People planning to attend future Town Board meetings here should be prepared
for more stringent rules on residents’ conduct.
Limits are proposed on
talking during meetings and on subjects that can be addressed during the public
comment period. The town supervisor would have the authority to boot a person
who is not complying from the meeting room.
An initial draft of the rules
would have barred use of still photography and limited the number of video
cameras. But town officials say they’ve scrapped those provisions.
“The
bottom line is to ensure the safety of our residents and town employees,” said
Councilman Robert Payne, who is the sponsor of the legislation. “We’re taking a
proactive stance.”
The new rules are not targeting any particular group
of people, Payne said. But two individuals who have been questioning town
government actions in recent years dispute that.
“I mean, there’s no way of
proving it, but the whole thing makes no sense because there’s never been any
problem,” said Cathy Lawrence, who attends town meetings, videotapes and
photographs sessions and keeps a blog that’s often critical of town
leaders.
Lawrence and Edmund Wiatr call themselves New Hartford Concerned
Citizens. In April, town officials met behind closed doors to discuss security
concerns and began locking the meeting building’s doors, citing incidents that
posed possible threats against employees.
Town Supervisor Earle Reed
said at the time that Wiatr had screamed at a town employee, which Wiatr
denied.
The new legislation states that the entrance to the meeting
building on Kellogg Road will be opened to the public no earlier than 30 minutes
and no later than 15 minutes prior to the start time.
Referring to
Lawrence and Wiatr, Payne maintained the proposal “has nothing to do with them
at all.”
“In my opinion, they record all of the board meetings and record
them in an orderly fashion,” he said. “Those folks have been very respecting of
meeting protocol.”
Still, Councilman Rich Woodland Jr. said he has some
concerns with the legislation and whether it limits people’s participation in
town government.
“The way I see it, it’s a work in progress,” Woodland
said. “There are too many unanswered questions.”
Asked if he thought the
resolution is directed toward New Hartford Concerned Citizens, Woodland said
it’s hard to tell.
“I would hate to think that was the motivation, guess
you’d have to ask Bob since he’s the one who spearheaded it, what motivated
him,” Woodland said.
Councilwoman Christine Krupa said there have been
some “situations in the past that seemed to have escalated.”
Krupa
wouldn’t elaborate, saying she wasn’t there to witness the
incidents.
Reed, Town Attorney Jerry Green and Councilman David Reynolds
did not return phone calls for this story.
Too much
power?
Having a set of rules that outlines acceptable meeting
conduct is “wise and good government,” said Robert Freeman, executive director
of the state Committee on Open Government.
But some of New Hartford’s
proposed rules could be simplified, such as a video camera clause that talks
about the need for a camera to be tripod-mounted, Freeman said.
“What
they should say — any person may engage in audio of video recording so long as
the recording is neither destructive or obtrusive,” he said.
And instead
of not allowing people to talk to each other during meetings, officials should
limit the measure to instances of disruptive behavior, Freeman said.
In
terms of the section of the resolution that gives the town supervisor the power
to end a public speaker’s address before the allotted 5 minutes is up, Freeman
said that should be a group decision.
“I would say with the approval of
the town board, so that it’s not one person who is essentially making the
rules,” he said.
Woodland agreed.
‘If there’s no a problem
…’
If it’s not broke, don’t fix it.
That much sums up the
sentiments from former New Hartford Town Supervisor Ralph Humphreys on the
proposed resolution.
“If you’re introducing a law, there should be a
reason. I guess my question to the board would be ‘What’s bringing this about?’
Humphreys asked. “The only reason for a regulation would seem there would be a
problem. If there’s not been a problem, I don’t see the point of any more
laws.”
As long as each side is allowed to speak at the board meetings,
this type of regulation isn’t problematic, said Jennifer Carnig, director of
communications for the New York Civil Liberties Union.
“So long as the
board does not exercise viewpoint discrimination — that is, limit speech on a
subject to only one side and prevent those who disagree from speaking out — the
board is free to limit public presentations and organize its meetings as it sees
fit,” she said.
Public hearing planned
The New
Hartford Town Board will conduct a public hearing at 6 p.m. Wednesday. It will
take place in the Community Meeting Room, Butler Memorial Hall, 48 Genesee St.,
New Hartford.
The purpose of the meeting is to consider taking of
approximately 0.015 acres of the 6.99 acre parcel of land owned by National Grid
located on or near Woods Highway. If adopted, it would allow necessary road and
other public improvements in conjunction with the development of the New
Hartford Business Park.
Councilman Robert Payne said the proposed
resolution relating to conduct at town meetings could be discussed at
Wednesday’s meeting.
