Back on December 15th, I had a post about allowing public comment at our Select Board meetings, tonight I had an opportunity to raise the issue and I moved that the Select Board change their policy on hearing from the public. Unfortunately, I did not have a copy of my post with me but I think that ...
...I got the general idea in my motion to change the policy. Happily I think, the motion was seconded and passed. I will try to remind the chair from now on about this policy and ask him to follow it. The policy is roughly the same as at this link.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Public Input at Select Board meetings redux
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
16 comments:
Bill thanks for representing the people. Last night Mr. Carney and Ms. Dias claimed as they have in the past, that the reason the Select Board stopped allowing the public to speak was because they were not always prepared for the questions or didn't have all the information. Since public input can only pertain to agenda items, you made an excellent point that if the Select Board doesn't have all the info regarding an agenda item, they shouldn't be voting on it in the first place. Well done!
i believe mr. carney and ms dias was stating that people would be coming in to discuss items not on the agenda. Sorry you didnt comprehend that mr trimble
Easy way to solve questions of not being prepared to discuss items not on the agenda would be to state that the item in question will be placed on the following week's agenda-giving the board time to research and the public an oppotunity to get their issue considered. Seems straight forward enough of a proposal.
I did comprehend their point, but I think they missed a salient part of the motion I made which is this,
"After a motion is moved and seconded by the Select Board but before taking a vote, the chair will inquire whether any member of the public in attendance wishes to speak on the motion before the board"
I hope that if someone rises to speak about something other than the motion under consideration the chair will rule them out of order and ask that they stop.
That said, I also hope that the chair would ask what it is the person wants to bring up and then ask to have that put on the agenda for the next meeting.
Let's face it, the old board didn't want public input. They would often put something on the agenda, DPW for example, then not allow public comment until after the DPW administrator left. Of course anything at that point that they didn't want to hear got the old "but Mr Hickox is not here to answer the question."
Don't understand why Michaud voted against public input last night. If he is against it, why did he let that guy speak last night? It was just a bunch of nonsense and he wasn't on the agenda.
Ms. Dias initiated a time for public input several years ago and it was continued for quite some time. It was ended when the speakers refused to stay on topic, were verbally abusive and often spoke over the chairperson. I think having some guidelines for input is a good idea, but to imply that Ms. Dias or Mr. Carney do not want input is misleading at best.
I only stated what Mr. Carney and Ms. Dias said themselves. Mr. Carney and Ms. Dias have said at previous meetings when the issue was brought up by Mr. Trimble that they did not want public input. Ms. Dias clearly stated that they had tried it in the past and it didn't work out. She and Mr. Carney can also be heard saying on DCTV that the board already voted not to allow the public to speak and they did not want to change that decision.
At the School Committee meetings, McDonald had a public comment policy passed which allows public comments on agenda items before the board. He had 2 seperate policies, one which allowed a cpmment period before the meeting to begin and the current on in use. So far, it has worked and kept the discussion on point. I think there are some issues which comments may not be taken which would be trip and fund raising requests. Budgets, some resolutions, policy discussion and presentation, I think, have been the focus of public comment. Whether it continues after his chairmanship will remain to be seen.
The teachers' union has the S-T in their pocket. If any candidate is more likely than their opponent to want to increase taxes for the purpose of increasing school funding, they will receive the S-T endorsement. The S-T will undoubtedly back Stone for this reason. I can't wait to see how they can possibly spin it enough to come up with a reason to back Carney over Gracie. They may have to remain neutral in that race.
I have watched many meetings in the past few months where Ms. Dias said she did not want public comments made."We already voted no on that" was her comment many times. That was after Mr. Trimble would bring it up at the end of the meeting. When people make the effort to go to the meeting so that they can speak, the should be able to speak. I'm glad this was finally put to a vote. Mr. Trimble, thank you for bringing it up again. If you had not done that, I bet the public would still have to submit their questions a week in advance!
Thanks Bill, the public wants and needs to be heard.
Bill,
I didn't know that much about you last year but I voted for you after watching the Rotary Club's get to know the candidates event. You are proving to be an excellent choice that just keeps getting better. I am wondering what you think of the current field of candidates.
The Select Board should accept open comment on issues at hand, not just about a specific vote. This is limited democracy the new rule. This alteration in policy happened because the elderly and a few parents complained about the lack of streetlights in busy areas where car accidents occured, crime was prevalent (remember the drive bys last year) and adolescents or children walked the neighborhoods. The lights out decision because the override failed was the world's most narrow minded decision and the people voiced this clearly. Ms. Mclean kept interrupting the public to derail them and did not give people the chance to speak, she closed discussion after less than 2 mins. Ms. McLean was not happy with the open criticism and she kept yeah yeah-ing the elderly and being dismissive, nobody was out of order or speaking for greater than minutes. This is the truth and the reason behind the silly no public input policy now. A lot of young citizens don't attend Select Board meetings now and about 6 elderly citizens left disgusted. So they got their wishes less involvement and less public to care about decision making.
Public inquiry, questions and opinions should be heard in America. This can be done for all in 5 minutes for a period of 30-45 minutes.
The fact is our Select Board is not for the people. The Slect Board is for their own politics and desires. Not a selfless Board, does such a thing even exist? Downer. No Lama quote will help Bill.
As long as we keep trying. We have made inroads in our ability to speak, thanks to Bill. Now we will have to take advantage of the opportunity, and make our thoughts known and voices heard, or the SB will think everything's just ducky, if no one speaks out on anything.
The Board adopted the policy at Mrs. Dias' request, I think, at one SB meeting after Kathleen Horan McLean lost it with Ellen Hamilton!
If I remember right, too, they made the policy that the public can speak, only if they get put on the agenda, tell MG what they want to speak about, and give him/Board members any paperwork they have and will be referring to before the meeting so the SB can study it. No surprises. Not a bad idea, but I don't always see people following it.
The problem with no ability to make spontaneous comment is that ideas and questions arise while decision making is happening. Waiting two weeks til next meeting is too late, the change or discussion is already done or final. There has to be some middle ground.
Post a Comment