Guest Mike S. Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:32 AM Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:32 AM How do you stop an individual from repeatedly attending meetings and issuing outrageous comments from the floor during open floor discussion? Do you have to call on the individual? Can you have them removed from the meeting or issue a gag order on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:45 AM Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:45 AM See RONR pp. 645-648 if the offending person is a member of the assembly and pp. 644- 645 and 648-649 if the person is not a member of the assembly. See RONR p. 3 for a definition of a member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted August 17, 2012 at 02:43 AM Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 at 02:43 AM How do you stop an individual from repeatedly attending meetings and issuing outrageous comments from the floor during open floor discussion? Do you have to call on the individual? Can you have them removed from the meeting or issue a gag order on them?A well prepared chair should do the trick. RONR (11th ed.), pp. 454-56 may help. What do you mean by outrageous comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted August 18, 2012 at 01:03 PM Report Share Posted August 18, 2012 at 01:03 PM Tim -- By outrageous I mean different unfounded, defamatory and scurrilous comments and questions of character expressed by an individual who is not a member of the assembly, but rather a local citizen, about different appointed or elected members of the municipality as well as their staff. These are usually expressed when local press is present and have no basis in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted August 18, 2012 at 01:23 PM Report Share Posted August 18, 2012 at 01:23 PM By outrageous I mean different unfounded, defamatory and scurrilous comments and questions of character expressed by an individual who is not a member of the assembly, but rather a local citizen, about different appointed or elected members of the municipality as well as their staff.Well, if RONR were the sole governing document, the members could simply eject the non-member from the room. But once you start referring to "citizens" and "municipalities" you've gone beyond RONR (and, therefore, this forum) into the realm of so-called "Sunshine" and "Open Meeting" laws, not to mention the First Amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sMargaret Posted August 19, 2012 at 03:40 PM Report Share Posted August 19, 2012 at 03:40 PM Well, if RONR were the sole governing document, the members could simply eject the non-member from the room. But once you start referring to "citizens" and "municipalities" you've gone beyond RONR (and, therefore, this forum) into the realm of so-called "Sunshine" and "Open Meeting" laws, not to mention the First Amendment.Or possibly the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms... Someone may also wish to try talking to the local citizen outside of the meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted August 30, 2012 at 02:36 AM Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 at 02:36 AM Tim -- By outrageous I mean different unfounded, defamatory and scurrilous comments and questions of character expressed by an individual who is not a member of the assembly, but rather a local citizen, about different appointed or elected members of the municipality as well as their staff. These are usually expressed when local press is present and have no basis in fact.If this is going on during a public hearing during a meeting of a public body, then see the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Protecting the right to criticize (with or without basis) elected officials is one of the primary reasons it exists. So, if someone does silence him, jut hope and pray that he doesn't know enough to hire a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted August 30, 2012 at 03:29 PM Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 at 03:29 PM . . . once you start referring to "citizens" and "municipalities" you've gone beyond RONR (and, therefore, this forum) into the realm of so-called "Sunshine" and "Open Meeting" laws, not to mention the First Amendment.Or possibly the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms...If this is going on during a public hearing during a meeting of a public body, then see the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So far the score seems to be: US 2 Canada 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Louise Posted August 30, 2012 at 03:33 PM Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 at 03:33 PM So far the score seems to be: US 2 Canada 1.Considering there are ten times as many Americans in this world as Canadians, Canada seems to be holding its own then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.