The Portage City Council’s rules on public comment at meetings could be formalized with a bill of rights incorporated to outline protections for citizens.
More Top Picks Best Wheel Alignment Tools
Resident Michael Cooper proposed the idea at Tuesday’s Ordinance Committee meeting. City Attorney Dan Bartnicki said he would update the proposed resolution spelling out the council’s public comment to incorporate Cooper’s ideas.
The public comment bill of rights, as Cooper named it, would spell out the council’s commitment to free speech under the First Amendment that kicks off the original Bill of Rights.
Cooper’s proposal notes that speakers are asked to provide their name and address at a public hearing because that gives them additional notification rights and standing if they pursue legal action. Refusing to provide a name or address wouldn’t mean they forfeit their right to speak.
The city would be required to make every effort to ensure access to the public hearing isn’t restricted in any way, including “arbitrary processes, politically motivated tools or intentional ambivalence.”
That includes not intentionally choosing a room too small for the anticipated crowd or packing the room to keep others out. If a room’s maximum capacity is exceeded, the council would be required to take extraordinary measures to allow everyone a chance to speak.
No member of the public would be given preferential treatment; however, people who might not be able to stay long could be allowed to speak first, such as senior citizens or parents with childcare considerations.
Whether to arrest a speaker would be solely at the discretion of a law enforcement officer, not the person presiding over the meeting.
The bill of rights would be posted at all public hearings.
The policy on public comment at public meetings is a long time coming. The council kicked the resolution to the Ordinance Committee in July after members couldn’t decide on the specifics.
“I work for the council. I don’t make any of the policies,” Bartnicki said. He wants a policy that puts in writing some of the unwritten rules that have been followed for years in how meetings are conducted.
“The public has the ability to speak and participate in government, but that does not give them the right to delay, for interminable periods of time, the business of the public,” Bartnicki said.
The two-minute limit for speaking has been standard for the city, and the state has said over and over again that it’s a reasonable limit. Bartnicki doesn’t want a resident to effectively hold a filibuster. “Now that citizen is stepping on other residents’ and citizens’ right to speak on another topic.”
“I’m all for having uniform guidelines of what to expect as long as they’re applied fairly,” said Councilman Collin Czilli, D-5th. That’s Bartnicki’s concern, too.
“I want a clock right there so you can see how long you’re speaking,” Czilli said.
Bartnicki said speaking at public meetings isn’t the only way to communicate with the city’s leaders. Written statements have impact, too.
“Not everyone communicates on social media. Not everyone does email,” former Mayor Olga Velazquez said.
Council members need to be willing to hang around five to 10 minutes after the meeting to engage with the public, and they should be willing to take residents’ phone calls, she added.
The Ordinance Committee, which meets at 5:30 p.m. before council meetings, will take up the issue again next month.
Doug Ross is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.
More Top Picks Best Hiking Watches With Maps