It was standing-room only at the Columbia County Commission meeting on Sept. 16. Two hot-button issues had drawn the crowd: a proposed solar farm adjacent to Patriots Park and concerns that the rezoning to accommodate the White Oak Technology Park data center project lacked transparency and community involvement.
In addition, many of us who oppose the county’s year-old library shelving guidelines, initially adopted by the commission on Sept. 3, 2024, and later affirmed by the Greater Clarks Hill Regional Library Board on Dec, 10, 2024, with the county’s 5–4 majority, were also there to speak. In many ways, that crowded room reflected residents’ growing frustration with county decision-making and the sense that community voices are too often sidelined.
The solar farm proposal was ultimately voted down. Before public comments began, commissioners addressed the audience and answered questions about the data center(s); however, many residents remain unconvinced that the project will be as wonderful as county leaders claim it to be.
During public comment, Marlena Bergeron, a frequent critic of the Commission’s library and environmentally related policies, also a dear friend of mine, gave an impassioned speech on constitutional rights.Towards the end of her speech, she said, “I don’t know if you’re listening to what we say, so I’m just going to play instead…,“ and after a few more sentences, began performing The Star-Spangled Banner on her violin.
From my seat in the back, I caught a brief exchange between Chairman Doug Duncan and County Manager Scott Johnson over whether she should be allowed to play. Johnson then signaled deputies, who escorted her out, even though she remained within her allotted five-minute window, and no written rule prohibits musical performance during comments. For context, Bergeron played her violin before, on July 1, 2025.
No one objected to the violin at that time. However, she did run out of time, and Patrice Crawley escorted her from the podium. On Sept. 16, the crowd’s reaction was telling: several people, myself included, quietly stood in respect for the national anthem. Only when deputies removed her did the crowd become agitated, with shouts like “against the Constitution” and, “Now we know where y’all stand.”
Beyond constitutional concerns, this incident also raises a critical question: Who controls these meetings? According to Columbia County’s official website, the elected commission chair conducts and presides over all Board of Commissioners meetings. However, it appeared that an unelected official, the county manager, was calling the shots in this moment. We can all disagree about how to run public meetings, but there should at least be a clear chain of command in the room, and any rules of decorum should be published in advance.
Defenders of the removal claim it was merely a constitutional “time, place, and manner” restriction. If that were the case, though, such a rule should have been in place before Marlena’s first performance in July, or at the very least, afterward. To me, it seemed more like Johnson disliked what she had to say, and her violin made an even stronger point he didn’t want her to make. This pattern extends beyond one meeting. When I spoke with a commission supporter at Publix over the past weekend, he said, “Y’all just gotta be smart and follow the rules.” The reality is that we do follow the rules. However, the rules keep changing.
Back in April, Freedom to Read Coalition of Columbia County (FTRCCC), which I lead, coordinated with all three county library branches to deliver a simple Publix deli lunch to library staff for Library Appreciation Day. At the last minute, we were forced to cancel our order and were accused of trying to influence library staff illegally. (Can we sit with how absolutely absurd the accusation is that we were somehow bribing staff with sandwiches and cookies?)
Anyway, we had no intention of publicizing this gift; we simply love the library and wanted to show appreciation. Now, though, anyone in our group, and only our group, must call or email for approval before bringing food for library staff. (Some in our group have brought treats to the library for years without issue before this.) Yet, later in the summer, a private business donated pizza to one of the local branches to promote the business’s summer reading program. This donation was highlighted and celebrated on the library branch’s and private businesses’ Facebook pages. I don’t begrudge enterprises for supporting our libraries, but the double standard is glaringly obvious.
Another example of shifting standards came after a 15-year-old spoke movingly at a Library Advisory Board meeting about LGBTQ teen suicides and handed out letters she had written in their voices. The library board chair then changed the rules to ban distributing materials directly to board members during comments, requiring that they be handed to him or staff after the meeting. New rules of decorum were strictly enforced at the library meetings, particularly for those opposing the guidelines. However, when supporters broke them, those of us in opposition had to remind the chair of the rule (which he had made), and then they were gently and apologetically corrected.
When library board meetings consistently drew growing turnout against the guidelines, the commission dissolved the county board and created a shell of a Columbia County Regional Library Board with no appointed members, effectively canceling nearly six months of public meetings. This also made it impossible for the Greater Clarks Hill Regional Library Board (GCHRLB) to reach a quorum for the rest of the year, as the governing documents of GCHRLB stipulate that a member of the regional board must also be a member of the county board.
So, by prematurely dissolving the county board, our commissioners not only canceled county advisory board meetings for the remainder of the year, but they also hamstrung the GCHRLB for the rest of the year as well. This silenced discussion during this critical transitional period while the county stands up its own regional library with its own governing documents. This also left commission meetings as the only avenue to share public comments. Parents often have limited time to attend evening meetings due to their children’s activities, and I can’t help but think that the timing and structure of the changes were designed not only to quell opposition but also to avoid disclosing new, developing library policies to the public. The same problems extend to demonstrations. FTRCCC held a second library-related protest on May 10 (the first was on Dec. 7, before the organization was officially established). Unlike our first event, the county enforced a policy requiring $2 million in event liability insurance as a requirement for a public gathering permit, which is a heavy lift for grassroots group. The ACLU of Georgia advised that such high insurance coverage minimums can chill protected speech. I raised this concern with the commission over three months ago. Nothing has changed.
Granted, FTRCCC could just show up and hold signs on the sidewalk, but I believe it to be in the best interest of the community to have coordination with the county, along with our own internal planning to mitigate safety concerns. You might not agree with the FTRCCC, but do you want your right to gather peacefully to face such deterrents if you happen to disagree with the County on something?
Also, during the May demonstration, library staff told us they were instructed to “call the police” if anyone entered the building carrying a sign, even though we always instructed participants to remain outside and only use the bathrooms in the building. At the Dec. 7, 2024, demonstration, we were also advised that we had to strictly stay in the pre-approved outdoor area with signs/flyers, which we did. Contrast that with Dec. 10, 2024, when supporters of the guidelines turned the regional board meeting itself into a rally, not only bringing signs to the meeting but also leaving them in the library breezeway afterward.
From shifting speaking rules to selective enforcement, the county’s approach appears inconsistent at best, discriminatory at worst. I am not opposed to reasonable rules of decorum, but it seems that certain people in our community get to do whatever they like, while others face enforcement of new or improvised rules on the spot. What unfolded on Sept. 16 was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern: rules were created and applied strictly to critics, while allies escaped similar scrutiny. If county leaders can show consistent written rules of decorum that are equally enforced, I’d welcome that clarification. Regardless of politics, everyone benefits when the rules are clear and fairly applied.
Local governance depends on public trust. If county leaders want to retain that trust, they must apply standards consistently, clarify who runs the Commissioner Meetings, and respect constitutionally protected speech.
