COMMENTARY

MARK SCHUMANN

“Following the lead of state and federal courts, moderators of local governmental meetings should err on the side of free speech, allowing for the widest possible expression of ideas.  At the end of the day, though, the fact remains that government meetings are held for the purpose of conducting the public’s business.”

Imagine if a couple United States senators or patients from a mental hospital took a field trip to a City Council meeting and each expected unlimited, unrestricted time to speak before the Council – and the cameras – one reading from Dr. Seuss’ book Green Eggs and Ham, followed by another who wanted to plod page by page through the phone book.

How would important public business ever be conducted, if citizens who insist on speaking for as long as they want about whatever they want were allowed to more or less hijack government meetings?

It is a question I often ponder when frequent performers at local government meetings, like Charlie Wilson and Brian Heady to name just two, posture before the cameras, pontificating endlessly about whatever issue has them disturbed enough to take up so much of the public’s time.

Last week, Wilson put on performances at the City Council meeting and at an impact fee workshop.  Heady, who has seemingly forgotten about his conviction many years ago for disrupting a school board meeting, was ranting before the City Council last week.

Heady insists he has a Constitutional right to take as much time as he wants to ramble on about the latest burr under his saddle. Whether his remarks are relevant to issues before the Council seems irrelevant to Heady.  It also does not seem to matter to Heady that he is often plowing ground already covered many times before.

Heady, who spent a number weeks in jail for violating probation following his conviction for disrupting a school board meeting, is simply wrong when he insists the Council and other local government bodies are obligated to allow for public comment during business meetings.  He is also mistaken when he claims the Council has no authority to place reasonable restrictions on the length of time members of the public can speak, or on the subjects about which they can offer comment and input.

It is important to remember that these meetings are held, and often televised, at public expense for the benefit of the public. City Council, County Commission and School Board meetings are not intended to be forums for the likes of Wilson and Heady to stage sideshows, as they seek to increase their name recognition in advance of yet another run for public office.

Besides, it is not as if Wilson and Heady are without other opportunities to let off steam.  Wilson is given ten to twelve minutes each week on a local radio station to share his shifting versions of the truth.  Heady has his own weekly television program, “Fired Up,” where he is free to rant and rave.

It is hard not to be sympathetic with the moderators of local public meeting who attempt to exercise tolerance with Heady and Wilson.  Both of these characters have short fuses and can try one’s patience. They both also have what appears to be an addiction to controversy and drama, and a yearning for the spotlight.

Both have also run for public office so many times it is a challenge to keep an accurate count of their failed campaigns.  The one notable exception was in the 2009 City Council election when, out of frustration over high electric rates, Vero Beach voters threw caution to the wind and put these two guys in office.

Heady spent much of his time on the Council arguing over meeting agendas. Predictably, he was not re-elected.  A month after being sworn in, Wilson was removed from office by Judge Kanarek for failing to meet the residency requirement for City Council candidates.  Wilson now lives within the city limits of Vero Beach, and may well be planning to run for a seat on the Council in November.

Wilson and Heady occasionally stumble across an idea worth hearing.  For those who have more do to than to simply listen to these fellows drone on, sifting the wheat from the chaff becomes a challenge. Following the lead of state and federal courts, moderators of local governmental meetings should err on the side of free speech, allowing for the widest possible expression of ideas.  At the end of the day, though, the fact remains that government meetings are held for the purpose of conducting the public’s business.

When Wilson, Heady, or anyone else, attempts to hijack these meeting for their own inscrutable motives, it is incumbent upon those who are responsible for moderating these meetings to insure that sufficient time is preserved to carry out the public’s business.