DOWNEY - Once again, it was a complete cluster you-know-what at City Hall Tuesday evening.

If you’ve been to a council meeting anytime recently, you’re probably familiar with the reoccurring large crowd that usually fills the right side of the audience seats.

These individuals have been fighting for the council to do something about the AB 1482 and rent gouging / no-fault eviction situation that is currently taking over the state.

I covered the issue first hand in Downey a few weeks ago when I spoke to two residents of Eden Roc, who were accusing their landlords and property manager of trying to force them out of their homes to make way for higher rent rates.

As a journalist, I had to remain as neutral as possible. As a human being, I sympathized with them.

I didn’t take issue with the group until several of them took what I felt were cheap jabs at the mayor over his recent health situation.

It was my opinion that if you want to question his health and ability to lead, it is not appropriate to make that argument as a bullet point on your argument against rent rates and no-fault evictions.

There is such a thing as time and place, and a housing discussion isn’t the time, nor the place for, “I’m here with a broken foot so where is the sick mayor?”

Unfortunately, things haven’t gotten any better. Instead, the situation has gotten worse, and near intolerable.

No more.

It’s time for City Council to take back control of their council chambers.

About a year ago, I interviewed Rodriguez (then Mayor Pro Tem) about his view on how to deal with and manage a gadfly.

I left the meeting with a nervous chuckle.

Rodriguez voiced opinions that the Mayor should use his or her gavel more often in order to maintain respect and decorum within the council meeting setting.

This screamed impending lawsuit to me, having already seen former Mayor Fernando Vasquez eject regular instigator Armando Herman a year prior, costing the city a $5,000 settlement.

Yet, here I am now, and I actually agree with him.

Up to this point, the council has done little to try and quell those who get unruly and disregard the rules of conduct during meetings, for fear of misstepping themselves (and the city) into a costly legal battle.

But enough is enough.

What many may not realize (or choose to ignore) is that the rules and regulations concerning how a council meeting / public comment operate were not put in place to silence residents. On the contrary, they give structure and flow, so that each individual may be granted their right to speak their mind, while also allowing the proceedings to continue functionally and efficiently.

Giving your name and address for the record helps staff and counsel isolate problems and their areas, and also keeps those who speak accountable for their words.

Insisting that your agenda item comment be heard during non-agenda comment, or weaving in and out of topic so that you can maximize your time at the dais is a waste of the council’s time, as well as the time of residents with other concerns who wish to speak (it’s also extremely unfair to those who play by the rules when you get back up during the actual agenda item and speak again).

I think it’s time for all five council members to pull their heads together with the City Attorney, and find an appropriate and legal way to draw their line in the sand.

That could mean stricter warnings that are more regularly enforced when members of the audience become unruly and disruptive.

It could mean cutting speaking time from five minutes, to two or three.

Whatever that case may be, the council chambers should no longer be treated like a free-for-all brawl in a Thunderdome.

Council woman Frometa gained a lot of respect from me on Tuesday when she put her foot down and told the crowd that she was willing to work with and for them, but would no longer tolerate being bullied, threatened, and ganged up on by the mob.

It took everything I could muster to not stand up and cheer myself.

An effective speaker can articulate their concern respectfully in a matter of one to two minutes.

Let it be abundantly clear, I am not against freedom of speech, protesting, or fighting for what you believe in.

I am all for public engagement.

But hooting and hollering, booing someone you don’t agree with, shouting out of turn, actively antagonizing the council with snide, vulgar, and classless remarks or threats, trying to hijack a meeting to the point of detriment to others; these are not public engagement.

It’s just being a jackass.

OP-ED: It's time for City Council to retake control of its public meetings