I have never used a blog post to debate another blogger. In fact, I can't remember ever even responding to someone else except to cite something said whether I agreed or disagreed. I'm not going to start now. However, I do want to share some things that I've thought about as a result of reading David K's post on Refuse the Juice HERE. (By the way, I join David in welcoming Anson Mills to the El Paso blog scene. Check him out. Bookmark him. You will find him refreshing.)
Before responding somewhat to David, here's a disclaimer some of which I've shared before. David K is a friend. I like him a lot. More to the point, his parents have been dear friends since my boyhood and youth. I grew up with David's Dad. We hiked in the Franklins together, our families went to the same Episcopalian parish, we played soldiers and told tall but very important tales. David K's Mom's Dad (following this?) ran the appraisal office at my father's insurance adjusting agency, TBL Adjusters. I've known her since her first year out of high school when she joined the employees of TBL - a company that was proud of its tradition of nepotism. (I worked there for summer after summer beginning with my Junior year in high school and stretching through college.) When I returned to El Paso in 2006 after 36 years away, it was a delightful serendipity to find John and Eileen. I say all of this so you understand that I know David K and his family well and know them to be ethical, honest and highly intelligent without being conceited or rude. They're genuine, down to earth, good people. I listen to them. I respect and value their opinions. My affection for them runs deep. We go back.
What follows, then, is not really a debate but some thoughts I want to contribute to this discussion. I've exchanged email with David and have a better understanding of his wisdom and opinions. I'm grateful to him for sharing his thoughts.
The Bonart un-appointment is a dead horse and I don't wish to beat it. You can see KVIA's video on Bonart's last meeting on the PSB when the communications policy that he fought was "torn up" and reactions (including mine) were voiced regarding his not being reappointed. See it HERE. David Crowder's story about the Bonart outster is HERE. Maria Garcia interviewed both Bonart and Crowder along with a member of the Canutillo ISD Board on ABC-7 Xtra regarding communication policies and free speech. Watch the video HERE. Ms. Garcia makes the excellent point that there are boards such as the PSB that make huge decisions that impact us and our wallets and yet are not obligated to answer to the public. It is this obligation and our obligation as citizens to make ourselves informed that matters most to me. Even though we have (thankfully) a representative form of government, it is still our obligation as citizens (our privilege, our duty, our joy) to know what the heck is going on and to hold those in government responsible and be willing to serve if need be. I differ from some of the things David K wrote in his post; but I think that he and I and most of us share a common value. He can correct me if I am wrong.
I'm not going to debate David's practical politics. There is no doubt that Bonart's forum hurt him and David's advice would have been well heeded. However, I don't believe that the forum was the reason that ignited Acosta or why some on Council "switched" their votes. The die was cast. Acosta's feigned indignation about the forum was a pretext for Council members to unseat an incumbent. Behind it was the turning and grinding of wheels in the bowels of the PSB/EPWU and City government. Those wheels were oiled by a Brutus, a Quisling, a Benedict Arnold from among the environmental group -someone who maintains his support for Bonart but who drove the dagger of assassination. He knows who he is. I will say no more.
I also doubt whether Bonart organized the forum of candidates for two PSB positions for his own self-interests. In fairness to those who insist that he did, I admit that I'm a proud friend and a biased one at that. You can read my comment on the subject of this forum and Dr. Bonart's motivations HERE. I don't believe that Bonart dominated that forum. The facilitator, Susie Byrd, wouldn't let him and, in fact, shut him down and gave equal time to all.
Again, the real issue is that of our officials being obligated to us and our being obligated to be - that's right - CITIZENS. There are constitutional issues and issues that go to the very core principals of our democracy within a Republic. I speak about IRS and Attorney General rulings in a previous post HERE. If someday a City Board (PSB or whatever) censures a member based on something he/she said, expect a civil rights lawsuit based on the First Amendment. I can't disagree with the wisdom of David K's practical politics. I do believe that Constitutional issues are indeed involved and involved whenever any of us serves in government as someone elected, appointed or hired or whenever any of us assumes our duty and privilege of a Citizen involved in government.
There is another issue and a value that I bet all of us can agree upon. We hate dictatorship - whether it is the control by an oligarchy working behind closed doors or an unruly mob or an overbearing person. There must always be checks and balances. Most of us know how to speak and to listen to others. We have such things as Roberts Rules of Order and we can agree to a process. The only time when someone should challenge the process is when the oligarchy uses the process to prevent her/him from doing her duty which includes homework. Bonart really wasn't the person to do a candidate's forum but then the PSB and City Council weren't going to do it. In fact, the resumes of the people to be appointed to this most important board weren't even shared with the public on any official web page. "Trust us," those in power say. I believe in representative government but I believe that is exactly where Reagan's Dictum best applies: Trust But Verify. How incestuous it is that the PSB members themselves have a vote when it comes to ranking the candidates! That's exactly how you perpetuate good ol' boy and girl clubs. That's exactly how you stifle variation and evolution. That's exactly how you get to a point that a single board member is told that he or she can't see this or that document or talk to this or that person and public relations pieces can be created to prop up the misinformation of CEOs and others in power.
By the way, I never observed Bonart as a PSB member disrespecting another person. He was never confrontational nor abrasive as Dr. No of City Council expressed. Dr. Rick Bonart was, as CEO John Balliew stated "the most conscientious board member".
It is more difficult to have checks and balances when it comes to government and other institutions. We do have the Constitutional checks and balances of tri-partite government: executive, legislative and judicial. We also have the very important balance created with the freedom of the press. We ensure that mobs cannot rule nor that majorities can legislate against our civil rights. David K and I probably firmly agree (and commiserate) on the balances created between the states and the federal government but I, too, digress.
Many are very concerned and rightfully so with the control by a mob or a person by their violence or their arrogance. Many of us are concerned and rightfully so with the control of those in power either because of their secrecy or because the press fails or citizens fail to keep vigilance. We don't like being controlled or having the processes which govern our lives being controlled by anyone, any mob or any institution. We don't like the arrogance and paternalism of those who use power for their own ends and not the public good. We want fairness. Quite frankly, I like representative government for the very reason that, as a citizen in a free society, I don't have to worry about the daily affairs of government and find things quite satisfactory most of the time. I like to be free to pursue my own happiness. But when I see attempts by government to control information, processes or persons, then as a citizen I have a right and an obligation to become informed and to speak out. And so do each and every appointed and elected citizen.
Elpasonaturally will continue to investigate and be a voice. I do intend to be more informative and less polemic because I realize now more than ever that honest people on boards or Councils can sometimes go asleep in the comfort of the easiness of oligarchy. They too are citizens and all of us and each of us want what is best for our community. The only persons whose whims and policies that we need to confront are those whose pursuits have been grotesquely deformed by greed and the pursuit of power or prestige for its own sake. Behind closed doors or with flamboyance and surely by our complacence they have become tyrants.
I am aware that the recent issues and events at the PSB may have widened the chasm between the environmental community and others. I am painfully aware that these events and several incidents in recent years have widened the chasm between those in the environmental community itself. There is reason for distrust but that distrust can be overcome by information and bridging the abyss created by polemic - my own included. Shouldn't we all be - aren't we all - people who care about the world we live in and the health and happiness of all?
Let's seek to serve not to control and do so while respecting the rights of others. Transparent government and processes make innovation and sustainability possible. That transparency often requires someone to buck the system especially when the system is efficiently stagnant and unimaginative and unresponsive and unaccountable to you and to me. Such bucking is a check and a balance that those who would have a free society need.
