I have received several requests to outline my proposal for restoring civility to city council deliberations. Below is an outline of the proposal with helpful links, and an answer to some of the most frequently asked questions.
Fairness is the cornerstone of civility.
For generations, we have worked to build a culture of accountability through transparency and fairness, which prevents a rush to judgment that allows passion to override reason. Such a culture recognizes the intrinsic value of every person by recognizing all voices deserve to be heard and considered. It also recognizes that we should learn from mistakes and that reconciliation, not cancellation, should be our goal.
As I stated when I announced my candidacy for city council last year – together, we must cancel cancel-culture.
Last week at Thursday’s special council meeting, I introduced a resolution for the council to work to establish a procedure that ensures fairness, openness, and civility when considering a resignation, censure, or other form of public condemnation of any person.
Please review these proposed changes and provide me your thoughts.
I propose we establish some simple rules that guide our actions – these rules require:
- The Opportunity to Respond: If a member of the council lodges an allegation of impropriety against another member of the council or the public during a public meeting, the person against whom the complaint was lodged shall have an opportunity to respond before the end of the meeting.
Rationale: All people have a right to be heard and this prevents ad hominin attacks without an opportunity to be heard. This is basic fairness.
- Notice of Resignations: All resignations of personnel whose resignations require the council’s attention shall be provided in writing to all council members.
Rationale: This procedure prevents confusion by ensuring communication is consistent in expression to all councilmembers.
- Due Process: All motions to censure will be in writing with supportive documents and statements allowing the person subject to the censure motion the opportunity to prepare a response. The censure process shall afford sufficient time for full notice and a full opportunity to respond and will allow the target of the censure timely access to relevant documents and information.
Rationale: History teaches us it is easy to light the torches and start the condemnation parade and that this rush to judgment often overlooks critical facts and rarely addresses the underlying problem. Due process provides fairness and facilitates a full understanding of the facts before acting.
These basic rules of fairness have not been followed by the council over the past several years and we have all witnessed the growing lack of civility, personal attacks, and failure to address critical issues and personality politics dominates council discussion. These proposals, I believe, will help bring the necessary changes to get us back on track.
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions.
- Does the law require due process when council censures against another member? Arguably not in most instances. This, however, does not mean that affording due process is wrong – in fact is a cornerstone of procedural fairness. For this reason, legislative bodies across the nation afford the one to be censured the right to know the claim against them and sufficient time to prepare a response to the claim.
- Isn’t it important to promptly condemn wrongful conduct? Yes and no. Our political culture is very prompt in expressing outrage and condemnation and often does so without understanding. Moreover, it is the easy political path to join the chorus of outrage rather than seeking to understand often leaving us in a worse position to prevent further problems.
- Why can’t you condemn the actions of school board member Christian DePaul relating to the photographs of Lynchburg’s school superintendents? I have condemned those actions and will continue to do so.
- Why hasn’t the city council voted to remove Mr. DePaul from the school board in light of his conduct? Removal would require a lawsuit in which the city must prove grounds for removal. There is doubt Mr. DePaul’s conduct rises to that level.
- What is the effect of the council voting to ask Mr. DePaul to resign? None legally or practically. Mr. DePaul indicated he does not intend to resign regardless of council action.
- Why did you express confusion regarding what had happened when considering the resolution to ask Mr. DePaul to resign? All of us received conflicting information. I was first notified we had a special meeting to accept Mr. DePaul’s resignation. Immediately before the meeting I was notified that Mr. DePaul was not submitting his resignation. Moreover, I was informed that the city council’s actions could not compel a resignation. Additionally, members of the council were not privy of the information and issues discussed in the closed school board meeting. This lack of knowledge and confusion as to the action of the city council invites a lack of understanding of the proper action to be taken.
I do not condone Mr. Depaul’s actions and have personally informed Mr. DePaul that I condemn his conduct. My resolution does not in any fashion prevent the council from condemning his conduct nor does it prevent any member of council from asking for his resignation.
You may wish to listen to my interview on WLNI to learn more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0EzTL88tgc&ab_channel=WLNIRadio .
I have also attached the two-page summary of ideas I provided to council members during the last city council meeting. I will continue to work for transparency and fairness in council procedures. Thank you for your questions and your input.