Findlay City Council Issues Rules on Public Input

BY PATTY KLEIN

Findlay City Council wants order at meetings. Residents of Findlay want to be heard. Some City Council members want to protect the feelings of elected officials. Some residents want to express their displeasure with the direction of their leaders. How can an ad hoc committee of council members balance their desire for a less contentious atmosphere while allowing a wide range of commentary about how Findlay City Council is operating? The answer is to err on the side of free speech. The ad hoc committee seems to be resolved to more limitation of speech.

The ad hoc committee for council rules met for the second time on March 26. For about 20 minutes, the three members discussed more plans for the limiting of the oral communication portion of a city council meeting. Their outline included the following:

• Public comment will be allowed during the time on the agenda for that topic
• Facing the podium toward city council members
• A 4 minute clock on the wall to clearly time resident speakers
• Residents will be barred from addressing comments to the Mayor and other administrative officials
• Public comment will be limited to a total of 60 minutes including questions from council members
• Incorporating a resident suggestion to add Ward representative to the speaker form
• Suggested a 2 month trial period for the new rules
• A resident is limited to speaking one time on a topic
• Non-agenda topics will be moved to the end of the meeting.

Committee Chair, Josh Palmer, did not allow public input, once again, at the second ad hoc meeting. Palmer noted that the new rules would be defined and submitted for  City Council approval after the third ad hoc meeting.

Ad hoc committee member, Dan DeArment noted in his rule proposal that there is a desire for respectful commentary that is not distracting to the meeting. Current council rules prohibit actual distraction to the meeting.The definition of distracting speech has not been discussed.

Residents have voiced serious concerns with the new rule suggestions. The rule allowing a 60 minute limit on public comment may open the door for council to filibuster in conversation with one resident, leaving little or no time for non-agenda topics at the end of the meeting.

There are also concerns that not allowing the public to address elected administrators, such as the Mayor, prevents the wider public from hearing a public record of redress of grievances against the administration. The ad hoc committee would like all communication with the administration to be done privately by phone, email, or a private meeting. Councilman Palmer inquired about the legality of not allowing city officials to be addressed. Law Director Don Rasmussen replied that if council makes this a rule it is legal. Will the Mayor be allowed to speak to residents who are addressing city council? The historical record is greatly altered when residents are required to handle their grievances privately.

If a resident can only speak once on a topic, how will input be handled as the topic evolves? Legislation usually has three readings before it is implemented. Residents speaking on the first reading of an ordinance would be prohibited from speaking on the second and third reading. This will not allow for thorough vetting of legislation by the public. A resident who is passionate about a topic may have new information or a new perspective during subsequent meetings. City council members have expressed fatigue when residents speak repeatedly on a topic. Should council’s boredom with speakers be a reason to limit their speech? This limitation is another concern for residents who regularly interact with their local government.

Only 3 residents are allowed to comment on the new rule changes according to the current rules. With a majority vote of council, more concerned citizens can give input. Residents are encouraged to attend the next City Council meeting. There are now more questions than answers with the re-write of city council rules.  Findlay City Council meets Tuesday April 2, at 6:00pm and comments will be heard.