Rudeness Hurts Public Forum

It’s easy to be insulting. It’s harder to be influential. And it’s harder still to maintain a responsive, credible democracy at a time when much of the political dialogue resembles the rude mouth noises heard in the back rows of a junior high school English class.

Consider, for example, the televised public forum the Spokane City Council conducts in the first 30 minutes of its weekly meeting.

The council had the highest of intentions last summer when it launched the forum. More public access. More listening. A relief valve for public bitterness and a remedy for suspicion of City Hall.

In our view, and in fact in the view of many other city governments, an open forum should be, and should remain, part of the City Council’s routine.

However, this important opportunity has been placed in jeopardy by a handful of individuals who have made it their hobby to cast monotonous abuse, week after week, on the public’s elected representatives.

No, we’re not saying it’s wrong to criticize politicians. Lord knows, that’s a mainstay of this page and we don’t want a monopoly on the privilege. As the nearby letters page shows.

But, the valid use for a public forum boils down to influence. Put yourself in a council member’s shoes. Who would influence you? And who wouldn’t?

If a speaker’s purpose is not to influence you but to denounce you, threaten you or make a self-promoting spectacle, you know you wouldn’t be influenced.

The citizens who do influence the council are not the hobbyist haranguers. The ones with influence are the fresh faces who show up with a nervous voice, a constructive spirit and some well-researched recommendations.

Given the many valid reasons for criticism of public policy, there is absolutely no reason for the community to tolerate those whose apparent motive is to nurse an old grudge or impress the TV audience with the ingenuity of their insults.

Spokane has difficulty attracting quality candidates to local government races and it also has difficulty rousing the general public to turn out at forums and speak. The perception council meetings are a clown show contributes to the problem. It’s like an out-of-control junior high class, where the noisy boors make the good students afraid to speak up. Fun, if you like mouth noises. Tragic, if you have higher aspirations.

So how can the forum be preserved? Some frustrated council members want to schedule it late at night so participation will be deterred. Bad idea.

Instead, the council has to recognize the open forum for what it is: A place where criticism may occur, some of it noxious. That comes with the territory. Beyond that, the council should feel well within its rights to limit speakers strictly to a certain number of appearances per month and to a certain number of minutes per appearance. It also might consider suggesting topics for informal discussion, in hopes of attracting original voices to the dialogue.

This will be among the first orders of business when the new council assembles in January. We hope the council keeps its door open and its sense of humor intact, and invents new ways to invite broad, vigorous participation in democracy.

, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board