Latest news with #SenateBill2180
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Public comment periods at North Dakota local government meetings become mandatory Aug. 1
Members of the Burleigh County Planning Commission hear public comments during a meeting on Aug. 29, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) Every meeting of a public board in North Dakota will be required to hold a public comment period during each of its meetings beginning Aug. 1. Senate Bill 2180, signed by Gov. Kelly Armstrong on April 30, requires local subdivisions, school districts, park districts and water resource boards to give meeting attendees the opportunity to make public comments to the board during their meetings. The bill states public boards may only limit the comment period based on total time of the comments, the time of each individual speaker to deliver their comments, or both. It would also limit the public comment topics to the current meeting's agenda items or the preceding meeting's agenda. Sen. Jose Castaneda, R-Minot, chair of the bill's conference committee, said the law sets the minimum standard and boards can choose to be less restrictive on public comments. North Dakota lawmakers approve needs, some wants with $20.3 billion budget Castaneda told lawmakers that if someone misses a meeting, they should be able to go to the next meeting and have their concerns be heard by that board. The bill stems from concerns that public entities were not providing adequate public comment periods during meetings and were limiting comments to only items on the board's current meeting agenda. Karen Krenz of Williston, who submitted testimony for the bill, said her local school board was limiting comments that could be made at meetings. 'As taxpayers, we should have the opportunity to contribute our input during public meetings,' Krenz wrote. 'When public input is limited, decisions may not fully reflect the needs and priorities of the community, leading to policies that are out of touch with public sentiment.' The law requires boards to craft public comment policies. The policies may require that comments need to be pertinent to the entity receiving the public comments and may 'not interfere with the orderly conduct' of the meeting. Comments may not be 'defamatory, abusive, harassing or unlawful,' and may not include confidential information. Photos: North Dakota Legislature works marathon final day Castaneda said the goal of the legislation was to find a good balance between giving time for people to address these public entities and not letting the comments hijack the meeting. Sen. Chuck Walen, R-New Town, a previous school board member, said limiting the comments to the current and preceding meeting was a good balance, otherwise, 'you can get into the weeds really, really fast.' 'I see this as a good compromise to have in here,' Walen said. Previous versions of the bill would have limited comments to only the current agenda items of the public board meeting and would have required a public comment period be offered at only some of the meetings, or once every three months. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
28-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Requiring public comment period at local meetings debated at North Dakota Legislature
Sen. Bob Paulson, R-Minot, testifies in support of a bill during a public hearing at the Capitol on Jan. 24, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) North Dakota school boards pushed back on a Senate bill that would require public comment periods during regular meetings of local subdivisions. Sen. Bob Paulson, R-Minot, said he is sponsoring Senate Bill 2180 in response to complaints he's heard from around the state. Complaints include public comment being limited to once per year at local government meetings or requirements that comments be approved ahead of time or limited to agenda items. 'These things are currently happening in North Dakota and I believe it is incumbent upon us as legislators to protect our constituents' ability to redress their government at all levels of our state,' Paulson told members of the Senate State and Local Government Committee last week. An amended version of the original bill would mandate local subdivisions offer a public comment period during regular meetings at least once per month. The bill states the local subdivision may only limit the public comment period to the time of each speaker or total time of the comment period, but it may not limit the topic of public comments to agenda items of the current meeting. KrisAnn Norby-Jahner, general counsel for the North Dakota School Boards Association, said the organization and 168 school boards across the state are opposed to the bill. 'Our public board meetings are not public meetings. They are meetings held in public,' Norby-Jahner said. She added that many school boards already have rules in place to provide for public comments while also limiting outbursts so the boards can conduct their work. 'We maintain the position that these local rules should be controlled at the local level,' she said. Norby-Jahner said limiting comments to agenda items makes sense because the topics for each meeting are included in public meeting notices to ensure the public knows what is being talked about during the meeting. 'When you open public comment to items that are not on an agenda, the public did not have any notice that those discussions were going to occur,' she said. 'And we have very strict notice requirements in our open meeting laws.' She added public comments on district personnel matters could prejudice school board members who often need to sit in a neutral capacity during non-renewal and discharge hearings. The bill allows local governments to require that public comments be pertinent to the local subdivision, not interfere with the regular meeting and not be harassing, defamatory, abusive or unlawful. Comments given by the public may also not include confidential information, such as contract negotiations or information about students. Commenters may be limited to one public comment per meeting. Kory Peterson, former mayor of Horace and a lobbyist for the North Dakota League of Cities, spoke in favor of the bill. As chair of the Horace City Council, he said he allowed comments from the public and put time constraints on the speakers so the work of the council could proceed. 'Sometimes they would bring up a topic that we had not even thought about, or something we were not aware of at the time,' Peterson said. 'So those are good to have when they can be brought up like that.' Peterson said the North Dakota League of Cities initially opposed the bill because it was overly broad, but now supports it after amendments narrowed the focus. Sheri Haugen-Hoffart, a member of the North Dakota Public Service Commission, testified in opposition to the bill. By having only three members of their board, she said a quorum is present during every work session and minor meeting held by the commissioners. She said it would create an undue burden to hold public comment periods during every public meeting. When informed that the amended bill would only affect local subdivisions, Haugen-Hoffart said the Public Service Commission would not oppose the bill. Sen. Kristin Roers, R-Fargo, chair of the Senate State and Local Government Committee, said the bill will be amended further to try and provide more control to political subdivisions on their public comments policies. 'We understand why people are motivated to want something to outline how this works,' Roers said. 'But we want to make sure that it's not so prescriptive from the state, that it isn't possible to do your work at the local level.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
