A public meeting of the Commerce city council in Texas was held last week. Dozens of people showed up in support of no kill, some planning to address the council during the public speaking portion of the meeting. They intended to speak about the needless killings at the Commerce pound. But they were denied that opportunity when the city council skipped the portion of the meeting where the public is allowed to speak. After the meeting was abruptly adjourned, taxpayers asked why they were denied their right to address the council.
“This is an issue that does not have to be brought forth,” Commerce Mayor John Ballotti said. “I get to pick what items we go over. That is the end of the discussion. You may all leave.”
Members of the city council hid from the media after the meeting and the city manager confirmed that the mayor is the Supreme Picker of Who Gets to Talk and When They Get to Do It.
The city later issued a statement regarding the pound to the media. You can read it in full here. The gist of it:
- The irresponsible public is all the irresponsible.
- Animal Control workers have a hard job.
- Everything at the pound is fine.
- Killing is a kindness.
- PETA kills 90% of the animals it accepts and you know they’re ethical because it says so right in the name.
So there’s that malarkey.
Here’s my question: Are taxpayers in Commerce truly only allowed to address their city council at the whim of Mayor Supreme Picker? Can anyone point me to where it says that in the law? If such a law does exist, I would raise hell about that if I lived in Commerce. If it doesn’t exist, I would raise hell about the mayor and the city manager disenfranchising taxpayers of their right to petition government for redress of grievances – which by the way is a right guaranteed in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which Mayor Supreme Picker must uphold even if he hates it. End of discussion.
(Thank you Patricia for the link.)