Resident urges council to drop requirement to state street address during public comment

A resident told the Oviedo City Council on April 21 that the city’s requirement that speakers state their name and street address on the record chills participation and may conflict with state and federal law.

David Williamson, who identified himself as a resident and provided his address on the speaker form, told the council: “It’s not permissible to compel anyone’s speech … to require or compel someone to speak anything at all isn’t allowed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.” He cited Subsection 4 of Florida Statutes 286.0114 and urged the council to amend its policy so meeting attendees are not compelled to disclose a street address on the record.

Williamson said his concern is related to modern audio and video broadcasts of public meetings: “The city's own broadcast of these meetings presents a chilling effect for people who don't want to publicly dox themselves … It's not possible right now to participate in these meetings without doing so.” He suggested staff and the city attorney consider redrafting the form and rules to remove the address requirement.

Council members discussed options later in the meeting while reviewing revisions to the city’s order of business and public comment procedures. Several council members said they want to preserve a way to know whether a speaker is a resident, or at least what city the speaker lives in, but expressed openness to change how and whether a full street address is announced on the live record. Deputy Mayor Brian Cobb summarized that staff will research the legal requirements and return with suggested language. No formal motion or vote on an ordinance or policy change was recorded.

Why it matters: The question touches on access to local government proceedings and on whether the municipal policy must be harmonized with state law and constitutional protections. Council members asked staff to clarify what, if anything, state law requires and whether the speaker form and on-the-record announcement can be adjusted without undermining the record-keeping the city desires.

Council direction and next steps: Council asked staff and the city attorney to review whether the city may require a street address to be spoken on the record and to return with recommended revisions. The transcript records discussion of two practical options: (1) keep the address on the written form but only require a town/city to be stated on the public record, or (2) allow speakers to come forward without having completed a paper form while encouraging, but not requiring, a form be submitted for organization and precedence.

No formal rule change or ordinance was adopted during the meeting.