City may cancel Coffees for rest of year

Published 11:05am Tuesday, June 19, 2012

The Austin City Council may soon say ‘no’ to its monthly cup of joe.

The council could suspend Coffee with the Council until next year, following a 5-2 motion Monday night to make the suspension a resolution. Council members Marian Clennon and Janet Anderson opposed the motion. The council will vote on the public service’s fate at its July 2 meeting.

The move came after Council Member Brian McAlister expressed concerns city office candidates would use the informal monthly meeting to promote themselves.

“It’s just not an appropriate venue for that,” McAlister said, alluding to a case he had already seen by a candidate at the June 9 Coffee. Council Member Jeff Austin agreed.

“Candidates can show up and they can turn it into a stump speech,” he said.

The potential for campaigning wasn’t the only concern about Coffees. McAlister also questioned the usefulness of the meetings in general. He said there were a number of problems he noticed in meetings over the last few months.

Anderson said citizens who attend often stay fixed on issues handled by the school board or county board, over which the City Council would has no control. There are also questions about bike trails outside the city limits, another subject the council cannot address.

A number of council members were also concerned about one or two citizens dominating the hour-long meetings and limiting the amount other Austin residents could contribute.

“How do you stop that type of thing?” asked Mayor Tom Stiehm, adding that during the two Coffees he had attended, a single person could occupy about 2/3 of the time provided.

Clennon said she opposed the potential change to Coffees.

“I think if we set down the right rules, whoever’s moderating it will stop it,” she said, adding that the council had agreed to do the Coffees earlier in the year. The next two coffees have already been scheduled.

In general, McAlister said he didn’t find the Coffees worthwhile.

“It’s really not doing anything very useful,” he said.

The motion follows the first Coffee with the Council meeting to have minutes written up and points of follow-up for specific citizens’ questions highlighted. If passed, Coffees would not resume until Jan. 1, 2013.


Sign in to Comment | Need help commenting? Click here

  • intheknow

    I think was a very positive idea for the town to be able to discusss in a formal situation concerns with the council. My ideas to improve:

    l. Maybe choose different times to accomodate some who can not attend Sat. at 10 a.m.

    2. Everyone attending has a 5 minute chance to ask a question or questions–that way more could perhaps join in on the discussions.

    3. Make it a joint venture with the county commissioners–I know that Tony Bennett did attend some of these.

    4. Let Steihm and McAlister stay home and they could have their own cop talk over coffee.

    Report comment

  • skunkhollow1964

    Nothing prevents a citizen group from getting together for coffee and inviting council members and commissioners to attend. Council members would need to watch their numbers so as to not violate open meeting rules.

    I don’t understand why anyone thinks they are accomplishing anything by showing up and being an *ss. That is counterproductive.

    Start moderating and you end up with what looks very much like a city council meeting. The Mayor is generous with time for citizen comments at council meetings. There is usually some rocket surgeon that shows up with constructive comments.

    Report comment

  • Asutinwho

    Unfortunately, this is another example of the elected officials disregarding who they represent or who is responsible for their election to the council seat. There is no reason that this type of meeting can not be accomplished successfully with moderation and a solid set of ground rules. If our elected officials were actually working for the people and not trying to advance their own personal agendas, they would be more than willing to meet with the public at any opportunity, not only when it is convenient.

    Report comment

    • skunkhollow1964

      I love a good conspiracy. Please share a few of the “personal agendas” that are being advanced.

      Report comment

  • skunkhollow1964

    That’s what I thought… The conspiracy and self serving policies are so top secret that we can’t even speak of them here. “EVERYONE KNOWS” that they exist and what they are and who is involved and why, but they can’t say.

    I predicted that these meetings would end for this very reason. A few dunder heads would show up and grandstand about this and that thing, accusing the city council of doing something so stupid as building the justice center (a county project) the dog park (private funding) etc.

    I didn’t predict that the guy running for mayor would get a haircut and bring his comedy act. A bonus I guess.

    So, the solution is to have a more structured meeting, rules, etc. Why not just go to a council meeting?

    Report comment

    • LotusFlower

      Perhaps I’m wasting too much time wondering who the heck you are, skunkhollow, but are you Jim Hurm? There is just something about you that tells me you aren’t just a run of the mill citizen, and lately you’ve been sounding an awful lot like Hurm.

      Report comment

      • skunkhollow1964

        Hi Marian.

        Report comment

      • marian.clennon
      • LotusFlower

        If you’re going to try and guess who I am, at least have a little creativity. I’m certainly not Marian Clennon, although it’s funny that you think so.

        It’s also duly noted that you didn’t answer my question, which was “are you Jim Hurm?” So, hello Jim Hurm!

        Report comment

  • skunkhollow1964
  • Asutinwho

    If it smells, looks, or sounds like a skunk. It’s a Skunk, that by the way mostly comments in favor of the council or the city on related new articles.

    Report comment

    • LotusFlower

      Thank you, Asutinwho! I’m glad I’m not the only one who has noticed skunkhollow’s comments as very pro-city (and awfully informed compared to your average citizen).

      Report comment

      • skunkhollow1964

        Funny. By the time Marion responds using her own name, this article is 4 clicks deep into the website. Lotus claims that she it not Marion at midnight and then Marion responds in person at 6AM. Two user names? Who follows articles 4 clicks deep on the site?

        I have responded to the Jim Hurm question in the past.

        I don’t understand the pro city idea. What have I said that is pro city? Thinking coffee with the council is not going to work is pro city? The City does plenty of stuff I think is really dumb, coffee with the council is one of them.

        Report comment

      • LotusFlower

        Not that I need to explain myself to you, but the reason I didn’t respond until 7 a.m. is because I was in bed by 11 p.m. and hadn’t checked for your response all day yesterday. Some people like to get eight hours of sleep – I’m sure that’s something you can understand.

        I can’t speak for Marian because I am not her. But you are welcome to believe what you will.

        Report comment

      • LotusFlower

        And this is just a hunch, but perhaps Marian was following the article because her name is mentioned in it. For all we know other council members also follow it and the comments but aren’t commenting themselves.

        Report comment

Editor's Picks