04/11/13: Where was the civic engagement?

This op-ed appeared in The Virginian-Pilot on the date shown.

NORFOLK IS GETTING a new hotel-conference center. The plan has been in the works for about 10 years. Yet the City Council saw no reason to delay the vote on the project for a couple of weeks, time that would have allowed citizens an opportunity to get up to speed on it.

Few in the near-capacity council chamber’s crowd wanted to nix the project. Those in favor of moving ahead reiterated that this project is good for the city. Those in favor of a delay cited previous projects the city has undertaken with much fanfare and rosy projections that have yet to pan out. Cited even more frequently was that the proposal was sent to the council Friday evening and made available to the public only on Monday. Each speaker had three minutes to make his case. As is the custom, council members did not engage the speakers; instead, they sat passively throughout the hour-long session.

Just before the speakers began, council member Theresa Whibley asked about a city manager presentation that she thought was going to be part of the public hearing. She was, apparently and unfortunately, mistaken. Such a presentation may have allayed some of the concerns raised by those uncomfortable with the proposal.

Later, in her remarks, Whibley gave voice to those who believed this project moved too fast, saying that the council bears responsibility for not explaining it better. Whibley and council member Tommy Smigiel seemed to be the only members who understood the dilemma and confusion of the public — and were the only votes in favor of Whibley’s motion to delay the vote.

The other members — some more vocal than others — argued that because previous versions of this project had been discussed in the past, that because the newspaper has written numerous stories and editorials about it, no delay was necessary. By its own admission, the council has been immersed in this issue since September. By their own admission, four of the current council members weren’t serving 10 years ago. The council had to catch up with the particulars, but citizens should not have the same opportunity?

Civic engagement has to be baked into the process whenever public money is being spent, even if the spending of such funds was decided years ago. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.”

What the council decided Tuesday was to take it from us. And it did so with the arrogance borne of unchallenged power. Public speakers got three minutes but members of the council had no such restriction. Did they use their time to educate? Hardly.

Council member Andy Protogyrou read a six-page closing argument — appropriate for the attorney that he is — alternating between providing a basis for his vote and taking digs at those who would delay it. The height of his hubris came when he said that he relied on angles unknown to the public.

Mayor Paul Fraim reminded us that a public hearing wasn’t required — something that obviously needs to change — but that the council decided to hold one. Gee, thanks.

Public hearings become complaint sessions for one reason: There is no give and take, no sharing of information. The council knows this, as evidenced by what happened later. Once Tuesday’s public hearing was over, the chamber almost completely emptied, but a few citizens stayed around to hear — and speak on — the rest of the agenda. A citizen rose to speak about one of the last items, but his was more of a question than a comment. He wanted to understand the issue that was being voted on. Council members took the time to explain to him what it meant and its impact. Satisfied, the citizen returned to his seat.

If only they had done the same with the hotel-conference center project.