Sayreville Council Clash Over Public Speaking Rules Ends In Another Tie-Breaking Vote
A proposal to give council members more say over whether residents can speak a second time sparked a tense exchange with Mayor Kennedy O’Brien before failing in a 3-3 split.
Want to know what’s happening at Sayreville’s council meetings without sitting through them? Subscribe to The Sayreville Insider for free for independent local news and updates on decisions affecting the community.
SAYREVILLE, NJ — Should residents get another chance to speak at Borough Council meetings if they’ve already used their allotted time?
That question sparked a lengthy disagreement Tuesday night, October 13, as Councilman Alberto Rios proposed changing Sayreville’s public comment rules to give council members more authority to allow residents back to the microphone.
The discussion grew tense when Mayor Kennedy O’Brien questioned whether the proposal would undermine his authority to run council meetings.
In the end, the six council members split 3-3, with O’Brien casting the deciding vote against the proposal.
Why Rios Wants To Change The Rules
The proposal followed an incident at the September 28 council meeting when a young resident wanted to address another issue after already speaking during public comment.
Rios said he was disappointed that the resident was initially told he couldn’t speak again because he had already used his opportunity.
Under Sayreville’s existing rules, residents generally have five minutes to address the council. The mayor, or whoever is running the meeting, has the discretion to allow additional time or another opportunity to speak.
Rios wanted to give the council a role in that decision.
His proposal would allow council members, through a majority vote, to approve additional speaking time or another opportunity for a resident to address officials.
“This isn’t about getting rid of the rules or giving anyone special treatment,” Rios said. “It’s about using common sense and making sure we’re not creating unnecessary barriers for people who simply want to be heard.”
Rios also pointed to his previous unsuccessful efforts to restore public participation through Zoom.
Mayor Questions Who Should Control The Meeting
O’Brien objected to the proposal, arguing that the responsibility for conducting council meetings rests with the mayor.
The discussion became more contentious as council members tried to clarify how the proposed change would work.
Borough Attorney Joseph Sordillo explained that the existing rules give the person running the meeting discretion over whether someone can speak again.
He suggested that an amendment could potentially allow the council to override that decision through a majority vote.
But O’Brien questioned the implications of shifting that authority.
“This is the latest attempt of stripping the role of the mayor,” O’Brien said during the exchange.
Rios disagreed with that characterization.
“I don’t get why there’s so much pushback to just give people opportunity to talk, to speak, to make their voices heard,” Rios said.
The mayor maintained that he already had the authority to make exceptions when circumstances warranted them.
Council Members Disagree On What Would Be Fair
While several council members agreed that residents should have reasonable opportunities to be heard, they disagreed over how the rules should work.
Councilwoman Mary Novak said residents had previously been allowed to speak a second time after everyone else had an opportunity to address the council.
She questioned whether requiring a council vote could lead to unequal treatment, with some speakers receiving additional time while others were denied.
Council President John Zebrowski raised a similar concern.
“I kind of agree with Marion that it almost sets up a situation where some people get an opportunity and some people don’t get an opportunity,” Zebrowski said, referring to Novak.
Zebrowski said he believed exceptions should be made when appropriate, particularly when residents misunderstand the rules or have additional information to share.
However, he wanted more time to consider the proposed change and how it would affect future meetings.
Councilman Stanley Synarski also opposed the proposal, pointing to the mayor’s existing authority to allow residents additional speaking time.
Another 3-3 Split Ends The Proposal
When the council voted, members divided evenly.
Voting yes: Alberto Rios, Herve Blemur and Mary Novak.
Voting no: Michael Colaci, Stanley Synarski and Council President John Zebrowski.
Mayor Kennedy O’Brien cast the deciding no vote, defeating the proposal.
As a result, Sayreville’s existing public comment rules remain unchanged.
Residents generally have five minutes to speak, and the mayor or meeting chair retains discretion over whether to allow additional time or a second opportunity.
The debate also left a broader question unresolved: whether additional speaking opportunities should remain solely at the discretion of the person running the meeting or whether council members should have a formal role in making that decision.
Stay Informed About Sayreville Council Decisions
From public comment rules and redevelopment projects to local budgets and neighborhood concerns, The Sayreville Insider covers the decisions that affect residents.
We’re approaching 1,475 subscribers, and every new reader helps support independent local reporting.
Know someone who wants to stay informed about what’s happening in Sayreville? Share this story with them!
