By Bill Wichert/The Star-Ledger

SOMERVILLE — Citing the potential impact on their budgets and manpower, municipal officials have come out against a legislative proposal to make various changes to the state’s public meetings law.

Several municipalities across the state, including towns in Somerset, Union and Monmouth counties, have passed resolutions in recent weeks to voice their opposition to a State Senate bill that they claim would lead to increased costs and make government less effective.

Some of the most controversial changes being proposed include adding new requirements for subcommittees, and eliminating officials’ ability to set an overall time limit for public comment at meetings.

“It’ll require more work for any town and, for the smaller towns, it’ll be a nightmare,” said David Hughes, the city clerk in Summit. “I think it’s overkill.”

Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), one of the sponsors of Senate Bill S-2511, said the goal behind the legislation is that “the public’s business should be done in the public.”

The legislation also will make it easier for municipalities to function by being able to post information online, Weinberg said. In addition to specifying what information should be posted on municipal websites, the bill also would create a state-run site where information would be posted about state agencies and towns that don’t have their own websites.

Weinberg, who said she has revised the legislation in response to various stakeholders’ concerns, pointed out her prior experiences on the county and municipal levels. “This is not being written from an ivory tower somewhere,” she said.

In addition to municipalities, the bill also would apply to other public entities, including county government, independent authorities and associations such as the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, which has criticized several parts of the legislation.

Among the various concerns cited by municipal officials is the proposed requirements for subcommittees.

Under the legislation, municipalities would need to provide notice of subcommittee meetings that they decide will be open to the public. Each subcommittee also would be required to file at least one report with the governing body, including the number of meetings held since its last report, the names of its members and a statement of the matters discussed.

But those provisions could require additional administrative support and increase legal advertising costs, according to Denise Szabo, the municipal clerk in Bernards Township. Szabo said such additional requirements are unnecessary for subcommittees that don’t make decisions or spend public dollars.

“They’re just costly, unfunded mandates,” Szabo said. “They’re just impractical.”

Summit Councilman Robert Rubino added that when resources are tight, it would be difficult to afford meeting those reporting requirements. “Fixing something that’s not broke isn’t always the right answer,” he said.

Weinberg argued that requiring one subcommittee report was not too onerous. That reporting requirement is included in the bill, because “we have reports of towns who do a lot of business by subcommittee and the public is never aware that there is even the existence of the subcommittee,” Weinberg said.

Another contentious issue involves the public comment portion of meetings.

The legislation provides that members of the public must be given at least three minutes to speak at the beginning of the meeting, but does not allow the governing body to limit the overall length of the public comment period.

Lori Buckelew, a senior legislative analyst with the League of Municipalities, said governing bodies want public participation, but not being able to set an overall time limt could lead to filibustering and prevent officials from conducting business.

As an example, if 100 people wanted to speak at a meeting, that could mean 300 minutes of public comment, Buckelew said. “So you have five hours of public comment before you even get to the agenda,” she said.

Weinberg said she’s attended many public meetings and it’s rare to have many people show up.

Asked why the legislation does not allow for an overall time limit, Weinberg said: “Because I have the basic belief that a public shows up, the elected members of the council should allow them to speak. Limiting a public comment to ten minutes could mean that you shut out a lot of people.”