Clapping Not Allowed

[XLFD]

A city first banned the ability for the local citizens to make comments at the beginning of the meetings this January.  When those who were quieted wished to show their approval of local issues that came to the city council by clapping, they were further shut down by being further disallowed to clap.  Does this sound like a scenario from Russia or mainland China?  No it's from New York.

PEEKSKILL, N.Y. (1010 WINS) — Want to get yourself thrown out of a Peekskill City Council meeting? Start clapping.

After a series of boisterous meetings, Mayor Mary Foster is trying to bring decorum back to the chamber by banning clapping.

“We’ve had to end meetings because the disruptions just became too unruly,” Foster said.

However, critics of the measure spoke with 1010 WINS’ Al Jones and said they felt like they were being treated like kindergarteners.

“If that was the only incident, it would be very different. But we’ve been receiving that kind of treatment consistently and this is just one little piece of that puzzle,” Jim Adler said.

Adler said the mayor and council are trying to silence anyone who doesn’t agree and he’s not happy about it.

“The bullying and the lack of decorum when she and her leadership in Peekskill treat people with such disrespect,” he said, adding he would continue to attend the bi-monthly meetings and clap.

Tracy Breneman admitted that the meetings have become a bit loud, but doesn’t agree with the rule.

“They institutionalized this no clapping among other things, which is absolutely absurd,” she said.

Mayor Foster argued that the rule is just another attempt to get through meetings with less interruption, but critics in Peekskill were reading the Declaration of Independence in protest.

“You think that a no clapping rule is really going to make these issues go away?” asked community activist Darrel Davis.

The City Council voted unanimously to ban clapping on Sept. 12. In January, the council also eliminated a public comment session at the beginning of meetings. 

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/09/27/peekskill-residents-livid-ab...

[AQUAMAN]

The Mason  County Commission also stated something like this last year when the wind farms for Lake Michigan were about to be voted on. Too bad, I started clapping anyhow when the locals' comments came against the idea. And I was joined by many others, too many to stop us. Another example of tyranny against the people, either let it happen, or fight for what is right I say.

[Willy]

Many cities require that people refrain from clapping during open meetings.

[AQUAMAN]

An infringement of "Free Speech" is what this is, and needs to be repealed at ANY and ALL levels of our elected governments. Either we DO have a SAY-SO, or We DON'T! Simple as that I say. And such expressions, as long as Not Violent or Invasive beyond Reason, are and SHOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, FOREVER MORE! Either that or have a Monarchy in charge, which is what America is ALL ABOUT!

[XLFD]

Yet that doesn't make it right, Willy, and the clapping part is just a small part of it.  When Peekskill decided to eliminate the public comment section of the meetings, they did the worse damage to free speech.  These meetings were open meetings in name only, and the only input the citizenry had, it appears, is through clapping or booing or carrying on in some other way as the council went about its business.   

When City Hall makes it useless for the people to attend meetings, the people either revolt or do not attend.  It's usually the latter, and that's when tyranny and corruption take root.  And that's the root of the problem here in Ludington.  The current regime has promoted apathy amongst the citizens at large and stifled dissent by ordinance.

[Willy]

The fact is, noone has challenged it so more cities are establishing the no clapping rule and people are just accepting it. Just like X's ban from city hall, until it's legality is challenged or there is a monumental uprising of public support and activism the practice of City Hall banning will continue just like all the other unconstitutional laws. Democracy is not easy or cheap and as long as we have a large population of hand sitters nothing will change. This next election will show just how in tune the citizens really are. If they have been paying attention and really want a positive change in local government or even care, then X should be a shoe in but if it is business as usual, then voter apathy will remain the norm. A major drawback to change is inept, inaccurate and biased news reporting by local news medias. Local newspapers that continue to promote cronyism, ineptitude and corruption by continuing to practice poor or negligent journalism only adds fuel to the fire. It's to bad that Ludington does not have the leadership or citizens [except X and his supporters] who really desire positive, efficient and corrupt free government.

[AQUAMAN]

Hand sitters is accurate and thanks Willy. The voter turnout in an off-year, when the Mayor and most seats are not up for election, could make a difference too, but I am hoping that isn't the case this time around. With 3,000 registered voters out there, they usually have only 500 or less vote from what I was told.

[XLFD]

Some of these things may slide through, but for the most part they are being challenged.  In Peekskill, they have been pushing the envelope since the public comment section was nixed, and there have been clappers since that ban has taken place in September.  It is only a matter of time that it will be tested in court I bet. 

As for the unconstitutional Workplace Safety Policy in Ludington, it will soon be an evil part of Ludington's history, as my attorney prepares to file a suit in federal court to knock it down.  Due to the nearly unprecedented, incredible infringement of civil liberties of that policy and its implementation on me, he has had to take a while in preparing it.  

As for the campaign, my opponent is spending a lot getting her message out, while I've tried to keep my budget appropriate for a job that will pay me $200 for four years work.  City Hall has actively worked against me, as regards signs and access, instead of being a neutral party.  The LDN has done a good job of marginalizing me.  I have actually been afraid (for the supporter) in seeking support from good people who might be targetted by powerful local cliques in business and government for actively showing such support for my candidacy.  If I win it will be a small political miracle.

[AQUAMAN]

Your opponent has name recognition on her side, and all the other clappers at the CC & the LDN sabotaging an innocent classy first run for office. Never knew it was THIS DIRTY in Ludington, removing signage and making slanders in the editorial to name just two, never been there or done this till now either, so was also naive. Your opponent does NOT HAVE a cogent, loyal, voting record though, and that is what shines through. People in general are too busy, and apathetic. But remember, it's NOT OVER till the Fat Lady sings, hope the opponent has a decent voice, or is she mute till Monday/Tuesday? Come Monday at MOM I'd take the gloves off a bit, not to be nasty, but to POINT OUT HER DEFICIENCIES, which are numerous over the last 8 years. Clearly another aloof arrogance is her platform, no substance to speak of for prosperity for the LOCALS at ALL! Just a CLIQUE Voter that we don't need anymore.