Saturday, January 11, 2014

A Few Thoughts About Transparency and Oversight

Happy New Year!

I seem to have fallen off the blogging horse. An entire year has gone by since my last post.  But maybe it's not too late to resuscitate this thing.

A few thoughts after the most recent board meeting...which provided ample evidence that democracy can be difficult.  (If this were a college exam, the essay question at this point might be: Two words that we hear a lot about these days are "transparency" and "oversight." Discuss.)

Prior to the January meeting, one of our residents asked for a copy of the check register for the last six months. And then the resident asked questions about checks that were written: amounts, recipients, missing checks. The questions were direct. At the meeting, the board provided answers and explanations, asked if there were more questions, there were none. The board was thanked. Everyone seemed happy, I thought.

I was wrong. At that point, a new resident commented that, based on his experience as a director of a much larger board, he believed that board members were elected to do a job and that members needed to trust those they elected to do a good job. (In other words, don't ask so many questions.)  Board Chair Bob Cumby said that he agreed, and that if members wanted to oversee every move the board made, then it didn't make much sense to have a board.

If I understood Bob Cumby correctly, what he wound up saying was that the members of the board work hard and do what they think is right and that if association members are not  happy with what the board is doing, or if they don't trust the incumbents,  members should vote them out of office.

It seemed clear to me that board members were offended by the questions that had been asked.

Time for  transparency

Long time resident Jeanne Smolley suggested that some transparency in board operations might be helpful. For instance: if the treasurer's report indicated "who got paid for what," it would clarify expenditures. Also helpful: copies of the treasurer's report available for those at the meeting. (The board stopped providing these months ago because they said, they printed them and no one took them. It was obvious at the meeting, however, that at least a few residents would appreciate having copies of these reports made available at each meeting.)

Now comes oversight 

Maybe it's not fair to compare the Portuguese Bend Board to Congress, or even the RPV City council. But they ARE all organizations of elected officials. There is some oversight with Congress and the city council. That's the job of the press...reporters for radio, tv, blogs, newspapers, magazines. The press has access to elected officials, so the electorate can learn what our representatives are doing. Reporters are able to ask elected officials questions.  And if elected officials don't want to answer: too bad. Reporters keep asking...or at least, they should if they are good reporters. And then they tell us, the electorate, who is doing what and where our tax money is being spent. (That's why the press is called the Fourth Estate.) They do this so we know who to vote for. A well-informed electorate is a basic necessity for democracy to work properly.

But there are no reporters asking questions of the Portuguese Bend Board members. There IS no press involved.  So how, then,  does our Portuguese Bend electorate get informed?

Members have to go to the monthly board meetings to know what is going on.

Unfortunately, few do.

Board members may view low attendance at board meetings as lack of interest on the part of residents.

  • But maybe it's that residents are tired after working all day, 
  • or they don't have a sitter, 
  • or they are working late, 
  • or they forgot. 
The important thing is that residents have no way of knowing what their elected representatives are doing except via direct attendance at board meetings... or rumor.

This is not the best way to get an informed electorate.

In the past there has been a newsletter. And for a while, there was a website.

At the moment, the only communication that residents have about board activities is by reading very brief minutes of meetings, which arrive via email a few hours before the next meeting...one month after events have taken place.

Our board members are our friends and neighbors and they are giving of their time and brain power to make this community what it is. And we appreciate their efforts.

But should that preclude asking questions?

What do you think?

btw: the election is next month.


2 comments:

  1. Quite a few of the Board members recently have been appointed to vacancies and not elected; does this void the requirement for trust? Seeking information should in no way be construed as implying a lack of trust or a criticism. Asking for and not receiving information for six months is not really conducive to trust, especially when the answer finally given turns out to be simple and totally acceptable: one has to ask "Why six months?"
    Do I trust my elected government representatives just because enough other people were foolish enough to vote
    for them? Hell no!
    Not a thing wrong with asking questions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quite a few of the Board members recently have been appointed to vacancies and not elected; does this void the requirement for trust? Seeking information should in no way be construed as implying a lack of trust or a criticism. Asking for and not receiving information for six months is not really conducive to trust, especially when the answer finally given turns out to be simple and totally acceptable: one has to ask "Why six months?"

    Do I trust my elected government representatives just because enough other people were foolish enough to vote
    for them? Hell no!

    Not a thing wrong with asking questions.

    ReplyDelete