Ups and Downs

Up: I did not want to speak at the public meeting last night about the proposed development of Oakwood Park. I felt I did not know enough about the subject.

I recalled that I had to appear at planning board meetings in the past. For those meetings a friend (an attorney, a gifted public speaker and reluctant political advocate) had advised me at those times that all I needed to do at the meeting was to state my name and residence, and that I opposed the proposal. That was sure a lot easier than mustering arguments and putting them to the elected officials.

Up: decided to research. Called the NJ DEP and spoke to someone in the Green Acres program. In case he was mistaken, I omit his name here. He said that according to Green Acres regulations, the property holders needed to inform the DEP 30 days before any public discussion about a transfer of title. He said that the DEP had not been notified.

This, I thought, was real information that I could proudly bring to the mic. Democracy in action.

Up: Called the New Jersey Conservation Foundation. Because I was too busy writing down my interlocutor's suggestions, I omit her name here. She gave me some great information about the ROSI (open space inventory), and about how to ask about impervious surface coverage.

Up: Looked up the New Providence Master Plan online. It was a productive lunch hour.

Down: Called my friend the attorney. He said my recollection was poor. He said that I could just mention that I opposed the action, but that it would be far better to muster the arguments.

Up: Attended the meeting. Even though I was not perfectly prepared, it was definitely better to be there in person than to learn about it after the fact and grouse about it in private.

Down: Sounded dumb at the mic. They were about to close the meeting because there appeared to be no more speakers from the floor. It was then or never so I approached the microphone.

I asked my three questions.

"What kind of synthetic turf?" and "Have you consulted your impervious surface coverage requirements?" got the "We don't know but maybe they will answer that at next week's meeting."

"Have you notified the DEP?" got "Of course we did. We have been discussing with" (did not have pen handy at the mic to write down his name). In the end my questions sounded random and not very pointed.

Up: Maybe the fact that I did not sound like the brightest crayon in the box encouraged some of the speakers who came after me to air their questions. Democracy is not just for those accustomed to microphones. It's for everyone.

Down: Many of the people who spoke after me sounded much more intelligent. Good thing that this was a public hearing and not a competition...

Up: I felt very web 2.0 blogging about the meeting as it happened.

Up: the meeting petered out around 9:30. Other meetings I have attended have lasted till midnight.

The mayor's public letter said that the borough council had discussed this issue at its December 08 meeting, which was televised. There was an article in the local paper at the time. The minutes of the meeting are online.

I could have checked any of those sources, instead of being gobsmacked last week learning about last night's discussion in the Independent Press. (Kudos to Mike Neavill!)

I definitely should be following my local government more closely. On the other hand, there are only 24 hours in a day. How many of them do I need to devote to the government?

I want to be able to trust that my government is going to pretty much do what I think they should do. I want to be able to trust that if the government is planning to do something really radical, the press will let me know.

Too bad eternal vigilance is so darned time-consuming, and, at times, humbling.