Hired by the city to write new rules of conduct for Kenmore City Council, attorney Michael Kenyon said no one — thankfully, in his opinion — has the right to infringe on any American’s right to freedom of speech.
However, Kenyon added government, including Kenmore’s council, does have the right to regulate speech and cited the old maxim about no one being allowed to yell “fire” in a crowded theater.
Kenyon was responding at least partly to criticism of the proposed rule ordinance, an ordinance council essentially ended up putting on hold. The issue was referred back to a council subcommittee, which notably includes Councilman John Hendrickson.
Many observers saw the rules measure as aimed specifically at Hendrickson, the often outspoken critic of the rest of council and the Kenmore administration.
As originally written, the ordinance allowed for the removal of councilmembers from office if any given councilperson was censured by the rest of council three times. The legislation was rewritten, leaving in council’s right to censure members — a right it already has — but eliminating any additional penalties for multiple censures. Kenyon never said specifically who authorized the changes or why they were made. He did state the measure was written to stand up to court challenges.
For his part, despite any rewriting, Hendrickson still opposed the measure.
“This ordinance is designed to intimidate people in my opinion,” he said at one point.
While the legislation spelled out an appeal process for any censure, Hendrickson’s questioning of Kenyon made clear no city money could be used to mount such an appeal, that the councilmember fighting a censure would need to pay for his own defense.
Again in questioning Kenyon, Hendrickson wanted to know who authorized preparation of the rules legislation, stating that council as a whole never had. He demanded to know if one or two councilmembers acting alone could authorize spending money on the issue. Kenyon responded in the negative, but added Kenmore’s city manager could do so.
Hendrickson has clashed openly with City Manager Fred Stouder, who was not at the Feb. 14 session. Citing what he characterized as troublesome conflicts with Hendrickson, Stouder has asked council to reconsider his contract, which expires at the end of this year.
During the audience comment session of the meeting, several of council’s regular public critics took shots at the rules ordinance, saying it was aimed at Hendrickson and would amount to censorship. Councilman Alan Van Ness later stated there might some confusion between censuring members and censoring members. Van Ness said no one has the right to tell a councilmember not to speak his or her mind, which would amount to illegal censorship.
But he said a voted censure by the rest of council was intended to be a rebuke for comments deemed out of line, an expression of the disapproval of the rest of council.
Hendrickson already has been censured by council at least twice.
In the end, with the additional penalties removed, Van Ness questioned the need for the new ordinance. It was Councilwoman Laurie Sperry who suggested the issue be returned to council subcommittee. Besides Hendrickson, the subcommittee consists of Mayor David Baker and Deputy Mayor Milton Curtis. While he basically acts as president of council, Baker gave no immediate indication of when the subcommittee might meet or take further action on the rules measure.
