The Jan. 5 Lysander Town Board meeting conjured flashbacks of the previous administration’s shouting matches. After resident Georgia Gillespie spoke out about social media mudslinging, resident Fred Burtch exchanged words with Supervisor Joe Saraceni, Councilor Roman Diamond and Deputy Town Clerk Janet Falconer.
The result was an hour-long free-for-all of a public comment period, with a brief recess during which Supervisor Saraceni asked PAC-B videographer Jim Houghtaling to stop recording. To Mr. Houghtaling’s credit, he refused, and the meeting will appear in full on PAC-B.
Supervisor Saraceni said he fully supports the rights of the press and was a journalism major at the University of Tennessee. While the Messenger was not asked to stop recording during the recess, we still find it disturbing that a public official would ask one of our media colleagues not to do his job. While Supervisor Saraceni reasoned that the barbs residents traded were not part of the town’s official business, what goes on within town hall is certainly the public’s business, no matter how ugly it gets.
More importantly, it did not have to get ugly. When Supervisor Saraceni and councilors Bob Ellis and Pete Moore took office in 2016, the town board expanded opportunities for public participation. Residents are now allowed to ask questions during work sessions, and there is no time limit for the public comment period during town board meetings. We applaud the town board for giving residents more avenues to speak their minds, but perhaps a little more regulation would go a long way.
While this is by no means the only solution, many municipalities place a limit on how long a resident may speak during the public comment period. The Baldwinsville Central School District Board of Education has a strict three-minute limit; a timer counts down and the microphone is silenced when the three minutes are over. Most other bodies with a time limit, such as the Cicero Town Board, are more flexible and will entertain longer comments, but the idea of a time limit exists so the municipality can spend a meeting conducting its business. Often, residents with specific concerns are asked to contact the municipality in writing so citizens’ comments do not dominate the meeting. In no way do we advocate limiting public participation, but a gentle reminder to keep one’s comments concise could be helpful in maintaining the flow of a public meeting.
Moreover, all constituents should be treated equally. We sympathize with the pain Ms. Falconer has suffered at the keyboards of anonymous Facebook critics, but no one should be given special attention, nor should any resident have their concerns continually brushed off. If Mr. Burtch is not allowed to direct his comments to a specific department head or town employee, then Ms. Falconer as a town employee should not be allowed to direct hers to a particular resident. If the town board answers resident Jim Stirushnik’s specific questions during a meeting, then they should offer the same consideration to Mr. Burtch.
Residents also should act respectfully when they approach the microphone. They should not raise their voices or swear while addressing a public body, as Mr. Burtch did. They should respect the town board’s time, and their neighbors’ time, by addressing concerns about an individual issue or employee outside of town board meetings.
Supervisor Saraceni told Ms. Falconer, “You are a resident of the town of the Lysander. You have every right to make a comment. There’s no prerequisite that you have to act a certain way.” Perhaps there should be a prerequisite for acting a certain way, for both the town board and residents wishing to participate in the public comment period.
