This article investigates the public hearings of a northeast Ohio city’s council meetings. Using grounded theory, conversation analysis (CA), and critical discourse analysis (CDA), the article examines the discourse exchanges between government officials and the general public during public hearings, access to the legislative process leading up to the public hearings, and access to the agenda that controls the topics and method in which the meetings are run. Results demonstrate that although the public has access to the public hearings, their access is controlled and restricted not only during the hearings but in the entire legislative, agenda-setting, and decision-making processes preceding the hearings.
BarberD (1981) Citizen Participation in American Communities: Strategies for Success. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
2.
BenhabibS (1992) Situating the Self: Gender, Community, and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. New York: Routledge.
3.
BerryJPortneyKThomsonK (1993) The Rebirth of Urban Democracy. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
4.
BohmanJRehgW (eds) (1997) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
ChrislipDDLarsonCE (1994) Collaborative Leadership: How Citizens and Civic Leaders Can Make a Difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6.
CrottyW (ed.) (1991) Political Participation and American Democracy. New York: Greenwood Press.
7.
FaircloughN (1989) Language and Power. New York: Longman.
8.
FaircloughN (1992) Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
9.
FarkasKRH (2013) Citizen (in) action: The limits of civic discourse in city council meetings. Critical Discourse Studies10(1): 81–98.
10.
FiorinoDJ (1990) Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values15(2): 226–243.
11.
FraserN (1990) Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text25(26): 56–80.
12.
HanakI (1998) Chairing meetings: Turn and topic control in development communication in rural Zanzibar. Discourse & Society9(1): 33–56.
13.
HauserG (1999) Vernacular Voices: The Rhetoric of Publics and Public Spheres. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
14.
KatzSMillerC (1996) The low-level radioactive waste siting controversy in North Carolina: Toward a rhetorical model of risk communication. In: HerndlCBrownS (eds) Green Culture: Environmental Rhetoric in Contemporary America. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 111–140.
15.
KennedyCWCamdenCT (1983) A new look at interruptions. Western Journal of Speech Communication47: 45–58.
16.
LakoffR (1990) Life and language in court. In: Talking Power: The Politics of Language in Our Lives. New York: Basic Books, pp. 85–107.
17.
LangtonS (1978) Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.
18.
LismanCD (1998) Toward a Civil Society: Civic Literacy and Service Learning. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
19.
McLaughlinM (1984) Conversation: How Talk is Organized. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
20.
MarkeeNKasperG (2004) Classroom talks: An introduction. Modern Language Journal88(4): 491–500.
21.
MathewsD (2000) How concepts of politics control concepts of civic responsibility. In: EhrlichT (ed.) Civic Responsibility and Higher Education. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, pp. 149–173.
22.
RyanM (1992) Gender and public access: Women’s politics in nineteenth century America. In: CalhounC (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 259–288.
23.
RyfeD (2003) The practice of public discourse: A study of sixteen discourse organizations. In: RodinJSteinbergS (eds) Public Discourse in America. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 184–201.
24.
SchegloffEA (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist70: 1075–1095.
25.
SchegloffEA (1990) On the organization of sequences as a source of ‘coherence’ in talk-in-interaction. In: DorvalB (ed.) Conversational Organization and its Development: Advances in Discourse Processes, vol. 38. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 51–77.
26.
SimmonsMW (2007) Participation and Power: Civic Discourse in Environmental Policy Decisions. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
27.
StygallG (1994) Trial Language: Differential Discourse Processing and Discursive Formation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
28.
Van DijkT(1989) Structures of discourse and structures of power. In: AndersonJA (ed.) Communication Yearbook 12. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, pp. 18–59.
29.
Van DijkT (1993) Principles of discourse analysis. Discourse & Society4(2): 249–283.
30.
Van DijkT (1996) Discourse, power, and access. In: Caldas-CoulthardCCoulthardM (eds) Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Routledge, pp. 84–104.
31.
WaddellC (1996) Saving the Great Lakes: Public participation in environmental policy. In: HerndlCBrownS (eds) Green Culture: Environmental Rhetoric in Contemporary America. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 141–166.
32.
WellsS (1996) Rogue cops and health care: What do we want from public writing?College Composition and Communication47(3): 325–341.
