Enough with Roanoke City council secrecy : The more the public knows, the better it will accept controversial projects.
Editorial: Enough with Roanoke's secrecy City council dooms itself to failure when it refuses to learn the lesson: The more the public knows, the better it will accept controversial projects. For four months now, Roanoke City Council has sequestered itself behind closed doors to discuss the building and management of an amphitheater along Reserve Avenue. Council apparently has six proposals. According to an e-mail written by the city attorney, council has directed the city manager to negotiate with "one of the two best respondents." The public doesn't know who that those "respondents" might be or why they are deemed the "best." In fact, the public doesn't know a lick about this project other than that the mayor and three council members decided -- with no public debate and contrary to consultants' recommendations -- that a 7,000-seat, $11 million amphitheater would best be built on property prone to flooding. The public only even knows about the e-mail because The Roanoke Times filed a Freedom of Information Act request. Then council courted developers willing to put capital into the project and to manage it. Not so fast on the capital part. Councilman Brian Wishneff disclosed that not one proposal received in September included a developer willing to invest. To which, Councilman Dave Trinkle now says, "The bottom line is we know that we're going to have to pay for this. ... Really what we're looking for is a design team and a management team." Council clings to a mind-boggling pattern in which it deliberates major projects in secret, brings only decisions into the public arena, then wonders why the public won't support its wisdom. People would be much more willing to lend support if they understood fully the choices before the city and if they were privy to the debate as to why one proposal fares better than another. They just hate it when a decision is rammed down their throats. Many scorned council when members selected the old Victory Stadium site for an amphitheater instead of Elmwood Park or another location without so much as one moment of public debate. Council is already working at a disadvantage in gaining support for this project. To continue in secrecy surely won't win over supporters. By now, with enough controversial and failed projects on the city's résumé, council should know this. Sadly, not one member seems to get it. They are conducting the people's business and spending the people's money. The people want -- and need -- to know how. If this council won't do it, voters should pick representatives who will.
Posts
