Archive: Opinions

Two controversial events in Lansing this week showed that you can't win for losing.  The school administration and Board Of Education took a lot of criticism for not communicating or being inclusive about the surveillance cameras in the schools, when, in fact, they have been.  And the Lansing Fire Commissioners took some knocks for the same thing, when, in fact, they hadn't been when they dropped the bomb on department volunteers that a paid fire chief position would replace the current volunteer (elected) chief post.  In both cases at least some of their accusers made it ugly and personal, which I believe distracts from the issues and the facts.

I admit it.  I was passing notes at school.  Leger Editor Glynis Hart passed me a note at Monday's Lansing Board Of Education meeting in the high school library that evidently nobody read her article about security cameras in the Lansing schools.  We were listening to a lot of people say that school officials never communicated information about cameras, when we were pretty sure they had.  We had both heard and seen the communications and written about them on multiple occasions.  I passed a note back that said, 'Or mine'.  We were both depressed about that.

These events highlighted something I often think about.  I see it happen a lot of times.  People make the assumption that if they don't know about it, it didn't happen and then they act on that 'knowledge'.  In the case of cameras in schools I knew that they were coming.  I knew that Lansing voters had approved them.  I knew they were being installed.  While I agree 100% with critics who say that a policy for their use must be in place before they are turned on, the notion that district officials somehow hid the fact of the cameras is absurd.  Unless I dreamed the whole thing.

So how come I knew about them and other, now vocal critics didn't?  When the district sent out information or posted it on the school Web site I read it.  When they held events I went to them.  And I read about them in my articles in the Lansing Star.  Obviously it's my job to pay attention to local government and taxing authorities and their activities, but at least two of those three things involve very little effort, and can be done from the comfort of your own home.

To me the issue of putting surveillance cameras in the schools was already dealt with by the community when it voted to fund the capital project.  At the time there was plenty of information about what was in the project, and cameras were clearly listed in a flyer about the project that was mailed to voters' homes.  Lansing voted, the schools built their project.  That piece of the issue is done.  Democracy in action.  Majority rules.  Saying people didn't know about it may be accurate, but saying the district didn't do a lot to communicate it is incorrect and disingenuous.

The saying is that people who don't vote get a government they deserve.  I think it is fair to say that people who don't pay attention get the cameras they diserve.  Again, that is not to say that a clear policy for the use of the cameras and their recordings shouldn't be in place.  It should be.  Monday Superintendent Stephen Grimm said he does not intend to turn on the cameras until it is.

In fact, I think the district should have developed such a policy at least two years ago, when the project was approved by voters and when cameras were installed on the school busses.  I applaud them for doing it now, but I wish they had done it in a more timely manner.  It probably would have moved the current controversy back a few years, but would have taken care of the issue one way or the other in one fell swoop.  I also wish school officials could produce hard data that the decision to install cameras was based on.  It wouldn't change the decision that voters endorsed two years ago at the polls, but it would go a long way toward defusing the current outcry.

On the communication front, school officials have two meeetings that are open to the public each month, they mail bulletins, they have become much better about posting public information on the school Web site, and when important votes are about to happen school officials, notably Superintendent Grimm, go to club meetings and local restaurants to meet with residnets and taxpayers in an informal setting so they can ask whatever they want to.

I've gone to a bunch of those.  I thought they were pretty well publicized.  You know how many other people showed up?  I could count them on one hand even if it were missing fingers.  And heck, the coffee was free!

As for the Fire Commissioners, I believe they, like school officials and board members, are good people and well intentioned public servants, but they blew it on this one.  As many volunteer emergency responders pointed out at a meeting Tuesday, there is a history and culture of the volunteer department that is important to consider carefully when making changes to its structure.  That culture is important, since we as a community benefit from highly motivated volunteers who not only do a terrific job of protecting us, but save us a ton of tax money.

As was also pointed out by a few of the department members, the department includes volunteers from a wide variety of backgrounds and training who would have been valuable resources in deciding how best to address issues facing the department today.  The incident was baffling to me, because all five commissioners are also department members.  Presenting such a fundamental change in the department's makeup without soliciting ideas from other members and community members was a tactical mistake that, after taking a lot of heat Tuesday, it looks like the Commissioners will now begin to rectify.  But I suspect it will take a lot of rectifying to restore the level of trust and confidence they have lost.

If the depeartment members didn't have their facts straight, they can't really be blamed for that because the information wasn't there.  A decision had evidently been made and sent in a letter to be read at the department meeting.  Tuesday they asked commissioners to talk about why they made this decision.  While some seemed to want to shout the commissioners down, others insisted on letting them talk so they could understand the underlying issues that prompted their decision.  That communication led to some  beginnings of solutions that may better address those issues.

I think the Fire Commissioners can take some little comfort from the fact that even if they had been inclusive they likely would have been slammed like the school officials were.  Perception is key.  What people think, whether it is based on facts, rumor, or assumptions drives public response.  These two incidents are certainly not unique.  I've seen it at Town meetings, Village meetings, County meetings... it's human nature, I guess.

Not to mention a humbling and frustrating thing to newspaper editors.  I should note that I have never thought newspapers, my own included, are the final arbiters of the truth.  But they are a pretty easy way to start to learn about and understand events that impact us, through the lens of whatever writer is reporting.  After that you can go to meetings, read newsletters or bulletins,  talk to officials, or even put in FOIL requests to get a more detailed view.  Not all, but most officials are approachable.

I have always viewed the Lansing Star as a simple digest of weekly local events.  Easy to find if you have access to a computer, and the price couldn't be better.  All our old articles from day one are still online and searchable on our Web site or on Google.  When people come out of the woodwork to protest this thing or that without first having their facts straight, I don't get it.

(By the way I am not saying that everyone who protested in the two meetings this week didn't have their facts straight.  But clearly some didn't.)

Of course, if you are reading this you are probably not one of those folks.  And please don't tell the teacher I was passing notes...

v7i45