May 25, 2012   Keyser   1 Comment

Prosecuting Attorney speaks at Keyser City Council meeting

Mineral County Prosecuting Attorney, Jay “James” Courrier spoke May 23, 2012 at the City Council meeting, in Keyser, WV.

Courrier spoke of what governments may do for citizens’ voices to be heard and the limitations. Explaining that governments may impose restrictions on in order to conduct normal business, citing code 61-6-19.

“What about when you’re not afforded the opportunity to speak. And also the council not necessarily afforded the opportunity to be on the agenda, to speak,” asked Ron Liller.

“Well I guess that’s another issue,” replied Courrier.

The prosecuting attorney stated that he believes it is not going to be proper for people to shout out and interrupt while they are conducting regular business.

“What’s the recourse if we['re] not allowed to address certain issues in the proceedings of our local government,” asked Ron Liller.

“I guess ultimately you could bring court cases in the court system if there’s truly a restriction on the right of people to bring their concerns to the council or the mayor,” said Courrier.

Another citizen questioned the point of having an open meeting if the hiring of employees is not open to comment. Jay Courrier indicated that personnel is probably different than a regular agenda item.

 

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
, ,

Keyser: Did Mayor Amtower Lie about his Business?
Mineral County: Keyser: City Council Meeting (March 28, 2012)
Business, West Virginia, and Gary Howell


  • EyeR

    “I guess ultimately you could bring court cases in the court system if there’s truly a restriction on the right of people to bring their concerns to the council or the mayor,” said Courrier…

    He recommends that, because its ‘right’ -=- Not because he’ll directly profit from influx of court cases.. because there’s no revenue generated when adults resolve their differences, well, like adults. The age-old formula of Problems + ??? = Profit, perfected and tuned into multi-faceted revenue generation.

    As a citizen this actually applies to, was keen and correct to point out(There is no such thing, Here, Council meetings occur closed doors – and the actual contents of many agenda items regularly shrouded from public view. Go ‘Democracy’! They did, however allow public vote on a waste incinerator construction – Due to large no’s of public concerns. 90%+ ‘No’ vote. It’s being constructed as I type.) – What is the point of an open door session, When the attendance are not allowed to speak their objections, concern or merits of the discussed proposals? After all, These are the people, and their children, that will have to live with the consequences of these decisions. Day in. Day out. I fear similar may of occurred here, once – But instead of just sitting down and shutting up, as officials would of preferred, People chose to speak their concerns. The solution to this isn’t to silence the people – As was applied over here – But to develop the system to fashion equal opportunity to speak for the councilors, and for the input from the general public. There’s a right time and place for everything – And given such opportunity, Most tend to use responsibly. And with a little thought and planning such opportunites could be readily and easily intergrated.

    But, as sensible and as logical and as fair as such a concept is, it ‘wastes time’ and generates v. little profit…. Besides, there’s always the chance that someone may say something of great wisdom and flawless logic as counterance – And it might infect the others…