Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Residency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council to revise public‑comment form language after debate over asking for speaker addresses
Summary
Members debated whether public commenters should be asked to supply street addresses; staff will draft a revised script that asks for a speaker’s connection to the city and clarifies that giving an address is optional to protect privacy and safety.
Gig Harbor — Councilors debated whether to require public speakers at council meetings to provide street addresses. One councilor argued that addresses help determine whether speakers are city residents and therefore part of the constituency paying city taxes. Others, including council members with experience working with survivors of domestic violence, warned that mandatory addresses could endanger some speakers or discourage participation.
Legal staff advised that limited public‑forum rules allow the council to adopt reasonable time, place and manner restrictions but generally cannot require a speaker to disclose an address as a precondition to speak. Council asked staff to prepare a welcoming, revised statement to be read at meeting openings that asks commenters to identify their connection to the city (for example, resident, property owner, business owner or other) but makes clear that providing a street address is optional.
Outcome and next steps
Staff will draft language to be placed on agendas and read before public comment explaining (a) how public comment works; (b) the optional nature of address disclosure; and (c) recommended ways speakers can identify their connection to the issue (neighborhood, business, property owner, etc.). The city clerk and mayor’s office will test a scripted invitation for public comment to reduce confusion and to protect speaker safety.
Why it matters
Councilors sought a balance between knowing who is directly affected by an item and protecting speakers’ privacy and safety. The change would be administrative and focused on clear, welcoming wording rather than on a new legal requirement.
Ending
Staff will circulate draft language to council and try the new wording at upcoming meetings; the city clerk will track feedback and return with a refined version if needed.
