A reporter for the SNH dared to refer to a city retreat as unfair, perhaps inferring that it should be labeled less than “open and transparent.” If the public can attend, even with mouths shut, it is relatively open. If interested private citizens could attend and speak the city might benefit from their insight. At any rate we agree with the SNH, a paper that rarely tackles controversial subjects with an opinion piece, or looks too deeply into city affairs. The SNH pricked the skin of the Mayor with an opinion, not a charge.
It is similar to a School Superintendent meeting individually with school board members prior to a regular board meeting. If private citizens were “invited” then we would allow that a meeting is open. There is little doubt that more can be accomplished quickly if behind closed doors but rightness of any decision is limited to participant’s experience.
2 comments:
Oh my, this will never do. A critical opinion from the newspaper that cares about Suffolk. The question is who do they care about; themselves, the city council or the people that read their newspaper?
Once again there is only silence from council candidates about open and transparent government. With the exception of Deborah Wahlstrom we don't know if the other School Board candidates are still running or care about getting their message out.
That reporter wont be around much longer. Calls and emails have most likely been sent to the owners in Alabama.
Post a Comment