The latest comments regarding the civility (or lack thereof) of the Trojan Heron in Kit Rawson's post cause me to reflect, once again, on the Trojan Heron's perspective on the matter.
The photo and inscription below is that of Stephen Fry, who is the Fry part of the famous British comedy team of Fry and Laurie. Fry's former comedy partner, Hugh Laurie, has since become better known as the character of Dr. Gregory House of the hit TV series House, which is the most successful TV program in the world.
Stephen Fry is a Cambridge-educated supporter of the Labour Party. He's vice president of an environmental group called Fauna and Flora, International. He's a gay man, an atheist, a comedian, an actor, and intellectual ... and I couldn't agree more with his view of civility. But then again, the Trojan Heron has often cited the Brits, especially their conduct in Parliament, as a model of brutally frank talk that I wish we could emulate here. Thatcher's last Question Time, for example, is a masterpiece of blunt political talk from both sides, with incriminations, recriminations, retorts, humour (notice I wrote that with an accent) ... and stirring, raucous dialogue all around.
By comparison, we sit here with a going-to-hell-in-a-handbasket bumper crop of vapid ungovernable quangos and think it polite to put up with the whole mess. How in the name of George Washington did we become more timid than the Brits?
Having said that, and before moving on to a description of the Stewardship Network in the next post, have a look at the MRC's Annual Report from 2010. How many citizen committees put out an Annual Report? How many claim responsibility for nearly $1.3 million in grants? The report says that the grants support jobs and the economy of the County, but we'd be curious to know who exactly benefits? Did the Council approve all these grants, or were they the result of the MRC establishing financial and policy obligations for the County of their own accord? I can't find any Council resolutions regarding the grants, but maybe I just missed them. Is the MRC working on any grants currently that the Council doesn't know about?
Citizen journalism about environmental deception in the San Juan Islands of Washington State
Showing posts with label civility. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civility. Show all posts
Monday, January 14, 2013
Saturday, June 2, 2012
The Astroturf Incivility Lament
Some of you may remember the posts on this blog about the Dalton video, and of course, many of you know that "civility" has been used to try to keep people quiet around here.
Below is an email from the Department of Ecology. Is it odd that persons demanding civility post a blog article and anticipate less than civil responses? Could that be because they know the blog article is inflammatory? Just askin’.
Makes it seem like the whole public incivility lament has been an orchestrated red herring.
From: Stockdale, Erik (ECY) [mailto:ESTO461@ECY.WA.GOV]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:36 AM
To: Richard Fralick; Lovel Pratt
Subject: blog article, Ecology response to Dalton case
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:36 AM
To: Richard Fralick; Lovel Pratt
Subject: blog article, Ecology response to Dalton case
Thought you might be interested in a blog article Gordon White posted yesterday evening regarding our role in the Dalton case.
I suspect some of the feedback will be less than civil.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Cheers, Erik
Erik Stockdale, PWS |Wetlands/401 Unit Supervisor|Department of Ecology| 425-649-7061| <mailto:esto461@ecy.wa.gov> erik.stockdale@ecy.wa.gov
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Siege Mentality
Pete Rose had a regular habit of sending out a Friday email to the Council. It functioned as part status update and part homily. One of his April emails encouraged the Council to change the tone of discourse (see excerpt below).
From my perspective, there are many ways the Council and staff can change the tone of discourse, but it isn't via any of the methods they keep choosing. There is a trust gap between many of the citizens and the County government, and when the County government appears to act in ways contrary to trustworthy behavior (e.g., secrecy, apparent bias), that doesn't help to narrow the gap. In Wile E. Coyote fashion, everything the County government seems to do, just makes things worse. They keep making the same mistakes in different ways.
Plan, plan, plan. Control, control, control. Scold, scold, scold. The County wants us to behave, but whether it be solid waste, land use, or something else, much of the citizenry simply does not perceive the County as having the demonstrated requisite professionalism, competence, good faith, fairness, or skill to do a yeoman's job. This isn't because the public is bad, deranged, or the agent of some political agenda. The many diverse people who feel this way have come to this view from our personal experiences with local government. If the County were to improve the experience, the tone would improve. If our local government did things "for" us instead of "to" us, or at least just got out of our way to let us get on with our endeavors, the tone would be better.
I don't see that happening given the siege mentality that has developed at the County. Instead, we should probably brace ourselves for more lectures on civility, with all the sanctimonious overtones that come with it. Genius.
Below is Pete Rose's April 5, 2012 missive to the Council about civility.
_____________________________________________________________
Changing the Tone of Discourse: One of your former colleagues used to say he liked the feistiness of the San Juan County citizens. The question we have to ask ourselves is “How much is too much?”. As public figures, we have to take a certain amount of this, but the CAO and other things are bringing a raw tone to the surface. Like the national discourse these days, it is much more “in your face” and much more personal. We have seen things in publications like, “staff with an agenda”, innuendos about councilmembers gone to the dark side, inadvertent “You Tube” stars, calling out staff members by name, chiding “pseudo-planners”, separating staff from our governing body. The sentiment has gone negative – too negative. Also, staff below the normal definition of public figure are being called out by name for doing their job. Tactics appear to be organized and are being rolled out like a political campaign. We are all taking our turn in the barrel. As regards the CAO, a staff perspective is this: It is your legislation that we are working on – the toughest job you will have while in office. It is being done in concert with the guidance document by Dept. of Commerce and your resolution from 2010 (periodically updated). For two years, we have been moving down the path of site-specific variable buffers as directed. Now that it has been delivered and people have realized it is more complicated to be fair and sometimes being fair is a wider buffer, the move is afoot to summarily kill and the mood on the blogs and in lousy cartoons is indeed feisty. At the same time, you have taken a measured and moderate course when given the opportunity on such things as rebuilding and other hot buttons, and the criticism has only increased. This is hard and people have to recognize that. I am calling on the Council to pull together and call for a tone of civility and to accept that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. If you do not feel it is appropriate for you to do so, I will do it.
From my perspective, there are many ways the Council and staff can change the tone of discourse, but it isn't via any of the methods they keep choosing. There is a trust gap between many of the citizens and the County government, and when the County government appears to act in ways contrary to trustworthy behavior (e.g., secrecy, apparent bias), that doesn't help to narrow the gap. In Wile E. Coyote fashion, everything the County government seems to do, just makes things worse. They keep making the same mistakes in different ways.
Plan, plan, plan. Control, control, control. Scold, scold, scold. The County wants us to behave, but whether it be solid waste, land use, or something else, much of the citizenry simply does not perceive the County as having the demonstrated requisite professionalism, competence, good faith, fairness, or skill to do a yeoman's job. This isn't because the public is bad, deranged, or the agent of some political agenda. The many diverse people who feel this way have come to this view from our personal experiences with local government. If the County were to improve the experience, the tone would improve. If our local government did things "for" us instead of "to" us, or at least just got out of our way to let us get on with our endeavors, the tone would be better.
I don't see that happening given the siege mentality that has developed at the County. Instead, we should probably brace ourselves for more lectures on civility, with all the sanctimonious overtones that come with it. Genius.
Below is Pete Rose's April 5, 2012 missive to the Council about civility.
_____________________________________________________________
Changing the Tone of Discourse: One of your former colleagues used to say he liked the feistiness of the San Juan County citizens. The question we have to ask ourselves is “How much is too much?”. As public figures, we have to take a certain amount of this, but the CAO and other things are bringing a raw tone to the surface. Like the national discourse these days, it is much more “in your face” and much more personal. We have seen things in publications like, “staff with an agenda”, innuendos about councilmembers gone to the dark side, inadvertent “You Tube” stars, calling out staff members by name, chiding “pseudo-planners”, separating staff from our governing body. The sentiment has gone negative – too negative. Also, staff below the normal definition of public figure are being called out by name for doing their job. Tactics appear to be organized and are being rolled out like a political campaign. We are all taking our turn in the barrel. As regards the CAO, a staff perspective is this: It is your legislation that we are working on – the toughest job you will have while in office. It is being done in concert with the guidance document by Dept. of Commerce and your resolution from 2010 (periodically updated). For two years, we have been moving down the path of site-specific variable buffers as directed. Now that it has been delivered and people have realized it is more complicated to be fair and sometimes being fair is a wider buffer, the move is afoot to summarily kill and the mood on the blogs and in lousy cartoons is indeed feisty. At the same time, you have taken a measured and moderate course when given the opportunity on such things as rebuilding and other hot buttons, and the criticism has only increased. This is hard and people have to recognize that. I am calling on the Council to pull together and call for a tone of civility and to accept that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. If you do not feel it is appropriate for you to do so, I will do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
