Trending
The ability to petition our government is a foundation of our democracy. A proposal by one council member in Wheeling to thwart that right could be the first step down a slippery slope over just who can appear to speak before council -- and for how long.
Councilman Ben Seidler recently recommended that council consider eliminating the practice by some members of the public to "yield" their time to another speaker. Current council rules limit each speaker addressing council to three minutes, and it's become common practice over the years for folks to sign up and then, when it's their turn to speak at the end of each meeting, yield their time to the current speaker.
"I want to make a recommendation that moving forward, we put an end to the process in which people wishing to be heard yield their time and kind of stack back-to-back their time to each other to build up their three minutes," Seidler said. "In the past, I've seen a lot of I guess what I would consider to be grandstanding, people who yield their time to each other. So I'd like to put an end to that moving forward. I don't think there's any legal basis as to why we would have to do that, and I'm not sure why we do it in the first place."
While he's right that someone speaking for 20 minutes after a half-dozen others yielded their time might be a stretch of the rules, it seems out of line for council -- remember, they are servants of the public -- to take such a draconian step.
Mayor Glenn Elliott agrees. "While it is true that some have abused this practice to go on extended rants about things that have nothing to do with any city council agenda, I am also sympathetic to the fact that some people are terrified of public speaking," Elliott said. "I used to be one of them myself. So having the opportunity to yield one's time to a third party does protect their right to be heard in the public forum at our meetings. If we continue to see this practice abused, I am open to reconsidering our current approach. But for now, my inclination is to continue the status quo."
Frankly, that's the correct approach.
Many people come to speak before council on issues that could affect their businesses or neighborhoods. Seidler's desire to limit their opportunity to address council simply because he may not like or agree with what they have to say is wrong and should not be considered.
If there are concerns with the public speaking rules, then the full council should meet and discuss the matter to create a policy that does not impact residents' chance to speak before council.
Doing otherwise is a disservice to our city and its residents.