Houlton eyes limiting public comment

HOULTON – Town councilors on Monday evening considered adopting an advisory that could change the way the public participates in meetings and how complaints are made about municipal personnel.

The advisory will be studied by Town Attorney Dan Nelson before it is returned to the council for consideration.

“The advisory comes from the Drummond, Woodsum and MacMahon, a Portland law firm that often represents school districts,” Town Manager Peggy Daigle told councilors. “In an open forum, everything is game in terms of public comment.

“Under this advisory, if people want to bring forward comments or discuss things, they bring it to the town manager. The town manager then makes sure that the council has full information so they can answer questions.”

Daigle’s words brought mixed reaction from the council.

“I feel public comment is good,” Chairman Dale Flewelling said at the meeting. “But it is difficult to know how much to let a person elaborate and when not to. If an item is not on the agenda, sometimes the council doesn’t have enough information to comment.”

“I think it will allow greater public participation,” Daigle said. “It provides better protection for the council in making sure things don’t get out of hand.”

Councilors Gerald Adams and Phil Bernaiche rejected the idea.

“People need to be heard, and they have a right to be heard,” Bernaiche said. “We don’t get many people here [at meetings,] and when we do, they should have the right to unload, as long as they’re not cursing.”

“We need to take constructive criticism,” Adams said. “I have a problem with this. I would never not allow someone to come to that podium and speak up. I didn’t know we had a problem with public comment.

“Evidently, the town manager came up with this herself.” Councilor John Fitzpatrick disagreed, saying the council had discussed it a year ago.

“We discussed it at our retreat last year,” Fitzpatrick said. “We discussed it a lot.”

“I thought it was over and done with,” Adams replied, “but now we’re bringing it up?”

“There were issues,” Fitzpatrick continued. “This protects the town manager and the council.”

Daigle said she felt that the process would better handle complaints about municipal personnel.

“This makes sure that the council doesn’t veer out on a limb that could put them at risk for defamation of character,” Daigle said. “It also gives personnel due process. It is timely, and I think we should take a look at it.”

Council Paul Cleary drew criticism after he remarked that the television cameras and the sound, used to broadcast council meetings, should be shut off during the “public comment and councilors’ remarks” portion of the meeting.

“That would prevent any grandstanding by us and the audience,” Cleary said. “And no one will make us look like fools.”

Bernaiche and Adams both disagreed, reiterating that the public had a right to be heard.

“We have got to be careful,” Cleary said. “If someone says something about a town employee, the employee could sue the person [who made the remark] and us … I’m just saying that turning the cameras off during that portion of the meetings would help. So on Wednesday in the newspaper, I’ll be a communist.”