Thread by @shayshinecastle

Moving on to Part 2 of tonight's meeting: "Productive Atmosphere in Public Meetings" aka "How do we stop people from yelling cuss words at us?"

"There is room for 'reasonably hostility'" says engagement manager Sarah Huntley. She's quoting an official research term there.

"This has prompted a really important internal discussion," says Brenda Ritenour, neighborhood liaison

Boulder already had a public participation working group, which put together a new framework for engagement. Idk if they touched on civility as such.

Apparently they did, and the word "civil" is no bueno.

Ritenour: "We heard from many of our community members that the concept of civil can be marginalizing." The idea of "having to show up in a certain way to be heard at all" was discouraging.

A cross-departmental team already working on how to "change the culture," Ritenour shares.

Some things staff report experiencing:
Verbal attacks on motives, integrity of work, attacks on identity, being doxxed (publicly sharing personal info as a means of intimidation), being physically threatened, jobs threatened

"This act alone helps them feel more supported," Ritenour says.

Also v troubling: members of the community attacking someone based on their gender/religion/race, etc. and "using their size/gender" to physically intimidate staff

Yikes.

Huntley: This stuff is happening beyond council meetings.

Wallach asks about "source of income" as a protected class. Boulder did this in 2018 (banning landlords from not renting to someone based on where they get their $$) and Colorado followed this year! dailycamera.com/2018/08/24/bou…

Oh, wait, sorry. LAST year (2020) coloradonewsline.com/briefs/gov-pol…

Huntley going over how the law limits gov't ability to curb speed during meetings. Those First Amendment protections are strong.

But, generally, speech that "disrupts meetings" can be regulated.

Like, speech that impacts the work at hand or prevents the meeting from continuing. Not "disruptive" the way teenage girls wearing spaghetti straps suposedly "disrupts" the learning environment.

Huntley: "We're also realists. ... There will be times ppl show up in a way we wish they didn't. That is their prerogative and that is their right."

"The single best way to address behavior that does not acknowledge our shared vision ... is to ask individuals to consider" another way of engaging, Huntley says. Not by interrupting. "Encourage them to think about a different way to make their argument in the future."

"Silence is almost always interpreted as acceptance or tolerance and creates a chilling effect" among staff, Huntley says.

It's best when a council member who is viewed as a political or philosophical "ally" of the speaker be the one to call out the behavior.

"What if diplomacy doesn't work?" Huntley asks. We have to be very careful with enforcement. As mentioned, disruptions can be censored "if it prevents the council from continuing the meeting in a reasonably efficient manner."

But council should be clear they're censoring the DISRUPTION not the SPEECH.

Some examples: Going over the time limit, using "distracting" technology, being intoxicated — which apparently has happened before? — interrupting other speakers, threats, or "racial epithets"

Huntley going over some "cues" to ID when a "disruption" has occurred, such as "an obvious emotional reaction" that stops the meeting.

"If staff asked for a moment to pull themselves together, that would be a cue." But don't expect that to happen, Huntley says: Staff might not feel comfortable asking. "There is def an imbalance of power in council chambers."

Use enforcement "sparingly, even-handedly and in situations where the conduct is egregious," Huntley syas.

Says*

There's a script! That council can use if they'd like to employ the rules of decorum.

Wallach has a comment!

I'm using too many exclamation points, aren't I?

Oh, his comment was just that it was a great presentation.

Think of the children! Weaver says

He wants to add that into the guidelines for speakers. "Not everything needs to always be appropriate for children ... but it might help in setting the tone" if we remind people that children could be watching.

Unpopular opinion, but as a prolific swearer, I don't think protecting your children is my job. I try not to curse in front of kids, but if I do, I'm not going to feel bad about it. It's a teaching moment for you to teach your kids that sometimes adults use that kind of language.

Like, IMO it's much more harmful to espouse awful ideas in front of kinds than it is to use harmless profanity.

But I'm happy to be convinced that I'm wrong.

Anyway, back to business.

Friend: "I feel like we're twisting ourselves into pretzels. ... What is the history of public comment .... what are the goals? ... You get up there thinking you’re going to have some kind of impact. … You come with hopes and they’re sometimes dashed."

Huntley: That's why we're trying to do more and earlier engagement. But we've heard from residents that "there is no substitute" for speaking in front of elected officials.

"This has been a very difficult nut for us to crack," Huntley says.

Carr: "I know it seems like (public hearings) don't change council's minds. I have seen it change minds. ... It does happen."

Per Carr, the history of open comment is based on "New England" style town halls where people can "say anything" but is intended for things not on the agenda.

He's going over the rule changes in recent years, because open comment was running for 2+ hours.

Laments that groups do brute force and sign up as many speaker as possible for one topic.

Also, open comment apparently used to be a more peaceful and gentler space.

This year, Carr says, "almost every comment speaker has been angry. That used to not be the case."

Maybe it's COVID, he says.

Ritenour talking about the need to "de-center" and try to connect with speakers' personal experiences and motivation.

Brockett nitpicking the guidelines for public engagement. "I like the sentiments involved, but it seems too abstract to change people's behavior much. ... Make it shorter and more specific."

Brockett: I would be more careful when it comes to profanity or anger ... "When certain rules of decorum of enforced, that can often be a way of maintaining the status quo from threats against the status quo."

"I wouldn't necessarily call out people for using profanity. I think we need to allow a certain amount of outrage to express itself if people feel it necessary," he says.

But also likes the idea of adding into the script something about kids possibly listening.

Joseph supports "making it a request as opposed to an admonishment, because by the time people get to us, they are pretty angry."

"When people are angry, they're not really thinking in a positive frame of mind; they're thinking negatively," Joseph says.

Wallach disagrees with Brockett RE: profanity.
"The ways in someone can express outrage ... are virtually limitless." You don't have to curse.

Yeah, but cursing is fun.

Staff looking for "backup," Ritenour says. The ability to take action or bring things to council without their job being threatened.

Huntley: Staff "is coming from a public service mindset. When you're in that mindset," it can be hard "to set boundaries" ... and not always "say yes to what the public is asking" of you. Sometimes we can't, bc we're implementing policy that you all (council) have directed us to.

Bergman, who is facilitating the meeting, says, "This is what I do, is high conflict public engagement. ... I have gotten applause in public meetings when I say ... it's OK to disagree, to be angry, but here's what I expect you not to do."

People appreciate having clear expectations set, Bergman says. (That's Heather Bergman, btw.) That can include a list of what NOT to say ('you're stupid,' etc.) and suggest things to say instead.

"Because we don't have the (practice) of constructive dialogue, we've lost the words for it."

That's it for this one, and I think this half of the retreat. I'll be back at it at 8 a.m. (!) tomorrow morning.

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you!