Council can't pick, choose free speech

People like Sam Dehne and Al Hesson test the boundaries of public patience and free speech, so it's no wonder the Sparks City Council finds itself adopting rules for what people can say at the council's meetings.

Still, it's the wrong move.

Dehne is a frequent critique and self-proclaimed watchdog of government who offers his opinions at nearly every meeting. Hesson apparently likes to wear a sandwich board during his public comments and recently has been escorted out of Sparks council meetings a couple of times for being out of order.

We're sure people like them are a headache for the council and an irritation for fellow citizens who come to hear city business, not the personal agendas of the self-appointed.

Nevertheless, we don't see a way to restrict the topics on which people may speak without seriously damaging their freedom - and, ultimately, the city council's credibility with the community.

Sparks City Attorney Chet Adams defended the restrictions this way: "Citizens are free to go to a traditional public forum and talk about any subject they want. But city council meetings are not public forums. (The council is) there to conduct government business, and there is only a certain amount of time to work on those matters that affect your jurisdiction."

City council meetings are, indeed, public forums. And the fact that a matter isn't on the agenda isn't justification enough to say the public can't speak on the topic. Once you start picking and choosing, you've sent a message that the public isn't welcome to participate in their own government.

We checked the minutes of a few recent Sparks council meetings, and noted that public comments took up 5 minutes of an hour-and-a-half meeting, 20 minutes of an hour-long meeting, 11 minutes of a two-hour meeting and 13 minutes of a one-hour meeting.

Yes, in some cases speakers were abusive and irrelevant. And we know there have been extended harangues in the past.

But city councils everywhere must take the heat, along with the constructive criticism. Setting rules to restrict free speech in order to deal with a few unruly individuals is simply bad policy.