The West Orange Township Council discusses the future of hybrid meetings — in person and via Zoom — at its Dec. 6 meeting.
WEST ORANGE, NJ — Several residents attended the Dec. 6 meeting of the West Orange Township Council to argue in favor of the council continuing to offer its meetings via Zoom; of the seven speakers on this topic, only one attended the meeting in person.
The continuation of hybrid meetings, meaning in person and via Zoom, was listed as a topic for conversation in the council’s meeting agenda, and speakers during the public comment portion of the meeting overwhelmingly support the hybrid format.
“If it wasn’t for Zoom, I could not be included in these meetings, because many nights I will work right up until 7 and I would not make it to the part where I could actually talk to y’all and be heard by y’all,” West Orange resident Zasah Khademi told the council. “And I would feel that that would somehow cut me out of community engagement.”
Khademi, and other speakers, stressed that there are residents who want to be involved but are unable to attend meetings in person.
“There’s people out there like myself who, in these kinds of periods when we’re having a tripledemic and we’re having a spiking contagion, there’s people out there like myself who are immunocompromised who would not maybe feel safe to come inside with a lot of people who are unmasked,” Khademi said. “There are also other people out there who have gotten used to being on Zoom that are disabled, are elderly and they’re not able to come to town council, and they would be cut out of this. I feel it would be really, really unfair if we went backwards instead of keeping with the now almost three-year standard, and it would give the appearance of the town council or the town lacking transparency and wanting to limit engagement of its residents.”
Resident Rosary Morelli said continuing the hybrid model comes down to democracy.
“It took years for us to get this televised,” Morelli said, “and now we’re going to be limited or restricted, and that’s not the way a democracy runs.”
Resident MK Adams explained that her work schedule is nonstandard and that, without Zoom, she would be unable to participate in council meetings.
“Virtual access has been invaluable to me and I have attended almost every town council meeting since Zoom was implemented in lockdown. I’ve learned a great deal about how West Orange functions and have been able to participate in meetings, ask questions and express my concerns,” Adams said, adding that having a well-informed electorate is vital for democracy to flourish. “Discontinued virtual access would be a disservice to the council, and to West Orange residents.”
For residents who are deaf or hard of hearing, Zoom allows them to engage more easily with local government.
“For people with hearing disabilities, it is virtually impossible to hear in person,” resident Claudia Sanders said. “Having the Zoom meetings gives them access in a way that’s not available otherwise. So I would really like to see the virtual meetings continue.”
Resident Sally Malanga asked the board to make the hybrid format permanent — not just for town council meetings, but for all town boards and commissions.
“The public will be harmed if the township eliminates Zoom access,” Malanga, who spoke on behalf of Our Green West Orange, said. “I understand that the zoning board has already unilaterally announced that it will discontinue Zoom access. This must be reversed. We have the Daughters of Israel project coming up. We have Mayfair Farms coming up. And at the planning board we have the subdivision of the Mount Pleasant forest. All residents must have access to these meetings.”
For resident Joyce Rudin, continuing Zoom is the most pragmatic option, both for residents who want to participate in meetings and for members of the council, boards and commissions.
“There are also practical applications for hybrid meetings. Meetings can’t be canceled due to bad weather. Or if one of you is sick or in COVID isolation, you can also tune in and the meeting can still continue,” Rudin said, stating that Zoom is preferable to streaming. “Public participation is not just watching live Facebook streams; it means a two-way interaction with the public so the public can ask questions and receive answers in real time and see the inner workings of our government. There’s a good reason to permanently embrace hybrid municipal meetings.”
Last to speak on the issue during public comment, resident Philip Litwinoff said, “Without further comment on it, my statement is that I really believe the Zoom meetings should continue to give all residents of this township access to their elected officials.”
While the members of the council were generally in favor of continuing to offer Zoom, they did not say definitively what the future of Zoom will be in township meetings a year or more down the line. There are practicalities, such as cost and moderation, that still need to be fully arranged.
“I am in favor of continuing the Zoom meetings, at least for the next couple of months,” council President Susan McCartney said at the meeting, adding that the pandemic is not over and many people remain uncomfortable returning in person. “I understand that we’re all here, we make the best of it, but there are quite a few people out there that are not able to attend and do want to participate, just as we heard from public comment today. I don’t know what that time is going to be, but at least three months. We have to talk about the expense of that as well.”
John Gross, the town’s business administrator and chief financial officer, pointed out that, while the township has previously been utilizing COVID-19 grant funding to pay for Zoom, that assistance will end and the town will need to pay for Zoom from its own budget.
“Since the council is going to be facing that in its next budget and since those expenses are going to start rolling in starting Jan. 1, I wanted the council to be aware of that and at least, (if not make) a decision, then indicate some direction so that the administration can respond and appropriately plan for what you want to do,” Gross said. “If the council says, this is what we’re going to do, we’ll figure out how to do that and the most economical way to do it.”
According to Gross, the cost of using Zoom and having a moderator would be approximately $10,000 per year if council meetings continue to use Zoom; the cost will increase if more boards and commissions use Zoom with a paid moderator as well.
Councilman Bill Rutherford suggested that costs could be reduced by training volunteers to serve as moderators for certain meetings.
“Things are never going to go back to the way they were before COVID, and for those municipalities that are not at a place where they are willing to provide a virtual and an in-person component to these types of meetings, I think (hybrid meetings) will be forced on them at some point in the future. This is the way of the world,” Rutherford said.
The council members and Gross also drew a distinction between offering hybrid Zoom/in-person access for meetings where action is taken vs. offering hybrid access for advisory board meetings; they agreed that meetings where action is taken are more of a priority and require more stringent moderation.
Councilwoman Tammy Williams brought up the importance of keeping track of the number of residents who currently make use of the Zoom option for meetings.
“I would definitely support continuing with the Zoom capacity. I think what is important is that we monitor the residents who participate on Zoom and, if we can, just make sure that we are getting that participation,” Williams said. “We certainly wouldn’t want to do what residents are suggesting, which is keep them out of the process. We want them to have access, and certainly COVID has taught us that we have to be agreeable and we have to pivot and do things differently.”
During the meeting, public information officer Joseph Fagan told the council that there were currently 25 members of the public attending the meeting via Zoom.
“This evening at our peak we had 28. And we had four or five people engage in public comment,” Fagan said. “And the numbers 25 to 28 are pretty typical of the Zoom audience at home.”
Councilwoman Michelle Casalino said that, while she believes it is important to be flexible to people’s needs and wants, she is also “a big proponent of getting back.” She specifically mentioned the importance of resuming in-person events to support downtown businesses.
“I’m one for setting the example: We’re all here; we just had a crowded room this evening. Those are the choices we make to serve the public, and that’s what you do when you’re on these boards — you’re serving the public. And I appreciate all those who have health issues as well and want to serve. Again, it’s a really touchy subject. I think we should stay the way we are for the next month or two and then, before the end of February, make another decision, have a conversation about it,” Casalino said, adding that, even prior to offering Zoom for meetings, the meetings were transparent and accessible. “These are on YouTube the next day, so if you can’t catch us tonight, you’re busy on Tuesday night, you’re right on the computer and you’re watching us tomorrow, and most folks are watching us, not really engaging.”
About the Author
