After Zoom hacking, City Council reassesses public meetings
To help counter criticism that its tightened virtual meetings rules are restricting free speech, the Lafayette City Council may hire a new company to run its online sessions.
As public agencies began shifting their meetings online in March because of the shelter in place order, many choosing to use Zoom, hackers quickly followed. Early on, a few meetings were Zoom bombed with obscenities — graphic child pornography during a Contra Costa County town hall on sexual assault, someone exposing himself to students during a class at Berkeley High School and displaying Confederate flags and dropping the N-word at the Danville Town Council.
In Lafayette’s case, at its first virtual council meeting March 20, someone referred to Mayor Mike Anderson by using a derogatory term describing sexual preference and later with a crude graphic that also described a graphic sex act.
The meeting quickly was locked out to the public and Lafayette since has adopted the practice of not allowing people to speak during the meetings — unless a council member or commissioner has a question for the emailed comments. The city staff instead reads submitted comments.
Since the early problems, Zoom has created security measures in response to a wave of criticism.
After hearing from residents who said the online format effectively keeps their voices out of major issues, the Lafayette City Council on Tuesday reassessed using Zoom. Council members also talked about their frustrations with the current format, while stressing the need for security and keeping out the hackers.
The four options presented to the council by city communications analyst Jeffrey Heyman were: continue with the current process of city staffers reading emailed comments with people invited to speak if a council member or commissioner has a question; not invite people into the Zoom meeting if a council member or commissioner has a question about the comments; open meetings to full participation on Zoom with safeguards; or contracting with a vendor to stage the virtual meetings.
In the end, the council tentatively preferred hiring Prime Gov, of Utah, which offers a month-to-month contract at a cost of $3,000 a month — plus $2,000 setup fees — to run its public meetings in an effort to add an extra layer of security and again allow speakers. The council has not made a decision, according to Heyman.
“I am really concerned about this … and I think my leaning had been toward spending some money to make this work, so I’m very drawn to” hiring the outside agency, Mayor Anderson said. “My sense of it is that it would give us more security.”
Vice Mayor Susan Candell said she has been bombarded with emails from residents since meetings went remote. She said most people tell her they want to read their own letters at the meetings, in their own voices, and feel the current format stifles discussion and feedback from residents.
“They get nothing from us now,” Candell said, saying she was “very opposed to the status quo” and favored opening up public access, even potentially inviting in possible Zoom bombing.
Council member Teresa Gerringer said she was “grappling with how to do this,” and said she was in on two meetings that had been Zoom bombed. She warned about inviting hackers back into the meetings.
“I don’t even like the term ‘Zoom bomb’ because … it does make it a prank; it makes it sound less harmful than it really is,” Gerringersaid.
“Nobody has looked at this as trying to impede public comment; none of us like that we’re doing it this way,” she continued. “I think we have to understand that it’s a balancing act.”
Nearly all of the Lafayette residents who sent emails Tuesday complained that the Zoom format was inadequate. Several referred to the May 19 Lafayette Planning Commission meeting in which the controversial, 315-apartment Terraces project was discussed. Nearly 90 letters were read by staffers at that meeting.
“Virtual meetings prevent natural discourse and compromise good decisionmaking,” Paul Melmed wrote. “Especially when important issues are before you.”
Linda Riebel, another resident, said, “There was not one single question from the planning commissioners. Interaction with the public was nonexistent.
“I recognize that times are difficult and you face competing demands from interested parties and regulators, but the problems … suggest that, as an exercise in democracy, the meeting was not a success,” Riebel continued. “Dozens of city residents were left unheard, frustrated and skeptical,” she said.
If the city does hire Prime Gov, City Manager Niroop Srivasta said the cost would come out of her department’s budget, and she also would check to see if the city would be reimbursed via a state COVID-19 grant.