Editor:
    It is with a good deal of thought and consideration that I finally decided to write this letter, but I have been haunted since attending the South Portland City Council meeting on June 4. At that meeting, I witnessed the public being treated with such disrespect by two councilors that it was unconscionable.
    When speaking to the proposed project for Waterman Drive, several residents commented that they hoped that the increase in taxes would not be the driving force in the decision (I am using my own words here). Councilors Beecher and Morgan felt it was necessary, in response to that, to reprimand, demean, and patronize speakers– scolding us from the dais– telling us that our comments were “offensive.” Councilors Beecher and Morgan both stated (in their own words) that they had not heard mention of taxes in council discussions.
    First of all, they are both incorrect. Councilors Loring and Boudreau both commented on the increase in taxes as a factor in their decisions; in fact, Councilor Loring asked several questions with regard to comparison of taxes between three and four floors and discussion on the specifics of the taxes went on for approximately 6 to 7 minutes.
    Second, why is it necessary to demonize speakers? Why must councilors judge the word of the public, rather than simply hear them, consider them and make their decision? Is it the need to justify one’s vote by criticizing and belittling the voice of the public? Mr. Morgan stated that some of the comments made by the public were “inappropriate.” What does that mean? Does that mean that they are not to his liking, and therefore, “inappropriate?” Inappropriate by what standard; by what authority? I wonder why he feels it is imperative to minimize the value of a person’s comments with such disdain.
    I have always understood the public comment portion of the agenda to be just that: an opportunity for the public’s fundamental right to comment– on anything an individual may choose to discuss. It is disconcerting, at best, to think that the risk of speaking might be the subjection of ridicule and condescension from some councilors who feel they are privileged to judge character and comment so openly and disrespectfully. Why would anyone choose to speak under those conditions (might that be the hidden agenda here?)?
    I walked out of Chambers with several speakers that evening. Comments included the surety that taxes had been discussed at the previous meeting, but more importantly was the dismay that we all felt at the treatment we received by these two councilors.
     “Why did they talk to us like that?” one person asked. “Don’t they even care about what we have to say? Do they even listen at their own meetings?” A third person asked, “was it necessary to be so patronizing to us? What is the point of that?” and a fourth said, “There was no way we could speak again, so they get the last word. I felt like I was a child by the way those two spoke to us.”
    It was a disheartening experience, for sure, and a not very attractive display by Mrs. Beecher and Mr. Morgan. If other councilors are able to maintain decorum, couldn’t that behavior be modeled by all of them?  There seems need to remind some that councilors serve the public– not the reverse.
    The people of this city choose their representatives– we certainly do not need to be named, scolded or chastised from the dais. Our residents deserve much better than that.
Rosemarie De Angelis
South Portland