Town considers changing comment rules at public hearings 

Riverhead town officials are considering revising Town Board meeting rules for audience members, including potentially reducing the general comment period from five minutes per speaker to three, prohibiting signage or posters and limiting opportunities to comment via Zoom videoconferencing. 

Town attorney Erik Howard presented a draft of the modified rules at the board’s Jan. 30 work session. He said the proposed additions and clarifications to the current public comment rules are intended to eliminate confusion about Town Board protocols, as well as improve overall efficiency and public input in meetings. 

The last time the Town Board rules were updated was in 2019, Mr. Howard said, and the revision before that was around 2012. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the use of virtual conferencing, which Supervisor Tim Hubbard said “most town governments have stopped using all together.” 

The more significant rules changes have to do with decorum during regular Town Board meetings, comments on resolutions and comments on public hearings. 

Audience members who wish to comment on resolutions or any general matters relevant to Riverhead Town, according to the proposed revisions, “shall be in-person, physically present” before the Town Board. Additionally, they can speak for no more than three minutes, as opposed to the currently allowed five minutes. Speakers will not be allowed to comment on resolutions via Zoom or other videoconferencing applications. 

Additionally, speakers would be permitted to yield their time to other speakers, but must refrain from making repetitive remarks and reading from written comments submitted by others, according to the rules draft. 

“We looked into what other towns do and what’s required under New York State Open Meetings law — the town isn’t required to provide time for comment on resolutions or comment on any matter,” Mr. Howard said at the work session. “My recommendation is that we keep comment because I think the public’s participation in that is important. Many other towns don’t do five minutes; they do three minutes.” 

Council members Bob Kern, Kenneth Rothwell and Denise Merrifield, who were present at the work session, noted that limiting the amount of speaking time gives more people a chance to make their opinions known. Mr. Rothwell noted that in the past, he has been in meetings that lasted up to two hours and has seen people leave instead of waiting for a turn at the podium.  

“I’d rather give everybody a chance to speak than have a few individuals come forward for longer periods of time,” Mr. Rothwell said. 

For public hearings, there will be no time limit on public comment. However, a speaker is only allowed at the podium once per public hearing. As with resolutions, commenters at public hearings would have to refrain from reading written comments submitted by others. Commenting via Zoom or other videoconferencing applications would be allowed during public hearings.

Mr. Howard said the Department of State’s Division of Local Governments suggests that in a heavily attended public hearing meetings, town officials can consider limiting the time to three minutes, implemented on a “case by case” basis. Incorporating a sign-in sheet for speakers was also discussed to improve intake of the meeting minutes and avoid long lines at the podium. 

On decorum at regular meetings, audience members would be prohibited from holding signs, signboards, posters and banners, as “such instruments serve to distract, disrupt and/or obstruct viewing of the meeting and given opportunities to speak before the Town Board on a variety of matters do not substantively contribute to the business of the Town Board,” the draft document stated. 

The current rules read that “no member of the public shall engage in any disruptive demonstration or otherwise disrupt the formality of a Town Board meeting.” Mr. Howard’s latest draft expands upon this by saying that all speakers — including the Town Board members — should avoid making partisan political comments and “personal, impertinent, slanderous or profane remarks” directed at anyone, including board members, town staff, general public and others.

The document continues: “Any person, including recognized speakers, who makes such remarks or otherwise disrupts the meeting with loud outbursts, shouting, threats or other disruptive conduct” would receive a warning. If the disruption persists after the first warning, the supervisor or a board majority would order that person to leave “and may utilize law enforcement to enforce such order of removal.” 

Unless a person fails to maintain decorum and courtesy, any criticism of Riverhead Town policies, procedures, programs or services, as well as acts or omissions of the Town Board would not be considered improper or grounds for ejection from a meeting. 

Mr. Hubbard mentioned the most recent hearing concerning Scott’s Pointe amended application, where those who spoke in opposition — and raised concerns about unauthorized construction, town code violations and the environmental impacts of the project — were often met with boos and jeers from the audience.

“I had an individual call me the next day after the meeting saying that there were … were rude and derogatory comments made [in the audience] to certain individuals that were talking about a different position than the majority of people here were,” Mr. Hubbard said. “That won’t be tolerated either — the board can’t talk to the public like that, the public can’t talk to the board like that, and the public can’t talk to the public like that, either.”

Kathy McGraw of Northville brought up these proposed rule changes at a Feb. 6 board meeting and urged that it consider keeping the five-minute time limit, as well as continue to allow comments over Zoom for those who are unable to attend. 

“Why not be a leader on this issue, rather than a follower?” Ms. McGraw asked, addressing Mr. Hubbard. “Show the other towns and the people of Riverhead that you want to hear from your constituents, and for meaningful opportunity to make comments, five minutes is much better than three.”

Councilwoman Joann Waski, who was absent from the work session, said at the Town Board meeting that Ms. McGraw and others have “overstayed” their time at the podium or on Zoom in the past. She said it is important for councilmembers to hear from everyone in the community, and the three-minute rule would allow that. 

She added that the use of Zoom is a cost to taxpayers and since town governments are not required to use it anymore, the ability to “slice away at spending a little bit” should be seen as a positive. 

Mr. Hubbard reiterated that these measures are not intended to stop people from commenting on town government matters and any written comments that are submitted are distributed to the board members, as well as put into the record by the town clerk. 

“We’re not really stopping people who can’t come to a meeting from getting their comments being part of the record,” Mr. Hubbard said. “So many times, we have instances with issues with Zoom — we … pay two employees to be back there [in the booth], and one can handle it much easier when we’re just doing it this way.

“It’s not about following or leading, it’s about efficiency in government,” he said.