[Winona Online Democracy]
At 12:43 PM 2/3/05 -0600, Roy N wrote:
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 is correct. Healthy democracy depends on people's continued involvement, but issues become so complex that it is impractical to expect everyone to stay fully informed of every issue. That is why we have a representative democracy rather than a direct democracy, depending on a small number of people to put in the full effort. However, that only works if the public and the people they elect to represent them trust each other.
That is no longer the case in most aspects of government in Winona, and both sides can give ample reasons for the breakdown. The school board (in this case) is not blameless in pushing agendas and being selective on what information they choose to believe, but the public equally shares the blame because we do exactly the same things to them.
We need to break this vicious cycle of distrust. All of us - school board and public alike - have the obligation to quit picking fights and start pulling together to solve problems; to accept that mistakes have been make (and will certainly continue to be made) and then refocus on finding solutions; to put aside personal agendas and personal interests for the welfare of the entire community.
The Winona community will continue to decline as long as we continue to square off against each other and as long as our focus is on complaints and accusations instead of solutions. None of us want that.
Ed Thompson
_______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
