Board declines to move public comment earlier after procedural clash

Mister Sloan, a board member, proposed moving public comment up in the agenda so speakers could comment prior to votes. The motion was seconded by Missus Kern but failed after a contested debate over procedure and fairness.

Supporters argued that allowing public comment before votes is respectful to citizens who travel to speak and may have childcare or work constraints. 'It just seems fair to the people that's coming in to comment,' Mister Sloan said, urging the board to show respect for constituents.

Unidentified Speaker 1 (Chair) responded with a detailed, policy‑oriented rebuttal, citing board policies and Robert's Rules to defend the current placement of public comment. The chair said, 'The placement of public comment later in the agenda is not unusual. It is not punitive,' and stressed that Congress and other local bodies use similar practices to balance orderly meetings with public input. The chair also noted that policy 23 10 limits board members' responses during public comment and that presentations are generally not acted upon at the time unless by unanimous vote.

Other board members said moving public comment could extend staff workdays and deprive staff of timely departures after presentations. Missus Kern and Mister Coopnik argued for moving public comment to ensure public input before decisions; Missus Kern said she 'would just like to say I just think that it's the kind thing to do for the people who were coming.'

After debate, the chair called the voice vote and announced 'Motion does not pass.' The board left public comment in its current place and reiterated that changes to public participation rules may be made only by formal board action in accordance with policy.