Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Speakers urge Raleigh council not to cut public-comment time
Summary
Dozens of residents told the Raleigh City Council that a proposed reduction of public-comment time would weaken civic participation and civic trust, urging the council to keep the current three-hour session and revisit the issue later if needed.
Dozens of Raleigh residents used the council's public-comment period to oppose a proposal to cut the amount of time allotted for public comment at council meetings.
The recommendation to shorten or limit public comment “is not just about minutes on a clock,” Robert Kortz told the council. “It's about fundamental principles of representation.” Kortz urged the council to reconsider any reduction.
Speakers said shortening public comment would reduce opportunities for sustained testimony and problem-solving from residents. “By limiting the time allotted for public comment, the amount per speaker will inevitably be reduced, which hampers the ability for an individual to contribute in the process of building much needed consensus,” Cole McMullen said. “An attack on public comment is an attack on democracy itself,” he added.
Several people referenced the Community Engagement Board's recommendation and data presented to council. Donna Bailey, a former member of the Community Engagement Board, said the board’s parameters were “unanimously adopted” and urged councilors to either follow the board’s recommendations or abandon the effort: “If you're not going to follow the recommendations of the board, get rid of it and save everyone's time.”
Speakers described practical impacts of shorter comment periods: organizers said it would hinder volunteers, mutual-aid groups, neighborhood advocates and students from presenting detailed proposals or community needs. Multiple speakers noted that the current structure allows residents who cannot otherwise access the council to speak directly to elected officials.
Several speakers asked councilors to delay any policy change until more public input and a yearlong review. Others recommended administrative fixes—such as advance presentation review and clearer notice of any changes—rather than a blanket reduction in time.
The council did not take a vote during public comment. Several speakers said they will return to future meetings to follow the issue.
