La Mesa won’t restrict who can put things on the council agenda

Any member of the La Mesa City Council who wants to place an item on the agenda will still be allowed to do so. A proposal to require at least two members to bring forth an item was soundly rejected last week by the council.

Mayor Mark Arapothesis said the proposal came at the request of city staff to avoid crowding meeting agendas and overwhelming staff, but several council members worried it would “silence” minority opinions.

“This new requirement is intended to conserve limited council time and staff resources by enhancing the viability of council initiated items forwarded to the council,” a memo sent to council members read.

In January, Arapothesis created a subcommittee to explore the issue and consider whether city policy should be amended.

The subcommittee ultimately decided to suggest agenda items be initiated by two council members, so “it is significantly less likely that an item will die for lack of a second due to at least two Councilmembers in support.”

Staff noted that the agenda item initiation process was amended in 2009 to limit consideration to items that directly impact city administration or operations to avoid overloading staff and extending meeting times.

The proposed change is not uncommon in San Diego County. Oceanside tightened its policy to add agenda items in 2017, following similar changes in National City and Escondido.

Councilmember Laura Lothian said the change would be “incredibly unfair,” noting that she is the sole Republican on the council.

“It doesn’t matter if it’s just me this time; whoever’s the lone member is getting silenced; it’s not right,” Lothian said. “You can literally marginalize and minimize the lone voice that’s different from everybody else.”

Though the council often unanimously approves agenda items, Councilmember Lauren Cazares said it is important to hear proposals they might not agree with.

Cazares said instead of changing the procedure, the council should strive to reduce overwhelming city staff, she said.

“I don’t believe this item was brought forward out of malice toward anyone or any viewpoint, but I am very concerned that the passage of this would unintentionally and directly harm a fellow council member, Councilwoman Lothian, because her viewpoints are sometimes opposed to the current majority,” Cazares said.

Further, Cazares said she is concerned the policy change could be “weaponized during election years” through the politicization of agenda items.

After hearing concerns from several council members, Arapothesis pulled the ordinance from the agenda.

He reiterated that the proposal was not “about silencing anyone,” but more so aimed at preventing city staff from being used as a “chew toy.”

“We want to work in collaboration, but be mindful that we need to be doing what our job is,” Arapothesis said. “We can’t use this body for whatever we want, it has to be for the will of the people.”