Council rejects multiple proposals to shorten public‑comment period after hours of public testimony

A heated public comment session and a series of council motions to limit public comment dominated the meeting. Many residents and advocacy groups spoke in person and online against any reduction in time, saying limits would abridge their First Amendment rights and make it harder for working people to attend. Speakers included Rachel Caballero, Blanca Parkinson, Marilena Garza, Eli McKay and others who urged the council to keep the existing three‑minute per‑speaker rule.

Councilwoman Vaughn said she placed the item on the agenda to improve meeting efficiency and proposed an amendment changing the proposed 75‑minute cap to 60 minutes between 12:00 and 1:00. "This is not about taking away free speech," Vaughn said; she and other supporters argued the change would help the council manage long meetings. Opponents — both on the dais and in the public gallery — said recurrent problems were procedural and should be fixed by applying Robert’s Rules and better agenda management rather than by shortening public comment.

Several formal motions were moved and voted on during the item: - Councilwoman Vaughn moved to amend a posted motion by striking 75 minutes and inserting 60 minutes between 12:00 and 1:00 (amendment). The amendment was put to a vote and failed. - The original motion on the agenda ("allocate each person up to 3 minutes or 75 minutes divided by number of speakers, whichever is less") was then voted on and failed. - Councilman Hernandez later proposed an alternate replacement motion that would have given residents served by Corpus Christi Water the same time as city residents, limited non‑service‑area speakers to one minute, and moved to 2 minutes if more than 25 speakers signed up. That proposal was discussed at length and ultimately failed as well.

Council members and staff heard repeated public pleas to preserve full public comment: "This will be unneeded if crafting the agenda and running the meeting are done properly," John Weber said. Several speakers asked for better written materials, evening hearing times or separate listening sessions to accommodate working residents. Council members acknowledged procedural weaknesses and said they will schedule further parliamentary and process training; staff and legal said they will coordinate additional orientation on rules and Robert’s Rules of Order for council.

Ending: No ordinance or rule change was adopted; the council directed staff and legal to provide training and to bring clearer written materials to future council members and the public.