Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Procedure Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Irving planning commission debates public‑comment limits and ex parte reporting; staff to draft rule changes
Summary
Commissioners discussed proposed edits to Planning and Zoning Commission rules including ex parte communication guidance, reducing public‑comment time in work sessions, and changing rule‑suspension from unanimous to majority vote. Staff will draft redlines for future consideration.
At a lengthy work‑session discussion June 2, commissioners debated revisions to the Planning and Zoning Commission’s rules of procedure, focusing on ex parte communications, public‑comment time limits and whether suspending rules should require unanimous consent.
Commissioner Denny (presenting a proposed revision) said the ex parte communications provision in the current rules read overly broad and could require reporting of routine, benign contacts; he proposed language that emphasizes awareness of the Texas Open Meetings Act and allows staff to supplement case information as needed. Several commissioners expressed support for narrowing mandatory reporting and clarifying staff responsibilities.
A sustained debate addressed public‑comment time. Commissioners compared the commission’s current longer time limits to the city council’s three‑minute default for non‑public‑hearing items and discussed applying a three‑minute public‑hearing default and a shorter time for work‑session comments (one commissioner proposed one minute for work sessions). Several commissioners favored retaining flexibility to reduce time when large numbers of speakers are signed up; others emphasized the commission’s role as a forum to build a public record for council review and cautioned against unduly restricting speakers.
Commissioners also expressed concern about the current rule that requires unanimous votes to suspend rules or shorten public‑comment time mid‑meeting. Multiple commissioners indicated a preference to change that requirement to a majority vote. Staff advised that procedural edits can be drafted and brought back with redlines for formal adoption; staff said they would prepare revisions for the commission to consider at a future meeting.
No rule changes were adopted at the June 2 work session. Commissioners generally agreed staff should prepare draft language implementing the ex parte revisions and the change from unanimous to majority on rule suspension; they also asked staff to return with options for public‑comment time limits and mechanisms to manage very large speaker lists.
