Community Board 11 narrowly votes to bar member from speaking for three months

Community Board 11 voted 15–14 on Thursday, May 22, to bar community member Roxanne Delgado from speaking at board public meetings for a period of three months, not including the board’s July–August recess.

The motion, introduced by board member Ryan and seconded by another board member, followed extended discussion about repeated interruptions, alleged intimidation of other speakers, and how the board should enforce its conduct statement. Ryan argued the board must protect the equitable right of all attendees to speak and cited a “paradox of tolerance” in explaining why the board should act. The State Committee on Open Government’s written guidance — read into the record by staff — said, "Absent some type of court issued stay away order, no member of the public can be barred from attending an open meeting," and further noted that a public body may require speakers to comply with a code of conduct but cannot condition speaking on issuing an apology.

The motion removed the apology condition that an earlier leadership committee motion had sought; that prior leadership motion was withdrawn after the state committee guidance was shared. Supporters of the new motion said it targets violations of the conduct statement rather than the content of speech. Detractors said the board lacked clear, enforceable steps, and several members urged the board to consult legal counsel before imposing a speaking restriction.

After the roll call, the chair announced the motion passed by a single vote. Board members on both sides said they expect follow-up steps: some urged immediate enforcement of the conduct statement, while others asked staff to obtain formal legal advice about enforcement options and limits. The State Committee on Open Government’s written guidance and a staff readout of that guidance were central to the debate.

The ban takes effect immediately and covers public speaking at board meetings for the three-month period specified in the motion. The board did not record a detailed roll-call list of individual yes/no votes in the meeting audio excerpt used for this report; the chair announced the final margin as 15–14 in favor.

The vote and surrounding discussion keep in focus perennial tensions for volunteer community boards: balancing open public comment with maintaining order and protecting attendees from harassment. Several members said they plan to pursue clearer, written enforcement steps and legal guidance before the next meeting cycle.

Members and staff indicated the board may consult the city Law Department or other counsel to confirm the scope of local authority on restricting speaking privileges and to develop a step-by-step disciplinary process tied to the conduct statement.