Times have never been harder for those who wish to know what's going on in Inglewood. Lately, city hall treats one's desire to be informed as though it was an act of subversion. If that person also happens to be on the council they are called a trouble-maker and branded a traitor! But regardless of whether it's a concerned citizen or a dissenting councilperson, our current administration's policy on information is... the less the people know, the better.
Once the Daily Breeze was discouraged from providing on-going coverage of Inglewood activities (in late 1997), the current administration, headed by Mayor Dorn, eventually succeeded in achieving an information blackout that can be likened to the former iron-curtain that choked Eastern Europe!
First, the dismissal of the press—next the shrinking of the public's window of opportunity to observe their government in action by changing the council-meetings from 7:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. This time change (which was not voted on by the council) reduced the attendance at council meetings from an average of 30 to 40, to a paltry 5 to 8 hearty souls who are generally bolstered by a dozen or more City staffers pulled from their jobs to paper the audience.
Then worse still, the administration stopped videotaping the council meetings for broadcast on cable television Channel 35. The City’s stated reason is “due to technical limitations” (no mounted cameras) “…the televising of council meetings will be stopped until further notice.” However, for the last nine years any meeting of the council that was held on the 1st floor was videotaped using portable cameras loaned by AT&T Broadband. The same offer still applies but administration has made a conscious decision to refuse to pick up the cameras. The City’s contracted video operator is still being paid, but now she sits at a new audio control board where she turns the microphones on and off on those wanting to speak—at the direction of Mayor Dorn.
Thus, the iron-curtain is now in full effect. Inglewood City government is under a news-blackout that would please most third-world dictators!
Unfortunately, there are some Inglewood citizens who don't much care about not having televised council sessions. They might even say, "What's the big deal? Most of the council meetings are consumed with arguments anyway, and Mayor Dorn will always tell us what we need to know!"
Now, this trust-our-leaders-type of indifference may be the standard mindset in a number of third-world countries but none will dare argue that it's a hallmark for being a responsible American. Americans DO NOT empower other Americans to deprive them of their right to know!
A case in point is the current controversy surrounding the redistricting plan (reapportionment) mandated every ten years by state and federal laws. Politically speaking, choosing the boundaries that determine WHO GETS TO VOTE ALONG WITH WHO and FOR WHO, is probably THE-MOTHER-OF-ALL-POLITICAL-ACTS that can take place in Inglewood. It is called that because it is the basis for all elections that will take place in the City for the next decade. However, once again, the current administration felt it was in the "best interest of the city" to DE-POLITICIZE this primary function. So, the task was assigned to the city clerk (no one knows by whom—it should have been done by a vote of the city council) and the procedure was kept hidden from the public until ten days before the "plan" was to be ratified by the council.
And right on cue, the council-majority applauded the results and joined a half dozen citizens at the hearing who agreed that the city clerk's redistribution plan seemed as fair as one person could possible make it. Lost among the compliments was the fact that a government of, for, and by the people should never be subjected to the judgment of a single individual. In a one-person, one-vote democracy, determining WHO gets to vote, WHERE and among WHOM, is a fundamental decision that must be left in the hands of the people through the open discourse of all their elected officials. (If it wasn't for the careful, controlled, gerrymandered districts in Southern California, we would have been deprived of many capable and talented minority officials over the last thirty plus years.)
So, if our officials in Washington—who face the same ten year redistricting requirements—can do their business in public... and if our officials in Sacramento can also do their redistricting in public... then the residents of Inglewood should accept no less.