Countdown to April 29 to PERMANENTLY close M. R. Reiter. Ask the board to see the 6 point plan.

Friday, January 9, 2009

Three Minute Rule Ended

From the BCCT.

I always figured that the eventual successor to the Emperor would end the three minute rule and pry the beeping egg timer from Marlys' hands. It looks like a simple lawsuit fixes it.


New policy ends limit on public comment
By: DANNY ADLER

There will be no time limit on public comment at Northampton's board of supervisors meetings.

And, certainly, there was no time limit in Bucks County court Thursday, as township officials took hours to reach an agreement of sorts.

Bucks County Judge John J. Rufe continued a hearing for one year on a lawsuit filed by Northampton resident and attorney Marvin Gold after the township supervisors agreed to the new board chairman's prohibition on time limits at public meetings.

Gold filed the suit in November after the supervisors' former chairman imposed a three-minute speaking limit on the public. Gold claimed the move was used as "a gag order" on residents with opposing opinions and violated the state's Sunshine Act.

Other residents also have wondered about the rule's freedom-of-speech implications.

After being appointed supervisors chairman Monday, Vincent J. Deon said he would do away with the time limit, barring "extreme circumstances" when there are a large number of residents who want to speak at a single meeting.

The rule was first imposed in September by Supervisor George Komelasky to prevent meetings from going into the wee hours of the morning and to ensure the township conducted all its business. Komelasky was inconsistent in enforcing the time limits during meetings, sometimes letting residents speak longer when fewer people wanted the microphone.

The judge ordered the three supervisors at the courthouse Thursday to get the other two supervisors on the phone and come to some sort of compromise, Gold said. After a two-hour conference call of the supervisors, township solicitor Joe Pizzo said the board agreed to Deon's policy.

"Chairman Deon announced that a policy that had previously been in place under the prior board chairman restricting public comment to three minutes was being lifted. He's doing that on his own volition and it's going to be his policy," Pizzo told the judge.

"It's a 100 percent victory," Gold said outside the courtroom. "All I was seeking was the right to speak for a reasonable amount of time."

Pizzo, though, claimed the case was a moot point "because there's no more time limits." He also noted that he disagrees that a three-minute rule violates the Sunshine Act.

Supervisors Frank Rothermel and Jim Cunningham were also on hand supporting Gold's case. "I'm pleased that reason prevailed," Rothermel said.

Township resident Ed Bailey, a regular at the board of supervisors meetings, was happy.

"I think the outcome is clear and just," he said. "The meetings should go as long as they have to."

The lawsuit stems, in part, from the Sept. 24 supervisors meeting where the limit was put into place.

2 comments:

Jon said...

[Northampton] Township resident Ed Bailey, a regular at the board of supervisors meetings, was happy. "I think the outcome is clear and just," he said. "The meetings should go as long as they have to."

[Morrisville] resident Ed Bailey, a regular at school board meetings, was not. "Have you ever been hit in the kidney by handlebars? It really hurts," he said.

Sorry, I couldn't help it - I just love that quote!

Ken said...

What is a reasonable amount of time to allow the public to speak?

Is it OK for Steve Worob to hijack a meeting by reading all of the minutea of a 45 page thesis on "the Raping of Morrisville"?

The purpose of a meeting is to get things done, and in the case of the school board, the meeting involves volunteers.

While I agree that the public's opinion should be heard (and apparently not everyone agrees with THAT, or at least "heard" and "listened to" are two separate things) should elected public officials be forced to abide by a no limit policy that essentially holds them hostage to anyone who can climb up onto a soap-box?

How can the public and their elected officials come to an agreement in this matter?