Decorum v. Free Speech
Guest post from Lenore Herskovitz
On December 5, the Council was scheduled to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel matters pertaining to re-incentivizing City Manager, Kathy Hodgson’s employment agreement. Unfortunately, before the meeting was to begin no written materials about the topic were provided by Mayor Adam Paul or Mayor Pro tem Sharon Vincent. As a result, Councilors Able, Springsteen, Olver and Janssen voted against going into executive session.
The discussion regarding Ms. Hodgson’s contract was rescheduled for a public meeting on December 19.
The Mayor did not seem pleased about this change in plans but did not acknowledge any personal responsibility in causing the delay. The Mayor referenced the canceled executive session several times on the 19th, placing full blame on the four Councilors.
As the special meeting progressed, the Mayor repeatedly interrupted or muted Councilors Able, Springsteen and Olver.
Councilors Mayott-Guerrero and Shahrezaei praised the City Manager without mentioning any of her specific accomplishments. They both stated that they supported the contract. When Councilor Olver offered an opposing view, he was interrupted by the Mayor who continued to talk over him for the remainder of his comment. The Mayor stated that personnel matters were meant to be held in private to avoid personal liability issues resulting from making negative comments in public. It was perfectly acceptable for the two councilors to make positive comments about Ms. Hodgson to explain their support of the contract, but the councilor who opposed it had his explanation suppressed.
Mayor Paul often justifies his muting of oppositional positions by claiming he is trying to maintain decorum. In reality, he appears to be silencing the councilors who challenge his views.
It should be noted that a man named Eric Brandt (presently incarcerated for attempted retaliation against a judge) would participate in the public comment portion of council meetings by spewing profanities for his 3 minutes. The Mayor never interrupted him, presumably fearing a potential lawsuit for violating First Amendment rights to freedom of expression.
Shouldn’t our city councilors be afforded the same rights? The Mayor’s definition of decorum appears synonymous with compliance: not making waves, not questioning staff, and being a team player. When challenged, Mayor Paul responds defensively by chastising, humiliating, demeaning or simply placing the individual on mute.
As the meeting on the 19th was drawing to a close, the Mayor called for a vote on the contract issues while Councilors Janssen and Olver had their hands raised to speak. The Mayor ignored them and proceeded with the vote which was 7 to 4 in favor of the contract. Ignoring raised hands and muting speakers is a lack of decorum more serious than opposing views spoken in moderate tones.
It is time for free speech to reign so our councilors can do their jobs without fear of retribution and effectively represent their constituents’ interests