That's the number one question I get from people after they watch a long public hearing or citizens time. "How do you sit up there and listen to that?" I reply, "well, it's my job". After an hour or so it isn't a lot of fun as my back starts to hurt but it is part and parcel of this job so I get up and stretch. That helps some but by the next day I am in a fair amount of pain.
Another question is "How do you listen to those people when they are obviously wrong/crazy/uniformed/whatever"? The answer is easy: almost everyone that speaks gets a least something or almost everything wrong. Nothing wrong with that. Their job is to tell me what they think. My job is to use the time I've spent on these subjects, the city's staff and my life experience to figure out what, if anything, to do about it. For instance, people at the recent public hearing regarding abortion clinics wondered why such a "common sense" approach to regulation wouldn't work? I can tell you in all honesty that, based on my experience with "Definition of a Family", the federal courts aren't much interested in common sense. The Federal system is an otherworld where common sense is not a primary concern where constitutional rights are at stake. No indeed, my job is to discern what an individual speaker is trying to convey. Some folks are passionate and tightly focused. Some are angry. Some wander all over the place. Some, well, you're not really sure what they're talking about but I need to figure out – at the most fundamental level – what they are trying to get accross. Most times you can sift something from the speakers words.
I will say that I have never understood why speakers feel compelled to threaten or insult the Mayor and Council members. Delegate Bob Marshall the other night told the Council "we will be responsible for the mayhem and unrest in the city" (or something close to that) if we didn't approve the "Aveni Amendment". What does that mean? Is he going to lead the unrest and mayhem? Another speaker indicated that the only reason the Council hadn't already approved the Aveni amendment was that we were being "paid by the abortion clinic". Money/corruption is always a fan favorite. It is with some regularity that we're accused of "lining our pockets", being ignorant, greedy, dumb, etc, etc. I think it's fine to disagree and be passionate about it but bribes from the abortion clinic? Really?
The one thing that I would change about citizens time: I would move non-resident speakers to the back of the line during citizens time. The taxpayers of Manassas should be first in line to address their leadership and not blocked behind people from all over. It is, after all, our money and our home town that is on the line.
March 15, 2014 at 5:20 pm
As to your last paragraph about Citizens Time: well, since it is a complete Code overhaul, put this section on the list as it is the key paragraph –
Sec. 2-1. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Citizen means any person, whether a resident of the city or not.
(Code 1978, § 2-24.1(e))
Cross reference— Definitions generally, § 1-2.
March 15, 2014 at 5:23 pm
"I will say that I have never understood why speakers feel compelled to threaten or insult the Mayor and Council members."
You forgot one group – those who either speak or write on a local blog (i.e. Moonhowlers) and say a Council Member ran on a pro-life platform, and since voted on Feb. 3rd to support the planned phase-in, that the members of the pro-life community will remember at next election time. This group who also then lobby to pressure a vote and, in my mind, "correct" the Elected, are also ones who fit in your paragraph.
March 15, 2014 at 6:08 pm
Art imitates life. Aaron Landsman & Mallory Catlett have done “City Council Meeting” in Fairfax during Fall for the Book last year and in other communities. You learn, and see your community in a different light, by seeing it performed on a stage, as a play. And the community gets to participate. So the person who likes to yell at the council member…gets to play the council member in the play.
Here’s the words from their website:
Basically they use the play “City Council Meeting” to incorporate local issues in each city where it is presented through partnerships with local artists, activists, government officials, and citizens. Audience members choose their participation level, acting as staffers, actual council members, citizens giving testimony, or bystanders. This piece is about the poetry in bureaucracy, the architecture of power, and the comedy of procedure.
The first session gives the playwrights a chance to connect with the college and the community…. its people and politics….then they return to produce and present the play in its entirety.
City Council Meeting is about the forms through which we govern ourselves, about the limits of empathy and participation in American life today. It considers issues of mutual respect and consensus versus compromise. In its fullest realized form, audience members and performers become mayors, staffers, schoolchildren, and clergy, and testify on issues of their concerns.
http://www.citycouncilmeeting.org/
March 16, 2014 at 10:33 am
I appreciate your patience with the long ones. Next time, let me buy you a milkshake before the meeting.
March 18, 2014 at 7:54 pm
Your contempt for the people you supposedly serve is evident