PERHAPS NORTH CANTON'S FOREMOST CITIZEN ACTIVIST-MIRIAM BAUGHMAN- COMMENTS ON LAW DIRECTOR'S "NOT UNDER OATH" ADMONITION
In this continuing series on North Canton City Council's demonstrated antagonism, seemingly since Tim Fox became the Council appointed law director in September, 2012, towards its any critically minded day-in, day-out citizen especially in the context of what this blogger calls "Public Speaks" but which Council terms as being "Recognition of Visitors."
Of course, any who come to Council to "praise Caesar" are welcome with wide open arms.
The point being even in its agenda listing terminology, Council distances itself from North Canton taxpayers and voters.
North Canton Council is a model of how local government should not conduct itself vis-a-vis its constituencies.
For a local government body that is at the pinnacle of how government interacts with its citizenry and, by the way, with the media is the Board of Stark County Commissioners.
The only North Canton Council member who comes anywhere what a councilperson ought to be is Daryl Revoldt.
However, it appears to the SCPR that Revoldt has made several switches in terms of embracing citizen accessibility over his long term service in North Canton government as the city's mayor, council member and council president interrupted here and there with breaks in service.
The zenith of his "pro-citizen" (even those who critique council) was during a recent break in which he worked at the Ohio Department of Economic Development and at Stark State College.
Here and there during that space he stuck his nose into the functioning or or lack thereof into the council side of North Canton government.
It has been amazing to see. A former insider to North Canton government who the SCPR believes has been the most "over all the place" and engaged with fellow council members and the administration and from the perspective of a private citizen being rudely treated by his former fellows in the "Public Speaks" forum seemingly reverting to a "make no waves" councilman.
This blogger fully understands the need of elected officials to be collegial, somewhat diplomatic in differing with fellow officials in order to not be marginalized by the "group think mentality" that appears to have the remaining council members in its grip.
And it may be that the North Canton voting public may be waking up to stagnant, "status-quo," and its seeming nobody on the "outside of North Canton government" has anything to offer and therefore be as chilling to public input as feasible and still function as a semblance of citizen interactive government.
This is where Law Director Tim Fox comes into the picture.
The SCPR believes that in late 2011 and through September, 2012 when he served as Ward 3 councilman was a segue for him ultimately becoming council appointed law director as part of "let's keep it the family" mentality of the councilpersons at the time of which Daniel "Jeff" Peters appears to The Report as being the primary architect of.
This blogger has come to believe that Fox was appointed by council with an understanding that his "off-the-record" mandate was to rein-in a particular citizen activist and beyond that any North Cantonians who questioned the actions, policies and practices of North Canton Council.
Council members have wanted to have it both ways.
On one hand they have wanted to appear citizen friendly even those citizen who might not bringing "good tidings" to the ears of Council during Public Speaks.
On the other, they appear to provide Law Director Fox with cover (in the context of recalling of an apparent primary reason he was hired in the first place) to lash out at those citizens doing the critiquing.
In this vein, it was gratifying to hear from one of North Cantons high quality citizens who takes seriously a citizen's responsibility to interact with government, to wit:
From: Miriam Baughman ...
To:Martin Olson
...
Nov 28 at 9:42 PM
Hi Martin,
...
My Comment:
Regarding today's blog: You should never have had to write this blog about the problems that occur during North Canton City Council meeting's public speaks between residents and the Law Director. The City Council President should not have to run interference between the Law Director and residents during public speaks.
The function of the Law Director during City Council meetings is not to respond to residents during public speaks. The functions of the Law Director during Council meetings is to give legal advice to Council members upon request.
City Council meetings should be conducted according to Roberts Rules. All City Officials who partake in City Council meetings should stay in their own lanes.
Miriam Baughman
In Part 1 of this series the SCPR wrote, in part:
As long as North Canton Council allows Law Director Tim Fox and his seeming chronic anti-public participation in government ways persist, there will continue to be a North Canton Council that appears to be out-of-touch with its public ... .
On reflection "allows" in not what the SCPR believes with respect to council's failure to keep the law director in his lane. Rather The Report thinks that Council in majority sentiment demands that Fox act the enforcer in Council's apparent desire to chill dissent.
The SCPR does not think the the "restructuring" of the North Canton Council order of business trumpeted by Revoldt as some sort of enhancement of citizen participation in North Canton governments abates in any fashion what appears to be an overall Council agenda of only wanting to hearing the praises of citizens and to tamp down on any critiquing.
Of course, everybody knows that if one speaks out at a local government meeting and has not been put under oath beforehand, anything the citizen has to say should be taken with "grain of salt."
The Council governors themselves have taken an oath of office to support the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions which as a primary goal sanctifies and encourages citizen participation of a government "of the people, for the people and by the people."
In chilling incisive citizen participation, North Canton Council brings into question their upholding their respective oaths of office.
With Law Director Fox being unleashed by Council on November 12th, it, notwithstanding the addition of Daryl Revoldt to its ranks, is sending a signal that only the fawning need participate in the "Public Speaks" part of North Canton City Council meetings.
In recognizing the achievements of Council, why would anybody want to put them under oath beforehand.
Isn't their being "truly factual" self-evident?
No comments:
Post a Comment