I couldn't have said it better, Ed! I agree with
you on this wholeheartedly.
Kathy Seifert
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:58
PM
Subject: Re: [Winona] Offices at High
School
[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
|
