A proposed motion during the recent Board of Commissioners meeting would have stifled citizens from speaking about certain topics at the public meeting, but that’s not the scariest part of the freedom-of-speech-dampening motion.
To their credit, the Newton County Commissioners did not vote to restrict the rights of local residents who want to speak before the board when given a chance to do so Tuesday. But the real mystery is who within the county leadership felt such a move was necessary in the first place.
Commissioners unanimously voted against the resolution that spelled out rules for decorum, such as no personal attacks or profane language, and said that the public comment forum was for items just on that day’s agenda.
That action was a violation of citizens’ First Amendment rights. Their ability to say what they felt should be done with their government would no longer be free. It would be restricted by the governing body.
The new motion stated non-agenda items could be discussed with commissioners before or after meetings, but that would be in a closed setting, offering deniability.
It is worrisome that the proposed resolution itself wasn’t the scariest part of the evening.
Shouldn’t the motion at least have gotten one vote to be enacted? How did it get on the agenda? Someone had to think it was a good idea and bring it up initially.
Citizens fought for the ability to communicate with their board from the moment they saw the agenda item. But why did commissioners not have the ability to communicate?
Two commissioners said they didn’t see the motion until it was put on the agenda. Not one commissioner piped up about setting the motion in action. The chairman said matter-of-factly that he wasn’t to blame.
No one admitted to it. We don’t know whose idea it was and that is troubling indeed. The fact is at least one member of the BOC, or the Chair, thought this was something that should have happened.
First we ask the person come forward and explain why this was on the table. Second, we ask that this never happens again.
Going forward, we would like to see the name of the commissioner or chairman who requested that an item be placed on the agenda, have their name be part of the agenda itself, next to the item.
This would create the transparency Newton County is entitled to, and prove that nothing is trying to be hidden and work toward regaining citizens’ trust.
Another way to regain that trust is better communication.
Trying to stop the communication from citizens was bad enough, but then to find out that the elected body can’t communicate between themselves is too much. This is the second time in as many meetings that at least one commissioner has said they didn’t see an item before it was placed on the agenda. In both cases, freedom of speech and Newton County’s water supply, the issues were county wide. Therefore why were some, if any, of the district’s representatives unaware of such actions being brought before the board.
We ask that when items are sent to County Clerk Jackie Smith, or whoever commissioners send items to in order to be placed on the agenda, that each commissioner and the chair be copied on that email. Most email programs can automatically populate the “CC” field with a pre-set address book, making the process take 3.5 seconds by our research.
This step is simple, will keep everyone in the loop and when it’s done enough times could even develop trust between board members. That may lead to trust from the community, and make the citizens comments period of each meeting something that elected officials wouldn’t want to be stifled.
