To the Editor:
Freedom of speech, the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States is an issue I hold in the greatest level of importance. I consider it as important as life …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
|
To the Editor:
Freedom of speech, the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States is an issue I hold in the greatest level of importance. I consider it as important as life itself.
I applaud the Warwick City Council for their role in protecting our citizens right to speak during the “Public Comment” section of every City Council meeting.
Warwick allows public comment for any item on the docket. If that item is postponed until the next meeting then the public comment is also postponed, but never eliminated.
Last winter, Robert Cushman was given 25 minutes to present his analysis and opinion of the city budget. He gave an intelligent report that I respected and agreed with for the most part. The firefighters union was there that night, in large number, and they tell me, they were supposed to speak in rebuttal after Mr. Cushman was finished. Unfortunately, his presentation took longer than the allotted time and the firefighters never had time for their rebuttal. They tell me they were disappointed, but they never complained to anyone about it.
I bring this example up, not to take sides, but to be fair to both sides. The Warwick City Council does defend our right to freedom of speech and Cushman’s report is a perfect example. I have researched every other city in Rhode Island and no other city offers public comment like ours does. Taxpayers are only allowed to observe, not participate. Other cities don’t allow public comment at City Council meetings. Warwick is the only city that does.
At the City Council meeting of November 16 a resolution, originally on the docket for that session, was postponed, but an angry taxpayer demanded to be heard. The item was no longer on the docket. The public comment portion was just as “postponed” as the resolution itself, but this taxpayer went to the microphone with no one’s permission and stated his opinion anyway. That was unfair to everyone in that meeting. That was unfair to the audience. That was unfair to the City Council. It was even unfair to the people he was with, by their association with him. And that wasn’t “freedom of speech.” It was “freedom of interruption.” It wasn’t given by anyone. It was taken by him. I hope he doesn’t continue to disrespect our council and the Warwick taxpayers this way. It doesn’t accomplish anything except lower his own level of credibility.
I will continue to attend the City Council meetings and I may comment during the “Public Comment” section of the meeting. I invite all taxpayers to join me. I’ve learned a lot at these meetings and I believe you will too. After all, it’s your money. You have the right to see how it is spent. The next meeting is December 14 at the Warwick City Hall, 3275 Post Rd. Please join me.
Happy Thanksgiving to all.
Richard Corrente
Democrat for Mayor - 2016
8 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
ronruggieri
Speaking about " free speech " and " public comment " in Warwick, I heard John Howell's morning interview with Talk Radio newsman Gene Valicenti where Valicenti feels out the Warwick Beacon publisher on Valicenti's BRIGHT IDEA of banning newspaper COMMENTS--- in The Providence Journal, for example - as they are frequently annoying ( to whom ? ) vulgar ( that's DEMOCRACY ) and " serve no purpose " ( like right here ). I guess Gene Valicenti thinks all we need is right-wing talk radio. And this is the last word in popular democracy ?
I commend Mr. Howell for not letting Gene make him sound too interested in this suffocation of PUBLIC COMMENT. If COMMENTS annoy the reader , he or she can just ignore them . And they are well monitored anyway. A democratic Socialist myself- giving critical support to Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont- I listen to 630wpro.com Talk Radio simply because I am interested in every barometer of PUBLIC OPINION. This morning there was a lot of hysterical rabble rousing by John DePetro on the hot topic of those oh-so-dangerous and sinister Syrian refugees. Certain illiberal liberals have boycotted John DePetro. I think this long boycott is foolish. Political correctness can also become tyrannical.
[ http://radicalrons.blogspot.com]
Thursday, November 19, 2015 Report this
Thecaptain
Rick,
By this statement in your comments it is clear that you have never read the council rules. "Warwick allows public comment for any item on the docket. If that item is postponed until the next meeting then the public comment is also postponed,".
I guess you weren't listening on Monday when I read the rule so here it is in black and white.
RULE 20. Any citizen of the City of Warwick may request to be heard on any docketed resolution or ordinance prior to passage by the City Council. Upon receipt of such request, the Council President shall refer the requesting citizen to the committee to which the proposed resolution or ordinance has been referred and the citizen shall be granted an opportunity to appear before the committee at its scheduled committee meeting, to present his or her views relative to the pro- posed resolution or ordinance.
For my edification, can you please point to anywhere in the city charter or the council rules that indicates and substantiates the false comment that you have made? There is no where in the rules that suggest what you "interpret" the rule as. Likewise, there is no area of the rule that would suggest that Mr. Harrington or any other council member can make up this crap as they see fit. The reason council rules exist in plain language is so there is no interpretation of them. That should be obvious, but we have seen how Ms. Wilkinson and Travis seem to dance around that rule every time one of their special interest groups shows up at city hall for a back slapping session, (ie the LGBT community, WFD, the gun folks, and lets not forget the chicken farmers or the de-vocalization of animals group)
Plain language, that's what the rules are written in. Just ask Harrington what the legal interpretation of "plain language" is.
Friday, November 20, 2015 Report this
Thecaptain
One more thing Rick,
Cushman's presentation was docketed through the proper procedure in the council. The resolution allowed him 25 min. The resolution did not allow for ANY public comment or question answer period. Get you facts straight. Don't take the default position "and they tell me".
Friday, November 20, 2015 Report this
Reality
I'm not going to dignify a response to your letter.....others will be pointing out your erroneous facts but I will say you have made Avedisian look good. Quite an accomplishment Richard.
Friday, November 20, 2015 Report this
richardcorrente
Dear Thecaptain,
Rob, I'll be happy to clear this up for you although I don't see how you're so confused about it.
As you pointed out, RULE 20 States that "Any citizen of the City of Warwick may request to be heard on any DOCKETED resolution..."
"Docketed" Rob. "Docketed!" When a resolution is taken off one "docket" and put on a future one, it is no longer A "DOCKETED" resolution for this session. It is now "DOCKETED" for the future "docket". That's why it's called "docketed"!
See! I was listening. Weren't you?
And as for the Cushman comment, you said "The resolution did not allow for any public comment." Doesn't RULE 20 apply to the firefighters just as much as everyone else? Aren't they part of "any citizen"? I think they are. As Roger would say "You can't have it both ways."
Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.
Hey, the tataug are still in. Want to launch from the Donna Travis dock in Oakland Beach and go get some Sunday?
Let me know.
Richard Corrente
Democrat for Mayor - 2016
Friday, November 20, 2015 Report this
richardcorrente
Dear Reality,
Thank you Roger,for your response that said you were "not responding". I don't know what I said that made "Avedisian look good" but thanks again for the "quite an accomplishment" complement.
Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.
Richard Corrente
Democrat for Mayor - 2016
Friday, November 20, 2015 Report this
Scal1024
Rob, as someone who was not there I'm curious what the docketed item was that was delayed? Also why was it important for you to speak that particular night? I believe you should have a right to comment, I'm just wondering why they wouldn't allow you to speak that night.
Sunday, November 22, 2015 Report this
Thecaptain
Scal,
The item that was docketed was an ordinance by Vella Wilkinson to introduce a law into the books that mandates firefighters have use of apparatus to perform shopping. Rule 20 indicates that any item "docketed" allows any "Warwick resident" to comment at the committee hearing. Additionally, in accordance with RI general laws - Secretary of State, indicates any changes to docketed items must be publicized within 48 hrs of the meeting to be in accordance with the RI open meetings act.
Simply said, even if an item is postponed, held, or removed, Warwick residents are still allowed to make comment. Further, nothing in the council rules suggests that the "author" of the ordinance has the right by discretion, to allow or not allow any resident to speak, and even further, there is no "historical interpretation" of law that is written in simple english. (see RI general laws)
The realty of what took place simply indicates that the city solicitor and many council members don't even understand the rules of the council as pertains to the open meetings act. By the way, the audio of the entire exchange is online. Hope this clarifies.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015 Report this