—————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
By Pauline Masson – Government of the people, for the people and by the people, one of the most often repeated descriptions of American government actually originated not in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, but as the closing sentence of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. Inspiring as it is, it only works when elected officials listen to the citizens. And that, folks, is what newly elected officials have promised Pacific residents.
On Tuesday, April 19, New mayor Heather Filley and new aldermen Rick Presley, James Cleeve, and Scott Lesh will be sworn into office. Each of these four new officials told me that listening to citizens would the be a top priority of their term in office.
It is safe to say that the contested races were heavily influenced by citizens who felt they were not listened to on the controversial Lamar Parkway subdivision. The result is four new officials taking office in their first term in their elected posts. Each said connection with their constituents was their main motivation for seeking office. This could be a game changer.
One newly elected alderman actually telephoned me recently and said he was putting together a group of citizen advisors to help him understand the nuances of issues aldermen are called to act on. He said no aldermen, no matter how well intentioned, can know the history of all the issues that are put before them. More importantly, they may not see how their actions on those issues will impact citizens in the future.
This brings up a good point. How many citizens are talking with their aldermen and/or the mayor about the issues before them? Probably not a lot.
We can see from published results after each election that great numbers of citizens do not exercise their right to vote. The obvious corollary is that many citizens do not make their concerns known to their aldermen and mayor
The past four years have shown a disconnect between city government and the citizens partly because COVID halted public attendance at city government meeting, leaving aldermen to rely on their own opinions and conviction. And partly because the administration style of governing placed citizens at a distance from aldermanic decisions.
Here are some examples:
Demolishing the citizen committee program: At the start of the previous administration citizens served on committees and boards that reviewed and discussed an array of issues affecting the community: cemeteries; history and genealogy; neighborhood beautification; parks; and tourism.
We have to believe that aldermen thought they were doing the right thing but the result felt different to the public. The committees were stripped of their autonomy and the real intent of their work. Two were abolished and two others had their membership cut back to five members – one of those was an alderman.
Every committee had an aldermanic liaison. In some cases the board liaison was not a voting member of the committee. Then the city administrator joined the liaison at each committee meeting. This amounted to stacking the committees with two officials monitoring and advising the committee members while they were trying to do their work.
In the past, committees were not established to do research and come back with a recommendation for what aldermen had already made up their minds to do. They were intended to be a true reflection of the citizens at large, offering input of what the people who live here think about and want for our community.
Manipulating the meeting agenda: While the agenda is posted online and available to the public four days prior to the board of aldermen meeting, actions have at times been taken in the meetings that were not specifically listed on the agenda.
The city is required by law to post its agenda ahead of the meeting for one purpose: to give the public a heads up of planned government action.
Officials found a way around informing the citizens by acting on issues that were presented during the meetings in the form of committee, staff or elected official reports. Citizens were kept in the dark about the actions until the votes were already taken.
The act of voting on issues not spelled out on the agenda violates the transparency in government policy, which is the intent of all Sunshine laws, and leaves citizen input out of the decision making process.
Reading bills twice in one meeting:
This is my biggest bugaboo. The rule of conducting only the first reading of a bill in one meeting provides preliminary approval of a new ordinance. Citizens then have two weeks to weigh in on a proposed ordinance before final approval and adoption of the new law.
Citizens can do a lot in two weeks. They can do their own research on the issue, talk to their neighbors, talk to their aldermen or the mayor and attend the meeting where the final reading is to take place. They can also address the aldermen in the citizen participation section of the meeting – at the beginning of the meeting before votes are taken.
I have written in earlier opinion pieces that it is often too late to try to persuade aldermen to alter their intentions in the same meeting were action is planned.
The frequency of reading a bill twice in one meeting increased dramatically in recent. years. When that happens – with no regular newspaper coverage and only local social media outlets offering some local news – many citizens do not even know a new law has been passed.
Citizen participation in government is as sacred a right as the right to vote. The question is, how many participate?
This absence of citizen participation leaves aldermen with a false sense of confidence that they know what is best for the citizens. Or, as the alderman who called me pointed out, it leaves them with the uncomfortable feeling they may not know as much about the issue at hand as they should.
If we are to change the relationship between citizens and government, and regain the confidence that officials care this is our chance to hold the newly seated city officers to their promise. We need to speak up.
The upcoming agenda is posted on the city’s web page on the Friday prior to Tuesday’s meeting. It can be found at www.pacificmissouri.com / government / agendas and minutes.
The newly seated officers contact numbers are listed below. These will change in the coming weeks when official city emails are assigned to each officials.
Mayor Heather Filley: 324-578-5143 email [email protected]
Ward One Alderman Rick Presley: 314-974-3129 email [email protected]
Ward Two Alderman James Cleeve: 636-686-0006 email [email protected]
Ward Three Alderman Scott Lesh 636-393-8121 email [email protected]
I was appointed to the beautification committee. Unlike tourism, we had no given budget. Even assuming volunteer labor, and presuming some in-kind assistance like trash pickup from city works, supplies would be needed. Some people thought it was about trash pickup, others about planting flowers. There were people who wanted to plan what we wanted to do, and people who just wanted to jump right in. There was someone who saw the committee as primarily a way to involve youth. And it really wasn’t a good fit for me; a better fit would have been some master gardener. One of the members was an alderman’s wife, who had her own following. We never coalesced, and it often felt like a top down thing, rather than bottom up, with we having any ownership. I left long before the committee dissolved.
I’ve heard the same thing from people with the genealogy/history museum committee–that the city wanted all ownership, and their ideas implemented, not ideas from the committee who have more expertise than the city component. It is difficult to do, but I keep a distance from our local parks/tourism development. I do have ideas, how to do things cheaply and well and the experience of , but cannot take the frustration of adding input just to be shot down.
If citizen input is going to add to our community, it has to be taken seriously, and given the opportunity to run with it Maybe the new regime can do this. We will see.
I serve on the Park Board. I spoke against the recent changes and expect that these changes will be re-evaluated by the new Mayor and Board of Aldermen. The Mayor-Elect is very well aware of the need for a strong Park Board. I can also tell you that the Park Board is independent, our Liaison doesn’t vote and will always look out for the best interests of our Parks and the families that use them.
That said, there is one immediate opening. Please contact Mayor-Elect Filley if interested in filling that position.
Input into City doings from the citizens is vital, but it also must be informed input.
There exist at least three useful ways for your government to learn of citizens needs and wishes. First contact between Alderman and residents by calls, e-mails and ward meetings (something new), yea one more meeting. Next, make the City newsletter an information source, not just a ‘brag rag’. Finally , take advantage of ‘you tube’ City committee meetings, watch and take notes.
As to the Board of Alderman agenda page, there is much more than just the agenda. Look at last meeting minutes specially the last few minutes with the ‘reports from’ listings.
Most informative is the Administrators memo , after the minutes. Most get bored and quit before this entry. Here in lye the administration take and justifications on many items, he has a subtle way of saying “this is how I want it to be” with out ‘insisting’..
For good changes to be made, one must understand how things are now based on what came before, This is where revitalized citizen committees will be of great importance.
To be practical, there will be at lot of money,YOUR money, spent in this city in the next few yours. Tell them how to do it by taking part in your government.