City Council adopts new rules around allowing residents to speak at meetings

City Council made several changes to its meeting rules that the city hopes will improve public engagement and transparency.

The changes adopted Thursday follow a Travis County judge’s ruling in May that found the city had violated the Texas Open Meeting Act by not allowing people enough time to speak during the public comment period at Council meetings. The decision was upheld in July.

City Manager T.C. Broadnax and staff proposed the new rules to Council.

“It is a new way forward for conducting city business in an efficient and transparent manner while also allowing for meaningful and deliberate public participation,” he said in a Sept. 20 memo.

City rules now state residents must have at least two minutes to speak per item on the agenda during a City Council meeting. Residents will also now be allowed to speak during Council work sessions. Work sessions are usually held the Tuesday before a City Council meeting and include briefings from staff and discussions of items that Council wants to hear more about before taking a vote.

Previously, the city was allowing residents a total of two minutes to speak regardless of how many items they wished to address with Council. Council didn’t allow any public input during work sessions.

Save Our Springs Alliance argued that limiting speaking time and restricting comments during nonvoting sessions was a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act. In April, the group sued Austin Mayor Kirk Watson and City Council for violating the act.

Bill Bunch, the group’s executive director, said the city should allow people to speak on each agenda item. He also argued the law allowed the public to address Council during nonvoting meetings, such as work sessions.

He said the new rules are a move in the right direction, but there is still more work to be done to ensure all people are heard.

For example, if a resident comes out to speak on an agenda item that then gets postponed, the person is able to comment only on the postponement; they cannot provide the feedback they had wished to give Council. Bunch said that was still not in compliance with the law and is not in the spirit of open engagement.

“It’s bad policy,” Bunch said. “If someone makes the effort to come down and be heard they should be able to speak on it because they might not be able to come back. And it’s still on the table, so having input earlier is beneficial.”

Bunch said being able to speak at work sessions is also a good step, but he worries people still won’t have enough time to comment.

The SOS lawsuit was just one of two filed against the city on transparency and public engagement. In August, the city was forced to remove more than a dozen charter amendments from the November ballot after a Travis County judge ruled it had again violated the Open Meetings Act.

In August, the city called for the Nov. 5 election – a procedure the city must take before each election. The approval included adding 13 charter amendments and the City Council and mayor’s races to the ballot. The city adopted the charter amendments as a single agenda item. Bunch and others argued the amendments should have been individually listed, giving residents a chance to understand and speak on each item.

The judge agreed the city did not provide adequate notice to the public about the amendments, which also limited the community’s ability to give input.

Bunch said he was concerned the new rules do not spell out that items, like the amendments, must be individually listed.

The new rules will take effect during the next work session and City Council meeting set for Oct. 8 and Oct. 10, respectively.

This story was produced as part of the Austin Monitor’s reporting partnership with KUT.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.