s item 26, it’s unknown when the item will be heard. They often do not hear items in order.

You can speak out on this issue three ways.

Of course, the most powerful way is to be there in person Tuesday Sept 1 5pm at City Hall.

You can ALSO participate via Zoom now (login info on agenda below).

https://longbeach.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=36766

OR you can submit written comment digitally. It will not be read out loud, but it will be counted in the “for or against” count. The link to submit can be found here:

https://longbeach.primegov.com/search/itemsearch?searchItemId=63378

I’m genuinely terrified of retirement. Not because of money, but because it seems like when people retire, if they don’t keep active, they immediately begin to decline. I have so many examples of this in my life. And I know that people will just say “so stay active,” but I struggle to imagine a day not structured around work. I also want to do SOMETHING work related to have a regular income; I imagine selling my current business and buying something less stressful and time consuming.

What about you?

TOMORROW June 9, 2026 Council votes on an amendment that effects EVERYONE, but especially anyone with a JOB.

Send testimony: CityClerk@longbeach.gov Subject line: Oppose Item 46 — Public Comment Rule Changes, June 9 2026
OR

Show up: June 9, 2026. Civic Chambers, 411 W. Ocean Blvd. Meeting starts at 5:00 PM. Get there by 4:45 to grab a speaker card. You get 3 minutes. You don't need to be an expert. You just need to show up and say you oppose Item 46.

LBCC is introducting an ordinance that would change rules about how you can participate in City Council meetings. The new ordinance would:

-Move meeting time to 4:30 (from 5pm) meaning anyone with a job would find it near impossible to be there in time to sign up for public comment.

-Cap public comment to 30 minutes 60 minutes . This might sound reasonable, but understand with the above change and the fact that project supporters routinely pre-position supporters to fill comment time, dissent on items could be completely eliminated further disinfranchising community members.

New "decorum" language bans behavior that "disrupts the meeting." How is "disruption" defined? It's unclear. "Disruption" standards almost always get enforced selectively. Think about it - when you show up with a sign, is that "disruptive"? Is disent "disruptive"? This is a First Amendment issue. If that alone isn't alarming to you, it would also leave the City open to lawsuit at our expense.

-Supplemental agenda protections get weakended. The current rule requires materials to be posted no later than Thursday before a Tuesday meeting because council snuck major changes on an agenda the Friday before a vote which caught stakeholders off guard. Council wants to be able to put things on the agenda at the last minute again.

SB707 requires cities to increase public participation and this ordinance IS adding the ability to attend meetings via Zoom, but under that guise, it's adding considerable restrictions to participation.

The California Brown Act (Government Code 54954.3) requires that city councils give the public a meaningful opportunity to speak on every agenda item. A blanket 30-minute 60-minute cap, is in direct tension with that law. The council hasn't asked for a written Brown Act compliance opinion. They should have to before any final vote.

The First Amendment doesn't stop in City Council chambers. Vague "disruption" language has been used in other cities to silence minority viewpoints, passionate testimony, and anyone whose comments make officials uncomfortable. That's the documented history of how these rules get used.

This is particularly reprehensible move for a City Council who loves to talk about representing the disenfranchised. Notably, this is the first meeting after the primary election, and. the last before they take the summer off. Don't let council do this without dissent, it could be your last chance.