Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Village reviews draft council rules and a social‑media policy; public‑comment limit debated
Summary
At a work session, the council reviewed a draft rules document and an emerging social‑media policy, including whether limits apply to members or to staff and whether public comment should be capped at three or five minutes.
The village council met in a work session to review a draft set of council rules and a proposed social‑media and digital communications policy, with members and residents debating public‑comment time limits, who may speak for the village online, and how the village should respond to misinformation.
A meeting participant outlined the session’s agenda and asked staff to circulate the draft rules to all council members for review. The draft was described as largely following the village charter’s structure but still in need of council review and refinement.
Residents and council participants focused early debate on the public‑comment rule on page 13. One participant flagged a discrepancy between the draft’s statement that public comment is “limited to no more than five minutes” and local practice, which several speakers said has been three minutes. Multiple participants urged a clear, written limit; one said, “I talked and I’ve never gone over three minutes,” arguing three minutes is sufficient for brief comments, while others favored keeping flexibility for longer hearings.
Council and staff members also discussed whether the social‑media policy should govern only council members’ official accounts or extend to employees and other village staff. Speakers said the draft should clarify who is authorized to post official statements, how to respond to incendiary or misleading material, and what steps staff should take before issuing a formal village response. A participant summarized the policy’s intent as defining when the village presents facts and where ordinance‑based information can be found, while avoiding online “fights.”
Several participants said they expect staff or the village attorney to produce a clean, employee‑facing draft for council review. One speaker said they would work with staff to prepare a polished version for the full council.
The work session concluded with agreement to refine the draft rules and social‑media guidance and to circulate a revised memo ahead of the next meeting. The council moved to adjourn at the session’s close.
