The hearing signup makes me choose support or oppose when what I want is one amendment

A state legislative committee is taking public testimony on a bill that addresses a problem I care about. I support the bill's main goal and oppose one section that gives an agency more discretion than I think the text explains. If that section changed, I would support the bill.

The hearing signup offers three positions: support, oppose, or neutral. None feels accurate. Support may be counted as approval of the current text. Oppose may put me in a total that includes people who reject the bill's purpose. Neutral sounds indifferent, which I am not.

I know the checkbox cannot hold an essay. My concern is how the summary will be used. If testimony is later described as a certain number for and against, my actual position disappears. I want lawmakers to understand that there may be a path to broader support through a specific amendment.

My tentative plan is to select neutral and begin my written testimony with one sentence: "I support the bill's stated goal, cannot support the current version because of Section X, and would support an amendment that limits the discretion in the following way." I would then quote the relevant language, describe the change I want, and avoid guessing about provisions I have not studied.

A more experienced advocate told me to choose support because lawmakers care about totals and the written qualification will still be available. Another told me to choose oppose because only opposition creates leverage. Both strategies treat the checkbox as a campaign signal rather than a description.

How do you participate honestly when a hearing system forces a mixed position into one label? Is neutral the least misleading option, or should the label reflect how you would vote on the bill exactly as written today?