My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes 07/16/2020
Portsmouth-City-Clerk
>
Minutes
>
2000s
>
Year 2020
>
Minutes 07/16/2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2020 9:40:18 AM
Creation date
8/11/2020 9:37:49 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
July 16, 2020 <br /> <br />Board (plus the casino referendum), is a time to risk disenfranchising the voters of <br />Precinct 33. <br />As a resident of Precinct 33 and as Secretary of the Park Manor Civic League, I strongly <br />ask that you vote against Item # 20-180. <br />Gary Bunting <br /> <br />New Business: <br />As you consider the confirmation and continuation of our local state of emergency, I write <br />to reiterate two objections that I have raised previously about the Portsmouth response. <br />The first is that many matters you have taken up in virtual meetings do not comply with <br />Attorney General Herring's guidance provided in the Sullivan Letter. On page three of <br />that letter, General Herring lays out a three-part test for electronic meetings allowed by <br />law and affirms that the first two "are plainly satisfied", an assessment with which I concur. <br />The third item, however, has been the Achilles's heel: "'the purpose of the meeting is to <br />address the emergency'". From my perspective, council has consistently been out of <br />compliance with that basic but essential requirement. In my view, this means that the <br />legitimacy of the non-conforming ordinances and resolutions may be subject to legal <br />challenge going forward. Portsmouth does not need the additional lawsuits. <br />My second objection is that the structure of your virtual meetings denies the public its <br />right to participate as fully as in a regular meeting. No legitimate reason exists for that <br />denial. The limitations of the technology the city employs for the conduct of the virtual <br />meetings is not an acceptable excuse; other platforms in use by neighboring cities do not <br />have the same constraints. Although I acknowledge that legitimate concerns about the <br />safety of participants in in-person meetings make virtual meetings a prudent mode of <br />operation for the foreseeable future, you have a responsibility to employ a technology that <br />aligns the virtual and actual realms as closely as possible. The inability of citizens to <br />comment on items considered by council as they are taken up is a significant impediment <br />to influencing the thinking of our elected representatives. Faithful representation of your <br />constituents requires that you get the communication logistics right. A minor procedural <br />adjustment you made two weeks ago in response to my contemporaneous complaint <br />does not come close to meeting the identified need. <br />Please let me know if you need additional information. <br />Yours truly, <br />Mark Geduldig-Yatrofsky, PO Box 50141, Portsmouth, VA 23703-0141, 757 967-7298 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.