Sharpsville school board solicitor John Reed made a recommendation Tuesday to amend a policy regarding public comments at board meetings, much to the dismay of several residents.

Reed said former board President Robert Timmerman several years ago deviated from the existing policy, which limits public comments to three minutes. At that time, Timmerman wanted the public to be able to comment freely on the teachers strike.

Since then, the board has not gone back to following the existing policy. Reed said he suggested several times that Timmerman go back to the policy, but he said that Timmerman was satisfied with the way things were.

When Terry Karsonovich was elected board president, Reed said, directors revisited the issue and Reed came up with a compromise. He recommended the board try it for a few meetings before voting on it.

The board's existing policy, adopted on Oct. 20, 1980, states that the public-comment period is to occur at the beginning of the meeting and limits each speaker to 3 minutes, with a total time limit of 15 minutes. All comments must be directed to the board president and no resident may address or question board members individually, according to a memo distributed by Reed.

Under Reed's recommendation, residents will be permitted to address agenda items at the beginning of the meeting, to address nonagenda items arising during the meeting at the time the issue is raised and to address nonagenda items at the conclusion of the meeting. All comments are limited to 3 minutes per person for a total of 15 minutes.

In addition, all requests for information -- financial or otherwise -- must be made in writing to the administration office. The requests will be answered in three business days, Reed's memo says.

The memo also notes that previously residents were allowed to speak for as long as they wanted, to ask questions of the superintendent, business manager and board members, and to expect immediate answers.

"The recent past is in violation of the board's policy, has been criticized as being disruptive of the orderly conduct of board business, and, in some cases, is violative of confidential matters," the memo says.

Karsonovich said the board is revisiting the policy and considering an amendment to make meetings more productive.

Residents did not take lightly to Reed's suggestion. Jim Gibbons made a plea to the board that the recommendation be "turned down and rejected."

"Mr. Timmerman ran a good meeting. We were free to talk. We didn't have a three-minute limit, we didn't have to submit questions in writing ... that is utter nonsense," Gibbons said. "I think this is terrible."

Resident and former board member Gerry Hanley urged the board to take a close look at the memo.

"You people are elected representatives. If we don't get answers from you, where do we get them?" he asked.

Hanley said he wouldn't have time to examine the agenda before the meeting in order to address items. Questions he asked months ago still haven't been answered, he added.

"Shame on you. I'm disappointed in the board for doing it like this," Hanley said. "It seems like you're in a big hurry to get in and out ... sometimes we had meetings that lasted until 10 or 11 o'clock at night."

Karsonovich pointed out that Hanley voted for the policy when it was first presented to the board. Hanley said the board didn't have the problems then that exist today.

Karsonovich added that he will see that questions get answered in a timely manner.

Residents were not the only ones concerned with the time limit on comments.

"I would hope people would be allowed to talk. We're elected by the public, we're responsible to the public," said newly-elected Director Donna Murray.

Reed said if the board does not vote on the amended policy it is obligated to follow the existing one.