Worcester subcommittee holds remote-participation decisions, denies 5-minute public-comment proposal and advances review of conduct rules

WORCESTER, Mass. — The Worcester City Municipal Legislative Operations Subcommittee on Tuesday split on a series of related procedural petitions: it held action on statewide remote-participation extensions, rejected a proposal to lengthen public-comment time from two to five minutes, and agreed to review rules and best practices governing councilors’ conduct.

City Solicitor Alexandra Calcuttas told the committee the state’s temporary suspension of certain Open Meeting Law provisions that allowed broad remote participation was scheduled to lapse at the end of March 2025 and that the city could request that state officials consider an extension but could not unilaterally extend the state law. Calcuttas said the committee could ask state representatives to pursue an extension and provide a report to the subcommittee; members voted to hold the item to a later March meeting so the state’s position may be clearer.

On the petition to increase public-comment time from two minutes to five minutes (agenda item 3d), the subcommittee voted to deny the change by roll call. Supporters of a longer limit said five minutes would let speakers tell fuller stories about how council decisions affect them; opponents said two minutes allowed more residents to speak during limited public-participation windows and that the chair can always suspend the rules for extended testimony. Councilor Louis Ojeda, Councilor Donna Clurier and Chairperson Morris Bergman voted to deny the petition.

A petitioner asked the clerk to read Rule 15 (relinquish the chair for the purpose of expression) on the floor so councilors would be reminded of the provision; the committee discussed how rule interpretation and enforcement fall to the mayor as the meeting chair and held the petition for further consideration. Members also approved an order from Mayor Joseph Petty asking the subcommittee to review best practices and rules used in other municipalities for public officials’ conduct during and after meetings; the solicitor agreed to provide research and a report to a future meeting. The committee also held a related request to hold a public hearing on remote participation (to be considered with item 3a) and reviewed city council rules (including Rules 21, 22 and 35) with staff before filing that item for further review.

Votes at a glance

- 3c (remote participation extension): held for later meeting; action assigned to solicitor and staff to report on state status and options; roll call to hold recorded as yes by Councilor Ojeda, Councilor Clurier and Chairperson Bergman.

- 3d (petition to change public-comment time to 5 minutes): motion to deny filed and approved by roll call (Ojeda, Clurier, Bergman — yes). Outcome: denied.

- 3e (request to have clerk read Rule 15): held for further consideration; no formal adoption.

- 3f (Mayor Petty order to review conduct best practices): approved; staff and solicitor to prepare comparative report for a future meeting.

- 3g (request to hold public hearing on officials’ remote participation): held to be considered with 3a.

- 3h (review of Rules 21, 22, 35 and conduct at council meetings): committee discussed and filed the request for follow-up; staff noted how point-of-order and suspension-of-rules processes operate under current rules.

Public commenters, including David Webb and Fred Nathan, spoke on multiple items. Webb urged preservation of remote options as an accessibility and safety measure and criticized proposals he said would curtail public expression; Fred Nathan warned that increasing individual time limits could extend meeting lengths substantially. Committee members emphasized that the chair may suspend the two-minute rule for specific circumstances and that the rules provide mechanisms—such as an appeal of the chair’s ruling—if councilors wish to challenge a chair ruling during a meeting.

The subcommittee recorded a mix of approvals, holds and denials as it sent several items for additional review and research by the city solicitor and clerk’s office.