Aiken City Council to Discuss Amending Ordinance to Scale Back on Citizen Feedback
On September 12, 2022, Aiken City Council began complying with twentieth century city ordinance governing citizen input on any subject related to City operations and policy. Section 2.64(a)(4) of city code, Order of Business, mandates two agenda items dedicated “non-agenda items from the public.”
These “open mic” sessions allow anybody to speak up for to three minutes on any topic not being covered in the regular meeting, with a cap of 30 minutes on the first session. The second comment period contains no restriction on total time, which does appear to be an oversight that can considerably lengthen meeting time.
Overnight, Council meetings progressed from a prohibitive process requiring advanced request to speak, to one of the most inclusive and open policies in the state, as probably intended by the Ordinance.
Agenda Item #3 on Aiken City Council’s work session agenda for June 12, 2023 is innocuously titled, “Order of City Council Agenda.” The information pertaining to agenda item the on page 359 within a 366-page work session agenda packet. The packet is dominated the updated draft Comprehensive Plan.
“Order of City Council Agenda” actually involves a Council discussion on reducing citizen particpation and input rules at Council meetings. Work Sessions rarely involve public comments or questions, only staff and council are heard and citizens are spectators. Ironically, the topic of reduced participation is addressed following 54 pages of citizen comments on the Comprehensive Plan.
The subject in the supporting memo from the City Manager’s office is slightly more specific: “Discussion of Proposed City Council Agenda Amendment.” The memo (1) states, in part,
“Staff reviewed other municipalities’ council agendas and consulted with the Municipal Association of South Carolina. Many municipalities require citizens to sign in or notify the clerk in advance.
Staff seeks Council direction with their preference on their preferred order of business of City Council agenda. Council can consider changes to other elements of the Order of business as well. Should Council wish to amend the Order of business portion of the City Code, an ordinance will be presented at a future Council meeting.”
A chart showing a listing of municipalities with more restrictive public comment periods is also provided in the packet. The chart’s accuracy is questionable, as three municipalities identified as having zero public comments periods do have mandatory comment periods within their respective city codes. The chart also fails to identify time limits for speakers. This discrepancy has been reported to the City Manager’s office.
The chart shows that many other cities have onerous requirements ranging from advanced notice by writing to pre-meeting signups, to approval to speak. For example, Anderson, SC has the draconian rule that “In the meetings of the city council, no person other than regular officers and councilmembers shall take part in the deliberations except by special invitation from the council.”
Fortunately, neither Aiken County, North Augusta, nor Aiken have such requirements that inhibit public feedback to elected officials.
Citizen Participation and Input Since September 12, 2022
At its September 12, 2022, public meeting, Aiken City Council policy on public comment periods converged with Aiken City ordinance governing public meetings. This change was reported in Aiken City Council Reimplements Citizen Input Rules, which also contains a letter to Council describing the city’s long history of citizen input periods on any city-related issues.
At issue is the ability of local residents to address City Council on any city-related topics—and which often overlap with county issues. Prior to compliance with city code that trumps city policy, requests had to be made in advance to speak and there were no “open mic” opportunities.
That all changed on September 12th after Council was notified it was not complying with its own ordinance. The notifications were immediately acknowledged and compliance with city code began.
The first “public comment on non agenda items” meeting predictably started off a little rough. The first person to speak during the new comment period, Aviation Commission member Doug Cusick, was abruptly cut off without warning at the three minute mark of his comments. Over time, speakers were given 30 second notice of the upcoming cutoff time.
During the second public comment period, Aiken resident McKenzie Morris complimented Council for the change and the opportunity to publicly raise concerns, stating in part that “since this is where I have chosen to live, I just think it’s a really cool thing to do.”
In a foreshadowing of tonite’s work session, Mayor Osbon followed Mr. Morris’ comments by stating:
“I am thinking we may merge them and just make a 4.5 out of them and just have one put on (the agenda). (Aiken City Council Meeting, September 12, 2022, 1:15:25 ).
After Mayor Osbon was reminded that a change to the city ordinance would be necessary, he acknowledged that reality and the issue did not go any further, until now.
Since open mic sessions began on September 12, 2022, numerous innovative proposals have been offered, several positive changes have occurred, and numerous questions have been posed and answered on the record.
The proposals have included improving the unsafe intersection at Laurens Street and Hampton Avenue, addressing nuisance properties in the ‘donut holes’ interface between county and city, repealing the obsolete ban on tattoo studios, and addressing the chronic roadside litter problem by establishing an ordinance requiring all restaurants with take-out service to have a single outside trash barrel.
The positive changes include a Council commitment to keep all neighborhood parks open, rescinding of the $2 youth fee to “play a game,” fixing deep potholes on North Union Street, cleaning up an unkempt city property, and creating more user friendly digital files of Council agendas and information packets.
Council has also had to hear some difficult issues, like the matter of the sale of the Mattie Hall property, concerns about Project Pascalis, Northside neglect, and the controversial Demo 200 program.
No reason is identified for the discussion on changes that clearly favor downgrading citizen access to elected officials. It is unclear whether the issue is time or a desire to reduce on-the-record feedback from constituents.
Citizen Participation in Other Municipalities
Documents for the “Order of City Council agenda” includes a table (above) showing requirements for citizen comments in other municipalities.
Four of the twenty listings—Greer, Florence, Anderson, and Bluffton— indicate an absence of comment periods on non agenda items. A review of the actual city ordinances (2) for those public bodies tells a different story.
Anderson, SC does have the most draconian ordinance, restricting discussion to only Council and staff.
But Greer, Bluffton, and Florence city codes (2) all contain provisions for public comments on non agenda items; with the only caveat being advanced notice. Florence allows for up to five minutes of comments per person. Another municipality allowing five minutes but not included in the chart is Georgetown, SC.
Aiken County Council is also listed in the chart. The county does allow only has one comment period at the end of meetings, but there is no sign-up requirement. As noted in Aiken City Council , discussions on concrete issues like road conditions, property damage, and public facilities can run well past the three minute mark, and the Council Chair makes followup assignments.
The City of Aiken can choose to maintain the spirit of openness codified in the 20th century, alongside fellow open communities like Myrtle Beach and Summerville, or it can seek to regress to a system that is more prohibitive and onerous.
Any proposed changes will require two Readings of Public Hearings in which citizens are allowed five minutes to address the proposed changes. There are likely to be changes.
Footnotes
(1) Memorandum regarding public comment periods
(2) Public Comment Rules on Nonagenda and/or agenda items for munipalities City of Aiken reported as having no such public comment periods.
Anderson SC
Section 2-73 identifies “communications, petitions, and complaints” as Agenda Item #5.
Section 2-73 states “In the meetings of the city council, no person other than regular officers and council members shall take part in the deliberations except by special invitation from the council.”
This means that citizen complaints cannot be heard in person.
Bluffton, SC
Section 2-46(a). There shall be on the Agenda of every meeting a time designated for Public Comment. Upon request, any citizen is entitled to address the Council at a regular meeting on matters pertaining to the Town. Council may regulate or cease public comment with reasonable rules and regulations pertaining to public comment and proper protocol.
Florence, SC ,
Section 2-24(h) Appearance of citizens. Any citizen of the municipality may speak at a regular meeting on a matter pertaining to municipal services and operation, except personnel matters. Citizens desiring to speak must notify the city manager in writing prior to the beginning of the meeting stating the subject and purpose for speaking. Each person who gives notice may speak at a time designated by the presiding officer and may be limited to a five (5) minute presentation at the discretion of the presiding officer.
SECTION 2-42 Public forum. (a) During a period of 30 minutes at the beginning of each city council meeting, referred to as a public forum, the presiding officer may recognize citizens of the city or others who have standing in the city, such as business owners, who wish to address council on matters pertaining to items on that meeting’s agenda.
(b.) Petitioner. Any citizen of the city or others who have standing in the city shall be entitled to an appearance before council at any regular meeting concerning any municipal matter, with the exception of personnel matters. Persons desiring to speak must notify the municipal clerk six days prior to the beginning of the meeting to be placed on the meeting agenda. Petitioners must provide their name, address, and topic to be addressed.
