Council seeks clearer rules for public comment, campaign activity and electronic communications

During the governance manual workshop on Sept. 30, Liberty Lake councilors reviewed draft provisions governing public comment and use of public facilities for campaigning, and discussed whether citizen comments about ballot issues should be limited at regular meetings.

Council member Kurtz raised possible ambiguity in the draft's prohibition on using public comment "for the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to any office," asking whether that would also block residents from speaking for or against a ballot proposition on a city ballot. City Attorney Sean Bouts said the statute distinguishes between using public facilities as a campaign venue and discussing a ballot proposition during a noticed public meeting: "You can talk about the resolution and that you're approving a ballot resolution supporting the county tax ... You can have that during the dialogue of your contemplation of that resolution," he said, while cautioning about town-hall style events that constitute campaign use of city facilities.

Council members debated edits. Council member Spencer warned that broad language could limit free speech during regular meetings, while Council member Kurtz proposed staff return clearer text tying the restriction to use of city facilities for campaign activities rather than ordinary citizen comments. Several members suggested simply ending the prohibition sentence after "any office" to avoid overbroad language that could be read to bar general discussion of ballot measures during citizen comment.

The council also discussed electronic communications to council members during meetings. Several members asked whether texts or emails received during a meeting become public records. City Attorney Bouts said such communications "could be construed as a public record," and that staff would propose clearer guidance. Council members asked staff to draft wording explaining how councilors should manage in-meeting electronic messages and whether certain in-meeting communications should be avoided or disclosed to the public record.

No final policy was adopted on public-comment or electronic-communication rules. Council directed staff and the city attorney to return refined language that (a) clarifies the difference between citizen comment during a noticed meeting and using city facilities for campaign events, and (b) explains the public-record implications of in-meeting electronic communication.