Letter: A Healthy Democracy Requires Critical Public Engagement
Photo: Sierra Club
The recent opinion piece published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette by Amherst resident and Jones Library trustee Farah Ameen began with the writer’s recollection of having “watched with horror as political unrest unfolded in Bangladesh…more than 500 people were killed and numerous others were injured…the youth stepped up to make change…and to sacrifice.” Ameen cried when she heard that Hasina resigned and fled the country, then stated, “Joy Bangla! We have hope again.” All well and good, right?
The writer then went on to state that while processing this news she, “…felt hopeless observing events unfold in Amherst over the Jones Library expansion/renovation project”. Head snap! What? How, in the name, I wondered, was it possible that a deadly uprising in Bangladesh could prompt any segue to a local, New England town’s debate over the expansion of a library, or one feeling hopeless regarding it.
Now, I don’t know Ameen, but neither does she know me. Yet, she labels me and any others working to “make change” regarding the current Jones Library plan as “spreading misinformation; attending meetings solely to criticize the project;” as abusive, disrespectful, selfish and more; she amazes me with her ability to know the hearts and minds of many she has never even met. She vilifies us for being “first-world” privileged while she champions a plan, the cost of which will likely result in higher taxes and jeopardize future funding for many basic services town-wide. In one breath Ameen speaks of existential threats around the world, transitioning from one in Bangladesh to lauding a drastic, huge and very expensive rebuild of a library that remains serviceable and is routinely in use.
With all due respect to Ameen, I find her sanctimonious posturing a bit rich. She denigrates those willing to spend countless hours researching local issues of serious concern to them, assuming they do this solely because they are out to do no good because, surely, they are persons of no good. There is so much more to unpack in Ameen’s venom-laced tirade. Most jarring, however, is her clear contempt for those who believe that it is their right under a democracy to question authority and put their own well-reasoned and fact-supported opinions forward. Sadly, as has become routine from those in power, Ameen makes statements as fact while offering no proof to support them. For example, regarding an alternative lower-cost plan utilizing the current size of the Jones Library that many opponents would prefer, she writes, “In fact, unofficial estimates put the number for repairs/Plan B closer to $20 million”. Yet, there is no “fact” in “unofficial estimates” and, despite repeated requests to do so, no library plan proponent has produced any current official estimates.
In closing, I would suggest that town officials, elected or appointed in service to the community, should conduct themselves professionally and with respect for all residents. Given Ameen’s public display of self-righteous hypocrisy, she has failed at both.
Rita Burke
Rita Burke is a resident of Amherst.
The week after Ameen’s opinion piece appeared, the Gazette ran a guest column by her husband, former trustee Jon McCabe. It was headlined “NIMBY obstruction threatens public good” and accompanied by the pull-quote, “Our experience in Amherst is all too common across the country. At the national and local levels we see political actors (elected or self-elected) attempting to undercut democratic processes.”
As you might surmise, this piece is laced with non sequiturs and lacking in factual support.
C’mon Gazette editors, you can do better!
Did the guest columnist miss this concept in high school (it was observed by a young French fellow when he visited America nearly two centuries ago, but the idea is even older)?
https://edsitement.neh.gov/curricula/alexis-de-tocqueville-tyranny-majority
Ironically, the source of the educational message above — a message which seems to have been seriously misunderstood by the guest columnist — and the source of a pending award for this project are one and the same! Would it be any surprise if the failure to understand a concept so obviously near and dear to funding agency were to preclude future funding from that agency?
And did the guest columnist miss an elementary math class (assuming that same columnist ever believed — or still believes— that the state will cover half the cost for this project)?
https://www.masslive.com/news/2016/07/jones_library_trustee_frustrat.html
But thanks anyway for the $18.56 contribution: after adding accumulated interest, it may eventually cover the other half — after* a few billion years!
[*assuming simple interest at current bank rates on a savings account with such a low initial balance —and hoping that no service fees will ever be charged by the bank for an account ….]
The whole point of the new form of government was to silence the pesky Town Meeting opposition that has kept developers, and other large players in town (who are supported by the Amherst Forward PAC) from having completely free rein to do whatever the hell they want to do. Thank the Lord for the Indy. It has given residents a voice when they would otherwise be silenced. A respectful, open and transparent government would not call its residents “naysayers” or “obstructionists”.
I could write a book about it but suffice it to say that this town government eschews public participation. Thanks also to those councilors who understand this and work against it.
Here.. here Darcy!
I am told that the downtown design meetings were more of same. I hope it’s not true.
Sometimes I can’t help but see the irony in what I read (from reputable sources, fact checked by the likes of Snopes) between what has been happening at the national level in the US and what I never thought would happen in Amherst. But, it’s there. It just jumps out at me and I play the-substitute here or-fill in the blank game. Voila!
Taken from Friday’s “Letters from an American” by historian Heather Cox Richardson.
“Controlling the country (substitute Town) through the courts (substitute Town Council) was the plan behind stacking the courts (substitute town Council) with Republican (substitute Amherst Forward) nominees and weaponizing the filibuster (substitute Master Plan) to stop Democrats (substitute others) from…(fill in the blank).
…McConnell (insert any name of an architect of Amherst Forward)…realized you don’t need to win elections to enact Republican (substitute their) policy. You don’t need to change hearts and minds. You don’t need to push ballot initiatives or win over the views of the people. All you have to do is stack the courts (substitute town council)…and they will enact policies that could never pass through the democratic process. And those policies will be bulletproof, because they will be called law”.