Not exactly democracy at its finest

To the editor:

I would like to propose that the Mat-Su Borough change the name of the section of the borough assembly meetings called “audience participation” to the following: “Please tell us what you think, but only if your views are in line with ours, because otherwise we don’t want to waste our time listening to you.”

This is how it felt at the assembly meeting on Feb. 19. A group of residents spoke appropriately and sincerely about what they feel was unethical behavior exhibited by a man who was about to be confirmed for the Mat-Su Borough Planning Commission. While the number of speakers and letters against his appointment appeared to be much higher than the number of people speaking in favor of him, the assembly (minus one) voted to approve him anyway.

I had refrained from using the word “cronyism” in my written public opinion message, but the mayor essentially defined the term when he said, “I am going to speak up for my man.” and went on to say that he had a right, as mayor, to select someone whose views were “in line” with his, even if that person was not the most qualified of the applicants.

Well, there you have it folks. As another resident at the meeting said, “It’s who you know, not how qualified you are.”

But before the assembly voted, the mayor and several assembly members criticized the residents who had spoken against the applicant, calling our words harsh and “desperate,” and trying to reduce them to a pro-coal vs. anti-coal issue. I was affronted by the attitude they had toward our public comments.

First, I thought there was freedom of speech in America. Second, I thought a public meeting was the place to bring up concerns when we believe that a person does not meet the ethical standards for public office. The things we spoke about needed to be known, even if they weren’t pleasant to hear. Someone on the assembly said that the applicant should not have had to sit through all the things we said against him. On the contrary, if someone desires to be in a public position he or she needs to be prepared to hear people speak out when they do not approve of his or her actions. And public officials (like the assembly and mayor) need to listen to and consider views different from their own. That is their job.

It is of note that one of the assembly members who had been asked if he might have a conflict of interest regarding this applicant flew off the handle defending himself and then came down off the platform during the break and cursed at the person who had questioned him, calling her a “f------ nut job” for suggesting that he had a conflict of interest. Is this acceptable behavior for a public official? Not exactly democracy at its finest.

Julia Plotnik

Palmer