Fort Atkinson council votes to add Pledge, carve out agenda and public-comment rules after months of debate

The Fort Atkinson City Council voted Aug. 5 to amend its order of business to add recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance at meetings, establish a consent agenda, add a public-comment period specifically for items on the agenda and a separate general comment period, and adopt rules governing those comment periods. The council approved each piece of the five-part substitute amendment after first splitting the question for separate votes.

The measures were presented as a substitute amendment to sections 2-53 and 2-54(f) of the Fort Atkinson Code of General Ordinances and were discussed across several meetings this summer. Manager Hulsman described the five parts as “the addition of the pledge of allegiance, the addition of a consent agenda, adding a public comment period for matters on the agenda, adding a general comment period, and then setting rules for the comment periods.”

The debate included comments from residents who urged both for and against adding the pledge. Resident Jim Roussis said he had “nothing against reciting the pledge,” but urged council members to consider the pledge’s phrase “liberty and justice for all” in light of community members who feel unsafe. Adam Thompson, another resident, urged council members to consider the pledge’s origins and how the phrase “under God” was added, saying the pledge “just doesn't seem like the right thing for a city council to be doing.” Laurie Balgamuth spoke in favor, calling the pledge a tradition and saying it honors veterans.

Council members who spoke raised legal, practical and representation concerns. One council member (recorded in the meeting transcript without a full name) summarized a constitutional view: “The first amendment doesn't guarantee the right to speak or express views in any way at any time or through any particular ritual during these meetings,” and cited court decisions to argue the council may set limited, orderly forums for its business. Other council comments emphasized constituent preference (members cited petition signatures and public outreach) and concerns about staff time spent on the ordinance process.

Council discussion also recorded the council’s informal tally of public input: one speaker said staff had tracked about 14 individuals in support and four in opposition across multiple meetings. A petition circulated during the ordinance process was described in the meeting as having 154 Fort Atkinson signatures, though council members noted some photocopies in the packet bore unclear provenance and that some signers may live outside the city.

Roll-call votes on the split questions and on each element showed the council approved adding the pledge, establishing a consent agenda, creating the two public-comment periods, and adopting the rules for comments. The vote on adding the pledge passed 3–2. The other four elements were approved by voice vote with no recorded opposition.

The ordinance language changes that were approved amend sections 2-53 and 2-54(f) of the municipal code to add the listed items to the order of business and to set the prohibited topics and procedures for comment periods. The meeting record shows the council chose to treat the pledge as an optional element of the order of business and to keep separate safeguards for orderly meetings: the rules allow the chair to deem remarks irrelevant to city business and to enforce decorum.

The council did not adopt any enforcement changes that would compel citizens to recite the pledge; council members repeatedly noted that individuals retain their First Amendment rights and may recite the pledge on their own. The ordinance change places the ceremonial recital on the council’s agenda as a matter of procedure rather than a compelled act. Council President Jackel called the motions and declared the measures carried.

The amendments go into the city code immediately as adopted by the council’s vote; any practical changes to how meetings are run (time limits, order of speakers, scheduling for agenda-specific comments) will be implemented by the council president and staff in upcoming meetings.