Elected officials (school, library, village and park district boards, etc.) volunteer time and talent to the residents of Glen Ellyn. Recently, many of them have been "called out" to respond on this board. This can be a sensitive area for a number of reasons. What is the appropriate way for them to communicate with posters on important issues facing the community?

Question:
When an elected official reads concerns of a resident(s) on the GEBB, how should they respond?

Choices:
In a GEBB post using real name
In a GEBB post using BB name
Individually and directly to the poster(s) if s/he knows them
At a public meeting when his/her board peers are present
Not at all until a consensus is reached by her/his board
None of the above, other:

 

I kinda responded to this in the "crime" thread before I saw this poll. I think each individual should feel free to choose when, if, and how they respond to bulletin board queries, and that they might make different choices depending on the specific query.

I do think that most officials are missing an opportunity by not at least appearing on the boards, even if doing nothing more than saying, "I read this, but will respond in the course of my official duties to the extent appropriate." It certainly does not surprise me that they might be hesitant to compose "position statements" that will be preserved for all time, simply because someone asks a question on a bulletin board.

I do think that 100% of the time elected officials should promptly respond to private inquiries made by identified constituents via e-mail, telephone, or mail.

A good poll question. I don't have time right now to respond as completely as possible. But, I'll say the following:

There have been discussion threads that I wanted to respond to but they included shots at other Board members. If I respond to the meat of the question and ignore the "shot", am I climbing into the gutter? Am I condoning the inappropriate post by even appearing in the thread? If I call out the post as out of line, will I be forced to do so every time someone takes a shot at the Board/District? And will that just move the discussion off-topic? I've been around Internet message boards and newsgroups long enough to realize that few people want a policeman, and even fewer want to be a policeman.

Thus far, I've taken the tack of just not responding as 'Bob Solak' in threads that have ugliness. The best way to get a response is to pretend we're in a public meeting and word questions/comments appropriately.

I also need to point out that there are some things that I can't talk publicly about. There are the obvious things - closed session issues. But there are also matters that have yet to be discussed by the Board or have been discussed but there is not a definitive answer yet.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
The argument that it is foreever memorialized is a bush league excuse in my opinion. Why should this be any different than an e-mail, call or conversation with a resident....you know, things that elected officials should be doing (and, in my experience, to their credit, do).

Is this a lawyer speaking, asking why someone might not want to respond publicly and in writing to an anonymous inquiry?

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Solak:
Thus far, I've taken the tack of just not responding as 'Bob Solak' in threads that have ugliness. The best way to get a response is to pretend we're in a public meeting and word questions/comments appropriately.

I also need to point out that there are some things that I can't talk publicly about.

Very good response, Bob.

Glad I voted for you.

He gave the courtesy of a reply, which is why I voted for him as well. At least we know he's thinking about these issues and not merely writing them off as the ramblings of fringe lunatics.

If they all thought like Bob, well, think about the possibilities.