Comments on: Court Ruling: Citizens Have No Right To Speak At Public Meetings

By: Lets_FIX_Stupid

Lets_FIX_Stupid — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 12:09:42 +0000

harley1,
You omit (or didn’t know) a valid point (that the COURT Should have CONSIDERED) :
The ‘board’ ISN’T an ELECTED Body.
In fact it’s a “Public/Private ‘consortium’”, where the County Commission has Only Appointed a MINORITY of the membership?

Since people who sit on that board will PROF$T from the decision(s) of that board wouldn’t it make them conflicted participants? Yes, yes it would. However that doesn’t matter as they (the board as a whole) aren’t acting as a government BODY.

Silencing the PEOPLE when what YOU seek is in opposition to their desires is the first step toward communism. EVERY Municipality in the state needs a CHARTER Amendment this November on the BALLOT allowing EVERY Citizen the RIGHT to SPEAK for 3 Minutes at ANY Public Hearing or Public Meeting, along w/15 minutes for presentation of ‘evidence’ if necessary, or ‘presentations’. So it Takes a Little Longer…what’s the point of a Public HEARING

By: harley1

harley1 — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:55:46 +0000

JJ’s comments are exactly right. Many of the comments here typify the mentality that America is a democracy. America is a representative republic. i.e. representatives are elected to put forth the ideals and agenda of their constituents. Most, but not all governing bodies are elected by the electorate. (That’s you the voter ,in case you didn’t know).

By: Century girl

Century girl — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 08:27:55 +0000

I agree with the opinion of “Jack”. I once had a friend who was seeking self-help thru a support group. Her spouse told her-”… you can go; but you can’t say anything”! In other words, he didn’t want any of the secret, dirty laundry aired in a meeting, even though it was a private meeting where everything was to remain confidential.

Saying all this to say, we, the people, have a constitutional right of freedom of speech…period. For any rules written that violate that, then they are violating these constitutional rights and should be challenged. How can the Florida 1st District Court of Appeals render an opinion which violates the U.S. Constitution?

Voters need to call our legislators and urge them to look at this ruling and do the right thing! They need to hear from “We the people…”!

By: Jack Moran

Jack Moran — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:24:33 +0000

Still the decistions are politically manipulated: white elephant office buildings, soccar fields, the BCC paying TWICE for property, completely cutting off citizen access to legally required Gov. Permits & Records – and you want to know why Escambia County is becomming a “Third-World-Country”?

By: Jack Moran

Jack Moran — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:02:21 +0000

The further impact of this has already been imposed and can now be legally enforced; you can ATTEND a Century Town Council or Pensacola City, or County Commission, or Committee of the Whole Meeting; but you do not have the RIGHT TO SPEAK – but pay YOU MUST.

TEA PARTY!

Call, Write, email your state Rep. and Demand a Voice in public hearings under FS 119! This IS an ELECTION YEAR!

By: anydaynow

anydaynow — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:12:53 +0000

It was Judge Collier, sitting at the head of the CMPB and not in a capacity as a judge, who denied the citizens of Pensacola their right to speak about a project that they have to pay for that started this suit. For a long time Collier even sat with his back to the public, and was known to make sarcastic comments regarding the public. There is a video tape of him commenting that he doesn’t care what the public thinks. Who wants to bet that Collier is set to profit from the project that the public will pay for? How many of you want to help Pensacola pay for this projet?

By: escambiamom

escambiamom — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:44:00 +0000

My only problem with this is that I have been to public meetings where this is selective. The rules said no public comment but the officials allowed certain people to comment and then shut it down when others wanted to rebut.
As long as it is applied evenly and fairly, I can see JJ’s point.
And definitely, the ballot box is where our voice is heard the clearest.

By: JJ

JJ — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:50:09 +0000

Nothing has changed. Your rights are not being TAKEN away. You have more of a VOICE than you used to have before all the “Open Meeting” laws. Basically things will stay the same as they have been. If it’s a meeting where input from the public is necessary, there will be time for you to speak. If it’s a meeting about an issue where there would be absolutely no benefit of public opinion being expressed, then you will not be able to speak. No biggie.

Some meetings are by elected officials to discuss matters of business that don’t necessarily need interruption at every point by some individual or the other who has a whacked out vision of what the outcome should be…. I’m just glad there are “Open Meeting” laws that give us access to these meetings. That’s a lot better than it used to be when you had no clue what was being discussed in these meetings.

Let’s say the city government wants to have an hour long meeting to discuss whether it would be feasible to add hangars to the airport. This is just a meeting to discuss which department will handle the expansion and whether they want to apply for a state grant that would make it possible. Applying for the grant doesn’t commit them to any action, but will open it up to make it possible. They discuss that they will hold a meeting with the public and pilots of the area before they move forward, but they need to know the funds are in place before they can even present it….

Now do you feel the need to be involved and complicate this process at this early juncture by interjecting YOUR opinion? Really? No… REALLY?

I guess it’s one of those cases of “Give an inch, take a mile”. We were given access to ALL meetings, and suddenly that’s not good enough. We now want to be able to be involved in ALL meetings. Hey, if it’s that important to you to be able to pipe up in every single meeting that takes place across the state, get yourself into politics and get elected……

At some point, I don’t guess we’ll need elected officials. We’ll all just get together on every issue, everyone can yell out their opinion at the same time, and then hold a vote by a raising of hands…..

I support their decision.

By: Casandra

Casandra — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:55:49 +0000

We the people exercised our constitutional rights when we elected government officials. That is the time when we make our voices heard and exercise freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not equal chaos, and I’m sure our founding fathers have rolled over in their graves many times at the antics displayed by such folks.

By: taxpayer

taxpayer — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:45:11 +0000

Sounds like a violation of our Constitutional Rights. When the time comes for my lawsuit, I will be sure to name each of those Judges independently in it.