The art of the public meeting
Rob Price

What's a public meeting?

The question occurred to me the other night as James Emo, chairman of the Bath town planning board, adjourned a 15-minute meeting, during which members of that board reviewed a town resident's application to subdivide his property.

Bath planning board meetings are loaded affairs these days, ever since the planning board became the lead agent in conducting an environmental impact study of the Wal-Mart supercenter project. Planning board meetings have attracted scores of visitors, many interested in letting the board know exactly what they think about the project.

Emo consistently has run these meetings in an efficient manner. I attended a public hearing on the Wal- Mart project late last month, prepared for a three-hour ordeal; Emo concluded the meeting in about 70 minutes - without anyone claiming their right to comment had been infringed.

Running an efficient public meeting is a rare skill. I have attended public meetings in Bath, Hornell, Canisteo, Campbell, Arkport, Alfred, Almond; some of the meetings were conducted smoothly; others turned into public shouting matches, where nothing was accomplished.

That brings me back to my original question - and another way of asking it: What is a public meeting not?

A typical public meeting - not, I emphasize, a public hearing - is meeting that is open to the public, during which elected officials conduct the monthly business of the municipality or district. It's important the public have access to these meetings, in order to watch and listen to their elected officials at work.

But unlike "public hearings," these meetings are not public speaking sessions. The public may attend and listen to the proceedings; it does not have the automatic right to participate. The chairperson or president of the board may open the meeting to public comments, but that is not required.

This may seem unfair, or undemocratic, to voters who think they are members of a participatory democracy, but there are practical reasons for limiting the public's role in a so-called public meeting. One important issue is the fact that elected members of the board have a certain amount of actual work to perform during the meeting. They need to listen to departmental reports and respond to the department heads if they feel that's necessary. They need to review old business and raise new matters for the board's consideration. They need to review official correspondence, and finally they need to authorize payment of the bills.

That can be a lot of work, and board members need to be able to focus on the work before them. To have members of the public continually interrupt to ask questions, or volunteer their own opinions, is a distraction from the business at hand.

Another important issue is the fact that the public already has had its say - when it voted to elect the current membership of the board to office. Regular board meetings are not public referendums in which visitors share responsibility for governance. Members of the public who attend a public hearing are not necessarily representative of the general voting public; they're just the ones with something particular on their mind.

That said, a wise chairperson recognizes the occasions when the public deserves a chance to comment. Sometimes people are upset or angry, and it's a good idea to give them the chance to make their case. The chairman who refuses to recognize those occasions generally doesn't stay in office very long.

Over the years, I've watched many board chairmen and presidents, plus city and village mayors, conduct meetings skillfully and poorly. Hornell Mayor Shawn Hogan runs a good meeting; Bath Mayor David Wallace runs a good meeting. Both move efficiently through the agenda and allow public comments to be made in an orderly fashion. Likewise, Bath town Supervisor Fred Muller runs an orderly meeting; John Clifford, a former supervisor in the Town of Hornellsville, ran orderly meetings.

And Jim Emo, whose planning board is responsible for an environmental review of a very controversial project, runs an orderly meeting. Work gets done. The planning board is moving efficiently through a complicated review process. When this whole Wal- Mart issue is finally settled, you may not like the outcome, but I predict it will be difficult to fault Emo for anything serious.

Meanwhile, those of you who have conducted disorderly meetings I've had the unpleasant job of attending, you know who you are. Boo. Hiss.