Bruceville-Eddy workshop outlines new meeting flow to preserve public comment while adding structure

Lawrence Katrone, the city administrator, opened a workshop in Bruceville‑Eddy to draft the city’s first formal parliamentary procedure and to review Texas open‑meetings guidance for public comment. "Our workshop will be on crafting the city's first parliamentary procedure," he told attendees, and asked participants to help produce exhibits the council can review.

The workshop centered on how the city should handle public comment and member‑public exchanges during agenda items. Staff walked through relevant language in the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA), read guidance from the Texas Municipal League and an Attorney General opinion, and noted an existing city ordinance that limits non‑agenda presentations to five minutes while allowing the presiding officer discretion to extend time.

Attorney Mike, who advised the group during the session, summarized legal limits and risks. He warned that informal gatherings of multiple council members can create a prohibited "walking quorum" under TOMA and urged care with social‑media exchanges. He recommended a practical meeting flow intended to preserve public voice while keeping meetings orderly: a thorough staff presentation, council questions, public speakers who have signed in, then a motion and council deliberation; if discussion produces new information, the mayor may briefly reopen the floor for short (proposed two‑minute) audience clarifying questions before a vote. "The format would be that you would start with a public comment ... then the first part of that is after you read it ... is for a presentation," Mike said.

Residents repeatedly said recent meetings left them frustrated and without a meaningful chance to question officials during deliberation. James E. To Tower, who identified himself and described decades of local civic service, urged the council to allow public exchanges during consideration of agenda items so the public can "deliberate with their elected officials." Others said they preferred the staff‑presentation‑then‑public‑comment model but asked that the public retain the ability to ask short clarifying questions if new information emerges while council members are discussing an item.

City staff also showed a sample public‑comment card and the current website posting; attendees suggested changes so sign‑up cards indicate whether a speaker wants to comment during the public‑comment block or at a specific agenda item. Staff said it will encourage sign‑ups and push agenda packets to the public in advance.

Next steps: staff and counsel will prepare written options — described in the workshop as Exhibit A, B and C — that reflect the proposed flow and rules. The group discussed making the core meeting flow a resolution or procedural policy and keeping enforceable conduct provisions in an ordinance. Those drafts will be presented to the council at a future regular meeting for adoption or amendment.

No formal votes were taken at the workshop; attendees agreed the draft language will return to council for decision.