A bill in California seeks to remove requirements for in-person public meetings and instead allow remote participation.
Supporters argue that remote meetings have decreased costs and increased participation, particularly for vulnerable populations.
Opponents believe in-person interaction is crucial for democratic institutions and that controversial topics may be saved for remote-only meetings.
The bill has been amended to require a majority of board members to be at the same location for at least half of its meetings.
Supporters argue that remote meetings have decreased costs and increased participation, particularly for vulnerable populations.
Opponents believe in-person interaction is crucial for democratic institutions and that controversial topics may be saved for remote-only meetings.
The bill has been amended to require a majority of board members to be at the same location for at least half of its meetings.
[
add
]
[
|
|
...
]