The Conroe City Council on Jan. 6 approved a resolution amending its rules of procedure for the 202426 term that, among other changes, restricts councilmember responses during the public-comment period to items posted on the meeting agenda and establishes a process for citizens to have off-agenda issues placed on future agendas.

Councilmember Marsha Arthur, who led discussion of the proposed changes, said the intent was to create a formal pathway for citizen concerns to be routed to departments and, when unresolved, elevated to legal staff and then to a future council agenda. "A citizen could ask that a topic be placed on a future agenda...if it is a property issue, it would be referred to the correct department. If this issue was not resolved, it would be referred to a member of our legal team," Arthur said. She added that council could still respond with factual information for non-agenda items and that the proposed rules would allow the council to correct misinformation by placing matters on the agenda for formal consideration.

City attorney Mike Garner told the council the changes were within the citys legal authority. Garner summarized state guidance and case law, and said a government body may adopt reasonable, viewpoint-neutral rules that limit public comment to agenda subjects and set time constraints. He also said a proposed $1,500 fine discussed during the drafting process would apply to council members' conduct, not to citizens, and was offered as a mechanism to preserve decorum during meetings.

The rules change drew strong objections from several council members and from members of the public who said the proposal curtails citizensability to raise urgent matters. One council member said during debate that if the measure passed, they would not enforce the new restriction as presiding officer. Multiple speakers called for the item to be deferred so the full council could discuss it; several councilmembers who were not present for earlier work on the document asked for more time to review.

Council voted to adopt the amended rules by voice vote; the motion carried. Councilmembers and staff said they plan to implement a public-issue management process stewarded by the city secretary and to publish expectations and timelines for responses.

Why it matters: The change affects how residents can present concerns at public meetings and how the council is allowed to reply. Supporters argued it provides a clearer, more efficient process for resolving constituent issues; opponents said it limits transparency and the traditional back-and-forth that can help resolve matters informally.

What the new rules do

- Limit council responses during public comment to agenda items; for non-agenda topics, council may provide factual information, recite existing policy or place the issue on a future agenda.
- Establish a process to route citizen issues to the appropriate department and, if unresolved, escalate them for legal review and potential future-agenda placement.
- Include rules intended to maintain order and set time limits for speakers; the city attorney said fines discussed in drafting would apply to councilmember conduct if adopted, not to citizens.

Next steps

Staff said they will develop published service-level expectations and an issue-tracking flow so constituents understand how off-agenda concerns will be handled and when they can expect follow-up.