The Common Council met 04/17/2024 and held an organizational meeting at 6PM prior to the regular meeting of the Council at 7PM. During that meeting they took up and voted on several rule changes for the 2024-2025 Council term.
The item that resulted in the most amount of discussion was the proposal by Alderperson Denise Fenton (District 6) to remove the requirement that was implemented last year to recite the Pledge of Allegiance prior to every committee meeting rather than only at the beginning of Common Council meetings. That rule change was passed at last year’s organizational meeting by a vote of 10-4 with Alderpersons Israel Del Toro (District 4), Fenton, Joss Thyssen (District 8), and Alex Schultz (District 9) voting against it.
This year, Alderperson Fenton proposed removing that requirement. A presumably much larger conversation took place during the Council’s informal organizational meeting on 04/16/2024. Unfortunately, the video for that meeting has not yet been posted, so some context is perhaps missing; however, during the formal organizational meeting, the alderpersons who supported removing the requirement to recite the pledge ahead of committee meetings cited concerns about propriety related to people coming and going in the Council chamber when the Pledge was being recited. They also thought it was awkward because the microphones did not pick up the recitation and everyone turned their backs on the camera as the Pledge was recited. Finally, though no details were given, it was suggested that this rule had been implemented “to call out certain people.”
Alderpersons that supported maintaining the rule thought that the concerns about propriety were overstated and that when people entered the Council chambers and saw that the Pledge was being recited they quickly oriented themselves and joined in. They thought it was important to continue.
The Council vote ended in a tie with 7 alderpersons voted in favor of deleting the rule and 7 alderpersons voting in favor of maintaining the rule. As a result, the vote to delete the rule failed and the Pledge of Allegiance will continue to be recited at the beginning of committee meetings as well as at the beginning of Common Council meetings.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
In addition to the proposal to remove the Pledge completely before committee meetings, the Council also voted on a rule to remove the requirement to recite the Pledge at the beginning of committee meetings that did not take place in the Council Chambers and that may not have a flag present to look at while reciting the Pledge. This rule change passed by a vote of 11-3 with minimal discussion. The general consensus was that it was awkward to require the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of meetings that took place in locations that did not have a flag present.
When the issue of entirely removing the Pledge before committee meetings came up, several alderpersons spoke in favor of that change.
ALDERPERSON KATIE VAN ZEELAND (DISTRICT 5): “My issue with continuing the Pledge of Allegiance in the committee meetings has to do with the inability to do it in a respectful manner with people coming and going in the gallery. […] being raised in a Catholic school family where we worked in military funerals, and those things happened at recess, and they taught us how to be reverent during those times, I just can’t in good conscience vote to continue it the way that it is. If people have other alternative ways to do it that I think can give it the reverence that it deserves, I would love to hear them; otherwise I think that I could never look my grandpa in the eye and tell him—the Legion Grandpa—that I did what was right for politics instead of doing what was actually right.”
Later on in the meeting she stated, “I think that the pledge of allegiance is a ritual. I think a ritual is very important to the people who practice them. I think that we all have an idea of how that ritual should be carried out. And I did vote for this because I thought that we would be able to carry out in a way that would be with my values, and it’s not right now.”
ALDERPERSON ALEX SCHULTZ (DISTRICT 9): “The challenge that some of us are having is that it’s not always easy, given who might be entering the room at the time the pledge is being spoken, who might be sitting at those desks and have to get up and speak to the and salute the flag, or if you’re actually not in this chamber, the challenges that are faced when individuals are looking around to find something to salute to. For that reason, I think it’s entirely appropriate to recite the pledge when we have ourselves in this room and this chamber for this meeting. But I think at other times, I don’t necessarily think it’s—I don’t think it’s necessary, and I think it actually challenges us to give it the respect it deserves when we’re speaking.”
ALDERPERSON DENISE FENTON (DISTRICT 6): “[P]eople are moving from meeting to meeting when we’re in committee meetings. We—it is not the—I don’t want to say “ceremonial”, but it’s not the organization that we have during a Council meeting. […] we are not breaking with decades of tradition here by ceasing to say the Pledge of Allegiance at every committee meeting. This was a rule change that was put in last year. I suspect that the rule change was put in, was initiated, to call out certain people, and […] it has proven to be awkward, particularly since we can’t move the flag and we have video where we see nothing in chambers but people but the backside of people and don’t hear it on video. So I think we’ve had our trial, and we found that it is not a way to show respect but just another ritual that becomes rote. And I—without any disrespect to the flag or any disrespect to the country, I don’t find it necessary.”
ALDERPERSON VERED MELTZER (DISTRICT 2): “The pledge is something that we give voluntarily. It is not something that should be compulsorily demanded of people. So there is something questionable about what is the purpose of requiring committee members to give the pledge multiple times a day when we all gather together and give the pledge at our full, official proceeding where we finalize the votes, is that not enough? For years and years we didn’t do the pledge at committee meetings, and now it has become this big item. Are we not American enough if we stop saying the pledge so many times? Does it make my oath of office less valuable if I don’t give the pledge at each committee meeting that I attend? I don’t think so. I think that there are some problems with the expectation that elected officials should be repeating a speech every single time they appear. I think it does really seriously cheapen the oath that we all took yesterday. So at this point, I will not be supporting continuing the Pledge of Allegiance at committee meetings. I think that it is very important for us to say this pledge when we meet for the Common Council meetings. I think it’s also very important for us to live out that oath of allegiance every single day and avoid performative spectacles that turn it into something other than what it’s meant to be.”
ALDERPERSON NATE WOLFF (DISTRICT 12): “I’ve been sitting here and thinking about veterans, specifically homeless veterans, and how much time we’ve spent in this chamber talking about people who have served this country who are out there suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder or experiencing homelessness. And we haven’t really talked about it that much in this chamber, but we’ve spent about two hours talking about this. I’m the type of person who likes to spend their time focusing on the things that help people rather than showing symbolic gestures that I care about those people. I’d rather go out and help those people. And I would have rather spent two hours talking about how we could help those people rather than talking about a symbolic gesture that is not actively changing the life of someone going through hell. I’m the son of a Marine. I’m the great grandchild of a World War II vet. And I love the American flag, and I love America. I would just prefer to focus my attention on helping the people who need it and not how I can show myself being a good politician in symbolism. I would rather actively go out and make a difference in my community. So I’m going to vote against this because I feel as though it’s become a political game rather than actually helping the people of the community.”
Alderperson Sheri Hartzheim (District 13) was the one alderperson who spoke in favor of maintaining the requirement to recite the Pledge of Allegiance prior to committee meetings.
ALDERPERSON SHERI HARTZHEIM (DISTRICT 13): “I encourage us to continue [reciting the Pledge} despite all the flimsy excuses that have been given today. Alderperson Fenton says ‘Well, we’re facing away from the camera, and nobody can hear us.’ That’s no different than […] when we say it in full Council. Alderperson van Zeeland states that there is not proper decorum when people are moving in and out of meetings, etc. on committee nights. I find that to be a flimsy excuse as well. Because no matter what, if someone walks in and we’re all saying the pledge, they immediately know we’re saying the pledge, and they’ll get right into it. […] I work as a usher at the ballpark, and when someone is ready to sing the national anthem, not everybody in the ballpark is paying attention. But as soon as the anthem starts, everybody’s paying attention. So it doesn’t have to be this ‘Well we’re not using proper decorum.’ I believe we are using proper decorum, and people will get the hang of it as they go. And I think that’s been proven as we look at all of the countless numbers of committee meetings that we have—already have on our video stream. I believe that all these people last year who voted to institute this rule probably had the same idea that Alder Fenton has that this was instituted as some sort of gotcha. And yet they still voted to approve this. And I would like everyone to continue to do so.”
Later on in the meeting she said, “Alder Meltzer asked what the purpose of doing this is. The purpose is to focus each of us each meeting. Just as I mentioned before, when you’re at a baseball game and everybody’s doing willy nilly and doing whatever they’re doing with their families, etc., at one point in time, everyone in that ballpark focuses themselves on what the next task is at hand. That’s what we need here in these chambers, and that’s why I wish that we will continue this.”
The vote to remove the requirement to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before committee meetings failed by a vote of 7-7 with Alderpersons Meltzer, Van Zeeland, Fenton, Patti Heffernan (District 8), Schultz, Vaya Jones (District 10), and Wolff voting in favor of the removal of that requirement and Alderpersons William Siebers (District 1), Brad Firkus (District 2), Martyn Smith (District 4), Patrick Hayden (District 7), Kristin Alfheim (District 11), Hartzheim, and Christopher Croatt (District 14) voting in favor of maintaining the requirement.
[Honestly, given that our country is now experiencing protesters shouting “Death to America” on our soil and in our streets, I feel like a little ritualistic patriotism from our local elected officials is more that warranted and offers at least a small degree of reassurance to the American citizens who elected them to office that they take their responsibilities as American politicians representing American citizens seriously.
I also think that if city staff members are tromping in and out of committee meetings disrespectfully while the Pledge of Allegiance is being recited that a little bit of guidance and correction from HR might solve that problem.]
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1182536&GUID=77004DFB-DBC3-45EF-A8B4-A0C0E360CE42
Be the first to reply