When citizens complained about the perceived transparency over the nature of the dual roles Gary Person holds as City Manager and Economic Development Director, the amount of chatter and clamor for transparency was stunning. It was also the right thing to do as the public has a right to know what goes into the decision to create or modify policies that affect how the government is run, or how it is reported.
I filled out an open meetings request for information related to the decision to create a policy for credentialing media at city council meetings. I requested in writing, a copy of the letter and the name of the councilman who directed Gary Person to conduct the research. I received the letter, but was told by Jo Houser that I needed to speak with Gary directly on the issue of the councilman's name.
I sent Gary a nefarious email which stated, "If you could let me know (the councilman's name), I would be very appreciative."
Gary replied with a one line email response last night:
"My individual conversations with a council member or citizen is not public information. It was simply a question I was asked to research and provide answers so I did."
I replied this morning with my concern under which with the secrecy this new policy had been designed and implemented.
"With all do respect Gary, that discussion led to a policy change that was unilaterally implemented. There was no public comment or debate over the issue, nor formal action by city council.
Maybe you don't have to tell me, but you can rest assured that I will ask for the issue to be on the agenda for the next city council meeting.
The way I see it, ksid's letter was an attack on my credibility. They didn't reference the sidneystaagecoach's participation for months at the table in their diatribe.
I believe the public has a right to know that a city councilman would take the kind of action done, while having a non-traditional media member sit at that table for six months.
You made a policy change on how media is defined in Sidney. That policy is public information and everything that went into that decision is public, in my opinion.
As I have said before, the issue isn't that I can't sit with the traditional media, it is the lack of transparency in the process.
Given recent events, you above all others, should be sensitive to the perception secrecy portends.
Respectfully,
Michael Rowland, Publisher
Theguardiannews.blogspot.com
The issue of secrecy, be it perceived or real, in governmental decision making processes was rightly brought into the light. Neither the City Manager, nor the affected councilman have a right to hide in the shadows as to who wanted the policy to change. Every procedure and process used to govern the city is a public record and by extension, every piece of information related to decisions that create, modify, remove or otherwise extend those procedures and policies.
It was right to demand openness when the issue was the City Manager. Shouldn't it be just as right when it affects those who cover the City Manager and Council?
Michael Rowland, Publisher
No comments:
Post a Comment