Local Government Project

As someone who is moderately involved in Bowling Green city politics, I was interested to see what would unfold on the night of March 20, 2007, at the Bowling Green City Commissioners Meeting. I had varying expectations of what would take place, but was interested to see how the officials I had helped to elect would handle such a meeting. Every time I mentioned that I was attending the commissioners meeting, the people I talked to always said that it would be a good one because of the proposed smoking ban and debate about the Transpark. In this paper I plan to show the structure of the meeting, the behavior of the elected officials that I witnessed, and to compare their behavior to my expectations.

Open To The Floor

Coming from California, I was surprised to find someone leading a prayer when I walked into the room where the meeting was held. There is so much talk about separating Church and state that sometimes I forget that I am in the "Bible Belt" where there are not as many objections to prayers in public buildings. After the prayer was over, I noticed the cramped seating in the very small room. Attendance was high, as seating was full and many people were forced to stand. The meeting started with a brief summary of issues discussed in a closed meeting earlier that day and then the floor was opened to those who wanted to speak.

The first man came to the podium holding a manila packet in a hand that was nervously shaking. He was then asked by Elaine Walker to give his first and last name, along with his home address. This was asked of all who approached the podium. Mayor Walker then told him that he had five minutes to speak on his topic of choice and that he should keep it brief, simple and to the point. He went on to object to the proposed smoking ban, holding up the packet which had a petition that numerous small business owners had signed saying that the smoking ban would ruin their businesses. After he had spoken his peace, Mayor Walker made an announcement. She said that she wanted to make it clear to those of us who were there that there was no proposed smoking ban on the table, nor had there been one talked about within their closed work sessions. She went on to say that those who wanted to speak on the subject were welcome to, but there would be no more mention of it after the comments from the floor were closed.

Three other Bowling Green residents then spoke their peace about the smoking ban. Two of them were for it, and the one other was against it. After the last person sat down, Mayor Walker then asked if there were any more people who wanted to speak. When no one proceeded to the podium, she then closed the floor session with the agreement of all of the others on the City Commission to proceed with the Consent Agenda. At that time, approximately half of the crowd left, as most of them were interest groups who were supporting the smoking ban.

I appreciated that the City Commission opened the floor to Bowling Green residents to voice their opinions, but I believe that the time limit was not entirely fair. I know there are certain codes of conduct that must be followed and that this environment was not the place to start an unruly argument, but it seems that the people who spoke did not have the time to fully express themselves. The time limit was brought up later in the code of ordinances.

Consent Agenda

First on the consent agenda was to seek approval for people hired into certain city jobs. I was surprised that candidates had to be approved into the vacant positions and could not simply be hired like many employers do. It almost seemed like a marriage ceremony: Mayor Walker asked for any objections, there was a second to her approval, and the name of each city commissioner was read off and he responded, "Yes." Mayor Walker then congratulated the newly hired employee and people clapped in approval. In one case, the person had already been working in city hall for two weeks prior to his approval. It seemed more of a formality than anything, a rule that was in the books that had to be followed and not something of any real merit. After the last employee was approved, we had a short break before they started in on the Code of Ordinances section. At this point, most of the newly hired employees left, along with another quarter of the crowd.

Code of Ordinances

Most of us did not have a copy of the agenda which had the code of ordinances attached to it. The more important issues were discussed first, such as renewing licenses and funding for the Transpark, authorization for the contractors to move forward with SKYPAC at the new location, extending the five minute time limit for the people who would like to voice their opinions, and travel expenses for elected officials of Bowling Green. There were several other ordinances mentioned, but those are the ones that took the most time. All of the others had very little questioning or debate. A private contractor came forward to speak about ordinance twenty-five, which advocated the necessity of widening Three Springs Road to three lanes all the way to the Natcher Parkway overpass due to the anticipated increase in traffic expected to accompany the proposed Gander Mountain store. But even then, the commissioners did not ask him any questions after he talked for about fifteen minutes defending widening the road. They seemed to have no problem approving some ordinances but others they debated for at least twenty minutes each.

The conduct of the commissioners toward each other was always civil, but they disagreed with each other openly. Commissioner Strow seems to be the most interested in the way that certain decisions would impact the tax payers of Bowling Green as well as areas that border city limits. Commissioner Nash seemed to be more interested in his own agenda and paranoid about how certain rulings would affect his personal family, especially the vote on travel expenses. He believed that if he had to get travel approved that it would leave his home open to predators that would harm his family. Commissioner Denning seemed to be the moderator in many ways and he was the neutral ground. Mayor Walker and Commissioner Strow had the strongest disagreements, followed closely by exchanges between Commissioner Strow and Commissioner Nash. Commissioner Wilkerson did not do anything but second an approval to get the sessions rolling along and he seemed to not want have any part in the arguments.

Conclusion

After almost two-and-a-half hours of debating, approvals and disapprovals, they took a break for about ten minutes before they got to the last five ordinances. I took that opportunity to leave as it was almost 9:30 p.m. I was one of few remaining people by that time, as most people had left after the floor closed. I was intrigued, however, and wanted to stay to observe the structure of the meeting and the behavior of the officials I had helped elect. I was also interested to see if they had the interest of the public in mind or their own agendas. I enjoyed knowing what was going on in Bowling Green straight from the source. The meeting exceeded my expectations and my hopes for the future of Bowling Green. I found that, overall, the commissioners and Mayor only had the best interests of Bowling Green in mind. I am confident, as a voter and an active member of the community, that the more these meetings are attended, the more involved the community can be in helping our commissioners make the right decisions. Things cannot get done the way we want them to if we are not involved in local politics.