The Farmington Board of Selectmen’s decision on Tuesday evening to adopt a policy banning virtually all political activity on town property was a very unfortunate one, and it should be reversed as quickly as possible.
Putting aside the fact that this new policy may well violate the Constitutional rights we all enjoy to both peacefully assemble and to freely petition our government, this new policy is simply a very bad idea. If enforced, it could prohibit people from presenting petitions or picketing or even engaging in political discourse on any property owned by the town.
Want to pass around a petition at a Hippach Field ballgame to make baseball the official sport of Farmington? Forget it, it’s forbidden.
Want to stand in Meetinghouse Park holding up a sign objecting to the way our town is governed? Don’t do it, it’s not allowed.
Want to spend some time in the parking lot of the town office trying to persuade people that our town taxes are too high? You’re getting the idea.
Democracy isn’t always neat and pretty. Or quiet. It means putting up with blowhards on television and seeing bumper stickers that make you want to mistake your gas pedal for your brakes and even getting asked to sign a petition backing a cause you think is idiotic or downright mean-spirited.
But the answer to pushy petition peddlers at an Old Crow Band concert isn’t to start carving up the First Amendment.
It’s to realize that that minor evil is far easier to take than making it illegal for all of us to peacefully say what we think where we want to say it.
I know that the decision of the Farmington Board of Selectmen was a well-meaning one, but our town parks and offices and meeting spaces are the last places we should make off limits for political discourse.
The best way to handle someone like that when they are bothering you, is to look at them as though they are an idiot and then ignore them. They will go away (and, hopefully, get the hint)
Does that mean that you can not vote on town property? Could you have a Town Meeting? How is “Political Activity” defined? Glad it was withdrawn.
I agree with what Woody writes here until he says that the decision of the Board of Selectmen was a well-meaning one. After attending most of the Board meetings since last November, I don’t feel I am among well-meaning people when I am there. I feel I am among arrogant, hostile people, with an agenda of their own which has nothing to do with representing me as a citizen. Just what their real goals are, or where they get them, I haven’t enough experience to figure out. Few voters ever attend those meetings, and I keep wondering whether, if more of us attended and took a look at what goes on, we might vote the pack of them out. I have always thought of Farmington as a town of friendly, helpful people; but I am in another city when I walk into a Selectmen’s meeting.
Supposedly these are public meetings, but they are held in a room that can’t accommodate more than a very few members of the public, and we have to climb over people’s knees. On the occasion when the people asking for a town meeting to reconsider funding the AWAP presented a petition, most of them had to stand in the hall. Why aren’t the meetings held in the Community Center?
Again and again, when I have expressed my thoughts, which I think are as well-meaning and well-thought-out as any others I hear there, I have been rudely and hastily told that my thoughts are irrelevant and I am wasting their time. Or they whine that they shouldn’t be criticized. And then they go right on with their agenda as if I hadn’t spoken.
I don’t see any other members of the public even trying. And I can’t keep it up. My health is on its last legs, and going to those meetings is the most unhealthy thing I do.
And Woody, I would still like your opinion: if they hadn’t backed off, would what they “decided” on Tuesday night have any legal standing at all? Do they have power to make new ordinances for the town all by themselves without any notice, at the drop of Dick Davis’s hat? Would the cops obligingly arrest anyone who did something “political” on town property? Would the courts find them guilty? and of what? And what is the penalty, since nobody stated one? Most of us can’t afford lawyers. Are there any checks on the town manager and Board of Selectmen?
As a Selectman, I voted my “gut” on this one by opposing the policy. But that does not mean I support people who antagonize would-be listeners at, of all things, an Old Crow Band concert. What I support is the right for people to enjoy a free, outdoor concert on Monday nights. The Old Crow Band, and now others, have the right to play their music. (Yes, it’s tradition) Why should some opportunistic petitioner go around and interfere with the public’s right to free music? Because it’s the petitioner’s right, too? Sure is.
I’m planning to attend the concert on Monday night and observe. I’ve heard this petitioner is rude, pushy, and disrepectful. I want to see him/her in action. And it will be fun to listen to the band.
Farmington is unique because we have a “band stand” and because there are folks who enjoying sharing their talents as much as we, the untalented, enjoy listening. And even better, these concerts are free.
Our “band stand” goes back a long way. It is over 100 years old, being built about 1903. In that era, people enjoyed band music, too. And most often, the music was provided by Wheeler’s Band, a group of musicians who were directed by Charles Wheeler. Wheeler’s band was an extension of the original Coronet Band that was established in the early 1870’s. I wonder if people who listened back in 1903 were subjected to a rude petitioner? I’m guessing not.
I really question why our local Board of Selectman could have the gall to pass such a major policy that anyone with even a basic understanding of the Constitution knows is at the very least going to be highly questionable, and most likely going to be downright unconstitutional. Praise to Ms. Porter for voting it down, but I really wonder about the three members who voted for this policy. Why didn’t their “gut” tell them how insanely over-broad this curb on free speech is? And I have the same question as Ms. Kuenning about whether the Selectmen even have the power to pass such a “policy.” If they do, something should be done to make sure that they don’t in the future, because clearly they do not have the proper understanding of the Constitution to make a decision like this. (At the bare minimum, you would think they would have at least thought to consult a lawyer or someone with understanding of the legal issues before passing the policy.)
PS: If the Old Crow Band or another musical act plays a political song in the park, would they be in violation of the policy?
I guess what this whole matter boils down to…we can’t legislate common sense, common decency, and just plain common manners. People these days just don’t seem to have much of any of these things. The origin of the complaint was from an attendee at the concert, and a couple of band members who finally had to ask the petitioner to get off the band stand because they were interfering with the band members trying to play music. That certainly doesn’t show much respect. to band members who are playing for NOTHING for the town’s enjoyment.
There are people (mostly over 40) that enjoy hearing Stars & Stripes Forever. That could be defined as “political”. What about “America the Beautiful”? Or “You’re a Grand Old Flag” or other John Philip Sousa tunes. He composed a lot of band music that showed his love of this country.
But this discussion wasn’t started by the kind of music, but the behavior of a petitioner. And if their behavior offends someone, or doesn’t leave an area when asked, I consider that harrassment, and harrassment is punishable by law. Right?
Doe the town own the sidewalks too. If so I guess the lady collecting signatures against gay marriage woul d be in violation too, as well as the people in black who stand in front of Post Office every friday.
The thing to remember here is that sdelectmen are just people too and can make mistakes. Hopefully they will reverse this at the next meeting.
I can’t wait to see the MCLU weigh in on this one.
Nancy Porter writes,
“I’m planning to attend the concert on Monday night and observe. I’ve heard this petitioner is rude, pushy, and disrepectful. I want to see him/her in action.”
She’s a woman, if it’s politically allowable to distinguish the sexes these days; and I don’t know whether she will be there tonight or not. (She wrote to me and asked whether I thought there would be an increased turnout at the concert “because of all the publicity”; I told her I didn’t know, but that my guess was there will be some increase.) I’ll be there, God and weather permitting, but not with a petition. (I declined to become a signature gatherer simply because there was too much red tape involved, and I need my limited time and energy for what I can do better.)
But then Nancy writes,
“The origin of the complaint was from an attendee at the concert, and a couple of band members who finally had to ask the petitioner to get off the band stand because they were interfering with the band members trying to play music.”
Since you’ve already said you weren’t there, Nancy, you really don’t know what the petitioner did. The complainant was probably politically motivated and may not have accurately represented what happened. I very much doubt the petitioner actually interfered with band members playing music. You add,
“And if their behavior offends someone, or doesn’t leave an area when asked, I consider that harrassment, and harrassment is punishable by law. Right?”
God save us. Nancy, some people are offended by ANYTHING that expresses disagreement with them. I was once accused of harassment because I sent another woman a few e-mails she disagreed with. She called the cops, and a cop actually showed up at my door threatening me with criminal penalties if I sent this woman another e-mail. I thought it over and eventually sent an e-mail to the Farmington Police Department saying I have a Constitutional right to send e-mail to whom I choose. Sent a copy to the complaining lady. Never heard any more from any of them.
There’s a very, very big difference between saying we should punish harassment and saying we should have a total ban on all political activity on any town property. The reason this was such a horrible decision was because the Selectman chose to pass a law to deal with this one minor nuisance, and in the process banned all sorts of speech that is required by the Constitution to be free.
Also, I think it’s worth pointing out that there is no such things as a right not to be offended. It’s a public place, and while there can be reasonable limits put on speech, they must fall under a host of detailed and well-understood principles, which it’s quite clear that this absurd law didn’t. It makes absolutely no difference whether people are “offended” by the petitioner being pushy, or whether the majority of people there would have preferred to hear the music. If she was genuinely harassing someone, then deal with it like any other harassment issue. More power to you. But the fact that people would have preferred to hear the Old Crow Band instead of having to deal with a petitioner is totally irrelevant, at least with respect to the policy that the Board ended up passing.
One of the many reason we have the 1st Amendment is to protect us citizens from well-intentioned-but-grossly-uninformed town officials who try to pass laws that infringe on our basic rights. Luckily in this situation there was enough common sense to seek a legal opinion, and no doubt whatever group is charged with reviewing this will laugh at how absurd it was.
Although the MCLU has chimed in on this issue, I still feel it is the duty of the citizens of Farmington to inform the selectmen that they need to rescind this assult on our freedoms.