Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public anger, council response after debate over inclusion resolution and proclamations
Summary
Public commenters and council members sparred over a recently passed resolution on inclusion and whether the council should issue proclamations such as for Black History Month; Councilor Carolyn Fish read a statement explaining her no vote and decried name‑calling directed at council members.
Several public commenters at the Feb. 24 Bangor City Council meeting criticized remarks made at a prior meeting in which they said council members were called offensive names during debate on a resolution reaffirming the city’s commitment to being welcoming and inclusive.
Colleen O’Neil, a resident, told the council that after a previous 70‑minute debate over the resolution some audience members had directed “neo‑Nazi” and other “highly offensive” names at council members who disagreed with the measure. She said the council needed to issue a formal apology to council members who were attacked.
Suzette Furr and other commenters asked that the city disband the municipal Equity, Diversity and Human Rights Advisory Committee, accusing it of activist behavior and procedural irregularities. The committee was criticized for conducting meetings without quorums and for pursuing name‑changes to streets and buildings, commenters said.
Hillary Simmons asked why the city had stopped issuing individual proclamations after approving a general “welcoming and inclusive” proclamation and specifically asked, “Why was Black History Month deemed unworthy of recognition through a proclamation?” Simmons said proclamations “affirm the contributions of diverse communities” and called for continued recognition.
Councilor Carolyn Fish, who was absent from the earlier meeting and whose previous vote drew public comment, read a prepared statement at the Feb. 24 meeting explaining why she had voted no. Fish said she had been labeled with “many negative and prejudicial names” and said she supports a welcoming community but did not agree with the resolution’s wording or the process by which it was brought forward. Fish said she feared the resolution, as written, would not include the entire community and that the timing and drafting felt politically motivated.
Other council members acknowledged the tone of recent public comment was inappropriate. Councilor Mallon and Councilor Chumble said name‑calling was unacceptable and apologized for not interrupting offensive remarks at the prior session. Several councilors reiterated that proclamations usually come forward when requested and that the council has a history of approving proclamations when groups request them.
No formal council action altering the earlier resolution or the city’s proclamation practice was taken during the Feb. 24 meeting. Councilors said they remain open to private conversations with residents and invited those who disagreed to meet with them to discuss concerns.
