Guest village resident Posted October 1, 2012 at 06:43 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 06:43 PM A Village Board member recently said according to RROO, people are not allowed to criticize members of the body (meaning the Board). This came in response to someone asking for concrete reasons as to why people didn't want to appoint a particular person to a position. Is this actually in RROO? If so, where can I find it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:03 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:03 PM Personal attacks (of each other) are beyond the pale, but healthy debate as to the merits of a candidate for appointment, or election, seems quite appropriate. After all, have you watched TV lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:11 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:11 PM A Village Board member recently said according to RROO, people are not allowed to criticize members of the body (meaning the Board). This came in response to someone asking for concrete reasons as to why people didn't want to appoint a particular person to a position. Is this actually in RROO? If so, where can I find it?Question by a Village Resident. People who are not members of the body have no right to enter into debate about a matter pending before the Board. If there is a portion of the meeting devoted to resident's comments, as John indicated, decorum must be maintained, but nothing in RONR would require the Board to answer the questions raised or criticisms rendered even if they are rendered within the rules of decorum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weldon Merritt Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:37 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:37 PM After all, have you watched TV lately? I'm not so sure that's a good example, given all the personal attack ads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:55 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 07:55 PM Gee, I though all that stuff dealt with the merit of candidates... silly me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted October 1, 2012 at 08:22 PM Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 at 08:22 PM Gee, I though all that stuff dealt with the merit of candidates... silly me!No one is criticizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 2, 2012 at 02:14 AM Report Share Posted October 2, 2012 at 02:14 AM A Village Board member recently said according to RROO, people are not allowed to criticize members of the body (meaning the Board). This came in response to someone asking for concrete reasons as to why people didn't want to appoint a particular person to a position. Is this actually in RROO? If so, where can I find it?No, it's not, and protection of the right to criticism of the government and elected officials is one of the principle rights in the First Amendment. Asking for concrete reasons in and of itself would not rise to the level of a personal attack or breach of decorum. If it falls under the realm of confidential personnel information the board may not be able to respond, but that's another (probably legal) question. Still, even on matters where the board cannot respond, that does not give it the right to cut off a person merely for asking the question.That village board member should probably begin fervently to hope that the person who was prevented from speaking does not hire an attorney and sue the Village for infringing upon his constitutional rights.For elected officials, being criticized by the public comes with the territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rthib Posted October 2, 2012 at 04:18 AM Report Share Posted October 2, 2012 at 04:18 AM That village board member should probably begin fervently to hope that the person who was prevented from speaking does not hire an attorney and sue the Village for infringing upon his constitutional rights.Non-members of the board do not have the right to speak, period.Any right to speak is granted by the board and they can set the rules of decorum.They could not prevent a person from standing outside the meeting and tell everyone how bad they are, as that is the protected speech, but talking during a board meeting is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted October 2, 2012 at 01:52 PM Report Share Posted October 2, 2012 at 01:52 PM A Village Board member recently said according to RROO, people are not allowed to criticize members of the body (meaning the Board). This came in response to someone asking for concrete reasons as to why people didn't want to appoint a particular person to a position. Is this actually in RROO? If so, where can I find it?The vague use of 'people' and 'person' makes the meaning of this unclear (to me, at least). I think the question being asked might be:Board member Jones was not appointed (by the Board) to a position that he appeared to be qualified for (maybe the head of an Important Committee... who knows). A resident (not a Board member) asked for concrete reasons why the Board chose not to appoint Jones. In response, a Board member stated that there is a rule against members of the Board criticizing another member of their own body -- i.e. Mr. Jones -- in public.If this is what was meant, I think Mr. Mervosh's response in post #3 applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:04 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:04 AM Non-members of the board do not have the right to speak, period.Any right to speak is granted by the board and they can set the rules of decorum.They could not prevent a person from standing outside the meeting and tell everyone how bad they are, as that is the protected speech, but talking during a board meeting is not.I beg to differ.The OP stated that this was a governmental body, and that someone was asking a question, presumably with permission, or during a public hearing portion of the meeting, which is typically required by law, depending on the state. But in any case it took place.Under those conditions, a village council which acts to abridge the free speech of someone based upon its content does so at its own peril. I know of one person who was awarded a six-figure sum for being told to sit down by a school board superintendent, under similar conditions.State law trumps RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnR Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:12 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:12 AM The OP stated that this was a governmental body…How do you know that? At any rate, it seems this discussion is veering sharply into legal, not parliamentary, territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:29 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:29 AM A Village Board member recently said according to RROO, people are not allowed to criticize members of the body (meaning the Board). The OP stated that this was a governmental body . . .How do you know that?Perhaps "village resident" and "Village board" were clues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnR Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:38 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:38 AM Well I'm from Southern California so the first thing that comes to mind is "Happy Palms Village Homeowners Association" instead of "City Council." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:59 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:59 AM Well I'm from Southern California so the first thing that comes to mind is "Happy Palms Village Homeowners Association" instead of "City Council."Point taken. I suppose we could also be talking about "The Village". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted October 7, 2012 at 11:37 AM Report Share Posted October 7, 2012 at 11:37 AM We have "Village Associations" around here that are neighborhood organizations with no government standing. They try to get people to adhere to standards they like with regards to property decorations and maintenance and such, but usually just end up planning block parties for the few who are really into the association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted October 8, 2012 at 03:08 AM Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 at 03:08 AM Well, I suppose unless and until Guest_village_resident ever returns we will not know for certain what his situation is.But we probably should be used to that by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.