At a Waterford City Council meeting, public comment was dominated by a dispute over Councilmember Liz Talbot's decision to describe the late commentator Charlie Kirk as associated with fascist ideology. Dozens of residents and several out‑of‑town visitors spoke, with some demanding Talbot resign or be recalled and others defending her statements and her record of community service.

The debate opened when Melissa, a Waterford resident and teacher, told the council she was "dismayed to witness an absolute circus" at the prior meeting and said Talbot's use of the word "fascism" was "incredibly disrespectful, and it was certainly unnecessary." Multiple speakers disagreed sharply about whether the label fit Kirk and whether Talbot's remarks were appropriate for an elected official.

Those who asked for Talbot's resignation said the language eroded trust. "You owe an apology to the people that you have hurt in this community, missus Talbot," Melissa said. Several speakers also complained about outside supporters being brought to the meeting to "pack this chamber," arguing that outside attendance had turned local debate into political theater.

Other speakers defended Talbot. A Ceres resident who identified herself as an elected representative to the county party said Talbot had "done so many good things in her private life and in her public life" and urged the council to return to city business. Multiple attendees who said they supported Talbot described her volunteer record and countywide roles.

Some speakers focused on definitions and public safety. An unnamed commenter who asked to "correct the record" read a definition of fascism and cited examples from public statements by Charlie Kirk. Another visitor from Modesto said Kirk's rhetoric amounted to "stochastic" or indirect encouragement of political violence and that Talbot's refusal to attend a vigil for Kirk was justified.

Councilmember Liz Talbot, speaking near the meeting’s end, acknowledged constituents' concerns about how her remarks were perceived but said her positions were not based on anyone's faith. "I feel very sorry that there are people in our community who feel that those opinions mean that I don't respect and appreciate your religious beliefs," Talbot said, asking for consideration of her intent.

Speakers and several council members repeatedly said the dispute had dominated multiple meetings. Randy Angle, a 32‑year Waterford resident, summarized that roughly 12 people had spoken on the issue during the two meetings and said eight local residents had spoken against Talbot while four speakers came from outside the community.

The council did not take any formal disciplinary action, direct staff to investigate, or schedule a recall hearing during the meeting. Public comment was closed after the council allowed a broad range of viewpoints to be heard.