County may change meeting policies over racist comments

[ad_1]

San Diego –

A week after public commentators used racial slurs to attack the region’s top public health official in routine COVID-19 update, county watchdog to review new rules designed to discourage “hate speech and racism” in their public meetings, according to a letter from the council proposed Tuesday.

Council Chairman Nathan Fletcher and County Supervisor Nora Vargas presented the council letter on Tuesday and called a special meeting at 2 p.m. Wednesday to discuss and vote on the proposed rules. The meeting will be held online.

If approved, the proposed changes would take effect immediately and be implemented at the next board meetings on November 16 and 17.

Fletcher said the changes are necessary to protect unelected county workers from hostile working conditions caused by threatening or abusive comments from some members of the public and to prevent these speakers from creating conditions so intimidating at meetings that they are other people feel that they are not free to talk.

“We will always protect the right of individuals to dissent, to dissent,” Fletcher said. “We will always protect the right of individuals to freedom of expression. But it is clear that we need to make changes in the way we communicate the affairs of the people, the way we come together to debate, discuss, govern.

An annotated copy of the current board rules of procedure includes a new section that serves as a roadmap for responding to discriminatory or harassing remarks of the type made against Dr Wilma Wooten and Vargas by a public speaker on November 2.

Wooten on Tuesday declined by the county media office to comment on the rules, which also call on the county to adopt the National Conflict Resolution Center’s civil speech code for meetings. The code asks those who engage in debate or dialogue to communicate in an inclusive, understanding, respectful and fair manner, while avoiding personal attacks.

Fletcher and Vargas at a press conference on Tuesday made a distinction between criticism and even insults directed at elected officials, and insults or threats directed at public employees. While the former is generally a protected exercise of freedom of expression, the latter can create a hostile work environment that violates other civil rights, they said.

“It’s really unfortunate that we’re here today, but it’s our responsibility to make sure we bring decency, kindness and respect back to our county meetings,” said Vargas. “Our employees need to feel safe and free to do their jobs without being intimidated or harassed. “

Under the new policy, the chairman of the board would read the county policy regarding discrimination and harassment to meeting attendees who make such comments and also allow offended county employees to refuse to attend meetings because of these comments. Remarks.

Fletcher frequently interrupted meetings and had some audience members withdrawn for interrupting other speakers.

The list of changes includes a ban on disorderly conduct that includes “expressing loud or threatening language”, whistling, clapping, stamping, speaking or interrupting the recognized speaker if these actions interfere with “the smooth running of any business. meeting “.

Fletcher said these provisions apply to members of the public interrupting a speaker, not to those on the podium.

Other proposed changes could limit the time members of the public are allowed to speak during meetings, in order to speed up the comment period on items where there are many speakers. Some recent meetings have lasted up to 3 p.m. as hundreds of speakers have registered to provide input.

Today each speaker has two minutes to make their point, but the proposal would allow the chairman of the board to cut that allocation in half, to one minute per person, if there are more than 10 people wishing to comment. a point.

Changes are also offered for group presentations, where three or more people can talk collectively on a topic for a maximum of 10 minutes in total. There is currently no time limit for an individual speaker in a group, but this would be capped at four minutes in the future.

Under the proposal, group presentations would only be allowed for land use decisions and appeals and would not be allowed on other matters except with the consent of the board chair.

Changes have also been proposed for the council’s consent calendar, a catch-all place on its agenda where mundane matters are quickly dispatched with a single vote. Today, members of the public can request to remove any item from the consent list for full discussion. Under the proposed changes, only a supervisor or county administrative officer could request revocation.

The public could still comment on the items on the consent schedule, but they would only have two minutes to discuss the entire list, instead of being able to comment for two minutes on each item. This change is intended to reduce off-topic comments on topics other than the item at hand.

Another proposed addition to the board’s rules of procedure appears to limit the overall time during which public comments are made on any agenda item. The chair may set limits for each side of an item or set a total time limit, if necessary, when many people request to speak on an agenda item.

Recently, comments on the county’s monthly COVID-19 updates went on for several hours before board members could begin their deliberations and vote.

The proposal would also require anyone in the audience who wants to show a presentation or video to bring their own electronic equipment to connect to the county equipment set up on the speaker’s podium. To use the county submission system, documents should be submitted at least 24 hours in advance to rule out potential technical issues.

In a call to see its affairs “conducted in an orderly manner,” the board also demands that public speakers do not use “strong, threatening, profane or abusive language that disrupts, disrupts or impedes the proper conduct of the meeting. board meeting ”and grants the chair the right to decide that a speaker is off topic“ or otherwise unrelated to the agenda item under consideration ”.

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors is not the only government agency trying to make the connection between the protection of free speech and the culture of civil speech. Local school boards have faced similar problems, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has seen a marked increase in profanity during public comments.

Amy Reichert, co-founder of an organization called ReOpen San Diego, which has demonstrated against COVID-19 policies, released a statement Tuesday afternoon condemning the proposed public speaking protocols.

She said the provisions to limit speakers’ time, ban “whistling, stomping or tapping your feet” and allowing the chairman of the board to decide when comments are disruptive or irrelevant are efforts to limit discussion. freedom of speech and represent the “continued shredding of our United States.” Constitution of States.

Fletcher said that, rather than restricting free speech, the changes would restore opportunity to people whose comments have been overshadowed by stronger, more provocative speakers.

“Dissent is a healthy part of any government,” Fletcher said. “But I can’t tell you how many people have contacted me and told me that I would like to come and share my point of view and my point of view, but it is a hostile environment, it is a threatening environment. . I’ve had people reach out to me and say, “Fletcher, I can disagree with a lot of what you do, but a lot of what I mean in dissent gets lost in toxicity, hostility and excess. the supreme rhetoric ‘.

Wednesday’s special meeting will be online. The notice says in-person attendance will not be allowed although the public can view the proceedings online and comment via an appeal option. Instructions are available at www.sandiegocounty.gov/telecomments.

[ad_2]