Censure: Forgiveness Not An Option
On May 1, 2023, Lakewood City Council held a workshop on adding a censure policy to council procedures. The idea was prompted by using a specific word (“girls”) used in Council once, in an old-fashioned, politically incorrect way that was taken as a personal insult by some Council Members and residents. A public reprimand, which is the general definition of censure, was immediately and repeatedly tendered by individuals who felt personally offended. Those individuals do not appear satisfied. City Council is now studying procedures to publicly reprimand with the weight of Lakewood City Council in case a personal insult is taken in the future.
Sitting City Council Members have explained in public meeting that censure was removed from City Council years ago because it was being used as a political tool. Council Members who believe themselves to be targets of censure also fear censure will be used politically because they have not aligned with the majority of Councilors on a variety of issues.
Censure may also have been removed because it is not common. Lakewood Informer conducted a search of the municipal code of the 75 most populous home-rule cities and towns in Colorado. The data reveal approximately 25% of those had a provision for censure, (with 75% having no provision). Of that 25% with censure provisions, approximately 75% require a public hearing and/or investigation by a third party.
Of those that do censure, only 2 would censure for defamation. None included censure for subjective actions such as personally offensive or critical speech. Censurable acts are commonly restricted to financial misconduct, conflicts of interests and breaches of confidentiality. One city included directions for personally offensive language to be dealt with at a personal level, i.e. without government support, which is the situation that sparked Lakewood’s controversy.
Lakewood City staff provided several examples of censure provisions from other cities, including the most aggressive policies among the examples, showing options for defamation and removal from office. Discussion revealed that censure is not an effective way to change behavior. However, Council Members that were insulted from the dais feel it is important to have the tool ready, especially when residents ask Council to act on their behalf. Removal from office was not a desired outcome, according to public statement by Council Members.
Council will proceed with future study sessions before implementing a new procedure. Issues to be decided include a definition of censure, actions which may be censurable, and majority versus super-majority votes. Guardrails such as an independent hearing was not yet discussed but is common.
Example guardrail: “integrity of the council member is undermined to the extent that the council member could not adequately perform as a representative of the city”
Study sessions may be scheduled soon, judging from the rushed timing of the censure workshop. The timing of the workshop also demonstrates the power of the majority, who would not discuss priority project ideas from Councilors who are now accused of offensive behavior. These ongoing political battles are apparent in every Council meeting. Forgiveness does not seem to be an option.