SALEM — Leaders of neighborhood groups filled a City Council meeting last night to keep a watchful eye over proposed changes to the ways the city posts public information on its Web site.

A city subcommittee has been reviewing the Sunshine Ordinance, which requires the city to post meeting minutes, agendas and other public documents on Salem.com.

But some felt the group's proposed changes have gone too far.

"What I was hoping would be more of a scalpel seems like a hatchet," Ward 5 Councilor Matt Veno said.

Subcommittee members said they were trying to strike a balance between creating clear transparency in city government and overburdening city staff with unreasonably short time frames to post the information.

After a resident last year pointed out that many boards and committees weren't complying with aspects of the Sunshine Ordinance, the city brought it to the attention of city departments.

"We got a lot of push-back because of the limited time to prepare minutes, to get them approved, and other concerns and questions," City Solicitor Beth Rennard said.

Among the changes, the subcommittee had hoped to extend the amount of time for minutes to be transcribed and posted online from one week to 45 days. The subcommittee later suggested easing the requirement to 30 days and requiring that draft minutes be made available upon request.

Resident Polly Wilbert said city staff can also be burdened when a flood of residents call city departments wanting to know what happened at a previous meeting because the information isn't posted online.

Ward 6 Councilor Paul Prevey noted the discrepancy between some boards whose minutes are meticulously transcribed and other boards that are months behind.

Some neighborhood leaders were also concerned about the subcommittee's removal of language that would have essentially banned the city from holding a meeting that wasn't properly posted on the city Web site.

Rennard said in the case of Planning Board meetings, a development could still go forward without the board's input, if a meeting near a project deadline had to be canceled because of a computer glitch or if a city worker were out sick.

The Sunshine Ordinance passed the council in late 2005 over the objections of then-Mayor Stanley Usovicz, who vetoed the measure. At the time, Usovicz said he supported the plan but was concerned it would open the city to lawsuits in the event of technical glitches or clerical errors. Usovicz tried to have language deleted from the ordinance that would have enacted penalties for noncompliance. But enough support existed among councilors at the time to override Usovicz's veto and pass the Sunshine Ordinance.

Last night's meeting stretched three hours — evidence, some councilors said, that there is widespread support for investing in tools to keep government business as open as possible.

"This issue is not about an ordinance," Veno said. "It's about transforming a lot of the ways the city conducts business."

Staff writer Chris Cassidy can be reached at ccassidy@salem news.com.