In response to a letter received from the American Civil Liberties Union in September, the Warren City Council amended its rules and procedures regarding public participation and citizen input.

In an effort to maintain decorum regarding community members speaking during public participation portions of meetings, the City Council voted unanimously at a July 25 special meeting to amend its rules and procedures to include strict rules for speakers and describing possible consequences if these rules are not followed.

Jerry Bell, a Warren resident who often speaks at council meetings, informed the ACLU of the amendment because he believed it represented a violation of the First Amendment. The ACLU agreed and contacted the City Council to request changes to the hearing rules.

The original amendment stipulated that members of the public must refrain from profanity, lewd conduct, disruptive comments or gestures, ridicule, personal attacks, speaking longer than the allotted three minutes or “behavior that is disorderly or likely to cause disorderly conduct.”

Anyone in violation risks having the microphone cut off while speaking, losing remaining speaking time, being kicked out of this meeting, and losing their right to speak at future meetings.

The ACLU letter focused on “personal attacks” and “behavior likely to provoke disorderly conduct” as areas of the policy it considers problematic. The letter stated that while the government could impose limits on the content of speech, those limits must be viewpoint-neutral and reasonable in light of the forum’s purpose.

The ACLU asserted that both restrictions are not viewpoint-neutral and are unreasonable.

Council Secretary Mindy Moore said the city council held a closed meeting with its attorney, Jeffrey Schroder, before the regular meeting on Nov. 12 and chose to make changes to the amendment in response to the ACLU letter.

“We had a closed session and discussion with our attorney to discuss a legal memo that was issued to council and this is the product of that,” Moore said.

The revised text still asks audience members not to speak for longer than the allotted time of three minutes; refrain from using sexually explicit or profane language; refrain from engaging in lewd behavior, gestures or comments and loud or boisterous behavior; refrain from making defamatory statements about another person by using epithets or threats against them; say or do anything to “incite an ordinary person to violence or retaliation” or engage in any conduct that disrupts, disrupts or interferes with the orderly conduct of a council meeting.

Bell said that even with the latest revisions, he believes the City Council is trying to silence critics and that the policy still violates free speech.

“The question of what is considered disruptive and what is not remains very subjective,” Bell said. “If I challenge the Council or a particular Council member on something, will it be considered inflammatory?

“I think they are trying to limit speech, protect themselves and prevent residents from criticizing them, but we have the right to criticize elected officials.”

The initial amendment was put in place after a July 9 City Council meeting in which Bell harshly criticized Council President Angela Rogensues, calling her a “defector” and implying she had used her tragedy personal to collect votes in the 2023 elections.

Rogensues cried and called Bell a “disgrace of a human being” before briefly leaving the Council stage.

Bell said he plans to speak to ACLU attorneys and meet with officials from the National Action Network to discuss the city council’s revised rules and procedures.

Additionally, Bell filed a complaint with the Warren Police Department last week alleging a violation of Michigan’s Open Meetings Act during a regular city council meeting on July 9. Bell said he was told the Warren Police Department and Macomb County Sheriff’s Office would not investigate these types of complaints and was advised to contact the Michigan Attorney General’s Office.

He said the revised rules regarding members of the public would not reduce his attendance at future Council meetings.

“I’m going to keep doing what I’m doing,” Bell said. “I’m not threatening anyone and I’m not trying to cause disruption.

“I’m just pointing out some issues that I think the board is responsible for or contributed to.”