Realignment, Representation, and Responsibility:Decision-Making '08-'09

Our first interview of 2009 on Ted Baker’s morning show began with a question about improvements in governing under the Einstein administration. Augustine pointed out that more public business was transacted in public, as it should be, instead of in executive sessions as it used to be. Baker agreed that this was an important development, as the public is always wary of decisions made “behind closed doors.” Capraro highlighted the meaningful participation of the public in giving feedback and providing information at meetings and work sessions. That’s an indication that not only is city government poised to make decisions according to a better process, but the process is likely to yield better decisions. It also predicts greater participation when people feel heard.

While things may be improving in city government, that does not mean that all governing in the city is running smoothly; for instance, the Geneva City School District, which was the focus of Baker’s next series of questions. Our first post about the proposed ‘realignment’ demonstrated that what might had made itself known as a mere rumor, upon finding the facts, turned out to be true.

The local paper eventually reported, as an afterthought at a meeting for a different purpose, that the Superintendent was forming a ‘citizens committee’ to “study” the issue and issue findings by mid-February. The paper didn’t bother to ask any follow up questions or see fit to gather information about the membership, mission, or schedule of that group.

Our second post on the topic gave, in our view, several compelling reasons to question the realignment and certainly raised red flags that might not be able to be fully addressed in a few short weeks. In the days that followed our posts, we received a great deal of feedback from people concerned about the changes, and additional evidence was provided that raises doubts about the academic merits of such a changed. Stay tuned for another post that will give those matters more consideration.

In the course of the discussion with Ted Baker, we honed in on the issues of representation, accountability, and transparency. Baker posed a question that strikes at the heart of the issue: Are elected representatives simply there to vote the ‘will of the majority’ or are they expected to ‘know better’ than their constituents and exercise their own judgment?

In answering this question, which took the balance of the show, we previewed our most recent posts on trust. Elected officials must always remember that they answer to the community. This doesn’t mean that they are supposed to ask a few people what they think about a random issue and then vote accordingly. No, that would be taking the easy way out. Instead, the job of an elected official is to gather, review, and share information about complex issues; to formulate and articulate their reasons for supporting a particular position on each issue; to solicit, consider, and evaluate opinions from a variety of people, those that agree and especially those that disagree. Only then can a person be said to truly be engaged in representation. Trust is built and maintained when representatives take a position after careful consideration and explain the basis of that position to their constituents.

Take a listen by clicking here, or visiting the NoStrings Radio Archive.