Save the borough from boards and commissions

To really understand the prior Spectrum article printed on Tuesday, Nov. 23 “Save our Boards and Commissions,” one must understand the true meaning of “special interest.”

Special interest: a person or group seeking to influence legislative or government policy to further often narrowly defined interests.

Our borough government is infested with small groups of people (special interests). A board like Real Property Asset Management Board is a board that was created by a special interest group, where few if anyone in the general public participate. This allows protectionists, preservationists, extremists and other fringe groups to assume control and insert their special interest agenda ahead of the general public need.

We are now at the point where we have more than 60 boards, commissions, RSA’s, FSA’s, community councils and special task force groups, with most of them having no official decision-making authority; but all of them requiring the participation of full-time paid borough staff.

It is disingenuous to write a Spectrum article, as the authors did, which portrays the public has no opportunity to testify. There is ample opportunity for the public to testify before the assembly, planning commission and other codified groups where action can be taken in an advisory stance, but the assembly has final say on every issue except those items ruled under quasi-judicial authority.

Our borough manager is empowered to bring in whatever expertise he or she needs to determine the best use of the borough assets, but the assembly is the body that actually makes the decision and obligates the borough. It is at this point that testifying has real meaning.

The authors of the recent Spectrum article that spoke to the benefits of keeping the RPAMB intact are a part of this special interest, preservationist influence. This brings into mind the question of their recommendations being untainted and whether those recommendations are in the best interest of all borough residents. Their Spectrum article is an attempt to cloak their true agenda through righteous indignation by inaccurate accusations of lost fairness and transparency. Bunk, I say! It has been preservationist ideology all along trying to promote “smart growth” ideals with no regard as to the economic consequences to the rest of us who actually pay the bills through our property taxes. These idealistic-minded persons are afraid of the light being turned toward their dark corner. It is better for them if they can hide in the shadows of a tainted process.

The argument that eliminating the RPAMB will benefit the lobbyist also holds no water what-so-ever. Eliminating RPAMB will force the lobbyist (special interest) to crawl into the light; force them, in fact, to crawl into the open public process. There are no closed doors to get behind in the assembly chamber; the light is shining brightly, where all the people’s business is conducted in the open, such that the taxpayer knows clearly what is happening — in the open.

There may be more proposed changes along these lines in the future. Once the new mayor and manager are in place, I am going to recommend a thorough review of all these “so-called” advisory entities. Government must become leaner, less intrusive and deliver a lower cost service. We must learn to live within our means and be completely responsive to the taxpayer.

Please remember, cries of dishonesty and skullduggery are most often heard from those who practice the art with mastery. To paraphrase a point “the henhouse has been moved to a safe location, it is the fox who is lamenting the move.”

Ron Arvin, is an Assembly Member representing District 3 and Deputy Mayor for the Mat-Su Borough.