|
Democratic Process Hijacked at PV Town Board Meeting
To the Editor:
Town Board meetings are not cocktail parties, barbeques or vaudeville shows. They are a venue for serious discussion of serious issues. Often, such issues promote very different points of view. And when what is at stake has great meaning for participants, discussion can be strident, emotional, contentious…and a host of other descriptives- along with informative- which, while sometimes uncomfortable- are legitimate expressions when they pose no emotional or physical threat to those present.
At the most recent Putnam Valley Town Board meeting, the issue which was the focus of the most impassioned discussion was the proposed disbanding of the Comprehensive Plan Committee. Several residents who oppose the disbanding expressed their opinions, presenting a great deal of data to support these, and posing challenges to the rationale for eliminating this valuable volunteer committee. Since Supervisor Tendy and the two new board members have announced their intent to vote for the disbanding, it was logical to address such remarks primarily to them. No personal slurs or innuendo were delivered, and it felt like an exercise in true democracy.
So, it was surprising when a few residents rose to chastise those who advocated for retaining the Comp Plan Committee. They alleged that this advocacy position was "politically" motivated. They charged the advocates with "not giving the new board members a chance". One challenger inaccurately implied that a speaker had impugned Mr. Tendy's honesty. Up to that point, the maturity quotient of the room had been high. Unexpectedly, the focus shifted from discussion of the issue on the floor to who-saidwhat to-whom. The democratic process had been hijacked. Those who considered it imperative to give our new Board members "a chance" had denied similar accommodation to their fellow residents.
Had these folks instead offered opposing opinions regarding maintaining the CPC, rather than sidelining the discussion process by impugning (without evidence) the motivations of those who (presumably) disagreed with them, we might have benefited from their points of view. There is still time to get our meetings back on track, but that will happen only if all participants recognize the purpose of these meetings. See paragraph I.
Dr. Kathleen O'C. Hoekstra
Putnam Valley
| Click ads below
for larger version
System and Method for Display
Ads have a Patent Pending.
Click Here for More Information
|
