AI 7: Councillor Rich again attempts to stifle free speech and information sharing
Councillor/mayor Rich has asked her followers that it
would be particularly helpful for those who attended the March 19 council meeting ‘who experienced the Zoom
bombing’ to share their experiences and thoughts about
future meetings.
We have of course been here before. Instead of sticking to the basics of running a very small city in financial crisis, a result of past councils choosing to focus on pretentious proclamations and funding pet projects, incredibly we are once again inviting dissenting voices to comment on
issues that should be well beyond the council’s purview.
The inevitable result is first amendment expression of
profane views by meeting participants, something which
is also increasingly common in San Francisco and
elsewhere.
It is not council’s place to police these rants or curtail them.
If an individual says something that is considered legally to be a racial or other slur that is a subsequent law
enforcement issue.
The obvious solution is to not encourage dialog at council meeting over contentious issues, rather than shutting
down ‘participation, the cornerstone of our community’
as the city website claims the city aspires to.
It is clear some factions would relish the opportunity to remove remote participation in the name of ‘zoom
bombing’ but this invites lawsuits while making a
mockery of city inclusivity for those not able to participate in meetings in person.
This is another council created mess. Keep council
meetings strictly about city matters. Councillors should feel free as individuals to wave placards and shout at
passing traffic and be shouted at on the 12/116 corner in their own time on matters that are not directly city related.
Keep remote participation in place. We have some very
important issues coming up that will require citizen
participation and focus.
The last thing we need is less
engagement and focus as city staff dig us out of the hole we find ourselves in.
Oliver Marks
Downtown Sebastopol