(The Center Square) – The Spokane City Council appeared split on Monday after one new member offered an idea that could severely limit the public’s ability to testify on individual agenda items throughout 2026.
The city currently allows people to testify for a few minutes on each agenda item, but the proposal from one majority member would limit all individuals to three minutes across the entire agenda.
The officials revisit their rules of procedure annually and postponed the process at the end of 2025 amid a renewed push to hold meetings on Tuesdays instead of Mondays, as they’ve done for the last century.
That was the only day that didn’t work for Councilmember Jonathan Bingle, one of the two people who represented the conservative minority up until 2026. Councilmember Sarah Dixit beat him in the election last fall; however, she joined the only conservative left on Monday in opposition to this new proposal.
“I also agree with Councilmember [Michael] Cathcart,” Dixit said during a Monday committee meeting, siding with the slim minority. “Even if the intention is good, I think it would not be done in good faith.”
Cathcart told The Center Square that he believes the idea is “egregious.” Both were responding to the informal proposal from Councilmember Kate Telis during the meeting to hold all testimony on legislative agenda items at the beginning of their regular meetings, with an open forum at the end for other topics.
As previously stated, the council currently allows public testimony on the consent agenda and individual agenda items, followed by an open forum at the end. The idea of splitting the testimony as Telis proposed would force people to compile their testimony across multiple agenda items into one three-minute slot.
“We’re not taking away in any way, shape or form, the right for a person to comment on each agenda item,” Telis said, defending her position. “We are simply asking them to be very efficient with their time.”
The officials briefly discussed some proposed rules during their committee meeting, but this idea didn’t come up until the end, after a few other agenda items. Telis argued that many cities don’t offer public testimony like theirs, and proposed limiting residents to prevent their meetings from running too late.
That rule would hold no matter how long or controversial an agenda might be, even during periods of political tension and budget negotiations. Cathcart called it a “slap [in] the face” for the community.
“We will stack and pack meetings with controversial items, and then restrict people to essentially three minutes,” Cathcart said, criticizing the idea. “Taking away the right to comment on stuff is just absurd.”
The proposal from Telis, who was also elected last fall, garnered support from Councilmembers Zack Zappone and Kitty Klitzke. Zappone argued that only a small number of the total people who testified last year accounted for most of the comments they heard, compared to those who only signed up once.
Klitzke said that two opportunities are enough and that this would be “the best use of everyone’s time.”
“State law says that we have to give a commentary [opportunity] before taking final action,” Zappone reminded the council. “It does not have to be oral testimony at all – it can just be written testimony.”
Dixit supported adjusting the process for people who can’t attend council meetings to increase communication, but argued that the few minutes they already provide for testimony go by too quickly.
Telis said neighboring jurisdictions don’t offer public comment opportunities like Spokane does, including at the Spokane Board of County Commissioners. Councilmember Paul Dillon, who represents District 2 with Telis, was not at the committee meeting. Council President Betsy Wilkerson offered a neutral take.
“We will be a laughing stock of this community,” Cathcart said. “… These are the actions of an illegitimate body, and I’m not questioning anybody’s motives, but I’m suggesting that this is a terrible idea.”
