THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, October 2, 1994 TAG: 9409300274
SECTION: CHESAPEAKE CLIPPER PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Guest Column
SOURCE: BY ALAN P. KRASNOFF
LENGTH: Medium: 91 lines
As if sitting behind a bulletproof dais wasn't enough to protect it from the public's slings and arrows, City Council's new majority voted last Tuesday night to raise the barrier still higher.
They say that turning off the television cameras is the way to restore dignity to the democratic process by which we conduct the public's business.
They say that eliminating on-the-record public comment is the way to put an end to what they describe as a circus atmosphere that surrounds City Council meetings.
Sure. And if frogs had wings . . .
Now, don't think for a minute that I find any pleasure in sitting quietly as speaker after speaker levels sometimes unjustified criticism at any member of council, the city's management or its day-to-day operations.
Nor do I think much of the language sometimes used to characterize our behavior. It is artless at best, often comes very close to being slander, and there is simply no excuse for its use.
On the other hand, being forced - well, not forced, because I can always leave the chamber - to listen to citizens' comments on non-agenda items comes with the territory.
And if there's a council member who was elected believing that his term on our legislative body was going to be free of criticism, warranted or not, then I suggest therapy.
Frankly speaking, and at least I can speak frankly, comments from citizens come with the turf.
The ability of a citizen to seek redress, valid or not, is part and parcel of a sometimes rough-and-tumble system we call the democratic process. It's the price we pay for freedom. And sometimes, it's what spurs us to action.
When all else failed, quite pointed non-agenda citizens' comments about the Lillel Farms borrow pit surfaced an extraordinarily tangled web of inept responses. They also resulted in a new set of approaches and ordinances regarding borrow pits.
Many citizens' comments on non-agenda items stem from the frustration of dealing with municipal red tape. They have also caused Chesapeake's government to begin to rethink how we do business with those who are already here, much less those whom we'd like to attract.
The hue and cry following an announcement that a jail annex would be located in the Greenbrier area prompted everyone involved to rethink its location there.
What's important about these examples is not what I think about each of them or how I might have voted.
What's crucially important is that citizens concerned about their well-being and that of the city had an opportunity to raise a subject in an on-the-record forum. They got the courtesy of a hearing from elected officials and Chesapeake's managers. And they got an on-the-record response.
And lest you think that an audio recording of a citizen's comments alone will come close to conveying an individual's passion and the convictions being expressed at the moment - much less that it might be aired or reviewed - think again.
So take away the opportunity for access - no matter what its order on the agenda - and what do we have?
Not much.
We might have orderly meetings that follow a prescribed agenda to the letter and they might look nice on television, but is that where attempts to control access and behavior will end?
Will it stop at comments on non-agenda items and where they belong, or next will we hear from the new majority that coats and ties are the uniform of the day for anyone wishing to address their City Council?
Should we next decide that council's agenda is far too complex to publish it before our meetings?
Will we decide, for example, that the subject of a referendum is too difficult for the average person to understand, but that council members are perfectly capable of making a judgment?
I voted against the new majority's proposal because it's a disgraceful first step down a very slippery slope.
It is controlling to an unacceptable degree. It makes the new majority appear to be afraid to hear what the public might say. And while it doesn't deny citizens the right to speak, it certainly denies them a forum.
And without that sanctioned, on-the-record, official forum, citizens might find their time better spent baying at the moon.
Lastly, this change in council's rules is an example of political shenanigans at best and pure leadership at worst, and I can only hope it will be reviewed and overturned. MEMO: Dr. Krasnoff, a Chesapeake chiropractor, is serving his second term as a
city councilman.
ILLUSTRATION: Alan P. Krasnoff
by CNB