The Clayton County Board of Commissioners faced backlash from some residents who were unhappy with the board’s decision to reject a proposal to extend the public comment period during meetings. The proposal, which was brought by Commissioner DeMont Davis, would have allowed each speaker to have up to five minutes instead of two minutes to address the board. It would have also increased the total time allotted for public comments from 20 minutes to 30 minutes.
Proposal aims to improve public engagement
Davis said he proposed the change to improve public engagement and transparency in the county. He argued that two minutes was not enough time for residents to express their concerns and opinions on various issues affecting the county. He also said that the current policy discouraged some people from participating in the public comment session.
“I think it’s important that we hear from our constituents and that we give them ample time to speak,” Davis said. “I think it’s a disservice to the public when we limit their time and their voice.”
Davis also pointed out that other counties in the metro Atlanta area, such as Fulton, DeKalb, and Cobb, had longer public comment periods than Clayton. He said that Clayton County should follow their example and show more respect for the public.
Board majority votes against the proposal
However, the majority of the board members voted against the proposal, citing various reasons. Chairman Jeff Turner said that he was concerned about the potential impact of the change on the board’s efficiency and productivity. He said that the board had a lot of business to conduct and that extending the public comment period would delay the board’s agenda.
“We have a lot of items that we have to get through, and we have a lot of staff that we have to pay to be here,” Turner said. “We have to be mindful of the time and the resources that we have.”
Turner also said that the board had other ways of communicating with the public, such as email, phone, and social media. He said that the board was always open to hearing from the residents and that the public comment session was not the only avenue for public input.
Commissioner Sonna Singleton Gregory echoed Turner’s sentiments and said that she was satisfied with the current policy. She said that she did not see the need to change something that was working well.
“I think we have a good system in place,” Gregory said. “I think we have been fair and consistent with our policy.”
Gregory also said that she was worried about the possibility of some speakers abusing the extended time and using it to make personal attacks or political statements. She said that the board had a responsibility to maintain order and decorum in the meetings.
“We have to be careful that we don’t allow this to become a circus or a platform for people to grandstand or to bash each other,” Gregory said.
Residents express disappointment and anger
The board’s vote was met with disappointment and anger by some residents who attended the meeting. They said that the board was ignoring the public’s wishes and that the board was not accountable to the people.
One of the residents who spoke during the public comment session was Brenda Johnson, who said that she was a longtime resident and a former county employee. She said that she was appalled by the board’s decision and that she felt disrespected by the board.
“I think it’s a shame that you all don’t want to hear from the people who put you in office,” Johnson said. “You all are supposed to represent us, not yourselves.”
Johnson also said that she had witnessed many instances of the board cutting off speakers or interrupting them when they were speaking. She said that the board was rude and unprofessional and that the board needed to listen more and talk less.
“You all need to learn how to be courteous and respectful to the people who pay your salaries,” Johnson said. “You all need to stop acting like you are above the law and above the people.”
Another resident who spoke was Roberta Abdul-Salaam, who said that she was a former state representative and a current member of the MARTA board. She said that she supported Davis’ proposal and that she was disappointed by the board’s vote. She said that the board was sending a negative message to the public and that the board was undermining the public’s trust and confidence.
“You are telling the people that you don’t care about what they have to say,” Abdul-Salaam said. “You are telling the people that you don’t value their input or their feedback.”
Abdul-Salaam also said that the board was missing an opportunity to improve the county’s image and reputation. She said that the board should be more open and responsive to the public and that the board should welcome constructive criticism and suggestions.
“You are the face of Clayton County, and you have a responsibility to represent the county in a positive and professional manner,” Abdul-Salaam said. “You should be proud of the people who live here and who want to make this county better.”
What’s next for the proposal?
Despite the board’s rejection, Davis said that he was not giving up on his proposal and that he would continue to advocate for it. He said that he hoped that the board would reconsider its decision and that he would bring the proposal back for another vote in the future.
“I’m not going to let this go,” Davis said. “I’m going to keep fighting for the people and for their right to be heard.”
Davis also said that he appreciated the support and feedback that he received from the residents who spoke in favor of his proposal. He said that he was encouraged by their passion and enthusiasm and that he was inspired by their courage and determination.
“I want to thank the people who came out and who spoke up,” Davis said. “You are the reason why I do what I do.”
