Praise, And Criticism, Where Due
Dec 18, 2007 14:15 - 4 Comments
[NOTE: This post is UPDATED. See below.]>
As one reader emailed me, channeling Monty Python: “the trash issue is dead, deceased, is no more and ceases to be . . . it is X-Trash!” Last night, at the Mayor and Council meeting, the leaders of Our Fair City took up the question of how often — and how — our trash would be picked up.
I will cut to the chase: After debate, the Mayor and Council voted to retain the trash collection decision from last term, but to reduce the frequency to once per week. (In other words, it will be semi-automated, single stream.)
The votes were: Mayor Hoffmann and Council Members Britton and Gajewski in favor; Council Members Marcuccio and Robbins opposed.
(In the interest of transparency, you should know I favor once-per-week pickup and always have. But, I do not care deeply about the issue.)
They also voted to do away with the standing Refuse and Recycling Commission, but to replace it with a time-limited task force which would exist for 12 months with the possibility of that term being renewed. Rockville Central contributor Mark Pierzchala, who was there, writes that “This was done in two votes. First for abolishing the commission, it was, I believe 3 to 1 to 1, to abolish with Gajewski, Britton, and Hoffman voting to abolish, Marcuccio against, and Robbins abstaining. As for replacing it with a Task Force, it was 4 to 1 in favor, with Gajewski voting no. By that point Marcuccio voted for the Task Force because the commission had just been abolished.”
There are citizens who are pleased with this outcome, as well as others who are not. This is no surprise. What is a pleasant surprise, however, is the civility and grace (between Council members) with which this decision was reached.
Gone were the fuming comments and smoldering looks between council members that characterized the previous trash-related meetings of the previous Mayor and Council. In their place, at least when it came to the debate at hand, was respect and thoughtfulness.
Rockville Central contributor Joe Jordan, who was hoping for a twice-weekly outcome, wrote in praise:
“I want to commend you [Mayor Hoffmann] for how you handled this evening’s meeting. While I obviously was on the side of the minority vote, your leadership and calm manner kept things civil and fair.”
Joe went on to say in his note:
“It should be noted how Councilwomen Marcuccio and Robbins comported themselves during the discussion periods. They each exhibited style and dignity in explaining how they would support what they knew would be a reversal to what they had voted for and approved earlier this year.”
Mark Pierzchala echoed these sentiments in a note to me:
“Even though there was heartfelt disagreement, everyone was nice about it. . . . [Marcuccio's and Robbins' vowing to] support the decision (they said this before the vote). . . was an example of the civility even though they both disagreed with the eventual decision.”
After a meeting like this, the real test is whether it is possible to move on and get back to business. Especially as it relates to folks who did not get the outcome they wanted: Can they live with it? In this case, I have some optimism — but just some. As Joe Jordan, who is president of the Newmark Commons Home Owners Association, wrote in an email:
“Now that it is over, I will do what I can to support the new system and help get buy-in from the residents of New Mark Commons. We were early in expressing our concerns as to how the proposed system would present problems with the townhouse sections of the community. Craig [Simoneau] and Scott [Ullery] did promise they would consider our concerns, and Scott did a walk through months ago, and agreed we had legitimate issues. I am now confident we can work out a solution that will be a win-win for the city and for New Mark.”
Why just “some” optimism, given this? Because the civility that was extended between Council members was not universally extended to the citizens attending the meeting. Rockville Central contributor Rich Gottfried, who made a number of fiscal suggestions and spoke against once-weekly pickup at the Citizen’s Forum that kicked off the Mayor and Council meeting [UPDATE: he didn't speak against once-weekly pickup, he spoke in favor of more study -- my mistake], was subject to a critical response to his statement that (in my opinion) is ill befitting an official meeting. After his presentation, Council Member Gajewski told him he was unfairly criticizing staff, made a joke about how the usually fiscally conservative Gottfried was seemingly suggesting the City spend more money, and went on to point out that Gottfried (who ran as a candidate for City Council) finished well behind others who also were not successful, and that (according to my notes from watching the video) “Your views have been heard . . . and found wanting”. The tone was that of a candidate in a debate, taking a jab at an opponent.
[UPDATE: An earlier version characterized the comment above as holding that minority views don't deserve a hearing. My apologies.]
This response has rightly (to my mind) generated emotions far disproportionate to its length, which was quite brief. City PAC Real Rockville’s incoming president, Judy Miller, said Gajewski’s comments were an “outrageous . . . show of intemperance. . . . Citizens cannot be subjected to such at citizens forum.”
Council Member Gajewski commented that, while “some may have found my comments uncivil, I did not think they were.”
Anyone who knows me knows I am highly sympathetic to how hard it is to be an elected officia
l, and that citizens by and large would do well to give officials a little more “room” when it comes to making decisions — room to be wrong, room to change minds, room for positions to evolve. I often disagree with positions Real Rockville takes, and I am skeptical of the suspicions many citizens seem to have of elected officials. Some have suggested that I am overly soft on people who are in office.
However, in this case, I am afraid I must side with those who are critical of this exchange. Citizens’ Forum is the time set aside by the Mayor and Council to hear the views of citizens — including perspectives with which they might not agree. It needs to be a safe space for citizens. Campaign time is over. It is telling that all other members simply chose to thank certain citizens for speaking up, even in cases where clearly there was disagreement over policy. It is equally telling that Mayor Hoffmann went out of her way to invite far more citizens to speak than had previously signed up. She bent over backwards, it seemed, to allow all a voice – including a number of former candidates.
In this space that should be safe, Richard Gottfried, a private citizen, did not deserve criticism from the dais for airing his views. And he most assuredly did not deserve ridicule.
[UPDATE: This is not the first time I have criticized officials for their treatment of citizens.]
(Images: CollegeRecruiter.com and Celine’s Original Graphics.)
Follow on Twitter
Here is a link to the story in today’s Gazette about the Gajewski incident at Monday’s meeting:>
http://gazette.net/stories/121907/rocknew210238_32362.shtml
Here are some direct quotes:
‘‘You were fond during the election process of saying that you know about numbers and you wanted to be on the council so that you could interpret what the numbers mean in real terms,” Gajewski said, addressing Gottfried. ‘‘The numbers of the election, in real terms, I hope you can interpret, means that many of your positions did not gain much support.
‘‘So you might show a little bit of humility and not embarrass yourself by coming and advising the staff on what they should be doing,” Gajewski added. ‘‘I think we have a crack staff.”
Brad>
I would have preferred to have constructive feedback on any of the five suggestions I presented at Citizens Forum. As you know, one of my chief concerns is that we the taxpayers receive maximum returns on our tax dollars. Obviously, there will need to be some re-prioritization of our fiscal responsibilities if we are going to continue to provide needed services and support our civil infrastructure in a cost effective way. We should not depend on “FEE-ing” and “TAX-ing” our way out of every difficult financial situation. The Town Center garages alone are being subsidized by $1.5 million in taxpayer dollars every year.
That is an investment and we should discuss it as an investment. It is not that different from talking with your stockbroker about how to manage your investment portfolio. Do we sell a loser (whether it is a stock or a parking garage) or do we hope it turns around before we go broke?
All I am asking is that we look at a few strategies and calculate the impacts to find out which strategy will be the most cost-effective for Rockville taxpayers in the long term. We are under a real time constraint if we want to incorporate any financial measures in this year’s budget. City Hall and the new City Council seems to be undergoing a bit of “irrational exuberance” at present. Rather than a careful deliberation of the trash situation, reviewing the cost to citizens in both service and fees and providing for real citizen input, three members of the Council rushed to reverse course. I hope that the “new majority” will slow down and be more receptive to all viewpoints and prudent in their deliberations.
I appreciate Rockville Central giving me the opportunity to respond to Mr. Gajewski’s comments for your readers. I have attached the text of my Citizens Forum speech for their information. I certainly value the opportunity that Citizens Forum represents for residents from all parts of Rockville to contribute to the public dialogue, and I hope we can continue to protect the residents’ right to participate in the democratic process every week, not only every two years when we have an election.
Sincerely,
Richard Gottfried, C.P.A., M.S. in Taxation
Here is a >link to the document Rich refers to in his comment.
I like Piotr and expect good things from him on the council. But this wasn’t his best moment. I was shocked, frankly. It was out of line. >
Surveys show that public speaking is the thing most people fear the most. Death comes in second. (So, as Seinfeld observes, at a funeral most people would rather be in the box than giving the eulogy…)
Government works better when people feel free to talk back to it. I know Rich won’t be deterred from speaking out. But there may be someone with a good idea somewhere in Rockville who will decide not to share it because he saw what happened to Rich.
Carl