By Ann Mort

We all do it, but we shouldn’t!  We listen to the TV coverage or read the newspaper reports of our Board of Education and City Council meetings and wonder, “What are they thinking?” Why can’t they just get along and all see the merits, or lack thereof, on the issues. Why must they pontificate in public and feel the need to make a full statement on each subject?

Well, elected officials are different. These people have a certain quality that allows them to stick their necks out to run for office even when every instinct for thinking humans is to run for cover and not be subject to the abuse heaped on public officials. And, yes, each one has a certain level of ego, willingness to compete for the office and comfort with being in the public eye or they wouldn’t run in the first place. Bottom line, there are only a small percentage of folks who will even consider running for office. Of those, some are clearly unfit and just seeking glory. Others have conflicts of interest issues with their employer or business clients. Others decide it just isn’t worth the hassle and family disruption public life requires.

Now that we know the people making the decisions are “different,” consider the setting for every decision—in full public view.  Many of us sit in decision making meetings on a daily basis or at least around the dinner table with our families.  Those meetings are private—no listeners, no reporters, no TV cameras. If we have a slip of the tongue or float a trial balloon on a subject, nobody knows but those in the meeting and we can discuss and argue to our heart’s content, bouncing ideas around until we arrive at the best decision on the matter. And, in those private meetings, everybody has all the background information or is quickly brought up to speed.

Now consider the public meeting settings of the elected officials.  The officials are kept semi-informed by the staff involved. But that is why we have staff – to do the background work and bring their best recommendations to the table on any given subject with enough of the explanation given in the public meeting to make it understandable.  Much background info has been distributed to those who will make the decision long before the public meeting.  Public meetings are not long enough to fully explain every single detail of every single issue before them.  That’s where it all breaks down.

The general public listening in on the meetings is not generally fully informed. They did not take the time to read all the public documents and have not been involved in all the many staff meetings that brought the issue to the public meeting for a vote.  The members of the media, while trying to be as fair as possible and report on both sides of each issue, can report only on what they know about.  They usually have no idea of all the background issues and battles behind the scenes. (They each have many other stories to cover in their work week.)  That is why, quite often, when we read the report of a meeting, we often wonder if we were at the same place at the same time. Maybe it’s because some of us know something that reporter does not know or the staff member can’t say in public for fear of appearing biased or mean spirited.

Both our Board of Education and our City Council have dealt with very sticky issues in this past month. Instead of heaping on the abuse, let’s cut ‘em some slack. After all, we elected them and, like it or not, our public officials generally reflect the lifestyles of the voters.  They are just like us – warts and all.