Board amends public‑comment policy, removes references to Robert's Rules and sends additional language back to policy committee

Board members reviewed proposed edits to Policy 2310, which governs public comment and speaker conduct at board meetings. After discussion about whether the policy should cite Robert's Rules as a procedural authority, the board voted 7–0 to remove explicit Robert's Rules citations from the policy text. Members debated new wording that would clarify what constitutes disruptive behavior and the role of law enforcement in removing disruptive attendees; supporters said codifying expectations helps chairs and officers enforce rules consistently, while others cautioned language could be overly vague if terms such as "civility" or "personal attack" were not defined.

Outcome: The board ultimately adopted the committee's original edits (the items in the policy packet) and voted 6–1 to send additional proposed language—including clarifications about law‑enforcement authority and statutory references—back to the policy committee for refinement and definition.

Why it matters: The policy sets rules for public participation at open meetings. Changes affect how chairs will manage decorum and how law enforcement will be asked to respond when a meeting is disrupted. Several members favored clearer, non‑ambiguous language; others argued the committee should complete the drafting to avoid unintended suppression of public comment.

Next steps: Policy committee will review the proposed enforcement and statute‑referencing language, add clearer definitions and return a revised policy for board consideration.