Browsing this Thread:
3 Anonymous Users
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
 |
I understand the frustration that some people, both board members and members of the public, have with the current format. There are about half a dozen regular attendees who will speak at both the beginning and the end of the meeting with little purpose other than to disrupt the meeting, preen for the cameras, and delusionaly think that they are activists speaking on behalf of the children, or will be the next school board president themselves.
But that's a small price to pay for open participation. There are two comment periods. The first one at the beginning, is for speaking on specific agenda items. The second one is at the end and allows the speaker to speak on whatever item they want. It's after the agenda business has been conducted, so it doesn't get in the way of accomplishing that business. So what it means is that board meetings will be a little shorter, and that the free for all at the end of the meeting is over. But if someone didn't want to stay for that in the past, they could leave. As for taping, there's no reason not to tape it. If someone does not want to be taped, they can ask that the tape be turned off. Or they can express their concerns by letter or call the board members. And for what it's worth, I find that I learn something from some of the rants. Sometimes a valid point is made. Even if not, it makes me understand how to formulate my arguments and responses against such claptrap. At best, this decision is remarkably tone deaf.
Posted on: 2014/1/17 12:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This was posted on Facebook:
Akisia Grigsby 11:24pm Jan 16 TOPIC: BANNING OF VIDEO TAPING SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS in JERSEY CITY Let me update you on a few things that happened this evening. School Board President Sangeeta said that she decided to exercise her Presidential rights and ban video taping. School Board Marilyn Roman said that the other Board members weren't even consoled about such a big decision. And what is remarkable is that Sangeeta made this decision at the Caucus meeting, which I believe was last night. (Correct me if I am wrong.) WHY WOULD ANYONE MAKE SUCH A HUGE DECISION the night before a monthly school board meeting impacting the community and parent involvement? Her reasoning was that she has heard folks say if the meetings were not recorded then they would want to speak. And that maybe that is the reason for low turnout at board meetings. And that she wants to do things differently. SO THEN WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE LOW TURNOUT WHEN DR. EPPS RESTRICTED VIDEO TAPING???? AND WHO EXACTLY DID YOU POLL INFLUENCING YOU ON YOUR DECISION? I am appalled that she made this decision without including those who are really involved!! And WHAT MAKES IT WORST is that she lied to me in her email about the video taping being banned. THE SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT LIED TO ONE OF THE MOST RESPECTFUL REASONABLE PARENT ADVOCATES in Jersey City!!! What does that show you about transparency and communication? Which brings me to another point.. 1) If one states that one will ban the video taping of "AUDIENCE", then why was the video NOT RECORDING ALL THE SCHOOL BOARD AND ADMIN when they were speaking???? 2) Why not find alternate solutions in appeasing those who want to be recorded and those that don't as it was done under School Board Presidents Sterling Waterman and Sue Mack? As everyone knows.. I am thorough. I understand that there is no policy or law stating that the School Board has to video tape all meetings. But honestly, I thought we were moving in the direction of great communication and transparency. If I need to advocate to the Legislature and advocate for the revision of the sunshine law (making it mandatory to video tape and make all meeting videos public) due to the age of technology, then I will. The fire has been re-ignited.
Posted on: 2014/1/17 4:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
Unfortunately Yvonne, with the new "positive direction"the board is going, the parents will never know why ps38 wasn't on lockdown when the kid brought the gun to school and we won't know if when a kid brings another gun to school if protocol is to lockdown the school,positive progress and transparency at its best(sarcasm)
Posted on: 2014/1/17 1:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I just returned from a school board meeting. I haven't been to one since McCann was on the board. I was shocked how the board treats the public. They act as though the public is the enemy. The board had the camera turned off when the public spoke. So what did the public say? Parents who had children in School 38 complained that the school was not on lockdown when a child brought a gun to school. They said there could have been other students with guns and lockdown would have helped. Other parents complained about contracts. But the problem is- public speaking is before the business.
When parents raised questions about the contracts, the board said it would be answer later, code for do not bother us. I have been attending meeting for 40 years, they are the most arrogant group of public officials I have seen. They said they changed the policy on speaking because they did not like how the public treats them. Now I can see why.
Posted on: 2014/1/17 1:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
are we going backwards? Quote:
Posted on: 2014/1/16 23:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
What it discourages is the voters right to participate in the process and rather allows the board to pass bills without opposition .A simple solution would be to first of all to cut the number of items on the agenda, post them in the paper 2 weeks prior to the meeting.people who wish to speak would have to call 48 hrs prior and be scheduled to speak and limit the time to five minutes. Now that would be positive progress, but rather then do that (requires commitment from the ELECTED board) let's just discourage people from excersizing their rights
Posted on: 2014/1/16 22:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I couldn't have said it any better myself.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 22:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
This measure discourages negative participation in favor of positive participation in the Jersey City Board of Education. "Positive participation" -- in this case -- means actions that encourage the maximum number of people to get and remain involved in the democratic processes of our school board, attend meetings, etc. "Negative participation" describes actions that discourage others from getting and remaining involved.
I'm willing to guess that anybody against this policy (a) has not attended a JCBOE meeting in the last three years, or (b) is one of the people who like to be disruptive and/or speak at every opportunity for as long as possible with no regard for whether or not their comments are pertinent to the matter at hand. The policy should be revisited by the BOE in 6 months or so to assess how it is working. If it is not working as planned, change it.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 22:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It's always the same four or five people, asking multiple, lengthy questions about EVERY SINGLE resolution. Sometimes they go up more than once to ask questions on the same resolution. I have a hard time believing that they are affected by every ordinance the city council passes. They largely seem to fall under the category of people who can't get elected and are using this as a way to keep themselves in the public eye.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 21:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
That may be true with people speaking at Council meetings,however it is their right to question the decisions that are being made by the City Council/School Board especially since it most likely will have some affect on their lives. Just because You may not find it important what they have to say doesn't mean it's not important to them or others, and if you are bothered because most of the people leave prior to Your speaking, well most people who go to the meetings are concerned with certain issues and once they either had the chance to speak on the issue or get the answer to their question they leave.Am ideal way for those issues to be resolved would be First of all be on time ,no reason why a scheduled 6pm council or school board shouldn't start on time ,secondly have an additional meeting during the day (won't happen)
Posted on: 2014/1/16 21:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Sometimes I wish a similar rule existed at city council meetings. The democratic process is great but I think some people just like to hear themselves talk. There is a certain cast of characters - not naming names here - at every city council meeting that get up to ask questions on just about EVERY resolution, and sometimes take quite a while to ask those questions and debate with the city council. That's their right but it really makes the council meetings go on for four hours or more. I have spoken at a city council meeting once, at the open mic part at the end, and by the time I got up to speak, it was almost 10pm and over half the room had left by then. All because it was getting late and largely a result of the same four (maybe five) people who had to get up and ask multiple toothless questions about every single resolution.
I would regard those people as inconsiderate to others, and I also don't think this is what the founding fathers had in mind. They are just wannabe politicians (who could never get elected) and self-styled activits who think they are making a difference by making the council meetings drag out longer.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 21:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Of course it was done at a caucus,they knew the public would never go for it...your right had this taken place during the Healy administration it would've been an outrage,but because it's Fulops people ,it's all right.They want to muzzle the people and simply do what the administration wants....Similiar to the way they tried to change the Ambulance contract. Secretly and hope no one notices... Transparency is a Foreign word to this administration
Posted on: 2014/1/16 21:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I just spoke to Terrance McDonald, the JJ reporter. He told me the Board of Ed passed this yesterday during a caucus. It was on the agenda as an item. So without public approval, an important item concerning public speaking has already passed. This is outrageous. If Mayor Healy did this, this forum would be calling him all kinds of names. But these are Mayor Fulop's candidates and apparently, it is OK at a caucus meeting to passed a law eliminating public speaking. Where is the transparency that was promised? Also you are not allowed to videotape the meetings. So that means they will videotape the meetings then edit them for their own purpose.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 20:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I agree with Yvonne, according to the article the meetings are scheduled for 6pm ,yet rarely start on time, maybe the board members should think about leaving a little earlier, so as to start the meeting on time. The limiting the number of items a person can speak about is all about control. The board only wants to allow people to either speak on general topics or the agenda not both. I thought this was a democracy not a dictatorship!! As a taxpayer and a voter I should have a right to speak about whats on the agenda and a general question. If the board members don't want to sit through the public speaking portion or feel it's to time consuming they should've thought about that before they ran for the school board, they KNEW what it was all about then, now they want to change the rules in the middle.......this is a way for them to make changes to the schools without the parents/public's input, to me it's rather transparent what their motives and the politics behind it are. And we certainly know why they no longer want the meetings taped.... No record of what they did
Posted on: 2014/1/16 20:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I can assure you from having participated in my Agency's public process for many years, the community is FAR better served by concise, coherent, well-made arguments. These make a big impression on my Commissioners - they have told me. Lengthy diatribes by people who mostly like to hear themselves talk, or rambling complaints by people focused on single-issues not relevant to the body's jurisdiction will get people to tune out.
The BOE, like my Commission, is composed of people with expertise to bring to solving problems, but they shouldn't be expected to play bartender all night...
Posted on: 2014/1/16 20:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This is how contracts and other important issues can slip pass the public. We are talking about public tax dollars. If board members do not have the patience to deal with the public then they shouldn't run to be board members.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 19:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There absolutely should be limits on testimony at Public Hearings of any kind. Good for City Hall for trying to make this happen.
5 minute time limit? I work for an NYC Agency that has regular Public Hearings, often on controversial development projects that make the news. We set a 3-minute limit on testimony, and it works great. If you are going to take up valuable time at a public forum where officials are expected to make informed decisions on complex issues AND take community input into account, it's only fair to be required to think about your testimony, to make it coherent, to the point, and concise.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 19:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Rahway rejects proposal to stop taping public comments at meetings
Tom Wright-Piersanti/The Star-Ledger By Tom Wright-Piersanti/The Star-Ledger November 13, 2013 at 6:06 PM RAHWAY ? The Rahway City Council on Tuesday unanimously rejected a proposal to stop filming its meetings prior to the public comment period. Under Rahway's municipal code, the city is responsible for broadcasting its full monthly meeting live on its cable access channel, then airing the meeting again three days later. But an ordinance brought before the council Tuesday would have modified those rules to cut the broadcast short before the final segment, when citizens have five minutes to speak on any issue they want. The proposal was defeated 8-0 by the council, with Councilman James Baker abstaining, according to the city clerk. Mayor Samson Steinman introduced the idea after a resident used off-color language that the mayor worried might offend viewers at home, according to Councilman Robert Bresenhan Jr. ?While I believe the mayor had good intentions, I do believe there are other ways to protect citizens at home against vulgarities,? said Bresenhan, who was vocal in his opposition to the proposal Tuesday. He suggested the town search for alternate methods to keep their broadcasts clean, such as a 15-second tape delay like is used in talk radio. ?I don?t think it?s wise to take transparency out of the process, I?m all for transparency,? Bresenhan said. ?To me this would be a disservice to the people in town.? Steinman did not return repeated requests for comment. ?The public comment portions is generally when the public gets up and says things the council doesn?t like to hear,? said Walter Luers, president of the The New Jersey Foundation for Open Government, a group that seeks to increase transparency and accountability in the state. ?One might say you?re just cutting out the public portion because you don?t want the rest of the world to hear bad things about your town,? he said. Luers, who is an attorney, said there is no state law requiring towns to tape or broadcast meetings, so any modifications to the process would be considered legal. ?While there?s nothing technically illegal about it, it?s still stupid,? he said. ?Believe me, there?s a lot worse things on television than some guy ranting at the end of a council meeting.? http://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/201 ... _section_of_meetings.html
Posted on: 2014/1/16 19:40
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Tax-payers do not benefit from the circus/riot-like atmosphere that has been the hallmark of our BOE meetings of late.
I can personally attest to the unpleasant and inconvenient experience it is to attend a JCBOE meeting. These changes do not limit anybody's ability to speak and be heard by the board members. The current state has discouraged the participation of parents and others who have lives and schedules and are not able to spend 4-6hrs at a board meeting. Those who think 5 minutes is not enough time would likely not be satisfied with 10, 20 or 60 minutes either.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 19:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Why is more than 5 minutes needed? If comments longer than 5 minutes are required, can't the person put their concerns in writing, submit the letter to the BOE, and refer to the letter in his/her public comments so that the concern itself is on the record and referenced?
I've been to numerous BOE meetings where parents with kids, there for a school-specific issue, have to wait until the public comments portion of the meeting to have their say. That means, at times, waiting until 9 or 10pm. This proposed change would, I assume, ease the process for the parents and children. Granted, individuals who need/want lengthy time in front of cameras and a large audience might suffer, but their rights are not being denied, they simply must learn how to be more succinct.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 18:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
These are the people that the mayor put into office. I would like to hear his comments on this.
Posted on: 2014/1/16 18:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
The JC School Board want to limit public comments
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Posted on: 2014/1/16 18:26
|
|||
|
||||