LEWISTON — The City Council voted 6-1 this week against proposed changes to its public comment rules, but officials signaled they are open to tweaking the rules to add more structure, as well as an additional comment period.

The changes brought forward by Councilor David Chittim would have added a second, untimed public comment period at the end of council meetings and allow public comment during workshops.

Currently, the council conducts one, 15-minute public comment session at the start of regular meetings, but sometimes continues past the time limit if needed. However, Chittim has long argued that the council rules do not allow for the session to be continued, and that Mayor Carl Sheline often “violates our own rules” by continuing the public comment session.

The proposal would have kept the first comment period to 15 minutes, while allowing the council to suspend the rules to continue the session if needed.

Others have also criticized Sheline for being too loose with the rules regarding the three-minute time limit for comments.

Sheline argued Tuesday that the rules proposed by Chittim are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. He said making people wait until the next session at the end of the meeting, or voting to suspend the rules creates a process that “would take longer than just allowing them to speak.”

“The ability to allow for some flexibility and latitude has worked for a really long time,” he said.

Most councilors said they just want the rules to be consistent.

“That’s exactly what the problem is,” Councilor Tim Gallant said. “You think you can do whatever you want, and the rules are OK. We have rules for a reason.”

Sheline also defended his past decisions with the three-minute time limit, saying he has used his judgment a small number of times when allowing comments to go on. One example was allowing a government official to give the details on a grant program for small businesses.

Asked for comment Thursday, Sheline said, “I appreciate the effort here, but the net effect of these rule changes are the addition of useless bureaucratic votes, the limiting of public comment, and the interruption of meeting flow.”

Councilor Josh Nagine said he wants to avoid concern from the public over how meetings are being conducted, saying that several times there has been “tension” or “frustrations” regarding public comment and “having a clear way that’s predictable makes it easier for all of us.”

Despite the appearance of council support for the rule changes, the council ultimately voted 6-1 against the proposal. Chittim was the lone vote in favor.

When asked Thursday if he might introduce an amended set of changes, Chittim said he doesn’t fully understand the objections of the other six councilors and sees other business and more pressing.

“I am fully in favor of as much public comment as makes sense, but there comes a point at which giving a soapbox to every would-be orator is simply not productive,” he said. “This is the balancing act.”

Reached Thursday, Nagine said if the proposal had received amendments it may have passed, but it was voted on as is.

“I have the sense the council is looking to establish a more consistent process that sets more time aside for public comment, but it was a substantial proposal for council rule changes,” he said. “I appreciate the work of Councilor Chittim to put this forward, and I’m sure we’ll be able to arrive at a place which will allow the public more access to speak directly to the body in a consistent manner shortly, without needing to suspend the rules.”

Councilors on Tuesday seemed mostly supportive of adding a second public comment period but did not agree that it should be untimed.

They also did not agree on a provision that would allow for public comment during workshops, which some said are learning sessions for the council that are typically short on time.

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Businesses embrace ‘yes, you can pee in Portland,’ but the stalls seem stalled

Next »

Oxford County commission hires new part-time sheriff’s deputy