Honorable Mention Editorial, 2015
Originally Published Jan. 29, 2015
The admittedly short time — 23 months to be exact — this editor has spent covering government meetings has included empty classrooms, packed courtrooms, outraged aldermen and jeered chairwomen.
No two meetings and no two agendas are the same. But all of them afford elected officials an opportunity to raise concerns, at least for discussion, about particular items not listed on an agenda.
Off-agenda topics run from the mundane – a stray dog’s lavatory patterns – to the monumental – toxic waste above the drinking water source for three quarters of a million people.
The omnipresence of those four little words, “new and old business,” on local government agendas across municipalities exists for a reason. A very good reason.
Which is why new DeWitt County Board chairman Dave Newberg’s decision to permanently remove those words from the board’s agenda is a demonstrably irresponsible one.
Board meetings exist for discussion, so elected officials as a group of the whole can attempt to solve the problems facing a municipality.
At Thursday night’s county board meeting, former chairwoman Sherrie Brown asked Mr. Newberg if old and new business would ever be returned to the agenda.
“If we have something that is old business, it is obviously going to go back to the committee,” Mr. Newberg said. “If we have new business, it will start at the committee level.”
While it is concerning enough that full discussion privileges for board members will be limited to committee, it is even more troubling when the committee meeting schedule is examined.
The January committee meetings took place in this order:
• Marina, 7 a.m., Jan. 5
• Public Safety 7 a.m., Jan. 8
• Land Use 5:30 p.m., Jan. 12
• Property 7 a.m., Jan. 14
• Road & Bridge 5:30 p.m., Jan. 14
• Finance 6 p.m., Jan. 20
• County Board 7 p.m., Jan. 22.
Any board member, let alone a private citizen, is looking at a part-time job just being able to attend the meetings to hear the real discussion that goes into decision making.
Certainly committees have their use, and Ms. Brown likely overstepped in abolishing the committee structure in its entirety as she did so infamously during her chairmanship. She has taken a drubbing for it, perhaps rightfully so.
But surely the full county board meets to further discuss matters, not just to rubberstamp the decision of a detached committee of less than the whole.
While we are hopeful that the efforts to send new and old business exclusively to committee are not an attempt to silence minority opinion, this could very well prove to be a consequence of that action.
Ms. Brown and board member Terry Hoffman are often the ones asking the questions that will now be categorically and expressly forwarded to committee.
Once part of a majority that has since disintegrated, the pair has been villainized in the media, and a contingent of the board even led a push for a vote of “no confidence” in the former chair during her chairmanship.
Ms. Brown and Mr. Hoffman have even faced scrutiny and unflattering photos on the pages of this newspaper.
Certainly, Brown, Hoffman, Newberg and any elected official have earned their share of criticism. It comes with the job.
This is no attempt to propagate or damn either side. Both are fallible, but neither is villainous.
Yet a spectator would be hard-pressed to find a board or a public which meets discussion with such inappropriate ridicule or disdain and so little decorum as occurs at DeWitt County Board.
Ms. Brown and Mr. Hoffman cannot raise questions—a pivotal function of any local government official—without being chided, scoffed at or jeered.
They stand accused of promoting personal agendas to the detriment of the county.
What we know is that Ms. Brown and Mr. Hoffman chose to stand boldly in November 2013, along with current board member Ron Savage and former board members George Wissmiller, Keith Koons, Pete Daugherty and Doug Tucker. They are the group of seven which voted that the board had never expressly allowed toxic waste in the Clinton Landfill above the Mahomet Aquifer.
You can argue that this was an irresponsible decision that did nothing but cost the county $1 million annually from the landfill—funds which the board has only just now authorized the state’s attorney to negotiate for repayment. Or you can argue that the stance led to Governor Quinn’s July 2014 action to halt the dumping of toxic waste—cancer-causing manufactured gas plant waste which was being accepted for more than a year—above the Mahomet Aquifer.
You can even argue that the public has already spoken loudly when they voted three of those bold – or irresponsible – seven out of office in November.
But you cannot argue that their stance went unnoticed by the governor, nor can you argue that their voice should be marginalized because of that stance. They still represent the people who elected them—people that were and are concerned about their aquifer.
It was former DeWitt County State’s Attorney Karle Koritz, an old nemesis of Brown, who once famously advised in an open letter to the citizens of DeWitt County: “never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel.”
Though he incorrectly attributed the quote to founding father Benjamin Franklin, Mr. Koritz’ point was well taken: if the headlines and media coverage surrounding any municipality become too one-sided, nastiness ensues.
Perhaps we’ve misinterpreted the intent of Mr. Koritz’ statement, but it remains true that the media can be a powerful tool. Whether wielded by an editor or utilized by an elected official.
And while Benjamin Franklin never did tell us not to quarrel with a newspaper man, he did give us this: “well done is better than well said.”
Mr. Koritz advised all to attend DeWitt County Board meetings, and this was good advice. It appears that it is time for another call to those more detached from the situation to attend the meetings, if only to see how questions are received.
The pages of this newspaper will always give equal heed to any side of a story.
Let’s hope the DeWitt County Board does the same.