ST. LOUIS, Missouri — New St. Louis County Council Chair Shalonda Webb (D-4th District) said she wants to limit the range of topics members of the public can discuss as they address her and her colleagues on the county's powerful legislative panel.
Webb argued the limited time they have for public comments could be more useful and productive if it was streamlined to focus on matters county government can legally and realistically address and not be bombarded with random thoughts or irrelevant rants.
"This is a business meeting for St. Louis County, and so we need to stay focused on the business of the county," Webb said.
Last week, the council voted 6-1 to push the public comment section back to the end of their proceedings. Several members of the public criticized the decision, claiming it reduced their ability to persuade their elected officials until after their votes were already over.
One woman approached the podium and began reading a poem listing her fears of a "globalist paradise" that controls her life and robs her freedoms.
Webb interrupted her to suggest the woman focus her comments on matters on the public agenda. Councilmen Mark Harder and Ernie Trakas, her Republican counterparts, rebuked her.
"You're out of line, Madam," Trakas said. "There is no limit or definition of what speakers can speak to."
"I'm definitely against anything that's going to limit free speech for now or in the future," Harder said.
Webb ultimately allowed the woman to continue reading her poem. It included apocalyptic warnings about COVID-19 vaccines leading to a dystopian future where a "chip inside my head" will be "running software through my brain," and where meat is so scarce, she will be "getting my protein from crickets."
While Trakas attributed the flood of public comments at the county council to pandemic-era policies that are no longer in place, he said he would likely vote against any changes to the rules that set limits on those topics of discussion.
"I think it's always important for citizens to be able to speak truth to power," he said.
However, archive video of past county council meetings shows Trakas argued for that exact policy when he held the gavel in 2019.
"The First Amendment does not protect an individual who's loud, threatening, disruptive," Trakas said at the time. "Your comments should relate to St. Louis County. That is the purpose and the scope of our public forum."
Webb noted that Trakas supported limits on public comments when they came from Black community activists protesting police abuses of power. She accused him of a "flip-flop" now that the bulk of public criticism is leveled toward his political opponents.
Trakas acknowledged his reversal but said it was the public comments from activists he initially disagreed with that ultimately changed his mind.
"In listening to the comments two years ago, and the arguments made, I'm of the position now that whatever's going to be gained by limiting speech to what's on the agenda is not significant enough for me to foreclose the possibility for people to speak what they feel is important," he said.
Trakas pointed out that the current rules already limit the public comment to just one hour, and said, "I don't think it's asking much of council members."
Webb also suggested that she took some of the public comments personally, and felt the temperature of the criticism was too intense or rude.
"For more than two years, we've dealt with statements that were demeaning, that was disrespectful, that was horrible for members of the council, the county executive," Webb said. "And I want to make sure that we are civil."
How would she respond to critics who call her thin-skinned?
"Nah, I would have to say that I have Teflon skin," she said. "I wouldn't be in this business, I wouldn't be serving in this capacity if it was anything less. But let's be perfectly clear about this: Your freedom of speech does not allow you to harm or hurt another person."
Trakas acknowledged the current policy of open comments without limits is a privilege, and not an absolute right.
"Certainly any legislative body is not compelled to have a public forum," Trakas said. "For instance, Congress doesn't have one; the legislature in Jeff City doesn't have one. So there's no obligation to do that."
He suggested arbitrary, vague, or subjective limits on public speech could backfire and result in legal challenges.
"Once the legislative body -- in this case, the council -- decides that we're going to have a public forum, First Amendment rights attach, and any restriction or attempt to control that speech could pose problems," he said.
Webb, whose government lawyers are reviewing options and drafting potential changes to the rules, agreed that they have to proceed with caution.
"We're open to all types of litigation because we don't have rules defined on how we handle our public comments," Webb said.
The U.S. Supreme Court has granted legislative chambers broad discretion to implement rules and regulations around access to elected officials and acts of public expression during deliberative forums, but the high court’s precedent has established that a legislative body’s discretion is not unlimited and must remain consistent with the First Amendment.
To watch 5 On Your Side broadcasts or reports 24/7, 5 On Your Side is always streaming on 5+. Download for free on Roku or Amazon Fire TV.