TAMARAC, Fla. — Dozens of Tamarac residents who spoke during public participation at the Jan. 8 City Commission meeting urged elected officials not to move the public‑comment period to the end of commission meetings or to impose limits that would reduce opportunities for neighbors to speak.

Speakers repeatedly said the proposed change — discussed at a commission workshop earlier in the week — would disproportionately affect seniors, working residents and others who cannot stay until late in the evening. Several said the change would effectively curtail the public’s First Amendment right to address the commission in a timely manner.

“Moving public address to the end of the commission meetings is totally reprehensible,” said Carol Mendelson, a resident of District 4, who identified herself as a frequent speaker. “Taxpayers have the right to come here and speak in three minutes on issues important to them.”

Kate Johnson, another District 4 resident, told the commission the proposed change would “stifle the ability for residents to speak” and noted that many consent‑agenda items receive no public discussion before votes. “Do you know how residents feel about renaming a street if they can't speak on it until after you've already voted?” she asked.

Several speakers said they travel from senior communities and cannot remain at meetings that run late. Richard (Rich) Levine, who described himself as treasurer of Kings Pointe, said his community includes about 10,000 people and asked the commission to keep public comments at the start of meetings and reconsider any proposed limits on the number of speakers or the allotted time per speaker.

Jeffrey Shapiro, a Woodlands resident who spoke on a zoning item later in the agenda, said he also supported keeping public comments at the start of the agenda because of work and health constraints that limit his ability to stay late.

Other speakers used public participation to raise separate concerns — including alleged ethics complaints and historical records — but several tied their remarks back to the same procedural issue. Sally James said she cannot stay late because of her job and called moving public comment “a thinly veiled ploy to shut down public discourse.”

Mayor Michelle J. Gomez and commissioners heard the concerns during the public‑comment period that preceded the regular agenda. The commission did not take a formal vote at the Jan. 8 meeting to change the location or format of public comments; the discussion at the earlier workshop prompted the public‑comment objections heard on Jan. 8.

Commissioners and staff did not announce any immediate changes at the meeting. During later agenda items, Commissioner Patterson, who introduced a separate agenda item about renaming a street, said she and staff would gather additional information on that item when requested by the commission; the public‑comment placement remained a matter for workshop discussion.

The public concerned about speaker access included a mix of long‑time residents, homeowners’ association leaders and neighborhood representatives. The comments record shows repeated calls to preserve access for seniors and working people and requests for the city to publish any proposed rule changes and the rationale for them in advance of votes.

Speakers and commissioners referenced the city’s rules displayed on the meeting screen; the mayor reminded speakers to state their names and locations before speaking. Commissioners did not vote on changes to the public‑comment policy during the Jan. 8 meeting.