I'm your huckleberry
Thursday May 17th 2012

Subscription Options:

Subscribe via RSS

Archives

The Sam Hall Question


It seems Pensacola City Council President Sam Hall isn’t out of the woods yet when it comes to the free-speech debate he sparked when attempting to have Father Nathan Monk removed from the public-comment microphone.

During the council’s Committee of the Whole meeting Monday, a number of citizens requested that Hall be removed from his post. While other citizens have made similar requests since the December incident, Monday’s requests were directed at specific council members.

Council members Megan Pratt, Brian Spencer and Sheri Myers were singled out Monday, with citizens asking them to personally take responsibility for bringing the issue up. Only Myers responded to her request.

“I’m going to plan on bringing up some issue on the First Amendment Thursday night,” Myers told members of the public.

Former council president Maren DeWeese said she was “a bit concerned about having further discussion” on the matter. Hall then said he would rather take up the issue during Thursday night’s ‘new business’ section of the meeting.

“I think the citizens have spoken,” DeWeese said to Hall, “and are deeply concerned about what happened, and I would ask, Mr. President, that you consider that.”

Hall’s free-speech problems began after he found several speakers out of order during a Committee of the Whole meeting. When Monk took issue with Hall at the council’s next meeting, the board president ordered police officers to remove him prior to the end of his alloted time. Although Monk was not removed, Myers and Councilman John Jerralds did walk out of the meeting in protest of Hall’s move.

One of the speakers requesting Hall’s ouster Monday night chose to demonstrate his point by reading out 29 words: “Nazi … carpetbagger … wetback … nigger.” The speaker said that although the words “make my blood boil,” they are protected under the First Amendment.

“Any restriction on speech goes against the Constitution of the United States,” the speaker said.

Hall invited the speaker back for the Thursday night meeting.

Today, Councilman Larry B. Johnson said he’s growing tired of the conversation and feels it is distracting the council from more important issues.

“Was there something that happened that shouldn’t have? Sure. But let’s move beyond that” Johnson asked. “I think something happened—the President pulled the trigger a little too quick—but we can move beyond that.”

Popularity: 3% [?]

Reader Feedback

10 Responses to “The Sam Hall Question”

  1. Defender of the Republic says:

    I would ask the Occupy movement to examine the Writ of Quo Warranto and its effects upon a municipality/corporate franchise/city. Just Google it and read how powerful it really is in ousting officials and dissolving charters, I think Pcola has about eleven decimal points worth of finances to consider. Imagine Pensacola having its charter dissolved,how many paychecks that would affect along with services stopping etc. Very powerful writ indeed and should be used.
    Respectfully in truth and liberty,
    Phillip – One of the People of the Preamble, OathKeeper, and the Sovereign spoken of in Yick Wo v Hopkins US 118.356,370

  2. Steve Quotes says:

    You are no kind of man when you can’t apologize when you are wrong.

  3. jeeperman says:

    If Larry B. Johnson is growing tired of the conversation, then hows about addressing the issue at the next council meeting and settling the issue.
    Instead of wanting to ignore the subject.
    Make a motion or continue to grow tired of the conversation.

  4. Joanne says:

    Sj summed up Councilman Johnson’s thoughts in the first comment:

    “…as an elected representative of the people and by the people, what is more important than the ability of the people to address their government?

    If you don’t understand your role, maybe you should resign as well.”

  5. Lola says:

    Mr. Lowery,
    I cerrtainly hope that your issue here has nothing to do with Mr. Hall not supporting the city’s funding of ECAT. Mr. Hall did not support the city funding of ECAT because he rightfully believed that these dollars should be used to continue the much needed paving of roads. As we all know we had become a year behind in paving and he thought that these dollars would serve the public better if used for our roads. There are people in the community who believe that this is your real issue with Mr. Hall and that it really has nothing to do with first amendment rights.

  6. LC says:

    It is my belief the Councilman Johnson, and others on the Council, understand and appreciate each of the concerns listed here. From Councilman’s Johnson’s quote it is obvious that he clearly respects the First Amendment Right. But he is correct, the appropriate amount of time has been spent on this issue and it is now time to move forward and focus on the work of the city. Our public servants (our City Council) deserves our thanks and support as they make important decisions to move this great city forward. They have always been open to our ideas, concerns, and suggestions and each one represents us very well.

    I hope you will join me in thanking them for the personal sacrifice that they make to serve on our City Council.

  7. timmy says:

    “Today, Councilman Larry B. Johnson said he’s growing tired of the conversation and feels it is distracting the council from more important issues.”

    Councilman Johnson.. I ask you, as an elected representative of the people and by the people, what is more important than the ability of the people to address their government?

    If you don’t understand your role, maybe you should resign as well.

    > I could not agree more. <

  8. eric says:

    At some point they need to decise to change the leadership or just move on…appears to be thursday.

    Abortion clinic bombings etc…Pcola needs some more press, don’t cha know.

  9. Michael Lowery says:

    What Larry Johnson does not get. When this first happen and there was a response by the public to just give an apology and assure the citizens that 1st amendment rights wouldn’t be cut off in the future. Mr. Hall failed to answer the people. The public wanted to be assured that limiting speech won’t be the new trend of the Council for the future. Mr. Hall has ignored answering this and Mr. Johnson also seems to want to ignore the citizens concern as well. We agree that there is so much to focus on for the future of the city but this needs to be finalized through the citizens demand. So where are we now – people getting the answer on Thursday night even if it takes having Sam Hall step aside as President and a leader like John Jerralds who clearly is a 1st amendment supporter taking charge.

  10. sj says:

    “Today, Councilman Larry B. Johnson said he’s growing tired of the conversation and feels it is distracting the council from more important issues.”

    Councilman Johnson.. I ask you, as an elected representative of the people and by the people, what is more important than the ability of the people to address their government?

    If you don’t understand your role, maybe you should resign as well.

Leave a Reply

Read This Before Leaving a Comment

Please make sure your comments follow our guidelines:

  • Please use real name - first and last names.
  • No foul language (please). Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Do not threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind. Email Rick: Rick@inweekly.net. The comment will be deleted asap.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person
  • Remember, this is my site. I set the rules and reserve the right to remove any comments that I deem inappropriate and to ban anyone who violates these rules.

Comments that do not adhere will be deleted or marked as SPAM.