Henry Smorynski, Sartell
We live in an age of apathy and indifference about so many things that truly matter. One thing that really matters that is slipping away in the United States is a commitment to democratic practice in our elected officials. Accountability to voters and concern for citizens in general is becoming less common among legislatures, regulatory bodies and elected officials. The Sartell City Council in recent years has demonstrated this declining practice and commitment in their meetings, decisions and public communications.
I would like to suggest several changes to dramatically increase democratic processes, public accountability for actions and communications transparency. First, instead of the current practice of public comments at the beginning of council meetings of up to five citizens with no council response, the practice should change to be like the British Question Period. At each meeting, have the opportunity for citizens questioning the council, its members and its actions and then require recorded responses during the council meeting.
A second improvement would be quarterly meetings of the mayor with residents to explain and defend city decisions. This is a practice of Mayor Dave Kleis of St. Cloud. It should be a practice of Sartell’s mayor as well to increase accountability and communications.
Third, the council should require public hearings for all matters involving expenditures of more than $1 million. These large investments of taxpayer money would be better served than the current practice of only holding required and well-advertised public hearings when either the state law requires them (for example bonding issues) or when the council wants to do so without any consideration of the magnitude of consequences to the citizenry of Sartell in both services and future taxes.
Finally, in a city that continues to grow rapidly, it’s important to be required to solicit public input via a community survey at least once every three years. This survey would ask residents to comment on city actions taken in the previous three years involving significant expenditures and/or changes in services. It would also ask residents to weigh in on services they want changed or enhanced, and provide an opportunity to comment on planned city actions in the coming years.
These four practice changes would make elections more meaningful. They would constrain city actions that are inconsistent with public desires and demands, and they would enhance communications in the city in the best interest of the public welfare.