{"id":2435,"date":"2011-01-29T11:26:09","date_gmt":"2011-01-29T16:26:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2011\/01\/celebrate-citizen-participation-john-s-quarterman.html"},"modified":"2011-01-29T11:26:09","modified_gmt":"2011-01-29T16:26:09","slug":"celebrate-citizen-participation-john-s-quarterman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2011\/01\/celebrate-citizen-participation-john-s-quarterman.html","title":{"rendered":"Celebrate citizen participation –John S. Quarterman"},"content":{"rendered":"A message to the only elected\nbody in Lowndes County that represents the entire county.\nI’ve added a few links, and otherwise what you see is\nthe suggestions I sent to the Commissioners and the County Clerk\nThursday after\n\noffering them Tuesday.<\/a> -jsq\n
\n\n<\/a>\nFrom: John S. Quarterman\n
\nSent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:40 PM\n
\nTo: Commissioner@lowndescounty.com\n
\nCc: Paige Dukes\n
\nSubject: Policies and Procedures for Citizens Wishing to be Heard\n

\nDear Commissioners,\n

\nAt your most recent meeting I mentioned I had a few suggestions\nabout your new Policies and Procedures for Citizens Wishing\nTo Be Heard, and at least one of you has indicated he would\nlike to see them, so here they are.\n

\n“2. A maximum of 10 persons shall be allowed to speak at any meeting.”\n<\/blockquote>\nI think that number is too low. On the one hand,\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n
\nI’ve never heard\nof more than ten people showing up to speak in Citizens Wishing\nto be Heard before this County Commission. On the other hand, if they do,\nsomething important may be going on in the community that the Board needs\nto hear about. Nine people showed up at the most recent meeting to speak\ndirectly or indirectly about this very set of Policies and Procedures,\nand more might have. I would suggest deleting #2.\n
\n“3. A maximum of three persons shall be allowed to speak on any one\nsubject.”\n<\/blockquote>\nIt may take more than three people to raise all aspects of a subject,\nor someone may think of another aspect after three people have spoken;\nthis is a form of public dialog.\n

\nI believe you heard at least one person Tuesday suggest raising this limit.\n

\nAnd I think you heard a suggestion to do as the Zoning Board of Appeals does:\nafter some reasonable number of people (perhaps 5), ask if there are any\npersons wishing to express different concerns on the same subject, and\nif not, ask for a show of hands for who supports the previous speakers\non the subject.\n

\nI tend to agree with what\n\nthe VDT said last summer (13 June 2010):<\/a>\n

\n“If a hundred citizens arrive, and each wishes to speak on the\nsame subject, well, they should have the opportunity to say their\npiece.”\n<\/blockquote>\nSo I suggest deleting the limit and also doing as ZBOA does,\nwhich will probably get a lot of people to agree not to repeat\nwhat somebody else just said.\n
\n“4. Persons shall be allowed to speak on a first-come, first-served\nbasis.”\n<\/blockquote>\nDoes that mean speakers should line up in front of the microphone,\nor does it mean in the order people sign up on the sign-up sheet?\nIf the latter, will someone read off the next speaker’s name from\nthe sheet? I think that’s how they do it in Hahira. Please clarify.\n
\n“6. Each speaker’s time to speak shall be limited to five minutes.”\n<\/blockquote>\nI think this is a fine idea, since it should prevent any individual\nfrom preventing others from speaking. Provided there is some flexibility,\nfor example when commissioners choose to interact with the speaker.\n
\n“7. Commissioners may in their discretion respond to a speaker at the\nconclusion of the speaker’s presentation.”\n<\/blockquote>\nThis is good, but could be extended a bit, to everyone’s benefit.\nSometimes a commissioner may have a ready response to part of a\nspeaker’s question which may be usefully interjected right then.\nSometimes a commissioner may ask staff to answer in dialog, as\nhappened at the previous Commission meeting (11 Jan 2011)\nwhen I was asking for clarification about speed limits.\nSometimes a commissioner may even ask someone sitting in\nthe audience for information,\n\nas happened at the most recent commission meeting,<\/a>\nin another form of dialog.\nPerhaps something like this:\n
\n“7. Commissioners may in their discretion respond to a speaker\nduring or at the conclusion of the speaker’s presentation,\nor may request county staff to do the same; commissioners may\nalso request information from members of the audience.”\n<\/blockquote>\nI’m sure you or the county attorney can think of better wording.\n
\n“8. The Board of Commissioners shall not vote on matters presented\nduring “Citizens Wishing to be Heard””.\n<\/blockquote>\nThat’s a prudent clause. I do wonder if there’s a means to get\nan item on the Board’s agenda for them to discuss and vote on\nat a later meeting? Maybe this clause could include something\nabout that, such as “, however, a speaker may request the Board\nto place an item on their agenda for discussion and vote at\na later meeting.”\n
\n“10. To speak at the Board of Commissioners during “Citizens Wishing\nto be Heard”, a person must be a resident or property taxpayer of\nLowndes County.”\n<\/blockquote>\nWhile I applaud the intent of sticking to local business,\nsometimes local people may need to bring in someone from\nelsewhere for their information or expertise. This could\neven be someone who used to live in the county and who\nhas historical information that no one else now possesses.\nGiven that people from other states have been known to\nspeak for developers during rezoning cases, it would seem\nodd if after rezoning a problem arose that could only\nbe addressed by someone from out of state and such a\nperson could not speak in Citizens Wishing to be Heard.\nPerhaps you could add: “, or must be introduced by\na resident or property taxpayer of Lowndes County.”\n
\n“12. Persons shall not make impertinent, derogatory, personal,\noffensive, or slanderous remarks.”\n<\/blockquote>\nThis is the clause I was referring to when I mentioned\n“vague and arbitrary.” The problem is: impertinent,\nderogatory, or offensive are in the eye and ear of the\nbeholder. People do have different ways of expressing\nthemselves, and some of them may seem offensive to some\npeople but not to others. For example, at a previous\nCommission meeting during a rezoning case the requestor\nwanted to go from R-1 or some such zoning to EA and\na commissioner said loudly “You mean you want to go backwards?”\nI considered that impertinent, derogatory, and offensive,\neven if none of the Commissioners did. Yet I don’t\nobject to the Commissioner saying it.\n

\nAs for slander, there are laws against that, so it\nhardly seems necessary to have a clause here about it.\nSimilarly, if a speaker should escalate to actual\nthreats (which has never happened in a Commission\nmeeting to my knowledge), there are already laws\nagainst that.\n

\nMay I suggest something like:\n

\n“12. Citizens, commissioners, and staff are asked to conduct\nthemselves with decorum and mutual respect.”\n<\/blockquote>\nI know decorum and mutual respect are also in the eye of the\nbeholder, but note “asked to” rather than “shall not”.\n
\n“13. Subjects on which speakers may speak shall be limited to subjects\nconcerning the business of the Board of Commissioners.”\n<\/blockquote>\nI’m not sure what this means. It can’t mean only items on the agenda,\nor there would be no point in Citizens Wishing to be Heard.\nGiven that citizens may want to speak to ask for an item to be put\non the agenda, how can the Board know in advance what that business\nmay be?\n

\nWhile the Board of Commissioners is officially known to the State\nas the Board of Roads and Revenue, it remains the only local elected\nbody for all of Lowndes County. More on this below about the\nWHEREASes. I do not have any suggested rewording for #13,\nsince I see it could serve a purpose in reminding people not\nto come to speak about trivial subjects.\n

\nHowever, the simplest way to avoid problems with #13 might be\nto delete it, since almost anything could concern the business\nof the Board of Commissioners.\n

\n“14. The Board of Commissioners may limit speech on subjects that\nthe Board of Commissioners believes to be closed.”\n<\/blockquote>\nWell, this is a tricky one, isn’t it? If the Board must decide this,\nand the Board shall not vote on matters presented during Citizens\nWishing to be Heard (#8), the Board cannot close a subject during\na given meeting; also the Chairman alone cannot close a subject.\nFor that matter, how does the Board know on what subjects\nthe citizens should not speak? They are citizens, after all,\nnot subjects. I understand that the board may become tired\nof hearing about some subject again and again, but the time\nlimit per speaker and the limit on the number of speakers\nper subject together limit the total time per meeting per subject.\nIf citizens consider a subject important enough to keep showing\nup meeting after meeting, maybe it is important enough for\nthe Board to hear it again and again until the subject is\nresolved and the citizens of their own free will\nstop coming to speak about it.\n

\nSo I suggest removing #14 entirely, and I also suggest removing\nthe reference to closed subjects from #15.\n

\nFinally, the WHEREASes in the draft provoked this reaction\nfrom at least one reader:\n

\n“This is all about limiting speech for the convenience\nof the Commission; what’s in it for the citizens?”\n<\/blockquote>\nThe reason I support some sort of policies and procedures\nis exactly to support and celebrate citizen participation\nin local government. Conducting orderly and efficient\nmeetings can contribute greatly to citizen participation\nby ensuring that no one person or party or subject hogs\nthe floor and thus that no one prevents others from speaking.\n

\nThe First Amendment may or may not entitle a person to speak\nduring Citizens Wishing to be Heard on any subject on which\nhe or she desires; I am not a lawyer, so I can’t say.\n

\nI can say that the County Commission is the only elected\nbody in Lowndes County that represents the entire county,\nand thus its meetings are the only public venues at which\ncitizens may publicly address their elected officials\nfor redress of grievances, to raise concerns about other\nbodies, or for that matter to compliment officials or staff\non doing good work.\n

\n\n<\/a>\nTo quote Chairman Paulk from September 2009:\n

\n“The job we’re in is listening to the public.”\n<\/blockquote>\n\nhttp:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=FdMO3jUSsmk&feature=related<\/a>\n

\nI applaud Chairman Paulk for\n\nencouraging people to come to his and the other Commissioners’ offices\nto discuss matters.<\/a>\nI recognize that people can call on the telephone\nand, even better, send written comments to Commissioners\nthat will thus become part of the public record.\nBut there is also value in speaking in a public meeting\nwhere the speaker can be seen and the Commissioners can\nbe seen to listen; value beyond all other means of addressing\nthe Commission.\n

\nSure, you and we probably don’t want people showing up to\ncomplain about their neighbor’s taste in ice cream,\nand probably not to complain about who won the Super Bowl,\neven if this a sports-crazy community.\n

\nBut I for one do want people showing up to say there’s\na problem in the county that no other body is addressing.\nThe Commission may not have any direct or specific power\nto redress such a grievance. But the Commissioners do\nhave referent power, in that their opinions do matter,\nespecially to the members of unelected boards whom they appoint.\n

\nSimply providing a forum, limited as it must be in time and space,\nfor citizens to raise their concerns, has its own power.\nAs we have seen recently, people do care what is said\nbefore you in your meetings; people well beyond the walls\nof your meeting hall.\n

\nAnd I think that’s a good thing. So may I suggest a few\nWHEREASes encouraging citizens to come and express their\ncompliments and concerns to their county-wide elected Board,\nand celebrating “the right of the people peaceably\nto assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress\nof grievances.”\n

\nYou are our local government, and the citizens will thank you\nfor representing us.\n

\n-jsq\n
\nJohn S. Quarterman\n
\njsq@quarterman.org\n
\nresidence: 6565 Quarterman Road, Hahira\n
\npostal: 3338 Country Club Road #L336, Valdosta, GA 31605\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A message to the only elected body in Lowndes County that represents the entire county. I’ve added a few links, and otherwise what you see is the suggestions I sent to the Commissioners and the County Clerk Thursday after offering them Tuesday. -jsq From: John S. Quarterman Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:40 PM To: […]","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[97,48,49,88,21,22,1923,1341],"tags":[944,3255,8721,8701,548,7,5088,5089,8847],"class_list":["post-2435","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-activism","category-code-enforcement","category-elections","category-lowndes-county-commission","category-planning","category-politics","category-sports","category-zboa","tag-citizens","tag-county-commission","tag-elections","tag-georgia","tag-john-s-quarterman","tag-lowndes-county","tag-opinions","tag-referent-power","tag-sports"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p585fK-Dh","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2435","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2435"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2435\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2435"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2435"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2435"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}