In response to discussion about and a decision to increase the number of public-comment periods in a Jordan City Council meeting, more than a dozen citizens turned out Monday night to talk to or watch the council in person.

One citizen warned the council that its seats would be targeted during next year's election.

Another shamed the council for apparently failing to serve the residents of Jordan.

A handful of those who attended gave opinions about the change from having one period for public comment near the beginning of each meeting to adding a second public-comment meeting near each meeting's conclusion. Mayor Pete Ewals had suggested that the public be asked to make comments during time that generally had been reserved for council discussion. 

Joshua Hein of Jordan said he expects to be heard before the council votes.

"All of you are not elected to make decisions for us. You're elected to make decisions with us," he said. "What we say should influence all your decisions."

Hein promised no shortage of candidates in the 2010 election. Seats held by Jeremy Goebel, David E. Hanson, and Jeanne Marnoff will be on the ballot. 

Carl Day of Jordan thanked the mayor for trying to allow public comment during the time at which an issue appears on the council agenda. The council instead voted 5-1 to add the second public-comment period and otherwise only allow public comment on a case-by-case basis at the consensus of the council.

"I took it as a direct insult," Day said, "not only to me but to the people of Jordan."

Thom Boncher of Jordan offered his recollection of the early November meeting. He said one councilmember talked about teamwork. "No mention was made of how the public fits into the team," he added.

Boncher said the other councilmembers: made little or no comment; said the public treats meetings as social events; basically called the mayor a liar; wasn't there and so was off the hook; and was more concerned about disrespecting "important invited guests" than disrespecting citizens they represent.

Hanson said the second public-comment period is meant not as "simply a wrap-up of what we've discussed," which might be meaningless, but as a time when citizens can offer reflective comments, say what they didn't get to say earlier, make and bring up questions that occurred to them during the meeting. Boncher made three requests for information during the end-of-the-meeting public-comment period.

Shaw said it is largely unorthodox among cities to have public comments throughout a meeting, the format for which the mayor advocated.

"Most of them are going to offer it one time," Shaw said. "Many of them offer it only once a month."

He said he doesn't need to have the same person come to the microphone twice during the same meeting, though, just to tell the council again that she disagrees. 

"We represent all the citizens, not just the vocal ones that are at the meeting," Shaw said.