Board backs off proposed changes to speaker guidelines
By Joann Groff joann@theacorn.com

After taking some heat over a proposal that would limit speaking time and ban yielding of time at school board meetings, the Conejo Valley Unified school board has backed off, making few changes to the current protocol.

At the Aug. 21 meeting, the board discussed making the following changes: limiting each speaker to three minutes, capping the total time spent on an issue at 20 minutes and prohibiting speakers from yielding their time to others.

Although Superintendent Mario Contini initially told the Acorn that the changes would require "no real amount of discussion," the board did address the proposal after several speakers reacted negatively to the changes.

At last week's meeting Contini said the board always intended to discuss the proposal. And after receiving "guidance" from the other board members, few changes were made to the existing rules.

As before, speakers will have three minutes per comment, which is just a clarification of the normal protocol.

Speakers can still defer their time to others; however, they must approach the podium and announce to whom they are yielding their time. Six minutes total should be adequate, the board said.

Also, the board may restrict total time dedicated to an agenda item, but there is no 20-minute cap.

"Rather than have a hard and fast number, which is not what it was but what it looked like," Contini said, "we are just saying a reasonable total time."

The only change in the typical process will be having speakers fill out one of three colored forms rather than the white comment cards of the past.

Speakers wishing to speak on an agendized item will pick up a green form. The blue forms are for major topics, usually as part of a public hearing. And yellow forms are provided for those who want to express their opinions in writing but don't want to speak.

Public hearing forms can be picked up during the hearing, while public comment cards need to be turned in before comment time begins.

The changes come after residents and board member Mike Dunn expressed disappointment with the original proposal.

"The changes will lead to criticism and embarrassment directed towards the school board," Dunn said last month. "The public will rightly perceive these changes as an arrogant attempt to censor public comments and suppress freedom of speech." He said he was "very pleased" with the new plan.