To the Editor:
Alexandria civic discourse is not well, and appears to be growing worse over time. Increasingly, people are comparing public meetings to an orchestra recital that consists of a cacophony of screeching tuning noises, followed by a brief minute of rehearsed music. To continue the analogy, one need not wonder why ticket sales to these events are dwindling. From an economic perspective, the public meetings are time consuming, nonproductive events that unfavorably compete with more rewarding uses of time.
As citizens start to recognize that the process is likely contrived, confidence in the fairness of the City’s decisions diminishes and ultimately fails. Citizens will then believe that they have no voice in matters of importance. At this point, the opportunity cost of participating in public meetings increases dramatically, since it will be perceived as a waste of time to do so, considering the likely outcome. Citizens will then cease to attend, or become very frustrated if they do take part.
From a citizen perspective, the City's decision making process appears to be a closed loop system, which removes itself from the flux of the external world, because a great deal of its energy is devoted to resisting change and perpetuating relatively mechanical patterns of behavior. To survive in such a rigid or comparatively closed system, participants must give up part or all of their individuality by keeping within the confines of the system, which can make the participant feel powerless.
Obviously, City Hall views it differently. It believes that citizen concerns are adequately addressed, and infers that its developments are far better because of it. City Hall feels that the citizens are overly critical of its efforts, so it must create strong defenses to protect itself from unwarranted barrages.
Determining which perception is more accurate can be resolved by a review of how often proposals are changed or refused anywhere in the process. Since this appears to be most infrequent, citizens may be correct in their perception of City Hall. In nearly every recent major effort, citizens have expressed frustration and disappointment against City Hall for a lack of voice in the matter. In a recent major effort, the City offered two choices that were so much alike, that the minute differences between them had to be explained to the citizens.
The previous City Manager made it clear that he and the City Staff worked for the City Council, and that they were very density-oriented. Since the City Council also appoints the various Committees, it follows that these Committees will tailor their directives accordingly. So, if something fits into a community, this is fine, but if it does not, argue that it does anyway. Since development and other pressures will affect some parts of the City more than others, this becomes an exercise in selecting who must suffer the consequences. To not have a voice when one is so affected signals a profound disrespect on the part of the City. Moreover, at what point will density trump community? I think that we all know that this time has already arrived.
Poul Hertel
Alexandria