For some on the council, that loss of freedom may not be worth any sense of consistency gained with strict time limits.
"I'm not so keen on a strict time limit," said City Councilman Ara Najarian. "Let the mayor feel comfortable with his authority in terms of moving the meeting along."
Currently, the mayor imposes a time limit of anywhere between two and five minutes, depending on how many speakers are present and whether the subject is an agenda item or general public comment — and that's the way he likes it.
"I don't think we have problem," said Glendale Mayor Dave Weaver.
"It has always been the prerogative of the mayor and I think it should stay there."
Rules and restrictions on how long city-council members and the public speak during meetings varies widely by city, but several have imposed strict limits, according to the city attorney's report.
San Diego imposes a five-minute limit on its city-council members, with a three-minute maximum response time for rebuttals.
The City of Los Angeles gives its council members six minutes each to debate, with three minutes for a rebuttal, while council members in Chicago have a relatively generous 10 minutes to speak at any given time.
Glendale's only restriction is that members and the public be brief in their statements and responses, a cap that has failed to keep some meetings from running past midnight.
"It's hard to say if a time limit is appropriate or not," Howard said.
Council members may also decide to reshuffle agendas to require council and staff to respond to the public during their dedicated speaking time after the public-comment period, the report suggested.
The report also found that the city is under no legal obligation to provide a translator for non-English speakers as they address the City Council, although several neighboring cities do.
