There's a saying in politics: If you're explaining, you're losing. Well, all three of our County Cmmissioners sure have been explaining a lot this week. It was bad enough that they made a highly questionable decision to pull the funding they had committed for the men's homeless shelter in Corvallis. That had them on the defensive all by itself.
Now, in today's paper, we find several new articles revolving around that same decision, and raising the questions about how our Commissioners operate, and whether or not they violated either the spirit of the law, or the actual law itself regarding public meetings in arriving at that decision.
To be honest, none of this comes as a surprise to me, as the issues involved are ones I have been concerned about and speaking out about for many months now. As I see it, there are three problems with our current situation.
One: Meeting times and/or meeting notices. The County Commissioners hold their meetings during the work day, when it is difficult if not impossible for working citizens to attend. And the agendas for these meetings, as noted in the Gazette-Times, are often incredibly vague, essentially stating "We're having a meeting and will discuss, like, you know, the issues facing Benton County." If you're concerned about or interested in a particular issue, it's generally difficult to know when, exactly, that issue might be being discussed. More problematically, this can also lead to discussions and decisions on issues that, if not given proper public notice, are illegal. (And per the current controversy, let's be clear: If all three Commissioners "come to consensus" on an issue, functionally, that's the same as voting on an issue, no matter how many semantic word games you play.)
Two: Problem One above leads directly to Problem Two, which is that, not surprisingly, not many members of the public ever attend a meeting of the Benton County Commissioners. In all the meetings I have ever been to, I have only seen one or two members of the public in attendance. (I have also never seen another candidate for County Commissioner at any of these meetings, by the way.) Go to any Corvallis City Council meeting - in the evening - and you'll find at least a few interested citizens there. But if you go to any given County Commissioner meeting - during the middle of the day - don't be surprised if you're the only one there.
Three: And that leads us directly to Problem Three, which is that our County Commissioners seem increasingly out of touch with the people they represent. They certainly make decisions regarding those people without actually hearing from them in any meaningful way. The public comment period at a City Council meeting can take up a lot of time, and there's always someone there to express there views on something. That's a good thing. So far as I can see, there is no corresponding public input the County Commissioners receive, at least not on anything resembling a regular basis.
And that leads to bad decisions. And bad decisions lead to lots of explaining. And, as stated above, if you're explaining, you're losing. Only, in this case, we're all losing.
We can do better than this in Benton County. If I'm elected, I will push for meaningful changes in the basic ways the Benton County Commissioners conduct their business, to help increase public input and oversight, and lessen the chances of confusion, disruption and community upset.
***I'm adding this note the next day, June 21st. The reason for doing so is because I wanted to provide a link to an editorial in today's Gazette-Times on this topic that is right on the money. Simply put, they call the County Commissioners out for all the problems with their handling of this: Anne Schuster's inflammatory Facebook comments; the "agenda" put out for this meeting that offered no details about what would be discussed; the fact that the discussion of this issue took place after everyone had left the meeting except for the three Commissioners and Joe Kerby, County Administrator; the Commissioners lame attempts to say no vote was taken, but that they "only" reached "consensus" on this funding issue; and Vance Croney's defense of it all as being legal - when it might not have been, and was, at the very least, underhanded and unethical.
Good call, GT.
Now, in today's paper, we find several new articles revolving around that same decision, and raising the questions about how our Commissioners operate, and whether or not they violated either the spirit of the law, or the actual law itself regarding public meetings in arriving at that decision.
To be honest, none of this comes as a surprise to me, as the issues involved are ones I have been concerned about and speaking out about for many months now. As I see it, there are three problems with our current situation.
One: Meeting times and/or meeting notices. The County Commissioners hold their meetings during the work day, when it is difficult if not impossible for working citizens to attend. And the agendas for these meetings, as noted in the Gazette-Times, are often incredibly vague, essentially stating "We're having a meeting and will discuss, like, you know, the issues facing Benton County." If you're concerned about or interested in a particular issue, it's generally difficult to know when, exactly, that issue might be being discussed. More problematically, this can also lead to discussions and decisions on issues that, if not given proper public notice, are illegal. (And per the current controversy, let's be clear: If all three Commissioners "come to consensus" on an issue, functionally, that's the same as voting on an issue, no matter how many semantic word games you play.)
Two: Problem One above leads directly to Problem Two, which is that, not surprisingly, not many members of the public ever attend a meeting of the Benton County Commissioners. In all the meetings I have ever been to, I have only seen one or two members of the public in attendance. (I have also never seen another candidate for County Commissioner at any of these meetings, by the way.) Go to any Corvallis City Council meeting - in the evening - and you'll find at least a few interested citizens there. But if you go to any given County Commissioner meeting - during the middle of the day - don't be surprised if you're the only one there.
Three: And that leads us directly to Problem Three, which is that our County Commissioners seem increasingly out of touch with the people they represent. They certainly make decisions regarding those people without actually hearing from them in any meaningful way. The public comment period at a City Council meeting can take up a lot of time, and there's always someone there to express there views on something. That's a good thing. So far as I can see, there is no corresponding public input the County Commissioners receive, at least not on anything resembling a regular basis.
And that leads to bad decisions. And bad decisions lead to lots of explaining. And, as stated above, if you're explaining, you're losing. Only, in this case, we're all losing.
We can do better than this in Benton County. If I'm elected, I will push for meaningful changes in the basic ways the Benton County Commissioners conduct their business, to help increase public input and oversight, and lessen the chances of confusion, disruption and community upset.
***I'm adding this note the next day, June 21st. The reason for doing so is because I wanted to provide a link to an editorial in today's Gazette-Times on this topic that is right on the money. Simply put, they call the County Commissioners out for all the problems with their handling of this: Anne Schuster's inflammatory Facebook comments; the "agenda" put out for this meeting that offered no details about what would be discussed; the fact that the discussion of this issue took place after everyone had left the meeting except for the three Commissioners and Joe Kerby, County Administrator; the Commissioners lame attempts to say no vote was taken, but that they "only" reached "consensus" on this funding issue; and Vance Croney's defense of it all as being legal - when it might not have been, and was, at the very least, underhanded and unethical.
Good call, GT.
No comments:
Post a Comment