Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Meetings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Margate resident urges commission to allow public comment on individual consent-agenda items
Summary
At the Jan. 22 Margate City Commission meeting, a resident urged the commission to amend its rules so members of the public can comment on each consent-agenda item rather than being limited to a single three-minute public-comment period. City Attorney David Tulsa said the agenda already allows comment during the public discussion portion.
A Margate resident told the City Commission on Jan. 22 that the commission’s current meeting rules limit public input on consent-agenda items and asked the commission to amend the rules so people can speak about each consent-agenda item before the vote.
The resident, speaking during the meeting’s public discussion period, said the commission’s schedule of meetings and its rules “limit the public’s ability to provide public comment” and asked the commission to “amend the proposed rules of procedure to allow the public to comment on each consent agenda item.” The speaker described the current procedure as permitting only “3 minutes to comment on all the consent agenda, plus anything else” and called that insufficient.
City Attorney David Tulsa responded during the public-discussion exchange, saying the agenda itself states that “anyone wishing to comment on any matter relating to city business or on any item on the consent agenda should approach the podium now. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes.” Tulsa said that the public “certainly have the opportunity to speak on consent agenda items prior to you voting on the consent agenda.”
The exchange clarified procedural differences between commenting during the general public-comment portion of the meeting and commenting after an individual consent-agenda item is pulled for separate consideration. Tulsa noted that if a member of the commission removes an item from the consent agenda, it is considered separately and can then be discussed at that time.
The resident asked the commission to change the rules to guarantee a public comment opportunity for each consent-agenda item; commission members did not indicate a vote or direction to staff on changing the rules during the meeting. The record shows the matter was raised in public comment only.
The commission’s printed agenda language and Tulsa’s statement provide the existing operational framework: citizens may speak about consent-agenda items during the public discussion section, subject to the three-minute limit, or ask a commissioner to remove an item from the consent agenda for separate consideration, after which public comment on that item can occur.
No formal action or vote to change the rules occurred during the Jan. 22 meeting. The commission did not announce follow-up steps on amending the rules during the meeting.
Evidence for this report is drawn from public-comment remarks and the city attorney’s reply during the Jan. 22 public discussion.
