Public comment has long been a staple of local government meetings. But in North Dakota and other parts of the country, this engagement tool faces a future that's a little less certain.

This month, the Fargo City Commission has come under scrutiny over possible plans to revamp the public comment portion of its meetings.

Some commissioners have proposed breaking up when residents can talk about certain issues.

Another idea being floated is to remove public comment from regular meetings and possibly shift that option to quarterly forums.

Cody Schuler, advocacy manager with the American Civil Liberties Union of North Dakota, said he feels local leaders are beginning to walk down a dangerous path.

"We are a government by, for, and of the people," said Schuler, "and our elected representatives are an extension doing the work of the citizens - and citizens have every right to fully speak."

Fargo leaders in favor of exploring a format change say they want more productive dialogue and to give residents meaningful answers on the spot.

However, not all city commissioners are on board with kicking around these ideas, echoing concerns raised by free-speech advocates. Similar debates have surfaced in cities such as Spokane, Washington.

In Fargo, Schueler said leaders need to realize that public participation has become a valuable way for BIPOC residents and younger adults to share their concerns with the city.

"We need to make sure that those who are not in power," said Schuler, "those who may be marginalized, those who might be of lower socio-economic status, have a voice."

He added that while this City Commission is pretty accessible, it can't be guaranteed for future elections.

He said fully maintaining public comment can mitigate any future panels that might not be viewed as fully engaged with constituents.




get more stories like this via email

More than 50% of voting-age women in Nevada are people of color, and a new poll found they do not feel heard or seen by most policymakers.

The poll was commissioned by a cohort of civil rights groups, called "Intersection of Our Lives." It showed, despite feeling disenfranchised, women of color view voting as an important avenue to accomplish the changes they want to see.

Roshni Nedungadi, chief research officer and founding partner of HIT Strategies, helped conduct the poll. She said rising costs of health care, fair housing and the need to close the "pay gap" are all important issues to women of color. Another big issue is abortion care.

"We also found, very clearly, that AAPI, Black, and Latina women strongly support abortion care and they really do care about communities being able to find and afford abortion care," Nedungadi reported.

Nedungadi noted more than three in four women polled said more should be done to ensure people have adequate access to abortion care. And the poll found a solid majority of women of color, especially Black women, believe it is important for the government to take action to address high rates of maternal death.

Celinda Lake, president of Lake Research Partners, called the poll data "game changing" and said it is inexcusable many elected officials around the country do not know what matters to women of color. She is convinced the poll results will help them. But Lake pointed out one thing she noticed in interpreting the data is the high level of pessimism being felt by women.

"One of the things that's so different from 20 years ago is so many things are not different from 20 years ago," Lake observed. "We need to hurry history here. We should've made more progress. We should not be looking at taking away rights."

Lake added while cost of living, reproductive rights and race and gender-based discrimination are all issues that will heavily influence the way women vote in November, another huge voting priority is addressing gun violence. She contended politicians cannot ignore women of color as voters if they want to win the election.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email

A new poll for AARP Pennsylvania revealed candidates must focus on issues critical to voters age 50 and older ahead of the November elections.

The influential voting bloc makes up more than half the state's electorate, and 85% told pollsters they are "extremely motivated" to cast their ballots.

Bill Johnston-Walsh, state director of AARP Pennsylvania, said voters age 50+ will be key in determining who wins in November.

"Voters age 50+ are the largest voting bloc in Pennsylvania and the country," Johnston-Walsh explained. "They consistently show up to the polls, and we anticipate that this year will be no different."

Johnston-Walsh added in the 2020 elections, older voters accounted for 55% of all Pennsylvania voters, and in the 2022 midterms, they made up 62% of the state's voters. He noted they expect those numbers to grow this year for the general election.

Bob Ward with the public-opinion firm Fabrizio Ward said voters age 50+ prioritize economic issues and will back candidates who protect Social Security and support family caregivers.

"When we look at it from an electoral standpoint, it is not surprising that older voters are more likely to vote for the candidates who say they will make sure workers get the Social Security they paid into," Ward observed. "The big picture here among voters 50+ is that economic issues are paramount."

Jeffrey Liszt, partner at Impact Research, said Pennsylvania voters, particularly 31% of those ages 50-64, have a high rate of family caregiving responsibilities and voice concerns about services.

"Over 40% of these family caregivers are spending more than 20 hours a week caring for a loved one, which is why it's such an important issue for them," Liszt explained. "That's why more than three-quarters of voters 50-plus say that they will reward candidates who provide more support for family caregivers."

A significant portion of older voters, 63%, also expressed concerns about their personal financial circumstances, citing the rising costs of food and utilities as reasons for financial strain.

Memorial Day is less than two weeks away, and for two Arizona veterans, it's a time to honor those who lost their lives while defending the United States, as well as stand up for democratic ideals like freedom and fairness.

Former Lt. Col. John Webster served in the U.S. Air Force for 20 years and thinks systemic barriers in Arizona's electoral system disenfranchise independent voters like him from participating in elections, which in turn prevents independent candidates from getting onto the ballot.

"Sometimes you have to change the system to get those people in," he explained. "It is this system that is giving you the politicians or the leaders that are at odds with each other and struggling. You're not going to see real change or consensus building until you go down one more level and you make an institutional change."

That is why Webster supports a bipartisan initiative pushing for open primaries in the Grand Canyon State. Currently, independent voters, the largest voting bloc in Arizona, are required to select either a Republican or Democratic ballot to participate in the state's primary election, taking place next month. Independent and unaffiliated candidates must collect up to six times the number of signatures as a partisan candidate to get on the ballot.

While Webster would like to see change, proponents argue closed primaries are integral to keeping party ideals consistent.

Former Lt. Col. T.J. Lindberg served in the U.S. Army from 1995 to 2015, including combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. For many military personnel, learning to consider and listen to various stakeholder perspectives is crucial; he wants to see the same approach when it comes to governing.

"We need people who are looking at the entire problem set and figuring out how to put all these things together. And I think that is where your independent voter and your independent, retired, or active military officer or noncommissioned officer, I think that really ends up shaping your views," Lindberg suggested.

Lindberg said the open primary movement in Arizona has a real opportunity to allow "middle of the spectrum, solution-oriented" leaders the chance to play a larger role in addressing problems -- not only at the state level, but nationally and internationally, too.


get more stories like this via email