[NOTE: This post is UPDATED. See below.]
As one reader emailed me, channeling Monty Python: "the trash issue is dead, deceased, is no more and ceases to be . . . it is X-Trash!" Last night, at the Mayor and Council meeting, the leaders of Our Fair City took up the question of how often -- and how -- our trash would be picked up.
I will cut to the chase: After debate, the Mayor and Council voted to retain the trash collection decision from last term, but to reduce the frequency to once per week. (In other words, it will be semi-automated, single stream.)
The votes were: Mayor Hoffmann and Council Members Britton and Gajewski in favor; Council Members Marcuccio and Robbins opposed.
(In the interest of transparency, you should know I favor once-per-week pickup and always have. But, I do not care deeply about the issue.)
They also voted to do away with the standing Refuse and Recycling Commission, but to replace it with a time-limited task force which would exist for 12 months with the possibility of that term being renewed. Rockville Central contributor Mark Pierzchala, who was there, writes that "This was done in two votes. First for abolishing the commission, it was, I believe 3 to 1 to 1, to abolish with Gajewski, Britton, and Hoffman voting to abolish, Marcuccio against, and Robbins abstaining. As for replacing it with a Task Force, it was 4 to 1 in favor, with Gajewski voting no. By that point Marcuccio voted for the Task Force because the commission had just been abolished."
There are citizens who are pleased with this outcome, as well as others who are not. This is no surprise. What is a pleasant surprise, however, is the civility and grace (between Council members) with which this decision was reached.
Gone were the fuming comments and smoldering looks between council members that characterized the previous trash-related meetings of the previous Mayor and Council. In their place, at least when it came to the debate at hand, was respect and thoughtfulness.
Rockville Central contributor Joe Jordan, who was hoping for a twice-weekly outcome, wrote in praise:
"I want to commend you [Mayor Hoffmann] for how you handled this evening's meeting. While I obviously was on the side of the minority vote, your leadership and calm manner kept things civil and fair."
Joe went on to say in his note:
"It should be noted how Councilwomen Marcuccio and Robbins comported themselves during the discussion periods. They each exhibited style and dignity in explaining how they would support what they knew would be a reversal to what they had voted for and approved earlier this year."
Mark Pierzchala echoed these sentiments in a note to me:
"Even though there was heartfelt disagreement, everyone was nice about it. . . . [Marcuccio's and Robbins' vowing to] support the decision (they said this before the vote). . . was an example of the civility even though they both disagreed with the eventual decision."
After a meeting like this, the real test is whether it is possible to move on and get back to business. Especially as it relates to folks who did not get the outcome they wanted: Can they live with it? In this case, I have some optimism -- but just some. As Joe Jordan, who is president of the
Newmark Commons Home Owners Association, wrote in an email:
"Now that it is over, I will do what I can to support the new system and help get buy-in from the residents of New Mark Commons. We were early in expressing our concerns as to how the proposed system would present problems with the townhouse sections of the community. Craig [Simoneau] and Scott [Ullery] did promise they would consider our concerns, and Scott did a walk through months ago, and agreed we had legitimate issues. I am now confident we can work out a solution that will be a win-win for the city and for New Mark."
Why just "some" optimism, given this? Because the civility that was extended between Council members was not universally extended to the citizens attending the meeting.
Rockville Central contributor Rich Gottfried, who made a number of fiscal suggestions and spoke against once-weekly pickup at the Citizen's Forum that kicked off the Mayor and Council meeting [UPDATE: he didn't speak against once-weekly pickup, he spoke in favor of more study -- my mistake], was subject to a critical response to his statement that (in my opinion) is ill befitting an official meeting. After his presentation, Council Member Gajewski told him he was unfairly criticizing staff, made a joke about how the usually fiscally conservative Gottfried was seemingly suggesting the City spend more money, and went on to point out that Gottfried (who ran as a candidate for City Council) finished well behind others who also were not successful, and that (according to my notes from watching the video) "Your views have been heard . . . and found wanting". The tone was that of a candidate in a debate, taking a jab at an opponent.
[UPDATE: An earlier version characterized the comment above as holding that minority views don't deserve a hearing. My apologies.]
This response has rightly (to my mind) generated emotions far disproportionate to its length, which was quite brief. City PAC
Real Rockville's incoming president,
Judy Miller, said Gajewski's comments were an "outrageous . . . show of intemperance. . . . Citizens cannot be subjected to such at citizens forum."
Council Member Gajewski commented that, while "some may have found my comments uncivil, I did not think they were."
Anyone who knows me knows I am highly sympathetic to how hard it is to be an elected official, and that citizens by and large would do well to give officials a little more "room" when it comes to making decisions -- room to be wrong, room to change minds, room for positions to evolve. I often disagree with positions Real Rockville takes, and I am skeptical of the suspicions many citizens seem to have of elected officials. Some have suggested that I am overly soft on people who are in office.
However, in this case, I am afraid I must side with those who are critical of this exchange. Citizens' Forum is the time set aside by the Mayor and Council to hear the views of citizens -- including perspectives with which they might not agree. It needs to be a safe space for citizens. Campaign time is over. It is telling that all other members simply chose to thank certain citizens for speaking up, even in cases where clearly there was disagreement over policy. It is equally telling that Mayor Hoffmann went out of her way to invite far more citizens to speak than had previously signed up. She bent over backwards, it seemed, to allow all a voice
-- including a number of former candidates.
In this space that should be safe, Richard Gottfried, a private citizen, did not deserve criticism from the dais for airing his views.
And he most assuredly did not deserve ridicule.
[UPDATE:
This is not the first time I have criticized officials for their treatment of citizens.]
(Images: CollegeRecruiter.com and Celine's Original Graphics.)
Article continues.
Click to expand and read more...
Click for summary only...
Austin Grill 
One thing that makes my 