The draft Code of Meeting Practice is currently on public exhibition, with submissions open until February 28.

READ MORE: Anger as council moves to reduce speaking time at public forum

The document lays out how meetings are to be run, including the public forum that typically precedes Bathurst Regional Council's ordinary meetings.

Speakers at the forum have had five minutes to address the council, with the possibility for an extension.

That time is proposed to be reduced to three minutes under the new Code of Meeting Practice, but there is an opportunity to amend that prior to the document being formally adopted.

While regular speakers are furious that they could lose 40 per cent of their time, some councillors think three minutes is sufficient.

Councillor Kirralee Burke said that people who genuinely need more time would be able to get an extension.

"If it's a really important thing to speak about, I would always be in favour of extending the time. Always. My biggest thing is listening to the community and ensuring they have a platform to speak about important issues in the community," she said.

"I think that often in history people have come and been upset about things. I think that if people have made their point in three minutes, it doesn't need to be repeated, but if there is ever a time something important is being raised I would always vote for extending that time."

Cr Graeme Hanger would also support the time proposed in the draft Code of Meeting Practice.

"I'm happy with three minutes. People have got other avenues, not only public forums, of contacting councillors," he said.

Those other means include by phone call or email, with contact details for councillors made available on council's website.

People can also lodge submissions on policies and development applications that require a resolution of the council.

Those submissions are usually included as attachments in the business papers for council meetings, which councillors receive days in advance.

While Cr Warren Aubin hasn't formally stated which way he would vote when the Code of Meeting Practice comes back to council, he did draw attention to the possibility of extending time.

"If it goes back to three minutes and someone wants to talk longer, they get an extension of time," he said.

"To be quite honest, it doesn't worry me either way. People still get to talk for five minutes if they want to talk for five minutes."

One councillor who is firmly against reducing time, though, is Cr Ian North.

"I'm not for it. I think they should be allowed five minutes," he said.

"As far as I'm concerned, five minutes has run well for council. It seems like a long time, but when someone's got an important issue and they need to talk, I think they should be allowed to have their five minutes."

Kent and Dianne McNab, residents staunchly against a reduction of time, said they plan to speak at the forum on February 16 about the issue.

They are speaking to at least 15 other people who might also address council or write submissions.

** NOTE: An earlier version of this story said speakers have had four minutes to address council. It should have said five minutes and thus has been amended.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can access our trusted content: