Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Ceremony Pledge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fort Atkinson council advances ordinance to add Pledge of Allegiance after hours of public comment and council debate
Summary
After an hour of public comments largely urging reinstatement of the pledge, the Fort Atkinson City Council voted to send an ordinance to add the Pledge of Allegiance to the order of business to a second reading on July 1.
The Fort Atkinson City Council on Tuesday voted to direct the city manager to prepare an ordinance that would add the Pledge of Allegiance to the council’s order of business and codify the use of a consent agenda, sending the measure for a second reading on July 1, 2025. The action followed an extended public comment period in which multiple residents urged the council to begin meetings with the pledge.
Supporters told the council that saying the pledge would demonstrate civic unity and honor veterans. “Reciting the pledge is not about politics, it’s about unity, it’s about respect,” resident Maisie Alley said, describing family military service and asking the council to “stand united.” Judy Lyons and Robert Bell also urged the council to restore the pledge to every meeting, arguing it takes little time and has symbolic value.
Several speakers expressed the opposite view. Councilmember (name not specified in the public record) opposed adding the pledge on constitutional grounds, saying putting it on the official agenda risks creating the appearance of compelled speech. That councilmember, a U.S. Army Reserve major and combat veteran, argued that “true freedom includes the right not to speak” and urged the council to avoid any government action that pressures individuals to recite the pledge.
City Manager Hausman told the council the proposed ordinance would also codify a consent agenda practice the council adopted in 2021. Council discussion ranged from procedural questions about whether the pledge would be voluntary to statements that the item had been requested by residents and supported by a petition of about 154 signatures submitted last year.
After debate, the councilmember who introduced the motion moved to direct the city manager to prepare the ordinance for a second and possible third reading at the July 1 meeting. The motion carried after members present voted “aye.” No final ordinance vote occurred; the council will consider the ordinance again at the July 1 meeting.
