Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />County Attorney Bangel advised that he had researched public comment at public <br />meetings and suggested that the Commissioners may establish content neutral guidelines for <br />the time, place, and manner of public comment with the goal being to conduct orderly, <br />efficient meetings. He read a couple of lines from a court opinion from the 11th Federal <br />Circuit Court of Appeals. (Jones v. Heyman) The County Code already provides that the <br />presiding officer may recognize persons who wish to address the Commission and, when <br />recognized, a person shall give his or her name and address and limit remarks to 3 minutes, <br />unless additional time is granted by the Commission. Regarding the order of business, the <br />Code states, under public discussion items, as follows: As a general rule, public discussion <br />items should be limited to matters on which the Commission may take action. The <br />Commission can strengthen the ordinance or can heighten enforcement and can regulate the <br />time, place, and manner of public comment. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn suggested the word "civility" be added to the Code (after order <br />and decorum) and maybe that would take care of any problems. She did not want to see a <br />lot of changes. It really had not been a big problem except around election time. <br />Commissioner Macht agreed. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge liked the idea of a procedures manual. She had been <br />complimented on Indian River County's Board of County Commissioners' proceedings by <br />people who have attended other governments' meetings elsewhere in the state. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn agreed it is a little awkward for a person to comment on an <br />agenda item when the agenda is not available until the Thursday before the meeting. <br />Chairman Adams understood that "order, decorum, and civility" was the direction the <br />Commissioners wished to take. <br />October 17, 2000 <br />