Decorum bill should become law

Representatives of the Association of Indiana Counties, Indiana County Commissioners and Accelerate Indiana Municipalities, as well as Indiana Public Access Counselor Luke Britt were among those testifying in favor of Indiana House Bill 1338 on Tuesday morning.

Add us to the list of supporters.

The bill, authored by State Rep. J.D. Prescott (R-Union City), would allow governing bodies to designate a time for attendees to speak, set a time limit and take reasonable steps to maintain order. Such rules would need to be posted or announced.

Attendees who break those rules would be subject to warnings, after the third of which they could be asked to leave the meeting or removed by law enforcement.

To be clear, the goal of the bill is not to silence. Rather, it is to maintain order.

Fortunately in Jay County, this has not been a major issue, though some meetings are allowed to become much more of a free-for-all than they should be. But in Randolph County, Winchester City Council has been hamstrung by this problem for more than a year. The same handful of individuals have sought to monopolize meetings, to the detriment of the council getting anything done and to others who are seeking to observe and/or express their own concerns.

Former Jay County Commissioner Jim Zimmerman was outstanding at handling such difficult situations. While he was never president of commissioners, Zimmerman chaired Jay County Plan Commission during a period when contentious topics such as confined feeding operations and wind farms were being discussed. He made sure everyone got their say, but was not afraid to tell someone they were out of line if they were talking out of turn, being disrespectful or interrupting others.

Dunkirk Mayor Jack Robbins also earns high marks for making sure residents get to have their say but also being willing to tell them it’s time to move on, thus making sure city council can conduct its necessary business.

It’s worth clarifying that there is a difference between a public meeting and a public hearing. A public meeting — regular city council, commissioners, board of works meetings, etc. — is a business meeting conducted for the public to observe. While it is good practice for such groups to allow public comment, it is not required. Public hearings, on the other hand, are specifically designed to hear public comment on a particular issue.

You’ll find no bigger advocate for the First Amendment — Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances — than us. But none of those rights are unlimited. You can’t yell, incite panic or make true threats of violence against an individual. We, as a newspaper, cannot commit libel.

Nor should any individual, or group of individuals, be allowed to monopolize or constantly disrupt a government meeting.

If House Bill 1338 becomes law, we’d suggest all local units of government:

•Hold a public comment period at or near the beginning of their meeting (forcing those with concerns to wait through sometimes lengthy meetings discourages participation).

•Limit each individual’s comment time — three minutes seems fair, five at the most — after which the governing body may or may not respond or ask questions.

Simple.

The bill made it through second reading in the Indiana House this week and is headed for a third reading Monday. If approved, it would then move to the Senate.

It should continue to progress and be signed by the governor.

We hope, once implemented, it will make for a smoother process for all local units of government, a process in which constituents are able to address their elected officials and the business of our towns, cities, counties and other government units can be effectively conducted.

Freedom of speech. Orderly effective government.

Both are essential to our way of life. — R.C.