Arlington City Council\u2019s rules for speaking during the public comment portion of its meetings are changing after a recent federal appellate court ruling held that another municipality\u2019s rules were too stringent.<\/p>\n
Citizens will now be allowed to reference specific council members or city staff. Before the rule change, speakers were barred from naming staff, using \u201cvulgar\u201d language or making personal remarks during both public comments on agenda and non-agenda items.<\/p>\n
Aaron Terr, the public advocacy director for the Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression, said the change is ultimately a positive for residents who want to point to the conduct of their elected officials.<\/p>\n
\u201cPublic comments exist so members of the public can speak candidly about issues in their community, raise concerns about city-related matters and hold their leaders accountable,\u201d Terr said. \u201cI think this change makes it easier for them to do exactly that, and is a win for free speech and the democratic process.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Arlington Report reached out to city spokesperson Susan Schrock requesting comment on the changes, but she said no official was available at the time to provide one. She directed the Report to the resolution changing the rules for public comment, which was passed unanimously Sept. 29 by the city council under the consent agenda.<\/p>\n
The resolution amends the rules to comply with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals\u2019 decision in Merriott v. City of Bossier City, Louisiana, which details legal standards for public comments at open meetings.<\/p>\n
In that case, an online journalist named Weston Merriott sued the city, alleging it had violated his constitutional right to freedom of speech as well as the Open Meetings Act. The court of appeals upheld his claims<\/a> in June, stating in its opinion that the city\u2019s rules were too broad and unconstitutionally vague.<\/p>\n Terr said the ruling held that Bossier City\u2019s rules on personal remarks prohibited a large amount of constitutional speech aimed at specific members of the council.<\/p>\n \u201cIt seems like the Arlington City Council recognized that the same logic applies to its ban on naming council members,\u201d Terr said.<\/p>\n While the changes will lead to a more open discussion for speakers, Terr said he still has concerns about the rules as they now stand.<\/p>\n In the rules, speakers can be removed from the meeting for using obscene language. Terr said that there is a First Amendment exception for some obscene speech, which includes a narrow definition of sexually explicit material set out by the Supreme Court\u2019s opinion in Miller v. California<\/a>.<\/p>\n He added that officials could interpret the obscenity rule to operate in the same capacity as the prohibition of vulgar language.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s very unlikely that anything someone would just say at the podium during public comment would be obscene in a legal sense,\u201d Terr said. \u201cThere may still be some issues with the policy, but I think overall, certainly removing the ban on naming officials is a positive change.\u201d<\/p>\n The city council first passed rules for public comments in 2019, but the rule specifically banning residents from naming individual city staff or council members was passed during a September 2025 meeting, according to previous council meeting minutes and agendas.<\/p>\n The staff report<\/a> for that item stated the changes to the public comment rules were made to comply with anti-diversity, equity and inclusion federal directives, which had led to a slew of other changes to city rules and programs<\/a>. However, it is unclear exactly what language was removed from the original policy.<\/p>\n During the meeting itself, only one speaker discussed the changes.\u00a0<\/p>\n DeeJay Johannessen, the CEO of the HELP Center for LGBTQ+ Health, came forward as a citizen to say he hopes the recent level of respect and decorum will remain even with the changes.<\/p>\n \u201cBefore you put some limits on (speaker guidelines), there were some really hateful things over the last couple of years,\u201d Johannessen told the council on Sept. 29. \u201cWe\u2019ve had some really difficult conversations here, but for the most part, they\u2019ve all been respectful. Even with this change, I\u2019m supportive of this because it\u2019s a compliance issue.\u201d<\/p>\n The changes don\u2019t mean residents will be able to derail meetings without consequence. The rules still mark disruptive behavior as a removable offense.\u00a0<\/p>\n Terr said the council still has the power to enforce rules against disruption, but that there is a difference between unpopular speech and disruptive conduct.<\/p>\n \u201cI think this type of conduct is what led many city councils and school boards to adopt these sorts of rules in the name of maintaining decorum, but they have to remember there\u2019s a crucial difference between banning disruptive conduct and banning what people are allowed to say about their government and the officials who run it,\u201d Terr said.<\/p>\n Chris Moss is a reporter for the Arlington Report. Contact him at chris.moss@arlingtonreport.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n