This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

When Should Your Government Ask For Your Input?

At the core of many of the current Plymouth Township controversies is the question as to whether the public should be asked for input, surveyed or be allowed to vote on strategic projects that will impact both finances and property owners for decades to come.

Whether it was the new buildings or the outdoor theater at Township Park; working with the City on joint recreation and arts on the Central Middle School PARC project; or the major move of the Hilltop golf course entrance from Beck to Ann Arbor Trail, hundreds of residents have complained that decisions were made without public input and sometimes without much advance notice.  Curiously, some of the critics do not necessarily disagree with the outcomes/the decisions made but are angered with the way in which they were made. 

Critics argue that projects of this scope and impact should not be decided without a legitimate poll of the population – by survey, vote, town hall or by other means.   Others, on the other hand, argue that leaders are elected to make decisions for us and that they do not need to consult with the public as we live in a Republic, not a Democracy.

Find out what's happening in Plymouth-Cantonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

I think both arguments have merit and that both sides are a little right and a little wrong. 

I have been thinking about this question – when is it good government to include public input in the decision making process and when should the public be left out?  Is it possible to agree on a standard for determining whether it is a “public input” or “no public input” decision and to stick to that standard no matter how much push back a Board might get?

Find out what's happening in Plymouth-Cantonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

For a moment, I need to digress to a topic that I find really distasteful, both as a citizen and as an elected official.  Government workers and elected officials too often fall back on what the law says is the minimum standard that we MUST follow.  We must open our meetings to the public but we don’t have to recognize that any members of the public spoke.  We must allow public comments but we don’t have to allow the public to ask questions.  

What we MUST do and what SHOULD do – as stewards of good government are two entirely different question.  We MUST do X but we don’t HAVE to do anything more than X is not a good way to govern, in my view. Yes, there is no law that says we must take public input on a major spending initiative, but we have to ask ourselves. "should we?" 

What do you think? - which is better government, one that holds itself to a MUST standard or one that holds itself to a SHOULD standard, one which acts because the law requires it or one which acts because it is the right thing to do for its citizens?

So when SHOULD we ask for your input?  I have heard the argument that you elected us to make decisions and so no decision should be put to your questions.  I think that is a weak argument when the issue was not on the table during the last election, it is important and it affects a great number of people.  None of us can say with certainty whether we would have gotten more votes, less votes or the same votes had the public known in advance how we would stand on the issue of working collaboratively with the City of Plymouth on recreation, for example.  Surely, some votes would have changed - maybe just 9 or maybe 201 - making it entirely possible that the Board composition would be different.  If the issue had been alive in 2012 and you knew where candidates stood and you voted for them, then it is reasonable for the electeds to make the argument that your vote served as your input.

Public input risks public criticism and so many in government avoid it all costs.  Well, I say that's too bad as that’s what you sign up for when you put yourself on the ballot and if you can’t take a little criticism then you don’t belong in office.  Of course, personal attacks and attacks on family members are excluded here. 

In my view, public input should be sought on major items that have recurring expense and that may have a disruptive impact on private property.  A new fire truck – probably no; an outdoor theater, probably yes.   A new golf course entrance that impacts an entire subdivision – probably yes; operational decisions regarding police department staffing, probably no.

Property owners surrounding the park should be asked.  They don’t have to be listened to, but at least they should be asked.  PRETEND to care, fake it, act like you are listening – but don’t shut it out, that is the very definition of bad government.  

Would love to hear your thoughts as I think this topic needs further public input and discussion.  ;)

bdoroshewitz@plymouthtwp.org

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?