Public Comment Practices Undemocratic in Spirit

Opinion and Commentary

Public comment is something every elected member of local government says they want, and even need. But we should judge them not by what they say, but by what they do.

In 2019, the Texas Open Meetings Act was amended, granting the right of the public to comment at government meetings. Texas Government Code §551.007. It grants citizens the right to make public comment on any item on the agenda. This must take place either before the items on the agenda are discussed or during the discussion of those items. One of the reasons this law was passed was because some governmental bodies placed their public comment period at the end of the meeting after all the votes had already been taken.

Here locally, there has been a recent trend to place further limits on that right.

A New Paradigm

Last year the City of San Angelo introduced a new public comment policy.

The detailed nature of the policy offers several pitfalls for the unwary. The first is that you must sign up before the meeting starts if you want to comment on an item; once the meeting starts, it is too late to sign up to speak.

You also have to designate the particular item or items you want to comment on.

If you are not signed-up to speak on that particular item by the beginning of the meeting, you will be denied the right to speak on it completely.

If you sign up for one item — but also want to speak on a second item — even though you are on the list, you will be denied the right to speak on that second item, unless you also signed up to speak about the second one.

Whether restricting a citizens ability to speak on an item on the agenda unless they sign up for each agenda item is legal is uncertain. Since the 2019 amendment provides that any member of the public who wants to speak on an agenda item must be allowed to speak on that item, the city’s current policy may go too far.

How Much Time Is Enough?

If you are the proponent of an item on the agenda, you are given 5 minutes to make your comment. If you are anyone else, or speaking in opposition to that item, you only get 3 minutes. But this does not take into account the nature of the topic and whether a comment can reasonably be made within that time.

Members of the council or the mayor can request and allow additional time. But that is solely at their discretion. Under this new policy, it has been interesting to see who these rules are strictly enforced against, and who they are not.

The changes also allow the mayor to impose other restrictions to maintain efficiency or decorum, but that language is so vague as to be of no practical use.

When governmental bodies use the word “efficient” it almost never means a more open and democratic government responsible to the people. Usually, it translates to “be quiet so we can get this done.”

Mandatory Sign In Not Permitted

Another interesting fact is that an armed officer is posted at the screening entrance to the city council meetings telling everyone attending the meeting to sign in.

There is no legal requirement that every member of the public sign in before entering a public meeting. The Attorney General’s position is that such is not permitted because it would violate the Texas Open Meeting Act.

The city can ask people to sign an attendance record, but it cannot require it.

The way the City of San Angelo is doing this now gives people the impression it is required, and if you don’t sign, the City Marshal won’t let you in.

The voluntary sign in sheet should be moved away from the security checkpoint and into the meeting room.

SAISD Does it Too

But it is not just the city whose procedures present obstructions to public participation.

The San Angelo ISD Board of Trustees also do their best to keep public comment to a minimum.

In fact, the way the board conducts public comment makes one feel like public comment is more of an annoyance.

The board is quick to tell you at the beginning that “This is not a public meeting. It is a meeting of the board that meets in public.”

While technically true, it doesn’t exactly convey the message that what the public thinks matters.

What is even more concerning is when the board allows public comment.

Public Comment Not Allowed During Discussion of Agenda Items

Citizens must sign up to give public comment. That is not that out of the ordinary. But they are only allowed to make their comment at the beginning of the meeting. The board does not take public comment when the items on the agenda are called for discussion.

While technically allowed by law, once again this is contrary to the purpose of public comment.

This forces the public to comment on that item — out of order — and out of the context of the discussion and any motion or action the Board is considering.

If the Board wants real public comment, it should allow citizen comment during the discussion on each agenda item. If it doesn’t, well than what it is doing works fine for that.

This is even a bigger problem considering the Board’s pre-agenda meetings. Much of the policy debate takes place in the pre-agenda meeting.

The discussion at the regular meeting is often just a recap of the pre-agenda discussion.

The Letter of the Law

This is perfectly legal, of course, but it is not transparent and it’s downright undemocratic.

There have to be limitations on public comment and participation in local government.

Without them meetings can bog down when discussing contentious issues. But the need for such limitations occurs seldom.

Our local governments should evaluate their procedures and practices very carefully.

The right to free speech, and the right to petition our local government are sacred rights, enshrined in the Constitution.

Restrictions should be enacted with great caution. They must be crafted to promote and encourage constructive, and even critical public input in the decision-making process.

The current practices used in San Angelo have not been well-thought out. The city, and school board would be well advised to consider liberalizing some or all of these restrictions.