Majority of Ann Arbor council members against reducing public speaking times

Ann Arbor City Council members have had some long meetings recently as they've dealt with issues that left them deliberating into the early morning hours.

Just since April, they've had meetings that have started at 7 p.m. and lasted until 3:11 a.m., 1:50 a.m., 12:55 a.m., and 12:30 a.m.

Another meeting was recessed at 11:31 p.m. and then continued four more hours — until 11:27 p.m. — the next Monday.

In addition to lengthy debates at the council table, long public comment periods have caused meetings to run late.

Some council members say they'd like to see speaking times reduced — for both council members and the public — in order to make meetings more efficient.

But a majority of council members voted Monday night against reducing public speaking times from three to two minutes, fearing that could send the wrong message to the community.

"Democracy is about giving people an opportunity to speak," said Council Member Stephen Kunselman, D-3rd Ward.

The idea of reducing speaking times at meetings was floated recently by the Council Rules Committee.

It was Council Member Jane Lumm's counter proposal Monday night that forced a voice vote in favor of keeping the three-minute limit for public comments.

"I certainly think there are instances when two minutes may be sufficient, but there are certain times when a speaker legitimately wants to make multiple points or in-depth arguments … and no matter how concise they are, two minutes is not enough," she said.

Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, said as someone who has addressed council from the podium in years past, she can assure that three minutes goes by very fast.

Lumm said it's OK if the council wants to try to limit the length of meetings, but it shouldn't do that "on the backs of the public."

The council ultimately decided to hold off on making any final decisions on council rules changes, including those regarding speaking. The council kicked the issue back to the Council Rules Committee, which is expected to come back Sept. 16 with a revised proposal.

While it seems evident now that there isn't support on council for reducing public speaking times, there might still be support for reducing council member speaking times.

Council Member Marcia Higgins, D-4th Ward, said there's even been talk about having a running clock at the council table so council members can do a better job policing themselves.

Under the current rules, council members are allowed to speak up to two times per agenda item — five minutes the first time, and three minutes the second time. The committee proposed dropping that to three minutes and two minutes, respectively, but that's still being evaluated.

Lumm said she'd rather see two speaking opportunities for council members that are each three minutes long. She feared two minutes wasn't long enough for closing arguments. She added there's been more robust discussion at council meetings lately and she doesn't want to lose that.

But there's a desire among at least some council members for shorter meetings. Council Member Sumi Kailasapathy, D-1st Ward, said she's not in favor of reducing public speaking times, but she would like to see meetings adjourn at a more reasonable hour.

Instead of meetings that last into the early morning hours, she said, the council should consider a policy where if a meeting goes past 11 p.m. it will be continued the next Monday — her thinking being that two four-hour sessions are better than one longer session.

Kailasapathy said it's difficult for people with full-time jobs and young children when meetings go past 1 a.m.

Mayor John Hieftje said some council agenda items are time-sensitive, so that would need to be given consideration if meetings are going to be recessed more regularly.

Council Members Christopher Taylor, D-3rd Ward, and Margie Teall, D-4th Ward, argued in favor of reducing public speaking times to two minutes to make meetings more efficient.

Teall said she could support a three-minute limit for speakers who reserve one of the 10 spots to speak at the start of council meetings, but she would like to see two-minute limits otherwise. She made a motion for that Monday night but couldn't get support.

"Maybe for me, it is a bit about how long meetings go on," Teall said. "And certainly that was one of the major points that the Michigan Municipal League suggested — that nobody should be making decisions at 2 o'clock in the morning or at 2:30 in the morning."

Taylor argued reducing public speaking times to two minutes isn't anti-democratic, but rather encourages more people to come speak.

He said many people have told him they don't like speaking before council because of the time investment necessary to wait through other speakers who get three minutes each.

"For my part, I can stay up late — I don't mind," he said. "I think it's good and useful to listen. I signed up for this and it's not a burden to me to listen to people. I welcome it."

But he said the average citizen doesn't want to have to wait until 11:30 p.m. to get his or her two cents in and they would appreciate a swifter process.

He stressed that council members receive no shortage of input from the public on issues between the emails and phone calls they get, in addition to other interactions with constituents.

Council Member Sally Hart Petersen, D-2nd Ward, said reducing speaking times is "not meant to be a cure-all for meeting efficiency," but she thinks it's one step to make meetings more efficient.

She said she was fine with either a two-minute or three-minute limit on speaking times as long as it was the same for both council members and the public.

One of the issues that wasn't resolved before council decided to postpone the rules changes Monday night was whether to prohibit people from speaking at the start of a council meeting if they already reserved one of the 10 spots to speak at the start of the last meeting or the last two meetings.

The idea there, according to supporters, is to better accommodate the average resident who wants to come speak, whereas right now those 10 spots can fill up quickly by frequent commenters.

Council Member Chuck Warpehoski, D-5th Ward, proposed a policy to give priority to people who have not reserved a speaking time slot at either of the last two council meetings, but that raised questions about how that would be administered or enforced by the city clerk's office.

There seems to be strong support on council for another rule change that includes adding public commentary time to informal council work sessions.

Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.