Security?? Hello?? Security!!!???

Sometimes I really am disappointed by the lack of common decency that people show each other.  As evidence I bring you this that I have read from the Howard County Citizens Association (HCCA) listserve.

I will paraphrase, but apparently, the reason for the presence of security guards at the County Council's recent meeting regarding the development at Turf Valley (technically, though, wasn't this a Zoning Board meeting?) was that two of the members of the County Council had received threats against either them or the entire Council.  Here there is not total clarity because two Council members communicated on this directly with the HCCA President, Bridget Mugane.  So was/were the threats against an individual member, more than one member, or the entire Council?  Not clear.

But what is clear is that to threaten a public official is one of the more disgusting things anyone involved in civic discourse can do. 

I am a former HCCA President, and I know well the passions that control Howard County residents when it comes to issues of land use.  I went through the hearings that constituted the development of Maple Lawn.  I recall a lot of strong language, accusations, name-calling, promises to hold public officials accountable.  However, as strong as feelings and voices were, I do not recall any threats against anyone's safety, or even a feeling that the atmosphere was such that someone may whack out and do something crazy/stupid at a meeting.

I can understand the feelings of the Council members on this.  Four of them are 45 or younger, and have young children.  (And I'm sure Ms. Sigaty, also a family person, would like to be able to serve the public in comfort and safety too!).  During the time I was on the OM village board I can think of one meeting where I felt uneasy.  (No, it wasn't the methadone clinic meeting!)  It was a meeting where the issue was land use-based, however.  I refuse to go into the subject matter because if the dorks who perpretated the nonsense read this post, they may feel some sense of satisfaction.

And that gets me to this: what the hell does someone who threatens/intimidates a public official hope to achieve?  Do these people really want to get their way through attempting to be imposing and dealing in fear?  In this well-educated, affluent county are we that much beyond reason?  Does it bring some satisfaction to threaten?  Or is intimidation the last refuge of someone incapable of operating in a civil society?

I think that those in the public arena, as part of the job, must willingly expose themselves to strong criticism and opinions.  But to get to the point of threatening people-- at the least, it's simple assault.  At most, it's a testament to how little human behavior has evolved past the level of the Stone Age.

Comments

[Clarice]

I read that those accusations from the council were false. Reread the entire message and you'll see that the HCCA president retracted them. Others who were at the meeting where it supposedly happened also said they saw nothing.

Why so willing to believe it did happen, when even the HCCA president retracted the statement and eye witnesses confirmed there was no threat?

[Marshmallow Man]

What I read, when I read, reread, and reread again the messages, was that Bridget expressed regret that HCCA, through the listserve was used. She said that she didn't feel she should have acted as a conduit for these private comments to her to go out into a public forum, and I agree. I think the action taken subsequently by HCCA was appropriate.

There is nothing in the e-mail thread to suggest that the threats didn't happen. And just because nothing happened at the Council meeting doesn't mean the threats weren't made. Thank God nothing happened!

Why so willing to believe the threats happened? Why so willing NOT to believe them? I can believe they happened; in a long history of community experiences, including those as an elected volunteer official serving my community, I've seen such things go down. Personally, it's never happened to me, at least partially I believe, is that at my size I cut kind of an imposing figure-- although I'm a pretty nice guy! : )

But, Clarice, you raise an interesting point. If these threats didn't occur (which, again, I don't think is what Bridget says) then this is more than two of the Council members just playing the HCCA listserve. Then this is two of the Council members lying. And in that event, I'd like to know exactly who those members are, because lying to the public is just as serious an offense.

[Clarice]

HCCA president did express regret that HCCA was used, and others posted that they were present during the time in question, and the threats didn't occur. I don't even think there was an accusation of threats, but more a feeling of being threatened.

After the initial post, one activist wrote in that he had been contacted as the person behaving threateningly, and he said it didn't happen. Also, it was supposed to have happened in a public meeting, and others who were at the meeting said nothing happened like this.

Aren't we innocent until proven guilty? No one stepped forward to accuse, and a replay of the events of the evening in question sort of melted the original accusation.

So, yes. We have two council members who saw a situation in one perception, and acted on presumptions which could have been severely damaging had others not stepped in to speak up.

[Marshmallow Man]

Hi,

I thought I'd post this e-mail below, sent by Sheila Tolliver to a member of the HCCA listserve and subsequently posted to the listserve. I took out the member's name to preserve anonymity. It seems that a lot of these perceptions are misperceptions.

I am perhaps channeling my inner Rohrschach (and a prize for anyone who catches that reference!) but what I am still uncomfortable with the fact that two county council members went to a local activist and used the person and the organization she leads in this manner. I find it poor judgment at best, at medium damn sneaky, at worst unethical. I wish I knew who they were.

I also wonder if the intent of these council members wasn't to attempt to discredit the organization.

Its nice to hear from you again, and I understand that the issue of enlarging the square footage of a potential grocery store in Turf Valley has created strong feelings among both those who favor the change and those who oppose it. Indeed, the issue has captured the imagination of citizens who live far from the site of the planned store, and some have taken the legislation on as a cause.

I do know from our past conversations that you like to get the facts before you jump to conclusions. That probably would be a good idea in this case, too, as some of the accusations floating around on the Internet are more than inflammatory; they are simply untrue. In some other cases a grain of truth has been blown into a sand castle of fantasy.

Let me give you one example. The Council did not hire security guards for the council session. Indeed, in the twelve years Ive staffed the Council, we never have done so, although many of Marylands metropolitan governing bodies routinely keep a security presence during public meetings. As I always do if we anticipate a large crowd with high emotions at our meetings, I notified the police department that we anticipated a crowd at our legislative session and that feelings were strong on CB 58. They did have an officer stop by at the legislative session to assess the situation. No accusations were made about anyone; there was no effort to suppress speech or movement; there was no violence or threat of violence; there was no intimidation; indeed, the officer checked in, stayed less than an hour, and went on his way. Weve had the same kind of stop-by during some of our budget hearings and on a number of other divisive issues both with this council and with councils Ive served before this. The more remote location in which we temporarily are holding our legislative meetings makes it increasingly important for us to keep the department aware of our schedule and the possibility of the need for assistance with crowds. While we had a security guard on duty at the Howard Building and the police department was next door, neither of these is the case at the Board of Education building.

I dont know what individual council members may have said outside of their meetings regarding CB 58, but surely we must respect their ability to have opinions and speak them as we respect the opinions of the public and their right to express them. After all, you elect them to listen to you and to use their best judgment to represent you. On issues in which public opinion is divided, such as the text amendment for the grocery store size in Turf Valley, the members surely will disappoint some of the citizens no matter what they say.

Thank you for making me aware of this line of e-mails and for taking the time to encourage fact-checking.

Sheila Tolliver

Administrator to the County Council