On the August 6, 2026 City Council agenda, a proposed change to Council rules will make it easier for a majority to control debate and discussion at City Council. A new rule will force a vote – and majority approval – to allow consideration of any agenda item after 11 p.m.
DC-1 (26-1265) Resolution to Approve Amendment to the Council Rules
This week’s proposed rule was first suggested a few months ago at the Council Administration committee. It was introduced when all five council seats and the Mayor were in contested, competitive campaigns.
The new rule anticipates the unwanted addition of debate and dissent at the Council table as a result of elections. It is not the first time that this particular Council majority proposed a change to rules in anticipation of new members.
In November 2022, right before the seating of a unanimous Council, rules were changed to remove open public comment at the end of meetings. The first few months of a unanimous Council were an embarrassment of pre-written speeches recited in agreement or no discussion at all. In the four years since November 2022, Council meetings almost never extend beyond 11 p.m., there is virtually no debate, and the public lost a longstanding opportunity to react to the absurdity of it.
This week’s proposed rule is a control tactic, not a genuine effort to solve a problem.
Since the installation of a unanimous body in 2022, there have been 89 regular City Council meetings. Only six of these meetings continued significantly beyond 11 p.m. More than twice as many meetings – fifteen – ended before 8:30 p.m.
Below is an illustration of the length of meetings when Council last included debate and dissent and how the length of these meetings changed once dissent was wholly extinguished.
In the last four years, multiple extra presentations have been added to the Council agenda. These were added to mask Council’s failure to discuss and debate the agenda. In 2022, only the Independent Community Police Oversight commission (ICPOC) presented regularly to Council. Now, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA), the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority (AAATA), and ICPOC give regular presentations. The extra presentations have created the illusion of a substantive meeting, even without actual discussion or debate of agenda items among Council.
In the last four years, Council discussion of agenda items is typically the smallest portion of their meeting time. The six meetings that extended past 11 p.m. included an hour or less of Council discussion. In other words: none of the six meetings ran long because City Council was engaged in lengthy or thoughtful debate ahead of a vote. The meetings ran long because they were inflated with presentations and/or residents showed up to participate in public comment and public hearings on controversial issues.
If the proposed rule change is approved, a majority of Council will have the power to end the discussion and debate that is likely to result from introducing a new Mayor and new Council Member in November (three months from now). Extending the meeting beyond 11 p.m. will require a specific motion naming which agenda items will be discussed. A majority of Council will control which specific agenda items can be discussed after 11 p.m.
This week’s proposed rule illustrates how desperately a majority of Council wants the power to end debate and discussion. The “problem” of late meetings has not existed for four years. If it were to become a problem in the future, someone might point out how the inflated agenda of presentations is part of the reason why. When public debate and public participation extends the length of a meeting, that is evidence of democracy in action, not a “problem” in need of solution.