President's Message (Arlene Ellis)|
National Voter Registration Act
Good to Hear from - Mildred Walston (Mildred Walston)
Is public input acknowledged, heeded and addressed by the Charter Commission -- or mere window dressing? In the final decision-making meetings, there was no evidence of any in depth discussion of the issues the public raised.
If the discussions were held in separate Committee meetings, why was the public barred from hearing those discussions? The location and times of the Committee meetings were not made public and doors were closed to those of us representing various public organizations who happened to be in the vicinity when committee meetings were in progress.
The secrecy of the Committee meetings would have been more palatable if during the public meetings at least the gist of the Committee's discussions were presented so the public could be informed as to where the final decisions came from.
The Chair's curt statement that the results of the Styles Committee's work would be presented to the public on the ballot and that an informational brochure would be printed and mailed to each voting household without the benefit of the public viewing the draft or having any input in the form or language is simply not acceptable. Particularly since it appears that the Styles Committee may be making decisions on substance, as well as form.
We see this an arrogant disregard of the public's interests. We think perhaps it is not too early to reconsider the system by which Commissioners are chosen to serve.
|May 1992||Home Newsletters||July 1992|