Before I note the current high
school battle, I think it is important to comment on Ed Thompson�s views of the
attacks on the location decision since they go to the heart of citizenship in a
democracy. One can sympathize with his dislike of uninformed criticism of
governmental decisions. The criticism may be messy, unfair, even vicious. It
certainly frustrates policy-makers who have studied issues and who have invested
their own ideology in their proposals. Nevertheless, it can indicate to them
problems that may need further attention.
An ideal citizen should have
knowledge of all issues. But of course the ideal citizen doesn�t exist. Just
look at the dismal results of surveys of citizens� understanding of national and
international affairs, even though the issues may be of paramount importance to
their lives. In local affairs, despite the current attention to community
involvement, the situation seems to be worse; just look at the decline of voting
by actual voters as you go down the ballot from national to state to local (and,
I might add, school levies). Only if voters perceive a policy as impacting them
personally will they give it much attention. For many issues, however, the
general lack of interest results in the famous �iron law of oligarchy,� which
seems to prevail under all forms of government, even the most democratic, in
which most policies are structured by the active and the interested. Often the
results are beneficial to everyone. Sometimes they are not.
Although an increase in citizen
knowledge certainly would foster more fairness and intelligence in decisions,
there are limits to what can be known. Hundreds of policy decisions are made
that affect people. It would be impossible for them to become knowledgeable
about all the subjects they must approve or disapprove. In fact, even
policy-makers who are expert in one area may show complete ignorance in other
areas. Thus, for those who are interested in particular policies, dependence on
the knowledge and fairness of the policy presenters must be paramount if the
policy is to be accepted. If complete substantiation of proposals is not given,
people should be ready to question validity, even if they do not have great
expertise or have solutions. Newspapers ideally have a responsibility to perform
this questioning too. It is unhealthy to believe everything the official
planners present. It is unhealthy not to consider the impact of past policies as
indicators of the feasibility of current proposals. Without questioning, the
iron law of oligarchy would grow even tighter.
In the case of the decision to
put the administrative offices in the high school, the tightening is evident.
Here, many people who were knowledgeable�the principals and staff of the high
school�evidently were ignored and not given information. Should anyone be
surprised that these people and others associated with the high school,
including parents and students, would protest? In most facilities planning, it
is highly unusual for plans to be advanced without close involvement of those in
the buildings concerned. (I have been on such planning committees at various
educational levels as both an �inside� and an �outside� member.) So the
situation here is not a case of decisions being made because of lack of interest
or understanding elsewhere. It is a case of bypassing people whose knowledge
should be indispensable to any planning, regardless of the additional static
they may produce in meetings.
Administrative offices in the
high school may very well be the most functional for the district. But before
the exact location is settled, the views of the high school people should
receive consideration.
Roy Nasstrom
