A medical doctor bloviated on September 25 how beloved and charismatic he was, and how much he loved his influential wife. The mayor allowed this though it was not on the agenda.

The mayor feigns stupidity about allowable public comment. At the September 11th meeting this mayor interrupted James Williamson who spoke about students placing a fire truck on the MIT Dome honoring firemen who died in New York City.

This mayor said “9/11” was not on the agenda. But it was. The mayor had sponsored a resolution acknowledging “9/11.”

The mayor censors persons whom he does not like. This shows contempt for free speech, the First Amendment and democracy.

On October 30 Kathy Podgers was the first speaker. The mayor said she was not speaking on an agenda item. But she was. Podgers said, “This is about community policing.”

The mayor interrupted again. “You’re repeating a conversation with the Manager about your mental state.”

Podgers “Correct.”

Mayor Reeves “That is not on . . . .”

Podgers “No, about how the police discriminate, how the police do not operate according to [...] the law of the land. [...] This is discrimination against people with disabilities.”

I spoke. The mayor interrupted me saying I needed to speak about an agenda item. I spoke on the Public Safety Committee meeting on October 3rd. Reeves said, “Mr. Bercaw I find it difficult to, to . . . Mr. Bercaw you, you have to speak about the order that you said you were speaking on. If you can’t keep your commentary to that then you won’t be allowed to continue.”

One of the City’s formal goals is to encourage public participation. The Council acts against their own goals.

Elie Yarden spoke. The mayor said it was not to an agenda item. Yarden objected. The mayor banged the gavel. Yarden objected. The mayor called a recess—and the police. Yarden is 83 years old.

The mayor continued abusing and provoking vulnerable citizens. Councilor Decker asked Podgers to leave with her service dog. Podgers rightfully refused. The mayor said, “Miss Podgers, [...]If we hear you again this night you’re gone too.”

Podgers answered the mayor. He said, “OK. Uh, officer we have another person disrupting the public meeting.”

After a recess of 19 minutes and 46 seconds the Mayor reconvened the meeting. Councillor Decker said, “There seems to be a discrepancy, Mr. Mayor. I’m having um a bit of an allergic reaction to an animal here in the room. [...] I’m going to actually just uh leave. So we can figure this out over the next week.”

The mayor stated, “For some reason there has developed in the air that there is an entitlement not only to be at this particular meeting but to also do whatever you like. And uh the complications tonight seem to suggest that we’re gonna have to review with ourselves and the public what can and cannot go on here. Uh when there is uh an animal introduced into the chamber and the member has allergies uh there is reasonable accommodation that can and must occur because the Councilor can only do the business of the council here in the chamber, so. That is pretty clear to me. [...] The chair does not believe that, believes that reasonable accommodation has been offered.”

Councilor Decker interrupted the mayor saying, “I think we tried to offer reasonable accommodations at this time.”

The mayor suspended the rules for the seventh time and read aloud one section of the Open Meetings Law. The mayor, the Council, and the city clerk do not enforce the rest of the Open Meeting Law. They do not enforce other Council rules. It would not be selective enforcement of the laws if they did.

Outrageously the mayor and the councilor think that citizens need to make reasonable accommodations for the government, that they do not have to make reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. That is a discrepancy.

[Quotes are transcribed from a video-tape of the meetings.]