Sisters city councilors know gadflies when they see them, and from the councilors’ point of view, Mike Morgan and Ed Protas fit the description to a T. Councilors are considering telling city employees not to fulfill e-mail requests from the pair, though doing so is a far less attractive idea than it may seem at first blush.

Council and city staff alike have earned their displeasure with Morgan and Protas. The two men, frequent critics of the city and its policies, have peppered city offices with e-mail requests for information. Responding to those requests takes time that officials think could be spent better elsewhere.

The problem has grown particularly bad in recent months, officials say, as the council discusses the possibility of raising water rates. Both men oppose a rate increase and have repeatedly asked city staff to provide information related to the proposal. At least some of that information is already available elsewhere. The two argue that their multitude of requests has forced the council to look at the proposal more thoroughly than it might have otherwise.

That may be true, but councilors’ irritation with the two men is understandable. City staffers say the frequent requests are disruptive to the city’s routine business and have become a drain on city resources. City Manager Eileen Stein characterizes the men as “serial requesters,” and it’s clear she would like to put a stop to it.

It’s with that in mind that sometime this spring the council is likely to vote on whether to tell staff members to begin ignoring e-mails from the two men asking for information, forcing them to file formal information requests for whatever it is they want. The city charges an upfront fee for formal requests, which it uses to cover costs of fulfilling them. Money not spent is returned to the requester.

Councilors should think hard before they decide to cut the two men off, however. They should treat all city residents equally, and unless they are willing to ignore all informal pleas for information, they should avoid the temptation to do so where Morgan and Protas are concerned.

Occasional — or permanent — irritation with members of the public is an occupational hazard of holding public office or working for a public agency. In Sisters, for now at least, Morgan and Protas are the source of much of that irritation. The best solution to the problem may not be as personally satisfying as striking back, but it’s a far better way for the city to do business. It’s not fair to have special policies for residents whom the council doesn’t like.