Council splits on public‑comment limits, ordinance reading and ballot packaging during charter review

Councilors at a Sweet Home charter‑review work session debated several procedural items tied to transparency and public access: public‑comment time limits, whether first readings should include the full ordinance text, and how to package the charter referral on the ballot.

Councilor Bronson argued against extending speaker time to five minutes, saying longer slots "can be very, very long evenings." Staff noted that a five‑minute limit is uncommon, but some councilors said five minutes better validates residents’ participation. Others urged keeping flexibility in council rules so the chair can adjust time depending on the meeting’s size.

On ordinance readings, several councilors insisted the public should see the full text of proposed changes rather than just titles. That preference won council consensus during the session: members agreed to remove language that would allow first readings by title only.

City Attorney Larson briefed the council on ballot options, saying single‑subject constraints apply primarily to citizen initiatives and that council referrals offer more flexibility. Larson said the council could present the charter as a single up‑or‑down question or separate high‑priority items onto multiple questions; staff recommended placing the full package on the May ballot and, if needed, splitting items in November.

On wording for an anti‑interference provision, a committee member and several councilors preferred using the word "coerce" rather than "demand," citing clearer legal connotations.

Next steps: staff will return with updated draft language and options for ballot packaging; a follow‑up work session was scheduled to continue deliberations.