El Paso City Council adopts new meeting rules giving public choice on when to speak; amendment allows comment at 10 a.m. or when items are heard

The El Paso City Council on May 13 adopted revised rules of order for council meetings that schedule public comment on consent and regular agenda items at 10 a.m., with an amendment allowing speakers to choose whether to speak at that 10 a.m. slot or when the specific agenda item is heard.

The change, which the council said is intended to give predictability to people who sign up to comment, passed as amended 7–1. Representative Limon cast the lone no vote. An earlier amendment — moved by Representative Acevedo and seconded by Representative Limon — to explicitly allow the public the choice of speaking at 10 a.m. or at the time an item is heard passed 5–3 before the final adoption.

City staff explained the package of updates to the rules as an effort to streamline meeting structure and to consolidate public-comment procedures. Carla Nieman, who presented the staff briefing, told the council the draft modernizes the meeting order, clarifies virtual-attendance deadlines and revises the council'public conduct exhibit that spells out permissible speaker behavior.

Nieman summarized the principal changes: public comment on consent and regular agenda items will be scheduled at 10 a.m.; call to the public (for items not on the agenda) will occur immediately after that public-comment block and remain subject to the existing 60-minute aggregate limit; public hearings (for example, zoning and tax-rate hearings) retain separate comment periods when those items are heard. Nieman also reviewed limits on members'speaking times and the virtual-attendance rules.

Representative Canales, who filed public remarks to correct what he described as misinformation in local reporting, argued the revisions do not reduce speakers'time: "The 60 minute time limit only applies to call to the public, and it has always been 60 minutes," he said. Canales said the policy gives predictable morning access for people who would otherwise wait through the day for their turn.

Representative Maldonado Rocha, one of the item's sponsors, said the changes were never intended to restrict public input and emphasized they were designed to reduce the burden on speakers who currently may wait many hours to be heard. "I feel that it's better when somebody knows it goes in order," she said, citing staff data showing extended waits at prior meetings.

Opponents said moving public comment to a fixed early time could reduce the influence of testimony because speakers would no longer be commenting immediately before votes. Several council members and members of the public urged clarity around how speakers who sign up on multiple items would be handled; staff said the rules allow a person to sign up for multiple agenda items and clarified how time would be managed.

The council also adopted an exhibit defining disruptive behavior and giving the mayor authority to warn and, if necessary, remove speakers who use abusive or obscene language or otherwise disrupt the meeting. The rules retain the existing per-speaker three-minute limit for public comment and the existing 60-minute aggregate limit for call to the public.

The adopted rules are scheduled to take effect on May 27, 2025. Council members said they will monitor the change and may return to the rules if adjustments are needed.

Votes and next steps: Representative Acevedo's amendment giving speakers the choice to speak at 10 a.m. or at the item passed 5'3; the final adoption of the rules as amended passed 7'1. The rules will be enforced by the mayor and the city clerk/parliamentarian; staff will publish the clarified procedures and will make operational adjustments to virtual-attendance notices and the public-comment sign-up process.

Community context: The debate followed several weeks of public discussion and reporting. Speakers in the council's public-comment period reiterated both sides of the question: some urged predictability for constituents who cannot wait all day; others insisted testimony should be heard immediately before the vote so it can inform council deliberations.