Wednesday, March 6, 2002
|
Wednesday, March 6, 2002 |
|
Open meetings: Lust for power drives secrecy You were forthright in your editorial, last week, asking why local officials so often choose secrecy instead of openness, so I'll be forthright in supplying the answer to you. There are three reasons: (1) lust for power, (2) perception of lack of interest, and (3) perception of public stupidity. Let me explain the third factor first, which applies to elected officials. Many public officials tell themselves that if the people were dumb enough to elect them, then the public can't possibly understand the information they're hiding. From my perspective, it is true that we were dumb to elect them, but quite often we simply voted for the least bad of a bad bunch, so we voters are not totally to blame. Lust for power is pervasive. People in government and out of government withhold information from other people because knowledge is power, and when you have and retain superior knowledge you can control other people better. We see that in private enterprise too. Public officials also often entertain the perception that the public is not interested. That's often the media's fault, because the media fail to understand their role as the citizens' professional watchdogs. They have become puppy dogs, or lap dogs, whose role, as they perceive it, is to please and to entertain. The media don't want the government mad at them. My feeling is that they're not doing their job unless they do get the government mad at them. The illustration of what I mean about the media that comes immediately to my mind is the school bond referendum we had in November 2000. The school board then chose one of the rottenest bond repayment schedules it could have, nine years of rising payments, and then basically hid the details from the public, while the press blindly sang the praises of education without looking at the substance of what the school board asked the people to approve. I suspect the school board intended the bond referendum to fail so it could come back with its infamous SPLOST, and we the public fooled them good, though we had to swallow a pretty nasty repayment arrangement. Today some of our students are deprived of badly needed facilities, such as auditoriums, gyms or air conditioning, because school officials pretend they have no awareness of the input of citizens like me who show an interest in providing intelligent solutions. Not only do they fail to encourage citizen interest, they seek to discourage it. Public officials do not want us to get involved, and then once in a while they blast us for apathy. What hypocrites! Let me bring on one more example of how politicians behave. Last week's Citizen featured an article where Tyrone Councilman Ronnie Cannon is reported as having said, of talking to County Commission Chairman Greg Dunn, that "It's like talking to a concrete wall." When I appeared before the Tyrone Town Council in September 1999 to try to dissuade them from endorsing a SPLOST tax, Cannon was there, and my talking to him (and the others) was also like talking to a concrete wall. None of them ever popped a question or a comment about what I said. They ignored me totally, and then proceeded to vote unanimously in favor of SPLOST. When I read Cannon's comments in The Citizen, I thought to myself, talk about gall! I am delighted to see that The Citizen is becoming a watchdog. I suspect your question on why public officials favor secrecy was rhetorical, and that you knew all along. I hope you don't mind my coming right out with a public answer. Claude Y. Paquin Fayetteville cypaquin@msn.com
|
||