Overview:
These changes allow public commenters to keep their addresses private.
Memphis residents who provide their state-issued IDs when speaking at Memphis City Council meetings will not be required to publicly disclose their address.
Council members passed a resolution to make the change during the virtual regular meeting of the council Tuesday. They passed the rule with same-night minutes, meaning it cannot come back for new discussion.
Council attorney Allan Wade said while this a way to “keep control “ over those speaking at council meetings, it also provides a layer of protection for residents who don’t want their addresses shared publicly.
The council’s previous policy states that members of the public wishing to speak must state their name and address before providing remarks. They were also required to sign in with the Sergeant at Arms prior to speaking.
The amended policy requires a person to fill out a public comment card and provide their full home address and provide the Sergeant at Arms with a driver’s license or any other official form of identification. When recognized at the appropriate time, the commenter would only have to provide their name for the record.
Members of the community who are unable to provide a form of ID would be required to sign in and provide their address on their comment card and for the record. Those who provide false information would receive a “written or verbal warning.”
“It’s kind of an accommodation of our interests and their interests,” Wade said.
Council member Dr. Jeff Warren said he initially thought this was a way to stop people from speaking, but later saw it as a way of protecting citizens’ personal information. He recognized that they as elected officials receive “nasty letters” and other forms of criticism, but the public hasn’t signed up for that type of pushback.
“People who are there as citizens I don’t think have necessarily signed up for any sort of blowback on social media that they might get by giving their name and address on air,” Warren said. “I think giving their name is sufficient – putting their address on there may be targeting if we’re in a controversial issue.”
The council said it would not keep copies of the IDs and only use it as a form of verification before providing the comment card to the council chairperson.
Council member Janika White said while they do at times discuss “contentious” topics, most of the time they don’t have a lot of speakers. She said she understood concern but doesn’t know if the issue is large enough for the council to “resort to this as a measure.”
“When I think of the benefit versus the obstacles, I don’t think we should be creating obstacles to public speech to the city council,” White said. “This seems like it’s limiting access in a way that I don’t know is necessarily necessary.”
Council vice chair Chase Carlisle said he understood White’s concerns and said the council should exercise discretion in implementing the rule. He said they saw more people who misrepresented where they lived as opposed to keeping people from speaking who were unable to prove they were from the city.
Carlisle said the council’s rules can be changed if there’s a problem, and voiced his support for the amendment.
“If we get feedback from the public that we have somehow alienated the rights of a core group of constituents that were trying to get there down and speak, and because they had to give their IDs and didn’t have them — we can change it back,” Carlisle said.