file photo Boyd Loving
“Manner of Addressing the Council” – Village of Ridgewood Ordinance 3-19
July 15 2014
Boyd Loving
Here’s the complete version of 3-19 as posted on the Village’s web site.
Read it before you go to the podium and comply while you’re up there, otherwise Aronsohn might personally give you the hook.
§ 3-19Manner of addressing Council.[Amended 1-11-1994 by Ord. No. 2442]
A. Persons other than Council members may be permitted to address the Council in the proper order of business. A person present may, upon recognition by the Chair, be heard either upon ordinances upon second reading or at the time of petitions and oral communications from the public and at such other times as the Council may, by majority vote of those present, specifically permit. No person shall address any remark or question to any specific Council member, nor shall any person be permitted to address the Chair while a motion is pending. A Council member may, through the Chair, respond to any communication or address received pursuant to this section.
B. Except upon consent of the Council, by the majority vote of those present, each person addressing the Council pursuant to this section shall be required to limit his remarks to five minutes and shall at no time engage in any personally offensive or abusive remarks. On a hearing on ordinances on second reading, a person who has previously addressed the Council on the issue may be permitted a period of no more than an additional five minutes, after all others desirous of speaking on the issue have had an opportunity to do so, provided the comments of the speaker are not repetitive. The Chair shall call any speaker to order who violates any provision of this section.
Is Aronsohn now trying to suppress our fundamental Freedom of Speech as guaranteed by the Constitution ? He may not like what people say but too bad, it is our right to say it !! This is America and if he does not like it then leave.
Thank you for these details……….. Perhaps, it will help in future meetings.
So much for “Paul’s conversations” with the public. Yes #1 the liberal agenda has run amok. Paul is in crisis mode.
Obviously, Paul doesn’t like what he’s hearing.
Here we go – shoot the messenger.
Next step – streamed/televised meetings will become “too expensive” and they will unsuccessfully attempt to ban visual and audio recording devices from the meeting room.
When they start to pull shit like this, you know that they’re running scared.
What about how members of the public are addressed? I witnessed some serious shut downs during the Valley hearings and Mr. Pucciarelli just recently indulged himself in some strong words at a taxpayer’s expense.
Our elected officials have pushed their constituency to its breaking point by continuing to ignore concerns about their previous questionable behavior. The Council has believed that by ignoring these transgressions, they will just go away. Now when the public demands that the Council answer our questions, the Council goes “letter of the law” to silence them.
Remember GW in June 2010. Remember history. The people will not be silenced.
All statements in the comment in question were made in the third person in a calm voice.
The only persons raising their voices, pointing fingers, uttering slanderous words, veering off topic, and attacking ad hominem were on the dais. Where is the ordinance outlining the comportment of the council?
If the ordinance allows 5 minutes for each public comment, why does the bell ring at 3?
Or perhaps the use of bad language won’t do it either.
Aronsohn and Pucciarel , and Hauck regularly put down their colleagues on the council for no good reason. Usually they are trying to cow somebody into refraining from accurately describing the three amigo’s actual behavior, or what they should have done but didn’t, or explaining why what they did or failed to do was ethically or legally or morally wrong. So they basically want to disarm their political opponents while retaining complete flexibility to fillet people they don’t like with impunity. How and why do we put up with this transparently mendacity behavior in our elected officials?
The bell rings at 3 because the Council would rather hear themselves talking than hear those who pay the bills talking.
Perhaps you should speak to friend the Mayor, Dom and tell him to changes his ways.
why not let people speck what’s one there mind.
Because they want just the good news. Our Mayor can’t put bad news on his web site and the Deputy Mayor ego can not take it.
It is a paradox that every dictator has climbed to power on the ladder of free speech. Immediately on attaining power each dictator has suppressed all free speech except his own.
Herbert Hoover
“2) remarks that are either personally abusive or offensive. “With the Three Amigos that anything that doesn’t tout the accomplishments .
If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
George Washington
What objective criteria are being used to determine whether a remark is personally abusive or offensive? Answer: there are no objective criteria to determine such. This is a subjective call based upon the whim of our mayor.