At the LWV forum for our trustees, prior to our election, a question was asked of all candidates regarding the village’s participation at the regularly held board meetings. Each of the eventual winners of that election — all members of the Greater Homewood Party — agreed that more participation was needed.
There’s the charge from our esteemed village leaders. Show up to speak up. It makes perfect sense, and is hardly arguable, isn’t it? In order for our trustees and village president to hear their constituents, we the people must speak.
Forgive me for not doing so in person, Mr. Hofeld and company. Sadly, I’m a more verbose person than 3 minutes will allow. While I’d consider a direct audience, alas, as a working parent of 4 children, taking out my entire Saturday morning to stand in line to earn a visit isn’t in the cards. But I digress. I’m wasting precious words already.
I have attended around half a dozen village board meetings to date. It could be more, but I’ll err on the side of caution — as I don’t want to imply I’m a regular at the function by any means. And for bonus points, I’ll add I took the 6 week civic academy this past spring — and even posted about how much I liked it online. You’re welcome. I have attended the meetings, each time, because several more motivated minds called out for folks to show up via the astoundingly popular Facebook group Moms & Dads/ Friends & Neighbors of Homewood-Flossmoor and the Snarky version of the same name. In all of these instances, one of these finer folks stood up with courage and conviction to address the board with questions, comments, and concerns regarding this town we all love dearly.
From the back of the room, as I’ve observed, these board meetings are far more pomp than circumstance. While a poli/sci major might fall in love with all the political procedure on display at any given meeting, there’s something a bit sinister roiling under the surface that should be noted. When the public stands and addresses the board-on-high, all I’ve ever heard in response has been “we hear you” from our trustees, and village president. There’s never any opportunity for debate or discussion. There is only hurried acknowledgement, followed by occasional offerings to take the issue down to a one-on-one conversation, offline, to cool off the would-be angered resident. Once, maybe, I recall there being a several minute admonishment from the board down to the villager that they simply didn’t understand the inner workings of how our town is run. The suggestion? Read more on the website. Book a meeting for a free one-sided education. Now sit back down, and let’s move on.
The tone and feeling of these meetings is such that comments from the public are invited but hardly welcome. The proof is in the pudding: for all the village has done recently to improve optics (more emails, more social media engagement, some oddly-specific personal outreaches to specific villagers…) it still treats the participation in meetings as necessary, less actually desired.
After attending the meetings such as I have, I recognize what I feel is a bit of a fatal flaw of our otherwise mandated reality. If everything that happens in our town is voted on by the trustees alone — and all of them share the same party affiliation — how do they truly hear their opinions from the people of this town? Would they simply not just look at each other and agree “we have all the seats, we ran the table at the election; the people clearly have placed their faith in us to proceed as we desire.” Even if you’ll say that’s not how it is? That’s exactly how it is felt by somewhere between a quarter to a third of the voting public among us in this town that disagree.
Several among our re-elected trustees on the dais at the formerly mentioned forum spoke vividly about “hearing more.” One trustee dubbed themselves a professional problem solver and let it be known they’d seek new avenues to hear from us, the public. Another trustee mentioned that when presented with arguments and facts they don’t have the time to absorb the information in time to make an immediate vote — gasp, an admission for the need for change! As it stands, the “free-for-all-for-three-minutes” rule we live under is less a dialogue, and more (or less) a soapbox in a glass cage.
I came to the most recent board meeting to see this attitude be adopted. Instead, it was business as usual. “We hear you,” and nothing else was said, nor offered.
As a bit of an experiment, I read my letter here, while timing myself. Everything prior to this paragraph clocked in at 3 minutes, 54 seconds. So, add in several verbal stumbles I’d likely suffer from, I would have been told to shut up before making that final point. Funny, no?
Funnier still? I actually have more to say. For those interested, you’re invited to read on: https://tinyurl.com/FishyThoughts.
Marc Alan Fishman
Homewood