Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings Petitions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney reiterates rules for 'petitions from the audience' and warns of Open Meetings Act risk
Summary
Pryor Creek city attorney reviewed the purpose and limits of the council petitions from the audience, stressing a firm five-minute limit and that council members cannot engage speakers during the public-comment period to avoid violating the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act.
City attorney Chase told the Pryor Creek City Council on Feb. 10 that the city attorney's report about "petitions from the audience" is intended to give citizens a structured way to raise issues directly to the council, but that the council may not engage those speakers during the comment period.
Chase said the citys policy sets a five-minute limit for each speaker and that the limit must be applied equally: "Prior has a time limit of 5 minutes. We should not go over 5 minutes. That's that's not an exception." He said allowing exceptions risks unequal treatment and possible legal exposure under the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act.
Chase explained the legal rationale: because petitions are not noticed agenda items, council members cannot engage in back-and-forth during that period without creating an unlisted deliberation. "If you engage now with the council, even if it's one of you, the council is now talking about something that's not on the agenda," he said, warning that such engagement could contravene the Open Meetings Act.
Council members asked several clarifying questions. Chase confirmed that the five-minute rule is currently implemented by the council and appears only on the posted agenda rather than in a separate city policy. He advised that the council may change the time limit but must apply any waiver uniformly: "If you waive it once, you gotta waive it for everybody." He said that willful violations of the Open Meeting Act can be a misdemeanor.
The attorney suggested practical measures to preserve both public access and legal compliance: have petitioners provide contact information so councilors can follow up one-on-one after the meeting, and invite petitioners to a future agendaed item if the council wants to discuss the subject formally. He also said that questions or testimony from people who are connected to a later agenda item may be solicited during that specific agenda discussion, when notice to the public has been given.
Mayor Zach Doyle and several council members raised concerns about maintaining decorum and preventing repeated abuses of the public-comment privilege. Councilors agreed to use a visual countdown timer to help speakers adhere to the five-minute limit.
Chase said he will prepare a written opinion to formalize the guidance discussed at the meeting.
Why it matters: The guidelines shape how residents may directly address their elected officials. The city attorneys warning underscores legal risks of unplanned deliberations and frames how councilors can respond to public concerns while protecting the city from potential Open Meetings Act violations.
At the meeting: the attorney's report appeared as agenda item 6A and prompted follow-up questions from councilors. No formal policy amendment or vote occurred that night; Chase said he would finalize a written opinion for distribution.
