Preservation Board Meets Behind Closed (and Locked) Doors
Yes, tonight’s Preservation Board meeting was held behind closed and locked doors! Well, not on purpose. As ususal, the public had assembled in the conference room on the 12th floor of the office building located at 1015 Locust for the 4pm meeting. People generally find the room although it is not marked as such.
During the meeting I stepped out into the hallway around 5pm and noticed the door between the elevator lobby and the hall leading to the room was closed. As in past months, the door was locked so that someone arriving late would be unable to reach the meeting. I opened the door and propped it open. A woman waiting for an elevator, likely an SLDC (St. Louis Developement Corporation) employee, asked me not to prop open the door — that it was supposed to be closed after 4:30pm. I explained a public meeting was being held and that in the past people were unable to gain access unless someone let them in by opening a closed door. She indicated people go go through the SLDC reception area which does have access to the conference room. I didn’t bother arguing with her nor did I check the SLDC reception area. This interaction was witnessed by Ald. Lyda Krewson.
I returned to the conference room with the door still open. A bit later I returned to see if the door was still open, it was. However, I was able to check the glass SLDC reception doors which were locked. The lights were off, the receptionist had gone home. Had I not opened the door, a late arrival would have been unable to gain access to the public meeting. A bigger issue is that in case of fire or other emergency, some people might have used the door to leave the room and go into the SLDC reception area where they would have encountered the locked glass doors. Unlike most security doors, these do not have a “panic” bar which allows you to exit. The public should not get led to a place where they might get trapped by locked doors.
My hope here is that the Preservation Board, the Cultural Resources staff and the city’s Development Corporation staff will review their emergency exit procedures as well as their policies on access for after hours public meetings. Some signage would be nice too. And while I am wishing, it would be swell if the members of the Preservation Board would actually use the microphones provided for them so that those of us in the gallery can actually hear what they are saying.
Steve are you surprised that citizens are excluded at every turn? Come on, those in leadership positions don’t really want public input. Sixty minutes just had a piece where blacks in the hood are not supposed to cooperate with police. Think there is a connection? Of course there is. You can’t whine about a portion of the population not respecting authority when authority does not respect the population. The thing St. Louis politics proves over and over is that the scum at the top is no different than the scum at the bottom. I’m dealing with right now with some bullshit in the 22nd ward with the Alderman and CDA that would make your head spin. Meanwhile it is business as usual. Lock down those public hearings!
For government in many places, this is an ongoing issue. The best way to involve the public is to have evening meetings. The majority of city workers, like most workers, like to be able to go home around 5. When workers leave an office, you need to lock the doors (otherwise, things “grow legs and walk off”). Finding suitable meeting facilities can be a challenge, especially for agencies and boards with limited or no budgets.
One solution is simply to hold meetings in city or private facilities that operate outside “normal” business hours. Many libraries have public meeting rooms. The fire and police departments operate 24/7 and have meeting facilities. Longer term, the simple commitment to build public meeting rooms that can be easily secured should be a standard design requirement on any city building (the new Animal House, for instance).
The other challenge comes with staff – they like having their resources “next door”. It’s going to take a change in mindset to get them “outside their comfort zone” and be willing to travel to meeting sites convenient to the public, whether it’s just “down the block” or “across town”. City employees need to be remind that the public is their employer and they need to keep them happy!
I for one am glad you are bringing to light the danger that has plagued a brave and noble profession whose members until now have suffered in silence. Countless brave security guards have died in the line of duty unable to escape by doors needlessly locked at the close of business hours. We must address this with the utmost fortitude and with all possible haste. No one who fails the police academy drug screening should be forced to work in an environment where the threat of death is present at every hour of the night. Please write your elected officials and say “No” to locks or “Yes” to 24-hour workdays.
(P.S. I agree with your argument regarding transparency of public government, but the whole lock thing too tangential and only makes you sound desperate for a fight.)
If the fire chief was an elected official you would have my vote.
Having the doors locked is ridiculous. I don’t think that it’s intentional — just another instance of local negligence. Once, I had to wait fifteen minutes for someone to let me back into the Preservation Board meeting after going out to the elvator lobby to take a call.
I’m intrepid. A first-timer might not be. We should run these meetings in a manner great enough to be worthy of the city that we are. The Preservation Board should keep the doors open and the microphones on.
I think the Preservation Board needs to be informed officially by someone who has missed part of a meeting by a locked door. If this is a regular problem, and the Board is aware of it, then I think there will be violations of the Open Meetings statute if this happens again.
I don’t think this is a problem with SLDC staff. It is a problem with the Board members not taking their positions seriously. Make them aware of the possibility that the meetings are closed to the public in violation of state law, and then they are responsible.
I’m old enough to remember this from thirty years ago, so locked doors ARE an issue with me, especially in public venues:
http://www.cincypost.com/bhfire/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Hills_Supper_Club
Michael Graves’ addition to the main library in Denver was designed with a full conference complex that can be isolated from the rest of the library. The only real downside to citizen participation is the need to pay to park. Two new police substations there were also designed with public conference facilities, as was the new city office building. Bottom line, it just needs to be made a priority – it’s a lot tougher to retrofit older public buildings to provide limited, after-hours public access than to build it into new ones. (It also gets back to the basic philosophy of encouraging [or not] public participation – if you don’t want the public “meddling”, why make it easy, convenient, logocal or safe?!)
If you have less than 50 occupants, the Building Code does not require that exit doors swing in the direction of exit travel (under the theory that that number of people probably won’t “pile up” and not be able to figure out how to open the door). Still, it’s good design to not impede any egress path.
The bigger question, is SLDC (and other city agencies) creating a hazardous condition by having more than 30 or 50 people in a room that was originally designated an “office”? “Assembly” uses (which public meetings are) have stricter requirements for protecting public safety, including having two separate exits and exit paths out of the room. I understand budget constraints and not wanting to spend money on a room that gets used once or twice a month for public meetings, but I also understand the clarity of 20/20 hindsight. It’s a whole lot easier to avoid or minimize a disaster than it is to explain why you didn’t follow the rules in the first place . . .
SLDC is located in leased space at the 1015 Locust building. It’s not a public building; but yes it does need to comply with all fire and occupancy codes. Actually the building management there is very attentive to these sorts of concerns.
That room has been designated the “board room” as long as I can recall; and there is, I think, a marked emergency exit route that will take you to stairs in the event that’s necessary.