Revised May 7th, 2024
Background:
What started as just another Shorewood City Council meeting on Apr. 22, quickly became questionable for what was said, and not said.
Before the Council could approve the agenda, administrator Nevinski removed items 2H and 6C. He did not explain what those items were for the audience. He only said there were “notice issues and concerns.”
This may have left viewers confused as no clarification was provided. The items will be back on the May 13 agenda.
The items not being discussed were ordinance amendments to:
- Approve Code Supplement S-19-Ordinance 605.[1] This ordinance is “housekeeping,” acknowledging the overall updates of the city code.(Note: On the Consent Agenda with no description and not for discussion.)
- Approve Amendments to Zoning Regulations to Create Content Neutral Regulations–relating to allowable signs within the City. Read the lengthy materials here.[2]
Why the vagueness from city leaders? Perhaps it was because an attentive resident, when seeing the agenda on the day of the meeting, notified the city that under Minnesota law, cities must provide a 10-day notice of proposed ordinances. The law applies to new proposed ordinances and proposed amendments to existing ordinances as well. The items will be back on the May 13 agenda. It should be noted that council agenda materials are posted on the website the Thursday evening or Friday before the Monday council meetings. This leaves little time for a resident to reach out with concerns before the meeting.
SCA came upon three more examples[3] of ordinance changes without hearings at the Apr. 10, 2023 meeting.
- Agenda Item 5A-Ordinance 599 (Chapter 1004)
- Agenda Item 6A-Ordinance 598 (Chapter 502)
- Agenda Item 8A-Ordinance 600 (Massage therapists)
Why it matters: Overall, this appears to be a failure of public process.
- Voters expect the City to follow the rules for itself–just as the city expects from its residents.
- Citizens expect city staff to provide the full story to the Council.
- Residents expect the Council to ask questions to provide answers, transparency and accountability on their behalf. Even if the council member knows the answer, exposing the information in public discourse benefits everyone.
SCA opinion:
These actions point to a larger perception that there is an attitude of exaggerated pride or self-confidence coming from the City professionals and Council. Alternatively, it may simply be a manifestation of incompetence.
City governance is not a guessing game for residents. The residents should not be put into the role of “researchers” to gain simple answers. The Council is our eyes and ears. It is our insurance policy that things are being done to the highest standards. They ask for our votes and we put our trust in these individuals. When they fail at their jobs, we all lose.
Psychologists say when there are gaps in information, humans create their own story to fill in. One resident has done just that. They say “the City wants to dumb us down.” And that becomes the story. Resident beliefs might not always match the real world exactly, but their belief becomes their reality. Public process matters.
In this election year, know who and what you are voting for.
___________________________
