Decatur council limits public comment during work sessions as residents press police oversight

The presiding officer of the Decatur City Council announced that public comments will no longer be allowed during council work sessions and outlined new limits for formal council meetings, drawing strong objections from residents who said the change undermines public accountability and called for police oversight reforms.

Councilmember Jacob, the presiding officer, told the meeting that “there will be no public comment period during work sessions,” saying the sessions are intended for council and staff discussion and that public comment will continue at formal meetings under the existing structure. He cited the Alabama Open Meetings Act while explaining that the law guarantees the public the right to attend meetings but does not require that the public be allowed to speak.

The change’s proponents said it preserves the intended purpose of work sessions; opponents said it will silence residents. “I get anxiety when I come in here now,” resident Lisa Bradley said during the public-comment period, adding that she is grieving and disappointed that city leadership has not reached out to families affected by recent police incidents. Bradley and several other speakers urged the council to create permanent civilian oversight, with one commenter asking, “Police advisory board, where do we stand on that?”

Councilmember Jacob told the chamber the presiding officer implemented the new rule based on practices in other cities and said the council can vote to change the procedural ordinance if members wish. He explained the adjustment is administrative and can be revisited: “If the council wishes to change that matter, they’ll have to vote,” he said.

Several residents framed the change as part of a broader accountability concern after recent high-profile police incidents. One public commenter pressed the council to denounce alleged misconduct and to act on recommendations for a police advisory board. Another asked for clarity about how and when allegations are referred to the city’s revenue or enforcement divisions, noting perceived gaps in enforcement of permit conditions for events serving alcohol.

The council did not adopt a formal ordinance at this meeting to remove public comment from the procedural code; the presiding officer’s direction took effect for work sessions. Councilmembers discussed the possibility of putting any procedural change to a formal vote under the city’s procedural ordinance. Several residents repeatedly urged immediate independent action on police oversight, including establishing a police advisory board with membership and scope to be determined by the council.

The public reaction included repeated calls for elected officials to use their authority to denounce perceived corruption, and several residents said they would press the issue in the coming months. The council’s presiding officer said he would work with other council members and the city attorney to determine next steps if the council wishes to take formal action.