Government Openness Not to Be Feared

The News & Advance
Published: May 5, 2008

If public interviews for School Board members are good enough for other city councils, why not here in Lynchburg?
According to news reports, the Salem City Council, for example, will hold a special session this Thursday to interview candidates and will appoint a member at its May 12 meeting. Council members will interview seven Salem residents who have expressed an interest in filling the unexpired term of a School Board member who moved out of the city.
And here’s the clincher: The interviews will be held in open session, last for 20 minutes each … and the public will be able to sit in and watch it all.
Now, let’s contrast that with how Lynchburg City Council handles School Board appointments.
On May 13, the names of the applicants for three seats on the Lynchburg School Board will be read into the record of City Council, and their applications will be made available for public scrutiny.
And that will be about the extent of the public’s involvement in the process, thanks to City Council, specifically Mayor Joan Foster and Vice Mayor Bert Dodson.
Back in April, council decided that closed-door interviews of selected candidates will be taped and made available to the public after nominees have been selected. That “compromise” came together after an effort to conduct public interviews failed back in March, thanks to staunch opposition from Foster, Dodson and Councilman Ceasor Johnson of Ward II. (By April 22, Johnson had changed his mind and favored a totally open process.)
The vice mayor voted against even taping the interviews, saying he feared the process would turn into nothing more than a “three-ring circus.”
The mayor didn’t want anything done in public, saying it’s “unnerving” to hear the public’s murmurings and mutterings.
And with that, the concept of open government died a death of a thousand cuts.
What is it about open government that some members of City Council just can not get?
You would think after the uproar from last summer’s ouster of School Board Vice Chairman Tom Webb by a mini-majority of council that they would have gotten the message that an open process best serves everyone: council itself, the School Board, the applicants and, last but definitely not least, the public.
But no.
To their way of thinking, the best government is that which is done behind closed doors, with the public being viewed as an annoyance to be tolerated.
The public, you see, mutters and murmurs; the public, you see, can’t be trusted and would assist some members of council in turning the process into a “three-ring circus.”
Applicants, they say, would feel “intimidated” and “put on the spot,” cutting down on the number of qualified citizens who would apply for a seat.
Please.
The citizens of Lynchburg are much more sophisticated than that. They know that our public school system is an asset that needs nurturing and protecting. The fact of the matter is there’s simply no question that a council member would ask in private, behind closed doors, that couldn’t … or shouldn’t … be asked and answered in public.
And again, we ask, if open government is good enough for the citizens of Salem, why not for the citizens of Lynchburg?