‘Radical’ changes to streamline Beaufort council meetings includes time limit on comments

Beaufort City Manager Scott Marshall has unveiled new rules that he says will radically change how the City Council does the public’s business and how the public participates in local affairs.

The proposed changes include cutting the number of monthly City Council meetings in half, and placing a time limit on how long residents can speak during public comment periods. Additional changes include the handling of multiple routine issues by placing them on a “consent agenda” that can be approved, without discussion, with one vote.

Some residents expressed concerns that important items could end up in the so-called consent agenda and OK’d without discussion. But checks are in place, Marshall argues, that would will discourage that from happening.

“These are going to be radical,” Marshall said of the proposed changes, “because they are different than anything the city has done before.”

However, Marshall added, the practices he’s proposing are routine and considered “best practice” at most municipalities. The changes, he adds, will streamline meetings and standardize procedures and make the City Council more efficient while still allowing adequate public input.

Marshall joined the city a year ago. During that time, he says, he’s watched meetings get bogged down because of the way they are conducted. Marshall explained the proposed rule changes to the City Council Wednesday, the final day of its two-day retreat to set priorities for 2024.

The city manager plans to bring a proposed ordinance that would implement the rules back to the council for its consideration.

Here’s the preliminary plan:

Meetings

One regular City Council meeting would be conducted a month, with a work session prior to each meeting. That’s a major change from current practice in which the council conducts two regular meetings a month, with work sessions held prior to those meetings. At work sessions, council members discuss issues more in depth but don’t vote. Formal action is saved for regular meetings. Marshall also is proposing a work session on capital projects once every quarter.

Public comment

Marshall also is recommending that the city impose a five-minute time limit for residents to comment at regular meetings. Currently, there is no limit on how long residents can talk.

With no constraints on how long a member of the public can speak, Marshall says, a dialogue with council members often ensues which slows meetings down.

Dialogue, Marshall said, is OK as long as a council member initiates it. “But public comment period is time for public comment,” Marshall added. “Its not a time for public discussion. We have work sessions for that.”

Two public comment periods during meetings also are proposed, one toward the beginning when residents can talk about items on that meeting’s agenda. A second public comment period, toward the end of the meeting, would be set aside for comments on any city matter. Currently, the council asks for public comment for every agenda item.

“It slows down our meetings considerably,” Marshall said, “and I don’t think its an efficient use of your time.”

The clerk would keep track of the time when residents speak and signal the mayor when the time’s up. The mayor, Marshall said, would be given discretion so they don’t cut off people in the middle of a thought.

“I’m all for shortening meetings,” said Councilman Mitch Mitchell, who supports the changes. A time limit, he said, “helps you really focus on what you have to say and kind of minimizes the rambling” while also being respectful of time.

Councilman Neil Lipsitz called five minutes to comment “pretty generous.”

Agendas

Routine issues would be placed on a single “consent agenda.” The consent agenda would be listed as a single item on the main agenda, but it would contain multiple items. Examples are requests to use city facilities or parks and parades and running events. Currently, the council acts on each of those items separately.

The advantage of a consent agenda, Marshall said, is that issues that don’t require discussion can be packaged and voted on once.

Going to one meeting a month means agendas will be longer, Marshall noted. The only way the city will be able to handle that large volume of work is if time limit and consent agenda proposals are approved, Marshall said.

“Otherwise,” Marshall said, “we’re going to be here all night.”

Concerns raised

Dan Blackmon, the president of the Northwest Quadrant Neighborhood Association, said the consent agenda idea bothered him. “Because that means you have to be at a work session to raise issues about it,” he said. “I should have a right to discuss a matter at the City Council not having been to the workshop.”

Blackmon also asked the city to give residents more time to digest agendas before meetings. While the agendas and supporting information are often published the Friday before Tuesday meetings, Blackmon says, satisfying state notice requirements, residents would be better served if the information was released sooner. That would give them more time to read and ask questions.

“Its a matter of freedom of information,” Blackmon said. “It’s a matter of allowing transparency as almost every candidate spoke about in their campaign.”

Marshall pointed out that the Friday release of the information was four days prior to the regular meetings.

Graham Trask, a Beaufort property owner and frequent critic of the city, raised concerns about placing multiple items on the consent agenda, too.

“If there was trust, I think it would be OK, but I think it’s an area to be manipulated if people want and that’s concerning,” he said.

Trask said he’s also worried about a crackdown on the back-and-forth dialogue during the public comment period. He’s concerned about council members just listening in the public comments, like they do at Beaufort County Council meetings, and not engaging with the public. When public officials just move on after hearing public testimony, it seems like they haven’t really listened, he said.

“It’s valuable to get some feedback and I think it’s something the council needs to manage ad hocly,” Trask said.

A consent agenda will require some level of trust in the city manager in deciding what items should be placed on the consent agenda, Marshall said. But he noted that checks are in place. Before every meeting, he and Mayor Phil Cromer review the agenda and the mayor can make suggestions. Also, council members can request that any consent agenda item be pulled for separate discussion and action.

Next steps

All of the council members said they would support Marshall pursuing the changes but they are raising some questions of their own.

Consent agendas, Councilman Mike McFee said, should contain very basic issues because “it makes me feel we have less transparency” if too many items are placed on it.

The city is not planning to limit the overall amount of time set aside for public comment, which Beaufort County sometimes does when hot-button issues draw crowds. That was a concern raised by Councilman Josh Scallate, who also says there should be flexibility for scheduling more work sessions if they are needed.

The new public comment time limits and back-and-forth dialogue will not apply during work sessions, Marshall said.

Mayor Cromer says the city may start to schedule public hearings on a separate day from regular meetings for controversial issues.