Readers: public bodies should stick to business at hand, skip opening prayers

I was pleasantly surprised by the results of the poll last week with more than twice as many saying prayer should be private as opposed to those that want to encourage prayer in public (government) meetings.  Add in those that don’t care and those that are OK with a moment of silence and it is clear this small sample would prefer to have public meetings without prayer on the agenda.

1. Prayer should be private, public meetings is not the right place 79 [43.17%]
2. Prayer at public meetings should be encouraged, not restricted 38 [20.77%]
3. Don’t care either way 29 [15.85%]
4. A moment of silence is ok but anything else is going too far 24 [13.11%]
5. Mentioning God is ok, but not Jesus 10 [5.46%]
6. Other answer… 3 [1.64%]

The three “other” answers submitted were:

1. Religion and politics should never mix…NEVER
2. Prayer at public meetings should be neither encouraged or restricted
3. replace prayer with the pledge of allegiance, like other places do

As I said last week I will strongly defend your right to believe as you wish but to have that forced upon everyone attending a public meeting is anti-American.  Do the government business in one building and your personal religion of choice in your office, church, hallway, restroom or quietly by yourself — just keep it off the official agenda.

– Steve Patterson

Poll: Public meetings without prayer

The poll this week is about an issue that often ends up in court — the role of prayer during public meetings.  Many public bodies do not begin their meetings with a prayer, but others do. One that does is the St. Louis Board of Aldermen.

Here is their outline for each meeting:

Rule 13 Regular Order of Business
The Order of Business and Procedure shall be as follows:

1. Roll Call.

2. Suggested Prayer.

“Almighty God, source of all authority, we humbly ask guidance in our deliberations and wisdom in our conclusions. Amen.”

3. Announcement of any Special Order of the Day.

4. Introduction of Honored Guests.

5. Approval of minutes of previous meetings.

6. Report of City Officials.

7. Petitions and Communications. (Source)

Increasingly public bodies that include prayer as part of their agenda are being challenged in court:

Federal District Court Judge James A. Beaty this morning ruled that Forsyth County is violating the U.S. Constitution by allowing prayers with sectarian references before meetings of the county board of commissioners.

Beaty ordered the county to stop allowing prayers under its current policy, which had come under fire from those who said that the county was promoting Christianity because most of the prayers have made reference to Jesus.

Beaty gave the county several options in his order. He said that the county could choose to open meetings without a prayer, or could require that prayers contain no sectarian references.

Mike Johnson, the attorney representing the county, told commissioners this morning that he hopes they will appeal the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. That court traditionally also has ruled against sectarian prayer at public meetings.

Today’s ruling by Beaty confirms what a magistrate recommended in November. The lawsuit was filed in March 2007 by several county residents, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union. They asked that the commission only allow non-sectarian prayer at meetings; in those, references to God are allowed, but to specific deities such as Jesus Christ or Buddha are not.

The lawsuit prompted other counties to study their policies on invocations before public meetings. Several, such as Yadkin County, changed their policies to eliminate sectarian prayer. Others, such as the Winston-Salem City Council, have held off, saying they would wait to see the outcome of the Forsyth County case.  (Source)

One example is the Texas State Board of Education:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdhGK9aYjDY

Friday the prayer at the start of the Board of Aldermen mentioned God four times.The poll this week asks how you feel about prayer and public meetings. The poll is on the right hand side of the site.  The final results will be posted Wednesday June 30, 2010.

– Steve Patterson

A birthday extravaganza for St. Louis’ youngest alderperson

Kacie Starr Triplett was elected alderman in the 6th ward in the Spring of 2007, at the time she was the youngest member on the Board of Aldermen.  In 2009 Antonio French & Shane Cohn, also young, were elected in the 21st & 25th wards, respectively. Both, however, are slightly older than Triplett so she retains the youngest title.

A week from today Kacie Starr Triplett is having a combination birthday party and re-election campaign kick-off.

I was asked to serve on the host committee and I accepted.  In the past I’ve called for term limits and other measures to ensure turnover at the Board of Aldermen, has something changed? No, but I’ve been pleased with Ald Triplett so a second term in office is reasonable in my mind.  The event is June 19, 2010 from 7pm-11pm in the Grand Hall of Union Station.  Tickets start at $50 per person.  For more information or to order tickets click here or the image above.  With Ald Triplett’s birthday we no longer have any aldermen in their 20s.

In the Spring of 2011 we will have elections for the fourteen aldermen in even numbered wards. In order to have a choice on election day I’d like to see each ward have contested races. And since we still hold a partisan primary before the general I’d like to see each political party (Republicans, Greens & Democrats) have more than one candidate for each office. If not, we need to work to eliminate the partisan primaries as they are a massive waste of money.

– Steve Patterson

Readers on resignation of Todd Epsten from the St. Louis Police Board

The poll last week apparently didn’t interest many of you:

Q: St. Louis Police board member Todd Epsten resigned on 5/19/10, well before the end of his appointment. Thoughts? (pick up to 3)

1. More proof why the state of Missouri should NOT control our police board. 40 [35.71%]
2. Unsure/don’t care 16 [14.29%]
3. Mayor Slay was right to back Epsten for board president 13 [11.61%]
4. Todd Epsten’s abrupt resignation was childish, good riddance 11 [9.82%]
5. Mayor Slay is a closet Republican which is why he voted for Epsten, who was appointed by a Republican Gov. 11 [9.82%]
6. Todd Epsten shouldn’t have resigned his appointment to the board 9 [8.04%]
7. More proof why the state of Missouri should keep control of our police board. 9 [8.04%]
8. Other answer… 3 [2.68%]

The three other answers were:

1. at what point to we give up fighting the losing political battle?
2. Don’t know enough to vote
3. don’t know enough to make an informed decision

The answer with the most votes shows that political fights between board members appointed by governors of different political parties is another reason to support local control of the St. Louis Police.

– Steve Patterson

Poll: Thoughts on the resignation of St. Louis Police Board member Todd Epsten

Last week the state controlled St. Louis police board had a leadership change:

Todd Epsten, the last Board of Police Commissioners member appointed by Governor Matt Blunt, abruptly resigned on Wednesday after he was ousted as president by a Nixon appointee, Bettye Battle-Turner.Epsten said later he believed the board’s three other appointed members acted at Nixon’s request. Nixon appointed all three, and all came on within the last 15 months.

Nixon denied personally asking his appointees to select a new president, but said he would not be surprised if his senior staff had not talked to those three members.

“I thought it moved more quickly than I perhaps thought it would, but I think it got to where it was going to get, and now my focus is on making sure that we get a quality appointment to fill out the board,” Nixon said. It will be his fourth; the board’s fifth member is fellow Democrat Francis Slay, the St. Louis mayor. Slay supported Epsten in Wednesday’s vote.

The three remaining appointed members, Nixon said, share his philosophy that day-to-day operations of the department should be left to chief Dan Isom. He would not directly answer if he thought Epsten micromanaged.

“I mean we’ve all seen stories over the many years of the police board,” he said. “Obviously I’ve been in law enforcement and elective office for many years. I just think my philosophy has been that this is a board that should provide guidance, should provide support.” (Source: St. Louis Public Radio)

The poll this week asks for your thoughts on this matter.  Do you even care? Will it matter on the street? Was Epsten micromanaging as Gov Nixon says?

– Steve Patterson