Silencing critics?
Most weddings don’t include the line to “speak now or forever hold your peace” anymore, but perhaps it should be included before each Uniontown City Council meeting kicks off. Thanks to a new set of rules set forth by Mayor Ed Fike, residents who want to ask a question or express an opinion at council meetings will have to do so only at the beginning of the meeting. The public will no longer be allowed to speak after council finishes acting on or discussing matters on the agenda as they have in the past.
Moreoever, people who want to talk about something will have to call City Hall before the meeting to be given a slot on the agenda, the mayor said.
These new rules are in contrast to meetings prior to the Nov. 10 when Fike allowed people to speak after council finished acting on the business on the agenda. The new rules are legal but strike us as troubling. Why does the mayor feel the need to severely restrict the voice of the very people he is supposed to be serving?
Fike said the move was necessitated because people were abusing that privilege by grandstanding, especially in the months leading up to the Nov. 3 election. This seems a petty reason for essentially squelching public comment. If you’re a resident of the city, shouldn’t you be able to speak your mind regardless of whether or not you have your eyes set on public office?
It’s also not like the public comment period was forcing the mayor and council to meet in marathon sessions. Usually the comments were limited to a few people and was over in half an hour or less, which strikes us as somewhat reasonable.
The move doesn’t run afoul of the law because it only states that public comment be permitted before or after the meeting – not both. However, it doesn’t take much to realize that neither method is ideal. With public comment only at the end of a meeting, no one has a chance to have a say on what was voted on or discussed during the meeting until after it is already done. The converse is that if something comes up during a meeting, you’ll have to wait until the next meeting to voice your opinion.
Other stipulations in the new rules serve the same purpose of making it harder to address council. If an organized group of people wishes to address council at the beginning of the meeting, the group has to select a spokesperson to speak on behalf of the group, which can lead to issues of who determines who belongs to a group and what the requirements are to be an “official” spokesperson.
It will be interesting to see how closely council follows this rule. Certainly if everyone in a group is in total agreement about what needs to be done, then a spokesperson can be designated. But as is often the case, city residents might have the same general concerns, but there could be a wide divergence on how the problem should be solved. And certainly, in those situations, every city resident should have the right to speak.
A good case in point is the current controversy over the elimination of jobs in the city’s fire department. While many city residents have spoken out against the cuts, there have been numerous options presented as to how many firefighters are needed and how funds could be found to fund the positions. In this instance, city council should allow all residents to speak so that every option is considered or at least heard.
We certainly hope that the rule wasn’t enacted to try and put a muzzle on residents upset over cutbacks in the department. That would be a big step backwards for the city and eventually it would backfire on Fike and other council members trying to limit feedback.
Moreover, comment is only allowed on issues on the agenda for that meeting even though the city council’s agenda usually is not posted prior council meetings. Residents can call to find out what is on the agenda, which seems unnecessarily cumbersome.
All of these changes, in addition to the five-minute time limit for comment, add up to a perfectly legal – but ill-advised – attempt to limit comment from city residents. We strongly suggest the mayor and council reconsider a return to unencumbered comment at the beginning and end of council meetings.
After all, you’d think anyone running for public office would want to hear what his or her constituents have to say about the issues of the day. That seems to be a fundamental part of a democracy. Also with the city facing possibly the biggest financial crisis in its history, you’d think the mayor and council would be welcoming input from city residents, not trying to limit it.