The Bronx Community Board 11 bylaws committee met virtually and discussed proposed amendments to its bylaws covering how the board handles public gallery sessions, committee composition and reporting requirements. The committee leader said the panel did not have a quorum and that members would discuss items informally and bring them to leadership and the full board for further action.

Why it matters: the proposals touch on public participation (how and when residents may sign up to speak), transparency (whether the district manager must file a monthly written report and whether minutes are published), and internal governance (committee limits, terminology and investigative committee timelines). Any change to these rules would be voted on by the full board before becoming binding.

Key proposals discussed included a 36-hour advance registration requirement to have speakers listed on the agenda, an option to allow some in-person sign-ups at the meeting, and a 30-minute cap for the gallery session with various suggested speaker limits (examples discussed included 5, 8, 10 or 15 speakers). Committee members also reviewed non-substantive wording changes (for example, using "board chair" rather than "chairperson") and more substantive items such as timelines and naming for an investigative committee created last year.

On public participation, some committee members favored keeping a 36-hour registration window so board members could prepare and coordinate public speakers. Others said having an in-person sign-up option at the meeting retained access for people without online access. One compromise discussed was keeping the 36-hour requirement for listing speakers on the agenda while allowing a small number of in-person sign-ups at the meeting so late-arriving speakers could still register.

Several public commenters objected to any rule that would reduce access to speak. A resident told the committee, "You're negating public input because you don't want criticism," and said limiting gallery time gave the impression of silencing residents. Community members urged clearer publication of minutes and timely agendas so the public can follow committee work.

The committee also debated a proposed removal of a requirement that the district manager publish a monthly written report on District Service Cabinet actions and issues affecting the community. David Levitt, who identified himself as a Community Board 11 member, said, "The report is an important milestone for the district manager so that we know what he's doing and when he's doing it," and urged separating that change for full discussion and vote. The district manager (name not specified in the transcript) responded that the report requirement was never consistently enforced and noted workload and ongoing personnel matters.

Legal and procedural context came up repeatedly. Committee members said they checked local "open laws" and could not find a city or state rule that requires a particular gallery-session registration deadline; one member summarized: leadership is responsible for setting the agenda and the order of speakers. The borough president's office had provided a recommendation on the matter, and the committee said it would consult leadership and the borough president's office as part of the process.

No formal votes were taken because the committee lacked a quorum. The group agreed to bring the proposed amendments to the leadership committee and to present them to the full board; the committee leader said a trial of the proposed signup approach would be tested at the next full board meeting. The meeting ended without formal action.

What’s next: the bylaws committee will meet again when a quorum is available, leadership will review the proposed language, and the full board will receive materials in advance of the meeting so members and the public can review proposed changes before a vote.

Quotes in this article are taken from the committee meeting transcript and attributed to speakers as identified in committee records and the meeting record.