Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Portal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff moves public comments to CivicPlus, limits written submissions to equal three‑minute spoken time
Summary
Planning staff removed an outdated Google comment form, routed comments to the CivicPlus portal with a 2,000‑character limit (≈ three minutes) to equalize participation, and was asked to return with recommendations on packet timing and how to handle longer, technical submissions.
Planning staff told the Grand County Planning Commission on June 8 that they removed an outdated Google public‑comment form and shifted comments to the CivicPlus dialogue box, limiting each comment to 2,000 characters — the staff approximation of a three‑minute spoken comment. "We limited to 2,00 characters, which is about a three minute, right?" a planning staff member said while explaining the change and emphasizing the county’s desire to remain content neutral.
The move addresses administrative problems: the old Google form routed messages to an employee who no longer works for the county, and staff found no recent submissions through that form. Under the CivicPlus configuration, commenters may submit one written comment per agenda item; staff said larger documents could still be supplied through the planning department’s general email or delivered as handouts at meetings.
Commissioners raised practical concerns about public notice and packet timing. Staff explained that public hearings must be posted with at least 10 days’ notice under state law, while ordinary meeting packets have historically been distributed on the Wednesday before a meeting; the commission asked staff to recommend a consistent approach so citizens can access hearing documents in time to prepare meaningful comments.
As a next step the commission asked staff to summarize public‑hearing documentation requirements and propose a synchronized notification and packet‑distribution plan at a future meeting. The commission also directed staff to clarify how longer technical submissions should be routed and labeled so that they are available to commissioners without upsetting the time‑limit parity intended for spoken and written comments.
