18138_Authority_Feb

municipalauthorities.org | 43 Remember, you still have to ensure the public has an opportunity to provide public comment, but you can enforce proper procedures for when, how, and for how long comments can be made. You may also prohibit the recording or streaming of the meeting prior to the call to order, during any recesses, and after adjournment. What if a board member is the one causing the disruption to our meeting? In this situation, your options are more limited than if it were a member of the public. Generally, you should rely on the chair to maintain decorum. You can publicly censure, admonish, and wag your finger, but the board cannot remove another board member (in most circumstances). You may have recourse if the board member’s conduct becomes a habit. In one case, the 3 rd Circuit held that a council president did not violate the First Amendment by removing a fellow councilmember from public meetings. In that case, the councilmember became unruly at two separate meetings, with about two months spanning between the occurrences. The council president had made “repeated pronouncements” that this member was “out of order.” During the first instance, the president called the councilmember out of order three different times before instructing police to remove him from the meeting. He was called out for “being disruptive and/or not addressing agenda items.” The councilmember had: (1) interrupted a citizen who had the floor and was speaking to council; (2) told the borough solicitor to “sit down and shut up” as the solicitor was preparing to answer a councilperson’s question; and (3) strayed from the agenda item he was talking about to question the president and police chief about the number of police officers at the meeting. During the second meeting, the councilmember again was called out of order three times in quick succession before the president instructed the police to remove him. At this meeting, the councilmember “continuously attempted to loudly interrupt” council as they were voting on agenda items. Subsequently, criminal complaints were filed against the unruly councilmember for his behavior. These charges were later dismissed but he sued the borough. The court noted that not all public property is open to unfettered public speech, for the First Amendment does not guarantee access to property simply because it is owned or controlled by the government, nor does it guarantee individuals – including Borough Council members – the right to communicate their views at all times or in any manner that may be desired. The council president’s actions of calling the councilmember out of order and subsequently having him removed from the meeting were content neutral and served the function of adhering to rules of decorum and confining the discussion to the purpose of the meeting. See Olasz v. Welsh , 2008 WL 5641580 (3d Cir. 2008). On the whole, our advice to avoid these situations is to remember to be civil and respectful toward your fellow board members. We know that tensions can run high in these situations, but recall that you are all in this together as representatives of the authority. S