Residents only: Bethlehem City Council considers restricting public comment

BETHLEHEM, Pa. — Bethlehem City Council proposes to limit public comment at meetings to involve city residents and taxpayers only.

While some aren’t too happy about that, others said Tuesday that council needs to focus on what’s at stake here locally.

That proposal could see a vote on April 2, according to city officials.

Councilwoman Rachel Leon was absent Tuesday.

The meeting lasted for about three hours, which was among the quickest of the year so far.

Councilwoman Grace Crampsie Smith wrote in a March 12 memo to her fellow council members that amending the rules to allow only citizens and taxpayers of Bethlehem to speak at public comment would be “prudent.”

“Given the unfortunate series of events that occurred at our recent council meeting of March 5, 2024, I feel it vital that we abide by the documented Rules of Council, which are to govern the business of Bethlehem City Council,” Crampsie Smith wrote.

“ … Non-citizens/non-taxpayers have no right to speak during public comment under Section 710.1 of the Sunshine Law.”

The previous meeting

The March 5 meeting was cut short after five hours of public comment — most of that consisting of “yays” or “nays” regarding a local Israel-Hamas war cease-fire resolution, as well as some affordable housing discussion.

The remainder of the agenda had to be placed on the schedule for Tuesday’s meeting.

About 60 people came to the dais on March 5 to share why the cease-fire was either a good or bad idea. While some of that bunch were from other areas of the Lehigh Valley, including Easton and Palmerton, a number of them were residents of Bethlehem.

To the dismay of pro-cease-fire activists in attendance who wanted a dedicated cease-fire resolution brought forward and passed, city council that meeting had shared a statement calling for peace in not only the Israel-Hamas war but around the globe.

Some of the activists said council members had “made a promise” at the Feb. 20 meeting to take what was shared by the public and put together its own document to share with state and federal officials who could help make a broader impact.

This is what each council member in attendance said in response that evening, including Councilman Bryan Callahan’s initial point saying he’d be “writing and proposing at our next council meeting a resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza.”

Councilwoman Rachel Leon was absent on Feb. 20.

During an interview later with LehighValleyNews.com, she said she’d have voted against any cease-fire measure on the grounds that council has limited international pull.

She also said such a vote could appear to prioritize the Israel-Hamas fighting over other conflicts around the globe.

'Mixed feelings'

Resident William Scheirer said he held “mixed feelings” for the proposed public comment amendment.

“On the one hand, I’m kind of proud of the fact that the Bethlehem City Council, for at least the 21 years I’ve been coming here, allows people from outside the city to speak,” Scheirer said.

“But after last week’s meeting and the disrespect to this council and to the city of Bethlehem, I am also sympathetic to the motion.”

After Scheirer’s comments, Council President Michael Colón clarified that the proposal was just being read into the record that evening, and would see an official vote at the next meeting.

A handful of other city residents came forward to remind council that other areas nearby contribute to economic growth of Bethlehem, nobody was hurt during the protesting on March 5 and the Israel-Hamas war remains both an international and local issue.

Valerie Noonan, another city resident who has spoken in favor of a cease-fire resolution, said she felt that Crampsie Smith’s motion was “twisty wording” and had nothing to do with the Sunshine Law.

She said the mentioning of personal attacks and a returning of focus to city business was ultimately “arbitrary,” and could “easily be used as a tool to curb free speech.”

“If I have a negative opinion of a council member, I should be able to express that — and there’s a fine line between public and personal,” Noonan said.

“Likewise, if I believe something is of concern to the city, I at least deserve my five minutes to make my case. And if you pass this resolution, you will be shutting out many valuable perspectives and will further erode the trust between you and your constituency.”

Regarding the night of March 5, Noonan said the pro-cease-fire activists responded with “an act of civil disobedience” due to council’s “lack of political will and a lack of a sense of urgency.”

A call to resign

Mike Stauffer, who introduced himself as a Bethlehem resident and Marine veteran, said he admired the passion from the pro-cease-fire crowd but they needed to remember that they’d all get to go home after the meeting and not be arrested for speaking freely.

“As a citizen, I have a great concern that your time is being used up in a way that you can’t address the city’s needs,” Stauffer said, speaking to council.

He said raising one's voice and demanding certain actions from elected officials will get the opposite of the intended effect.

“These people do not have the power to fix every problem in the world — they don’t,” Stauffer said, speaking of council.

“And I don't agree with a lot of things they do. But I do respect the fact that they’re here and they’re trying and they’re working.”

Bethlehem resident Harry Faber said each member of the panel should step down following the events of March 5.

“Again, you’ve chosen to put the interest of yourselves above your civil and moral duty to serve the people of this city,” Faber said.

“Through your failures, I humbly ask that you resign, each and every one of you, because you do not deserve this position.”