N.S. residents staunchly opposed to Nike vote
Speakers at North Smithfield meeting were mostly against proposed non- binding resolution
NORTH SMITHFIELD – In the end, their pleas fell on three resolute members of the Town Council and local residents did not stop the panel from voting 3-2 to approve a resolution asking town departments not to purchase Nike products because of its association with Colin Kaepernick-- but they did try.
Early speakers in the long appeal Monday night, such as former Town Council and School Committee member Melissa Flaherty and her husband John Flaherty, a past Town Council president, tried to sway the panel’s members with an argument that Council President John Beauregard’s resolution did not reflect the views of North Smithfield as a community and that it was even embarrassing to have to oppose such a move.
“I think it’s despicable. This is not good government, this is not transparent government,” Melissa Flaherty said while noting she had spending the weekend looking into the matter after learning that a resolution banning the purchase of Nike products was on the agenda for Monday’s meeting even if she could not get a copy of it beforehand.
“I’ve read hundreds of cases and articles and news feeds. It comes down to this. Colin Kaepernick is using his first amendment rights to free speech to bring attention to the injustices faced by people of color. It’s that simple,” Flaherty said. “People who choose to right it off as disrespect of soldiers or police in general are missing the point. It should be noted that this is an enormously divisive issue in this country. And rather than squelching it. We should ask ourselves how we as a community can make it better for all people,” Flaherty said.
North Smithfield, as a town that is 96.6 percent white, “should really try to understand this issue better. I grew up in Central Falls. I’ve worked on social justice issues in this state for the last 25 years.
I’ve worked in Pawtucket, Providence, Woonsocket and Warwick with fabulous community police officers,” she said. But at the same time, Flaherty said she could tell the gathering “that racism is alive and well in this state.”
Flaherty said she had read where Beauregard voiced a belief that Kaepernick, and Nike for sponsoring him, were perpetuating a “lie that police are racist and that they are out to keep people of color down.”
In response, she offered “No Mr. Beauregard, your action in putting this item on the agenda perpetuates this narrative.
“This is not North Smithfield, this is not my opinion, I respectfully request that you do your job and focus on town issues,” she concluded.
As her husband took the podium, he too suggested that the resolution did not reflect the true feelings of town.
“We’ve lived in this town 22 years, my wife and I, raised our family here, and over those 22 years we’ve come to meet a lot of wonderful people in this town. And I’m here to tell you tonight that this resolution is not who we are as a town. We’re better than this, this is an embarrassment on this town in my opinion,” Flaherty said.
Before he won the support of two of his peers, Claire O’Hara and Paul Zwolenski, to pass his resolution, Beauregard responded to the criticism that the resolution violated Kaepernick’s First Amendment rights to free speech or was racially oriented.
“This is not even directed at Colin Kaepernick,” Beauregard said. “He has the right to say whatever he wants. And as I’ve said just because I don’t believe in his cause, it doesn’t mean I don’ t believe in his rights,” Beauregard, a retired R.I. State Trooper, noted.
As for why the council was taking up an ordinance asking town department’s not to purchase Nike products if possible instead of other town business, Beauregard responded both actions were possible.
“First of all I am capable of multi-tasking and so is this whole council. So we can handle more than one issue on the agenda. But much more important, since when is standing up for something you believe in not a council issue,” Beauregard said. “If there is a wrong being done to our police officers why wouldn’t I use my position to attempt to right a wrong. So am I taking advantage of my position as council president to bring an issue to the forefront, absolutely I am. I admit that wholeheartedly,” Beauregard said.
The speakers challenging Beauregard’s resolution in some cases called it a “racist” action and one that would send a message about the town indicating it valued the image of law enforcement over what they viewed as a legacy of racial inequality in the country.
Others such as Michael Clifford, a retired teacher and past member of the school committee, voiced a concern that the resolution was improperly changing town purchasing policy.
“The big picture here, and by the way I don’t think there is any rationale that would justify this resolution. But the big picture here is in my mind, and what is alarming to me is apparently public officials, elected public officials, some seem to believe that the public treasury of municipalities, is a private treasure trove that they can dip into and make purchases from companies when and if they are in agreement with their own ideologies and on the flip side punish companies if that don’t share an promote those same ideologies by withholding the purchase of services and goods,” Clifford said. Kristy Dolph told the council she just moved to North Smithfield a year ago and that one of the reasons she chose the town “was my feeling it was a nice community, a welcoming community,” she said. “But as soon as this resolution came forward, I felt like it was no longer welcoming. I feel like this resolution is quite divisive and I think it had its purpose to be divisive,” Dolph said.
“I think there is a lot better things that we could be focusing on and I am also speaking as a mother in this community where I think there is a lack of resources to teach things like diversity and working with people with disabilities, working with people who are marginalized and that is lacking in this community and I feel like instead of presenting something that is so divisive, this should be a forum to have these kinds of conversations and learn from it to implement better solutions for our community, better solutions for our schools and teach the things that we should be teaching and being welcoming and being open to hearing other sides of the story,” she said.
Tarsha Geoghegan told the panel how she had been excited about moving to North Smithfield with her daughter, a junior at the high school, and son, an eighth grader at the middle school.
“We were excited about moving to North Smithfield and we were excited about the community and the schools and I have to say everyone was very welcoming,” she said. “I loved this community and you sir have completely changed that,” Geogheagan told Beauregard.
“I can’t believe an official would want to put a divide between the police and young children. This is your personal opinion. You don’t like Nike put pen to paper let Nike know `Hey I’m sad I don’t like what you are doing,’ but to put this on a town to say that the town feels this way,” she said. “You have a child in middle school, and I can’t believe that a parent would want to put this on their children,” she said.
“My son got done with soccer practice, he got into the car, he was so excited, his peers nominated him to be captain of the soccer team, he was so excited. And then one of his friends sent him a snap shot of a mime of North Smithfield banning Nike products,” Geoghegan said. “And then I had to explain to him that you sir, you alone have decided that you don’t like Nike, you don’t like Colin Kaepernick so guess what North Smithfield doesn’t like Nike.”