Essay Sample on Local Government Meeting

Description of the Entity, Meeting, and ParticipantsThe Provo City Council held the chosen local council meeting. Provo is the 3rd largest town in Utah. It is also Utah's second-biggest metropolitan area with an estimated population of 526000 people, according to the 2010 census (Provo, 2020). The city has a total area of around 44.2 square miles, and 41.7 square miles of it is comprised of land, while 5.6 square miles is composed of water (Provo, 2020). The meeting was attended by the city council members, including Michelle Kaufusi, the mayor, and the council members, including David Sewell, Brian Jones, Gary Winterton, George Handley, and Dave Knecht. The meeting was conducted on October 30th, 2019, in the Municipal Council chambers. The meeting was general, covering a wide range of agendas that were discussed. Most of the people leading the group were politicians because they all mention that they are elected public officials. There were also different public administrators including, the Director of administrative services, Director of public services, and city planners who were introduced when presenting agendas. There were several citizens present during this city council meeting.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Issues Discussed

One of the agendas up for discussion in the meeting was a resolution requesting the recertification of the city`s city justice court by the Utah Judicial Council. The presenter of this agenda was the Director of public services. He was respectfully called upon by the chair of the meeting, David Sewell to present the issue. There were no interruptions as he presented since everybody patiently listened. The city council members opted to approve the request by the administrator with little debate between the council members on the viability of their approval. Another agenda that was discussed was a resolution by the Provo city council authorizing the acceptance of a Utah State Infrastructure bank loan for the local airport. The agenda was presented by Brian Addison who is the Director of public services and was invited by the chair of the meeting. During his presentation, there were regular exchanges with the council members asking him to clarify the proposal The council chose to approve this project after deliberation with some of the civilians present in the meeting on when the loan would start being paid back since there was confusion initially on when the airport was expected to start paying back the loan.

Another agenda discussed was an ordinance to rectify Provo city code to identify the zones where cannabis production was allowed. The agenda was presented Brandon Lawson from City Planning invited the Chair of the meeting. He identified areas that were appropriate for cannabis production. He determined that the chosen zone was the perfect location to produce other medicinal products like codeine and pain relief products. The commission opted to approve the proposal with little deliberation between themselves and the civilians present because it was reasonable and in line with expectations that members of the council had on the location of the cannabis production. The next agenda discussed by the council was an ordinance that sought to amend the Provo city code to clarify that electronic display and animated signs are restricted in Agricultural and Residential zones. The agenda was presented by Brian Maxfield from the Planning department who was invited by David Sewell. He clearly stated that the purpose of his presentation was to reaffirm the prohibition of electronic displays and animated signs in residential and agricultural zones. The council voted to approve the agenda after deliberation between themselves on what constitutes a residential area. It was discussed that advertisements in schools could not be discussed because it was prohibited by state law and it. The council members agreed that the issue would be discussed at the next meeting.

The politicians and public administrators responded uniformly with each other. The public administrators were polite and respectful when the council chose them to present the agendas and were quick to respond to any queries that the council members had. The politicians were also amicable and respectfully called and listened to the agendas presented by the public administrators. The board members also interacted respectfully among each other. When there was a contentious issue being discussed, the council members would respectfully discuss their opinions or correct each other when there was a mistake. The decisions made by the council were made after deliberation with the public administrators and the general public who attended the council meeting. When they were making the decision on whether to approve the recertification of the city`s city justice court there was a brief discussion on the terms of the judge and whether the council had such powers to approve the agenda. They made the right decisions at the end of it since there was adequate deliberation among themselves on the viability of the agendas.

Citizen Participation

There were a few citizens present during the council meeting. They were all given equal opportunities to speak with no limit on the time that they could air their opinions. The public administrators and politicians were respectful of each citizen's view because every issue raised by citizens was dutifully addressed. One of the citizens decided to air his opinion on when the airport was required to begin repaying the loan given by the city. The citizen seemed to represent a larger group comprised of people working at the airport. If the issue were being raised personally, I would be satisfied with the response because any item raised was addressed adequately.

Conclusion

After assessing the whole meeting, it is reasonable to conclude that the meeting went well. It was a success because all items on the list were addressed, and any objections to the agendas were addressed properly without the emergence of any conflict. There are a few impressions that can be observed from the meeting, among them being that the council members of the town were professional when conducting these meetings. However, one of the concerns that can be seen from the meeting was that few members of the public attended the meeting despite that important city agendas were being discussed. The session was interesting because, despite the discussion of essential topics, there were no signs of conflict between people attending the meeting.

References

Provo City Corporation. (2020). Provo Rankings. https://www.provo.org/about-us/provo-rankingsProvo City Council. (2019, October 29th). Provo City Council Meeting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-Cu3QIOkZU&t=7830s