Hat Hater Sioux Falls City Councilor Rolfing insults a Veteran at council meeting

tex1-golfing

The only time I wear a hat is when I’m chasing gophers on a golf course by my wife’s house in Florida.

Rex Rolfing last night asked a Vietnam Marine Corp Veteran, William Mourer, to remove his MIA/POW memorial baseball cap before addressing the council during public input. The vet refused at first explaining the purpose of the hat was to memorialize veterans. Rex of course (who I believe IS NOT a veteran) brought up the death of his son while serving in Iraq (which I felt was in poor taste) in a way saying his son’s sacrifice was greater than this veterans.

Very strange.

After a tit for tat, the veteran obliged, but he was NOT happy about it. When he was finished with his comments (another story about how the SFPD isn’t really doing their job when it comes to detective work and investigating crime-BTW, where is the Tuthill Ghost?) he quickly put his hat back on and gave one of the dirtiest looks I have ever seen to Rex.

I was actually surprised the veteran didn’t go up and, well, you know. Good thing the doggy fence is there for Rex’s protection. I guess I would have responded to Rex, “Mr. Rolfing, if you want me to remove my hat, you are sure welcome to come down here and remove it yourself, otherwise, it is staying on my head.”

Rex has asked me in the past to remove my hat, and I also obliged, he claims ‘Decorum’. Well guess what – no such rule in Roberts Rules of Order exists, the closest thing is that the CHAIR (which in this case would be the mayor) can ‘ask’ someone to remove their hat if the hat is causing disorder and if they don’t he can either tell them they cannot speak or not, which would be very bizarre considering NO rules are being broken and wearing a hat is hardly disorderly, especially one that memorializes veterans WORN by a veteran. If Rolfing would like someone to remove their hat, he has to get that permission from the chair. And like I said, there is still nothing stopping anyone from wearing a hat while addressing the council.

Here is a discussion about ‘hat wearing’ in a Roberts Rules of Order Forum;

I have read Robert Rules of order and the Board of Supervisors by-laws and I cannot find anywhere were it says you must remove your headgear in order to make a comment at the Board of Supervisors meeting.

So instead of just researching Roberts Rules, I also decided to delve into other aspects of when and where it is appropriate to wear a hat. Obviously, we are all not living in 1952 like Rex Rolfing, and etiquette has changed over the years.

Here are some ‘standards’ when it comes to wearing hats in public and military (or vets) wearing hats;

In Public Places: You may wear a hat indoors (yeh… even a baseball cap if you absolutely must) in public buildings, such as airports, public lobbies, and crowded public elevators.

As I view this, Carnegie Hall is a ‘very’ public place, and Roberts Rules aside, there is really nothing in etiquette saying you should remove your hat in a public place (except for invocation and pledge of alliegance).

People in Uniform: People in the military, Boy Scouts, police and people in other uniformed organizations keep their hats on during “full dress.” Many other interesting regulations about hat wearing in the military exist, so hat etiquette is a required course in the military.

I haven’t looked into this totally, but I can tell you that it is very common practice for veterans to wear hats during public events. Just have lunch at the VFW some day, you would be hard pressed to find someone NOT wearing either a uniform vet hat or memorial baseball cap.

So was councilor Rolfing wrong in asking this veteran to remove his hat? I think so. First, because nothing prohibits hat wearing in Roberts Rules, it is okay to wear hats in public places and last but not least this man was a veteran wearing a memorial hat, oh and then there is that pesky 1st Amendment.

Is an apology in order? I guess that is up to Rex, because I also couldn’t find anything in Roberts Rules about elected officials apologizing to constituents after acting like a jackass.



13 comments ↓

#1 Defeat Huether 2018! on 10.07.15 at 1:14 pm

I believe one is show the same respect to a city council chambers as a court room where hats must be removed.

I realize this man was a vet and lost his son but he should of known this and could of displayed his honoring of sacrifices made by another way such as wearing a short with emblems on or by some other way that is tasteful and with honor.

When I was in the military we were not allowed to have our head gear on unless it was for formation or a ceremoney which called for it.

#2 l3wis on 10.07.15 at 1:20 pm

This wasn’t a military ceremony, it was a city council meeting. As far as I am concerned, as long as your hat is not disrespectful or disorderly it is no different then wearing a tie. Not sure why Rex thinks people are purposedly being disrespectful to him by wearing a hat? I remember a few months ago he asked a construction guy to take off his hat, and the guy was confused (he didn’t even realize he was wearing a hat). It’s an article of clothing, not a political statement

#3 anominous on 10.07.15 at 5:44 pm

What’s this kangaroo court bailiff gonna do when some real diversity shows up?

#4 jeff on 10.07.15 at 7:42 pm

challenge to all who read this blog…let go to next meeting…all with our military hats on.

#5 Lewis on 10.07.15 at 8:16 pm

Gee, what did I say about 1st Amendment rights? Something the clowns at Carnegie Hall don’t understand.

http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2014/10/the-aclu-gives-pulido-and-the-santa-ana-city-council-a-constitutional-smackdown-you-violated-the-law/

#6 Me on 10.07.15 at 10:10 pm

So let me get this right, open carry side arm okay at the meeting, baseball cap, not okay. Hmmmmmm

#7 duggersd on 10.08.15 at 6:00 am

I have always been under the impression a gentleman removes his hat when indoors. Whether or not this is actually accurate, it seems to me when in a government proceeding, I think etiquette would dictate the removal of the hat. When politely asked, the person should comply.

#8 l3wis on 10.08.15 at 8:17 am

Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda.

Like I said, this isn’t 1952, and I consider a hat just another article of clothing like a tie. As long as it is not purposedley distractive or disorderly it is no different then wearing underwear. People need to start living in the present.

#9 The D@ily Spin on 10.08.15 at 9:41 am

Amazing how the city attorney quells councilors unless they choose to give an order to remove an article of clothing. I’ll be at the next meeting addressing the council wearing my wounded warrior cap with topless strippers on each arm. Say something Rock Face, I dare you. Of course, the mayor will false arrest and probably assault me.

#10 The D@ily Spin on 10.08.15 at 9:50 am

Rolfing represents unconstitutional city government. It’s proven with court cases past and present. I respect his son for his service and the ultimate sacrafice. Mr. Rolfing, you should show your patriotism and respect for your son by resigning.

#11 teatime on 10.08.15 at 1:03 pm

Much ado about nothing. I believe common courtesy would favor removing the hat, but who cares, really. This city is pretty casual about dress — even more casual than “business” casual. This is just a distraction when someone is ill-prepared to listen to a constituent, or not interested in hearing a constituent regarding any topic. “Pesky constituents, just go away and let us get this meeting done, it doesn’t matter what you say anyway. == yaaawwnnn”.

#12 l3wis on 10.08.15 at 2:19 pm

Tea Time, you are correct, has nothing to do with wearing a hat, has to do with some on the council wanting constituents to bow before them like they kings instead of equals.

#13 teatime on 10.09.15 at 12:48 am

l3wis — you got that right.

Leave a Comment