Council maintains public comment policy

After some discussion, the Red Oak City Council has chosen to maintain the public speaking policy for meetings.
At the regular meeting April 21, the council held discussion on council procedures, including meeting policies and procedures; city council ethics, and public hearing protocols.
City administrator Lisa Kotter said the procedures were developed based on best practice recommendations from the Iowa League of Cities. After a review of other city policies across the state, the policies were drafted by Mayor Shawnna Silvius and Kotter.
“The purpose of these policies is to ensure that we uphold the highest standards during our meetings. By clearly defining the expectations for both elected officials, staff, and the public, we aim to create an environment of transparency, respect, and accountability. These guidelines will help maintain order, promote fairness, and ensure that every voice is heard, fostering a more effective and respectful decision-making process,” Kotter said.
• The City of Red Oak City Council Meeting Policies and Procedures. This proposed policy outlines the procedures governing the conduct of the city council meetings, including guidelines for meeting order, public participation, and the decision-making process. It emphasizes efficiency, transparency, and respect for all members of the council, staff, and public. This policy and procedures shall govern the conduct of the City Council and shall be interpreted to ensure fair and open deliberations and decision-making.
• The City of Red Oak City Council Code of Ethics, This proposed policy establishes a code of ethics to ensure that public officials maintain the highest standards of conduct in their roles. It covers the expectations for acting in the public interest, complying with the law, maintaining transparency, and upholding ethical conduct to ensure public trust.
• The Red Oak Public Hearing Meeting Protocol. This proposed policy outlines the procedures for public comment during city council meetings, including guidelines for both in-person and Zoom participants, ensuring that all voices are heard efficiently and respectfully. After the public comment period is closed, the Mayor/Chair may ask the council/board to consider discussion. No further public comments will be taken. The council/board may, however, ask relevant party(s) questions for clarification on the item(s) for public input.
Looking at the proposed policies, Councilperson John Haidsiak feared that it didn’t give the public the right to address the council without the approval of the Mayor and the City Administrator at any given meeting. Councilperson Brian Bills disagreed.
“They do have the right to contact their council member, and the council members at large, and I take calls from people that aren’t even in my ward. This is our business meeting. If we sit and talk to everybody about everything that everybody wants talk about, we probably wouldn’t be able to finish out the meeting by the end of the day,” Bills said.
Silvius added that all public comment was a courtesy, and not an actual requirement.
“By state code, we are not required to have a public comment session at our regular meeting,” stated Slivius.
Bills felt that if the council decided it wants to talk about public comments further, that’s up to the councils. And if they wanted to put those public comments on the agenda at a future meeting, that’s up to them as well. Councilperson Adam Hietbrink said there were plenty of opportunities for comment.
“They can come in and sign up and talk about anything they want for three minutes. This policy does not limit that. They can talk to anyone they want, but to stand up here and talk to us about something for more than an hour, I don’t think that you can come on in here, or sit up here for an hour to complain about something, that’s a little long,” Hietbrink commented.
While she understood where Haidsiak was coming from, Kotter said the key is that people don’t have a right to go back and forth with the council.
“People get the impression that they can come here and question and answer you, and it clearly states in that best practices for the city that there is no requirement to have public comment. I don’t think anybody would say not to allow it, but when somebody just shows up and starts grilling you, and nobody knew that you were going to come and talk about it, it goes back and forth, and so it’s listening, receiving it, and then it’s up to the council, if you want, to discuss it further by putting it on the agenda. And then we can have public comment. It’s a one-way conversation until you decide,” said Kotter.
Haidsiak felt that the public had the right to express their feelings.
“It doesn’t matter whether you like them or not, whether she likes them or not, whether I like them or not, they have that right, and I think that they should be able to have that right without a three-minute time limit. I disagree whole-heartedly with anyone that says that they don’t,” Haidsiak advised.
Councilperson Tim Fridolph said that public comment was a new feature and it didn’t exist a few years ago.
“Prior to 2022, they didn’t even have public comments on the agenda. Nobody was real upset then. Nobody made any comments about it,” Fridolph said.
Bills said if a Red Oak resident wanted to talk to a council member for hours about a certain subject, they can call the council member on the phone.
“We have to control our own business. Because that’s what this is. We don’t do business with the city or government. Part of our policy is our responsibility. So this is creating policy that is therefore not arguable, that everyone would agree to,” explained Bills.
Under general provisions, the generally accepted rules of procedure found in Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, shall govern City Council meetings unless otherwise requested by the Mayor or a City Council member for a specific reason. Fridolph said that might need some revising.
“It’s very detailed, so I would just be very careful in that this would not bind us to following those to a T. Even the state of Iowa does not require cities to follow them that strictly. So I would just be very careful how you word that because you want talk about a five hour meeting, follow Robert’s Rules of Orders, and we’re never getting out of here. It’s not about not having rules and decorum when we have a meeting, but to say that we are going to follow those rules of order, you do not want to do that. It could be a guideline or something of that nature, but you do not want be pinned down with that. I looked that up too. It says it can be very burdensome,” advised Fridolph.
Kotter said that the policy could be revised to indicate that Robert’s Rules of Order shall guide the council rather than shall govern. Also, Kotter said the policies were not to be acted upon by the council at the regular meeting, and that they were simply for the council to review and then discuss at a future council meeting.
The council took no further action on council procedures.