“Seagull, have you gone nuts using a term like SOB in a headline in a column that appears on a Sunday?” When one considers what the city of Branson’s elected leaders and senior unelected officials are attempting to do to Branson, it is understandable why one might think that the letters SOB stand for something other than one who might “sob” because of the city of Branson’s use of “Dodink Law” or the acronym, “S.O.B.,” which could be used for an organization such as “Save Our Branson.”
In a previous column entitled, “Give us a break, the City of Branson can keep the term ‘Dodink’ but leave ‘Branson’ alone, please,” the Ole Seagull coined the phrase “Dodnik Law.” In an Ole Seagull’s opinion, it’s the kind of abusive law that the city of Branson’s citizens and small businesses can expect when the actions of the city’s senior unelected official, city administrator, Terry Dody and city attorney, Paul Link are not controlled by those having the responsibility to do so, Branson’s elected board of aldermen and mayor.
At the Oct. 23 meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen, during the Public Comment portion of that meeting, the city of Branson’s highest unelected official, its city attorney, the board of aldermen, and the mayor, provided yet another illustration of the arbitrary one sidedness of how Dodink Law is applied. As appears to be the case with increasing frequency as of late, it was again used to permit city of Branson officials to do exactly what they wanted to do, when they wanted to do it, regardless of what the very law they were allegedly doing it under says.
Section 2-55 of the Branson City Code, is the ordinance designed to “accommodate citizens and guests who have comments or information regarding city business.” Its requirements are straight forward and easy to read so that the average person knows what it is that they have to do to be able to speak. It says, “Any person wishing to appear and speak at the public comment meeting shall sign the speaker sign-up sheet located at the front door of the council chambers. Each person wishing to speak at the public comment meeting must personally sign the speaker sheet prior to the opening of the public comment meeting.”
The first thing of note is that the word “shall” is not optional. Who “shall sign the speaker sign-up sheet” according to the ordinance? “Any person wishing to appear and speak at the public comment meeting” must sign the sheet. According to the tapes of the meeting, Paul Link, the Branson City Attorney, had not signed the speaker sign up sheet. Paul Link is a “person” under Section 2-55.
After a citizen of the Branson area had expressed themselves, in accordance with the ordinance, Link, in apparent violation of the ordinance and without any acknowledgement or approval from the mayor, the meetings presiding officer, just started speaking. What did the city’s senior unelected official, Branson’s elected board of aldermen, and the mayor do in the face of this apparent violation of city ordinance and the decorum prescribed for the meeting? If the tape of the meeting is any indication, nothing! What makes the situation even more ludicrous is that the board of aldermen had just passed changes pertaining to that very section earlier in the meeting.
But wait, the “one law for you and another for us” application of Dodink Law isn’t over yet. As the speaker attempted to respond to Links unauthorized comments they were informed that they could not do so because their ten minutes was up. How arrogant and hypocritical, one application of the law for Branson city officials and another for its citizens and businesses. Yet another illustration of the professionalism and fairness that Branson area citizens, and businesses alike can expect if some S.O.B. like organization doesn’t save Branson from the city of Branson and its Dodink Law.
“Isn’t it unusual for citizens and businesses to have to form an organization to protect themselves from the very city whose relevance and revenues comes from them?” The answer is “Yes” but then what other city would try to do to its area’s citizens and businesses what the city of Branson has done and is trying to do? What city in its right mind would treat the very theatres, attractions, other entertainment venues, and the lodging industry that has made it so successful as the “financial incubator” for the “New Branson” that, in an Ole Seagull’s opinion, is being built on the their sweat, investment, and effort? Exactly who wanted the convention center built downtown?
