The Silence Of The Greenwich Media LambsThere Is Nothing To Report Here
UNFAIR AND UNBALANCED:
The Greenwich Citizen, The Greenwich Post And The Green Kitty Litter Liner Known As The Greenwich Time Are Afraid To Rock The Boat Of The Powers That Be In Greenwich
Last week this editorial was sent it to all the print media in Greenwich. Interestingly, two corporately owned newspapers stated they would not publish it, and the other newspaper has not published it still.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal Should Require That All Three Greenwich Newspapers Paste The Following Warning On It's Masthead:
WARNING:
This Newspaper Is Owned By
An Out Of Town Corporation
And Lacks The Diversity, Skeptism
And Alternative Points Of View
Required For A Democracy.
Here Is The Editorial That Hearst And Acorn Newspapers Have Censored From The Voters Of Greenwich......
The Power of the Assembly
The Representative Town Meeting (RTM), as a deliberative society, undertakes the onerous task of balancing the wishes of those we represent with the goal of making decisions for the good of the community as a whole. This balancing, like any debate, will have proponents and opponents whose desires are at odds with each other. The task put to the RTM and its members requires orderly and fair discussion and debate of the questions and issues at hand. Without rules and procedures, the discussion
can quickly descend into chaos.
As a public agency, the RTM is also bound by some statutes that govern the public's right to know how we conduct our business. We deal with public ordinances, public boards and commissions, and the use of public funds. Foremost of these statutes are those codified in the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act. This requires, among other things, public notifications of meeting times and places, publication of the agendas, and the ability for the public to know (within 48 hours) how each member of the public agency voted on the agenda items. The statute, however, does not dictate the method used to vote on those items. The Freedom of Information Act assures the public that they can examine how their elected officials are representing them.
The RTM also, as a deliberative society, has all the authority to control how they conduct their business.
Throughout the Town Charter, ordinances, and the Rules of the RTM, the authority for the assembly itself to judge its own members, its own votes, its own procedures, and its own elections is granted solely to the RTM. It is with this authority that the RTM has the ability to change its own rules and processes. With the exception of contradicting law, no elected official or body can tell the RTM how to conduct itself. In fact, the RTM has all authority under the Town Charter that is not specifically granted to other entities.
It is the will of the assembly, the RTM itself, in conducting its business, that is paramount. “The majority rules.” “The rights of the minority must be protected.” “The will of the assembly supersedes the will of the individual.” These statements have been heard by all, and they govern all actions the RTM takes as an assembly. Opponents and proponents have the ability to debate their perspectives on the issues, but, in the end, items are approved by a majority vote. That majority is the will of the assembly on the question placed before it.
The RTM appoints and elects members to help the assembly conduct their business. These individuals are members of the RTM, and so have the same privileges as all members, but have no additional authority. It is, therefore, the majority of the assembly who decides what their roles are, and how they are to execute their roles in support of the RTM.
These individuals are not supervisors or bosses or managers, as they have no authority to control the will of the assembly. They are facilitators ... members appointed or elected to assist the RTM in the conduct of its business.
But, like all members of the assembly, they are entitled to their opinions and they are entitled to vote along with their colleagues. Beyond that, they hold only the power of their opinions ... they do not have the power or the authority of the RTM itself. It is only a majority of the RTM that can express that authority: no individual can speak for, or rule over, the other members. While these individuals, either as a single person or as a committee of members, are charged with certain responsibilities, those responsibilities are granted solely by the majority of the whole RTM.
But, like all members of the assembly, they are entitled to their opinions and they are entitled to vote along with their colleagues. Beyond that, they hold only the power of their opinions ... they do not have the power or the authority of the RTM itself. It is only a majority of the RTM that can express that authority: no individual can speak for, or rule over, the other members. While these individuals, either as a single person or as a committee of members, are charged with certain responsibilities, those responsibilities are granted solely by the majority of the whole RTM.
There are no dictators or kings in our form of government: there are opinion leaders, well spoken legislators, resolution authors, and those the assembly elects or appoints to facilitate the conduct of their business.
The RTM has codified some rules to govern its own procedures, and has designated the use of Robert's Rules of Order to assist the assembly when our own rules are silent. But Robert's Rules of Order are not law, nor are they infallible. Because the RTM has some rules of its own, the interpretation of how to apply Robert's Rules of Order in any given situation is subject to debate. So, as a deliberative society, the RTM as the assembly looks to the will of the majority to decide how our assembly chooses to apply the guidance of Robert's Rules of Order.
The RTM has codified some rules to govern its own procedures, and has designated the use of Robert's Rules of Order to assist the assembly when our own rules are silent. But Robert's Rules of Order are not law, nor are they infallible. Because the RTM has some rules of its own, the interpretation of how to apply Robert's Rules of Order in any given situation is subject to debate. So, as a deliberative society, the RTM as the assembly looks to the will of the majority to decide how our assembly chooses to apply the guidance of Robert's Rules of Order.
There is no single individual who dictates how the rules are applied. It is the will of the majority that decides how and when Robert's Rules of Order are used in the conduct of our business.
Once the debate ends, and all of the opinions have been expressed, it is the assembly as a whole that expresses their will through their votes. No single individual can dictate to the other members what the will of the assembly is. Those holding opinions can cajole, persuade, discuss, and debate their point of view, but even then, those points of view remain opinions. It is only when the votes are counted, and the majority spoken, does the issue become the single voice of the whole RTM.
Once the debate ends, and all of the opinions have been expressed, it is the assembly as a whole that expresses their will through their votes. No single individual can dictate to the other members what the will of the assembly is. Those holding opinions can cajole, persuade, discuss, and debate their point of view, but even then, those points of view remain opinions. It is only when the votes are counted, and the majority spoken, does the issue become the single voice of the whole RTM.
This is the power of the majority rule ... and this is what a democratic, deliberative society holds as its highest, and most important, rule.
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
-- Thomas Jefferson
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
-- Thomas Jefferson
By Paul Curtis
Greenwich RTM District 9
No comments:
Post a Comment