City Council opts not to adopt code of conduct

City Council opts not to adopt code of conduct
Citizens group advocates for open govt., televised meetings
BY KENNY WALTER Staff Writer

LONG BRANCH — With four new members and only one meeting under their belts, the Long Branch City Council has decided against introducing an ordinance to rein in conduct during the public comment portion of council meetings.

A proposed “code of conduct” ordinance modeled after an ordinance in Edison Township never made it to a vote as the council unanimously rejected the idea at the July 27 workshop meeting. The ordinance would have addressed behavior deemed hostile or unruly during the public comment portion of meetings.

City Attorney James Aaron said that the intent of the ordinance would not be to limit free speech.

“We started to look at what other municipalities did, not to reinvent the wheel, not to limit free speech, not to limit how individuals express themselves, but how to control, with some teeth in it, the relationship [between public speakers and the council],” he said.

The issue of controlling the demeanor of residents who comment during the public portion of meetings arose after a speaker was removed from a council meeting following a heated dispute with council President Mary Jane Celli over how much of the five minutes allotted per speaker remained.

Aaron explained the intent behind the proposed ordinance.

“This originally came up just after you were elected,” he told the new council members. “You, as a council, put together a series of statements.”

Currently, a “statement to the public” is read at the beginning of council meetings, which states that comments must be “directly related to the ordinance/resolution under discussion.”

Also, the “council reserves the right to terminate any remarks made by any individual that are rude or in a tone that would incite or engender hostility whereby in the judgment of the council president the meeting may become disruptive.”

The proposed ordinance would have made the statement law.

Councilwoman Joy Bastelli said in an interview that the proposed ordinance would not have limited free speech but allowed the council to restrict improper behavior at the podium.

Councilwoman Kate Billings said that after only one meeting the council should give it more time.

“I think we’ve only done informal speech once, I think we should try to keep doing that before we do something like this,” she said.

Councilman Michael Sirianni agreed with Billings.

“I was all for the statement being informal,” he said. “I’d rather stay on the informal.”

In part, the controversy stems from the previous council’s decision to limit public comment to five minutes per person, a limit vigorously enforced, which frequently was a point of contention between the previous council and a few speakers.

Aaron said that the five-minute rule is the council’s way of controlling meetings.

“You, as a council, have the ability to control meetings, and you control it by virtue of time allocated to individuals,” he said. “You can do it in a manner where you control a meeting to an extent where people do not become unruly or disruptive that would cause the meeting to be disrupted.”

At the meeting following the workshop, the council was praised for their attentiveness.

“You’re talking notes, you’re paying attention, I think we are taking good strides,” resident Michael Bland said.

Bland, who ran unsuccessfully for council, did, however, criticize the municipal officials for being less attentive on the dais.

“How would you feel if someone didn’t look at you?” he asked.

Long Branch Citizens for Good Government founding member Diana Multare praised the council for implementing office hours when two council members will be available to meet with residents individually or as a group.

“I think this is great,” she said. “People can come up and figure out the small problems like garbage collection.”

Before speaking, Multare gave a copy of the group’s manifesto to each member of the council.

The manifesto, or goals of the group, include: ensuring open and transparent government; protecting the interests of citizens; full disclosure of documents; publicized and televised meetings on important issues; and term limits.

Multare noted that the office hours would not replace public participation at council meetings.

“While that has its place, nothing can take the place of what goes on here,” she said. “You have an open assembly where citizens can express their concerns, their ideas, they can challenge the City Council, they can challenge each other.”

Multare said the citizens group is not politically motivated.

“We have been branded as political opponents of the mayor,” she said. “I’d like to emphasize that it wouldn’t make any difference who is the mayor and who are the City Council members.

“We are concerned about process,” she added.

“We do not promote or advocate on issues. As individuals we can do that, but as a group we are about process.”

The council was also presented with a sample ordinance and resolution from resident Vincent LePore that would eliminate the city’s six redevelopment zones.

“You can separate yourself from the past council,” LePore told the new council in urging adoption of the ordinance.

Contact Kenny Walter at

kwalter@gmnews.com.







Click here to enlarge



No Flash Detected
Please download the latest version by clicking below:

Get

Click for www.tomsford.com