A Pledge for Public Service:
As an informed citizen, I hereby call upon every elected official of the Municipality of Mt. Lebanon and the Mt. Lebanon School District, and all candidates for such office, to publicly agree to be bound by the following principles of open representative government:
MT. LEBANON OFFICE HOLDER/CANDIDATE PLEDGE OF RESPECT FOR CONSTITUENTS
As an elected official of the Mt. Lebanon School Board, or of the Municipality of Mt. Lebanon, or as a candidate for a seat on the Mt. Lebanon School Board or the Council of the Municipality of Mt. Lebanon, I pledge that my public service will be dedicated to the following principles:
1. It is my duty to give due and patient consideration to the substance of constituent sentiment on all matters of policy and taxation.
2. It is my duty to provide a civil, respectful, and thoughtful response to every constituent communication, whether or not I agree with the points of view expressed by my constituents.
3. It is my duty to be forthright, complete, honest, accurate, and fair in every communication I have with my constituents.
4. It is my duty to be clear and consistent with my constituents as to my position on all issues, and to be honest, forthright, and timely when I deem it desirable to change my position on public matters.
5. It is my duty to conduct myself at all times in an open and transparent manner, avoiding meetings with other public officials in circumstances that are likely to hide from public scrutiny my actions and purposes.
6. It is my duty to assure that meetings at which public business is conducted or decided are open, transparent, duly noticed, and scheduled so as to maximize the opportunity of the public to attend, observe, and/or participate.
7. It is my duty to fully disclose all information that I reasonably believe is of interest to my constituents and to assure full disclosure and full public knowledge of how official business is conducted.
8. It is my duty to assure that intergovernmental meetings and coordination are fully open and transparent in a timely manner to my constituents.
9. It is my duty to seek redress from appropriate authorities for all acts of fraud, waste, abuse, or unethical, illegal, or improper conduct by public officials and employees in the course of my official duties.
10. It is my duty to consider and avoid any unnecessarily negative impact on the economic welfare of my constituents, including taxation.
11. It is my duty to speak out against and to actively oppose all attempts to limit diversity of opinion by official policy or action, formal or informal.
12. It is my duty to insist upon compliance with these principles by the body to which I am elected, and to hold my colleagues accountable to these principles as well.
I ask each person holding or seeking public office in this Municipality or this School District to subscribe to these principles by giving their written concurrence, thereby indicating their commitment to constituent service and respect. I would hope that all members of the Council and the School Board, and all candidates for seats on these bodies will subscribe to these basic democratic principles now and in the future.
Respectfully. Steve Diaz
23 comments:
Once again Steve Diaz has demonstrated that not only does he have a command of the English language but he can use it as a high-intensity spotlight on anyone running for a local office; or currently holding same. None of his “twelve principles” carries any political baggage, and it is hard to imagine any rational person objecting to them.
Richard Gideon
Richard, they key words are "rational person", and we have found that we are not dealing with many (any?) of them.
Joe Wertheim
Lebo-Lips has never been rational. Sarah Morris
The name calling on this blog, ie our elected officials are not "rational" people, and "lebo lips" is the reason that so many think that this blog is ugly, and mean spirited. If you respectfully disagree you will earn more respect from those who disagree with you. I am not specifically talking about school board members, I am talking about your neighbors and members of the community.
Said by an anonymous person.
This blog is a result of trying to reasonably deal with the school board. We have been ignored, bullied, and been accused of fear mongering.
I am in the process of posting what happened at the policy committee meeting today. As soon as I can post a link to the last five minutes of the podcast from Lebocitizens.com, you might want to reconsider what you anonymously wrote. Or maybe you were at the meeting. I betcha you were.
Elaine
I love how people say this blog is mean spirited and ugly. I love how there are only 25 people who think the school board, i.e. our neighbors and members of the community, is doing a fine job. Out of 187 votes!
Elaine
Anonymous, casting accusations behind an anonymous posting? Unless you are willing to identify yourself your opinions are worthless.
Joe Wertheim
This posting is about a pledge for clean, honest and open government, but look how some unnamed urban guerilla-warrior has tried to hijack the discussion and take us all way off point....this posting calls no names and walks the high road, but the base tactics of the Orwellian-double talking opposition continues the game--let's grow up people and talk about facts, policy and the effect of government on people's lives instead of deflecting everything with rhetorical attacks...and it always seems to come from "people" who have no identities--I guess it takes a coward to tell a lie...
Steve, why pick on just anonymous? What was respectful or civil about Mr. Wertheim's comment. The double standard on this blog is unbelievable. There are plenty of people who don't approve of the school board but we don't resort to character attacks and name calling. I agree you would have far more support for your efforts if you did the same.
Yes, double standards indeed. I posted your comments without you signing your name. Talk to the school board about double standards.
Elaine
may i ask with whom i have the pleasure of speaking? it is only civil and polite to identify yourself...however, speaking of the substance of your comment, let me say that you fail to address the merits of the Pledge or the principles espoused in it, instead you try to deflect the discussion by choosing to enflame passions by picking on a marginal comment that is beside the thread of the discussion.....i consider whoever-you-may-be to be a provocateur seeking to draw attention away from the lack of civility and respect the citizens of this community receive from some office holders and the secretive and anti-democratic methods by which they seek to avoid accountability or fair play in the development and implementation of policy in our school district...shame on you for your transparent trouble-making--come out, come out whoever you are and engage me in a thoughtful, fact-based and ethical discussion of the real issues here, if you can...i challenge you....
well, after more than 2 hours of Ms./Mr. No Name anonymously trying to distract attention from the high ethical call of the proposed Pledge, i see that they have, perhaps predictably, "hit and run", just quit the discussion when challenged to fact-based, ethical discussion of the merits of The Pledge...so typical of that element that responds to legitimate policy concerns by purporting to question the motives of ordinary citizens who question the policy of our elected officials--more evidence of the anti-democratic tendencies of the ruling cabal and its unidentified supporters (or, perhaps there is no signature because the disruptor is herself a member of the school board, trying to create the appearance of at least one public supporter for her position)--it is pretty pathetic that when we call for civil and open discussion of the merits of public policy all we get is this kind of silliness in reply--if this is the best they can say in defense of their ill-considered policies, perhaps we should accept it as an admission that they really cannot defend the mismanagement and abuse of public process we have experienced in our community. This is exactly why The Pledge is necessary. I again call on all office holders and office seekers in Mt. Lebanon to meet the challenge and accept The Pledge.
I am a firm proponent of clean, honest and open government. I stated during my campaign that my main priorities would be to increase efficiencies, consolidate and not duplicate services, facilities and departments.
I stated the following as I successfully ran for the office of commissioner in 2009. "Looking into the future I believe that being fiscally responsible now means creating less future debt. The problem that will arise is when taxes collected are consumed by debt service which in turn will create a need for increased taxes, less value and continued long term debt to provide services. Remember, long term debt is just deferred taxes!
This might not be so troublsome if it weren't for all of the fiscal pressures facing other taxing bodies such as, federal, state, county, city, local and school. Defined benefit plans will continue to incur huge costs with which the taxpayer will be held responsible."
I believe that my statements remain viable presently and into the future.
Special interest groups within the municipality should not dictate the future course of Mt. Lebanon and important issues that could consume the assets of the residents and thus affect the municipalities viablity should be put to a vote.
Spend some time seriously thinking about these issues that affect the entire community.
As Milton Friedman once said, "Taxes are not the problem, spending is!"
Matt Kluck
I like the pledge but for one weakness: it overlooks the most important failing in elected representatives: they're human. Humans make mistakes, ignore evidence, and are overly confident in their beliefs. Therefore, I propose these additional items:
It is my duty to recognize that I am wrong more than I think I am.
It is my duty to plan for contingencies and, to the best of my abilities, make my decisions robust to errors in my judgment.
It is my duty not to dismiss but to consider faithfully all evidence that challenges my beliefs about matters of policy, taxation, and governance.
Cheers,
Tom
Matt – Your position statement is why you won the election and it is also why the majority of the community supports your position, as opposed to the vocal minority special interest sports lobby here in Mt. Lebanon. Thank you for your service and your adherence to the guiding principles that you mentioned! We shouldn’t be spending money that we don’t have – period. If folks want amenities like additional soccer fields or high school gymnasiums, then let them pursue their dreams through responsible fundraising. It is unfair to ask all residents to pony up for such a small segment of our population. We don’t have excess dollars burning holes in the tax collector’s pockets! Personally, I think we need a dog park or bike trail, but I am not expecting my neighbors to pay for either of them.
Anonymous, please resubmit your comment about Matt with your name this time.
Elaine
Tom: You raise important points, but I believe they are implicitly, if not explicitly, addressed in The Pledge. I agree with everything you would add, but (1) as I say it is unnecessary, and (2) the point is not to debate how many errors of judgment and failures of democratic process we have seen them make, but to move forward to a better future. I think the effect of such doting on minutiae is only to obscure the main point: local government needs to be clean, open, and honest. I think we agree, so let's not get off point over details. Notwithstanding what I have said, I deeply appreciate your participation in this discussion as you are one of the most thoughtful and committed reformers in town and you have spent at least as many hours as anyone to improve the process. Thank you for your contributions, all of them. Regards.
I want to be the first to thank Matt Kluck for his eloquent restatement of principles, which I also take as an endorsement of the The Policy itself. There is the first elected official to step to the plate, who will be next?
Anonymous, I published your comment about Matt after all. I don't know why you wouldn't want to sign your name to that.
To answer your question that you posed to me again anonymously in a later comment,I am owner of this blog.
Elaine
Steve, the point of making those things explicit is that the can never be explicit enough. Humans suffer from easily-overlooked systematic cognitive biases that predispose them to making, especially in matters far removed from hunting and gathering, decisions that seem well-reasoned but are actually terrible. A person who took your pledge and earnestly tried to stick to it would still make bad decisions while thinking they’re good. My point, then, is that when your decisions are magnified across the entire community, you have a higher responsibility not to make bad decisions, whether they are caused by a failure of fidelity to the public trust or by a failure to compensate for hidden flaws in your reasoning processes. Your original pledge protects against the first kind of failure; my additions, the second. If you want good governance, you need protection from both.
Cheers,
Tom
We have six people running for School Board and so far, we have heard nothing. We have four sitting SB members and not a peep from them. I didn't expect that we would, Steve. When I had asked a question about the way they voted on that 10.5% tax hike of a budget, James Fraasch was the only one to give a sincere answer. Kubit submitted his with all the grammar corrections still in blue. I just republished the Voting Records page on LeboCitizens.com. Remember how they voted before you cast your votes in November.
We have six people running for Commissioner. Nothing from them either. We have heard from Matt Kluck, Dave Brumfield, and Dan Miller on this blog.
Isn't it interesting how people expected me to invite candidates to write in on MY blog while I was campaigning for 3rd Ward Commissioner, but now, nobody wants to say anything in terms of their campaign? 61+ days to go.
agreement to basic non-controversial items of public manners should not require hauling anyone in,,,,if it is too much trouble or if they just don't want to indicate what they think basic standards of officeholder conduct might be, fine...maybe one expects too much from an old-fashioned notion of "public servants" if you say you agree and you say you already comport with such standards, why fuss about saying so publicly...it should be kept in mind the next time anyone who may not agree with them appears in front of them while they roll their eyes or polish their nails or insult those who make the effort to engage in the public discourse--it is small wonder that politicians are held in low repute (it often doesn't even matter if they agree with you, if you are not among the insiders)
Tom: I agree, however, endless editing (we could improve on Jefferson's declaration but would the phrase "develop a perfect union" be more stirring than "to develop a more perfect union?"? My point is, that we need to start somewhere, and "editing" instead of asking for agreement on what is there already is distracting and ultimately undermines any progress at all. The great is the enemy of the good, as always. Let's try to be practical and realistic. Then, I will join you in going to the next milestone. As it is, this back-and-forth will result in nothing being achieved, which I know is not your purpose. One good thing from this very public discussion is that it shows how people can respectfully, but without caving in, disagree on matters of strategy and tactics without tearing each other down and without abandoning belief. I, for one, would welcome any expression of agreement on the basics from any officeholder or candidate, such as we saw from Matt Kluck, put in their own words is even better than agreeing to any formulation you or I might come up with. The thing is to get elected officials and candidates for public office to acknowledge the harm that has been done in this community by past abuses of authority and get them to find their own cleaner, better way forward on behalf of all of us. This discussion should include more voices of those who seek the power. The outsider reformers seem to be the only ones who want to chime in (save for Matt, so far).
Post a Comment