Violence Has No Place in Local Government

Last week I was attending a local township meeting, sitting in the back of the room as a member of the audience, when someone sent me an article via Facebook. The headline was “Three shot dead at PA Township Meeting”, describing a horrible act of violence taking place in a rural community on the other side of the state. Apparently a man, who was upset with township officials over a property dispute, came into the meeting and opened fire. Three people were dead before members of the audience tackled him.

This unfortunately isn’t an isolated incident. Just days ago, a West Virginia man was sentenced to prison for threatening his local school board with a mass shooting if they didn’t reinstate his access to be on school property. And during the recent municipal primary election, a man was charged for leaving a voicemail for a local township supervisor candidate threatening that she’d need an ambulance if she knocked on his door to campaign. That’s right- she; the man threatened to assault a woman if she knocked on his door.

I realize all politics is local, and it’s easy for tempers to run high at local meetings. In the heat of the moment, someone may say something over the top or make a threat to do something they really have no intention of carrying out. But as recent events have tragically demonstrated, things can get out of control very quickly.

There are many ways to express displeasure with local government. Write a letter to the editor, encourage friends and neighbors to come to meetings to voice their concerns, or even run for office yourself. But there’s no place for violent behavior, or even the threat of violent behavior, in a government meeting.

In my time as a township supervisor and then as a state representative, I’ve been at too many local meetings that devolve into a free-for-all, with people yelling and speaking out of turn. Sometimes it’s the result of a particular contentious issue, but just as often it’s the result of a group of people with a specific agenda of disruption to gum up the works and create controversy. A very vocal minority intent on causing trouble can make it very difficult to work through issues rationally, especially when their conduct discourages citizens from showing up because they don’t want to sit through a three-ring circus.

Most municipal officials I’ve worked with really want to help their communities. The job is often a thankless one, with a lot of work for virtually no money. If we want to get qualified and competent people to run for office, the last thing we need is the real concern that the audience gets so worked up that someone does something stupid and hurts people.

All of these thoughts were going through my head as I left the meeting I was attending last week. As I walked outside, a man came up behind me and started yelling at me, calling me a “bald-headed pr*ck” in an effort to get a reaction. Instead of giving him the confrontation he wanted, I kept on walking to my car without a single word in response. It was worth being berated to avoid a confrontation. But should anyone have to put up with that kind of behavior at a simple township meeting?

So what can we do to promote more civility at meetings? I am a huge proponent of local governments broadcasting their meetings on the Internet. The technology is cheap and simple, so there’s no real excuse not to. Not only will more people have access to see what’s happening in their town if they’re unable to attend a meeting, but maybe the people in the audience would conduct themselves differently if they knew the whole town might be watching.

John F. Kennedy said, “The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.” While Kennedy surely intended his words to be more figurative than literal, there is a practical wisdom to be mindful of. We can disagree without being disagreeable, and we should remember that no disagreement in local government should ever be solved by resorting to threats of violence.