Resident files open‑meetings complaint, urges separate public comment on consent items

Steve King, who identified himself as representing Comfort and Gardens, told the Livonia City Council on May 4 that the council’s use of a combined consent agenda prevents meaningful public input and amounts to “a direct violation of the open meetings act.” King said he was prevented from speaking on multiple consent‑agenda items and formally requested that the council allow individual public comment for consent items or let residents request items be pulled for separate public comment before a vote.

At the study session, King told the council: “If multiple decisions are being made, the public must have a fair opportunity to address those decisions in a meaningful way.” He added that he intends to file a formal complaint with state authorities.

Councilmember McCullough and others responded during the meeting that the rules the council uses treat the three‑minute public comment allotment as per speaker, not per consent item, and that the council has an established process to pull consent items to allow separate discussion. McCullough urged audience members who want separate consideration to “come up and ask one of us politely” to pull an item, saying a pulled item can receive separate public comment and debate.

City counsel (Sydney) clarified that items removed from a consent agenda are considered separately and that study sessions offer an opportunity for more detailed review of items before the formal vote. Several council members said the contested items will appear on the council’s May 18 consent agenda, where members can again decide whether to pull any item for further discussion.

The study session did not include a vote on the matter; King’s complaint and the council’s process recommendations were the most recent developments. The council’s next regularly scheduled meeting, at which the May 4 items will be formally voted on, is May 18.