Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Reality Really Does Bite Some Times.


I was elected to the Commission in December, 2013.  I had a very clear track record in the Village, owing to my continuous involvement at reasonably high levels, and I faithfully attended Commission meetings for eight years before that.  It would not be hard, or inaccurate, to argue that I had a pretty good sense of what was going on in the Village, and how things worked.

In addition to my normal activities, I also started a Village-focused blog (this one) in which I held forth without much, if any, restraint regarding my opinions and positions about things.  And there was the Meet the Candidates event that year, where I further expressed opinions and even intentions.

To take two issues that were prominent at the time, I expressed myself in this blog, making clear I did not favor annexation, and at the Meet the Candidates event, I answered a direct question regarding outsourcing sanitation to say I didn't favor it.  What I knew or thought I knew, and what I imagined, led me to both conclusions, with the confidence that came from limited information.  "Ignorance is bliss" kind of thing.  (It's not the truth that sets you free; it's not knowing what the truth is.)

Once I became a Commissioner, and was exposed to much more information, I famously and publicly changed my mind about both issues.  I would say I learned things I had not previously known, and I had a chance to discuss both issues with people in conversations that were far beyond the superficial and emotional ones I had had before.

Before I became a Commissioner, my exposure to reality was incomplete.  After I became a Commissioner, it was much more complete and extensive.  The other thing that happens after someone becomes a Commissioner is that he or she begins to hear from people who had not been in the inner circle or comfort zone of the pre-Commissioner.  The result of all this is that you are offered opportunities to expand what you know, and how you think, and you're in a position to feel more responsible to consider those opportunities.

So the new Commissioner, or probably any elected official of any length of tenure, has a choice.  In some cases, this choice is a dilemma.  Do you ignore or refuse to hear what is newly offered, because you've already made up your mind?  Do you hear it, but dismiss it, because you feel personally committed, or beholden to your supporters, not to waver from your original path?

One of our neighbors chided me for being "closed-minded" about something.  I think it was outsourcing.  She was angry and frustrated with me, because I decided the right path was not the one she favored.  What I said to her was that I couldn't think of any better example of open-mindedness than an ability and willingness to change one's mind, given new information.  And I still feel that way.

As an elected official, you are guaranteed to frustrate and disappoint someone.  No matter what you do or don't do, and no matter the issue.  You only decide whom you're willing to frustrate and disappoint, and on what basis you will do it.  You can respond to what you used to think, or what your friends prefer, or what you feel you promised.  Or, you can respond to what you come to learn is true, and more true than what you thought before.  If actual reality happens to be in line with what you already thought, good for you.  If it isn't, you have a complicated dilemma on your hands.  But no matter what you do, or don't do, you are guaranteed to upset someone (perhaps it makes you feel better that you've pleased someone else), and that someone will have as compelling, impassioned, and strident a competing approach as the one you went with instead.

For me, I decided it was better to be "right," whatever "right" was.  And my way of trying to answer that question was to choose whatever I thought made the Village a better (stronger, more stable, more likely to succeed, more pleasing) place.

The problem was expressed in one of the questions in this year's Meet the Candidates event: would you rather choose something that makes people happy now, or would you take a broader and longer range view that might leave some people-- maybe lots of people-- unhappy?  Or angry.  Or furious.  Or wanting nothing more than to get you out of office.  That's the choice, and that's the dilemma.  It will happen to every elected official, frequently.  It doesn't feel like that at first, when you get elected.  You feel chosen, like someone's choice from among others.  (Which of course you were.)  You feel approved of.  You feel uniquely legitimate, as if someone has told you you were right, and you should do whatever you think is best.  (For...?)  I'm sure that's the way every election winner feels.  And I felt that way even though I knew that there was a population of Village residents who really didn't want me there.

That's what I, and every other elected official, thinks and feels, and I have not the slightest doubt it's what our new elected officials think and feel.  That's why they'll confront and deal with what we all did.  The only question is which way they'll go, on any issue, and what will inform and motivate the choices they will make.



"The color of truth is grey."  Andre Gide, Author, Nobel laureate (1869-1951)







7 comments:

  1. Fred Jonas’ blog post should be an addendum to a handbook that each Commissioner receives when he or she takes office. Rules of the Road so to speak. It's both informative and philosophic. It's the guts of what they should expect, as Fred cogently goes about telling it like it really is, having "been there." And, it should raise the consciousness of all involved: elected officials, and the Village at large, so they understand that what works best isn't always instant gratification or being the “Most Popular Person on Campus.” It refers to big decisions that can often be daunting and uncomfortable to make.

    The post exudes that effective touch of reality that hopefully will resonate when choices need to get made for the betterment of Biscayne Park - a reality check that moves past easy solutions, and goes beyond one's ego, for the ultimate benefit of the "truth," grey though it often can be.

    Judith Marks-White
    Westport, CT

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fred, thank you for your comments here...I wanted to make a point of personally thanking you for your service and dedication to our community...you mention several of the large decisions that you were involved with...but what you don't mention are the many, many, many (how many many's are you allowed in one sentence?) hours that you must have endured of small things and issues...some of which were intensely boring...probably carving a small hole in your soul (ok, that's about me probably)...and still attending...that attention to the minor business of a life of a community,such as a shrub here, a sign there, a curb here, a light there, paint here and there is payment that you made for me and for most of the Villagers! Thoreau described government as a "convenience" for its citizens, serving so that most of us don't have to...I am grateful for your service.
    Cheers through the holidays for you and those you love!
    Tom Ferstle

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom,

      You couldn't be more generous. Thanks.

      As for the "small things and issues," which you imagine were likely "intensely boring," I know what you mean, but it doesn't come out that way. It's true they're not earth-shaking, like the bigger structural issues are. But if you approach the task with an eye on the big picture, and you recognize at the same time that the Village (or anywhere else) is composed of people like you and me and all the rest of us, then you quickly understand that every issue is big, in it's way. A dispute between neighbors, or between a neighbor and something like the P&Z Board, is big for the people involved. And each of these kinds of issues affects the overall adjustment and equanimity of the Village as a whole. It's a balancing act for sure, but no part of this is really trivial.

      So it's been my pleasure (well...), and I'm very glad I did it. I never had the plan to run again, and the one and only reason I did was that I had a theme and a vision and a focus (you know, "For the Best We Can Be," blah, blah, blah), and I wasn't sure any of the other candidates represented that theme. So I put myself back out there as an option. Either the neighborhood no longer wanted that option, or it didn't want me in particular, and that's fine.

      You're on P&P, and if what I offered appeals to you, you can try to enact the P&P version of the same thing. I have already asked to be appointed to any Board that needs someone, and I will continue to do what I've been doing from there.

      Thanks again, Tom.

      Fred

      Delete
    2. Tom,

      Here's an example of one that got away. Well, maybe two. As you might know, I am sort of a great art enthusiast. I have a sizable personal art collection, and I also believe very powerfully in the value of public art. Perhaps you know that a number of your neighbors and I pooled some of our money to purchase pieces of art, and we donated those to the Village, for its own enhancement. What I wanted to do was to get the Commission to set aside about $8 (eight dollars) per house (not per person) per year, so that the Village would have money enough to expand its collection, and feature its own abundance of public art. Eight dollars per house per year means nothing to anyone, but I got so much resistance that I was unable to get the rest of the Commission to agree. So it was a tiny matter, but it might have made a big impact in the "For the Best We Can Be" direction.

      The second one that got away was my endless droning about our needing more revenue, and the advisability of increasing the millage. I'm not sure this is strictly correct now, but when property values were a bit lower than they now are, the difference between 9.7 mills and 10 mills was an average of about $45 per year on the Village portion of the tax bill. Again, next to nothing to almost anyone ($45 per year), but I couldn't get agreement on it, even though it would have resulted in at least $50K more per year to the Village, which would have made a dent in some of our smaller problems (tot lot surface, redoing the Codes, etc). So I'm sorry I failed to make a good enough case about something that was in reality not more than a "small issue." But a tax increase always sounds to people like a big issue, even when it's not, so it was what it was. Here's hoping.

      Fred

      Delete
    3. Tom,

      I'm sorry to belabor this, but I want to show you another example of a dilemma, and a need to consider adjusting your thinking about something. A year or two ago, a matter that had reached an impasse at P&Z came before the Commission. It involved homeowners who had made substantial improvements, including a pool, and who also wanted a shed, to house the stuff for the pool (and some gardening items, I think). On faulty advice from someone not connected to the Village, they went ahead and bought a shed. The problem was that the shed they bought, on the faulty advice, was bigger than the Code allows, and there was no adequate basis to approve the larger structure.

      The bigger problem for me was that I really like the two people who are the homeowners, and I would generally do anything for them. What's the difference between a shed that's the right dimensions, and one that's a little bigger? And I can please my friends, if I vote to approve their shed, which they already bought. (Actually, since I don't remember what the vote was, I don't really know if my vote one way or the other would have mattered.

      But I had to vote against the commitment two people I like a lot already made, and I had to do it, because we have Codes, and we have to follow them. I couldn't even say that the bad advice came from someone employed by the Village, and it was our mistake. It wasn't easy to vote against those two lovely people, whom I like a lot. But that's what I had to do.

      So I did a blog post, advertising the too big shed, and trying to help them sell it. Which they did. But still, when you have to keep your eye on the Village ball, you make decisions you might not like to make. That's the deal on the Commission.

      Fred

      Delete