>Overwhelming attendance at VC meetings is an inefficient and, often, unproductive way to convey a group’s position. It is a visable show of force from those who attend, which may be 50-100 people, at the most. That looks like a “landslide” at a public meeting. But, what if those are are the ONLY 50-100 people who support a particular view in a village with over 8,000 households? Not very substantial support!
No…trying to create the perception of support by stuffing the room at a VC meeting is a crude, unsophisticated and brutish attempt to intimidate the village into the group’s way of thinking. Occasionally, this leads to rude and inappropriate shouting matches. It ALWAYS leads to an inefficient use of everyone’s time, as a long parade of the “usual suspects” take more than their allotted time at the podium, often with outdated or incorrect so-called “facts” to support their case. Without supporting or criticizing their positions, I point to the residents who oppose the Master Plan proposals at Grove Park or the “anti-turf” residents, like Linda & Katie McNamara, as notable examples, in the past year, of members of groups who have repeatedly shown up en masse to meetings and often attempt to “shout down” opposition. Because one or two members of the VC are concerned about being “politically correct”, this tactic is sometimes effective with those VC members.
Ironically, groups with logic and the facts on their side generally do not feel the need to resort to these tactics and are typically more persuasive, as a result of their less antagonistic approach. Thus, a far more effective method of communication is to have thoughtful, factual and, sometimes, lengthy direct conversations with individual members of the VC and other community leaders on a frequent basis and long before a public meeting takes place. If it is necessary to demonstrate widespread community support for or against a project, then petitions with names and addresses of supporters can be presented and highlighted at meetings and in the press.
I am not saying that deals should get done in “shady back room negotiations”, as the conspiracy theorists on this blog incorrectly suggested happens so often. I am simply saying that, in my experience, if groups and individuals are willing to engage in thoughtful discourse with appropriate village leaders and can present factual and compelling rationale for their case, there is no need to make a “spectacle” at public meetings. It is an issue of building consensus among the VC members, who will ultimately cast the votes. This might actually lead to far more productive and effective village governance, since things might actually get accomplished without the need for multiple meetings to rehash the same topics month after month.
This post will not be popular with those on this blog who like to “stir the pot” of public emotion for the sake of a reaction. But, it is sage advice that might help to improve our democratic process of government in Ridgewood.
