Still Not Time For In-Person Meetings
by Bill Gouveia for the Sun Chronicle
Recently this fine newspaper ran an editorial stating it is time for the larger local public boards and committees to hold public meetings in person again, allowing citizens to attend.
With all due respect — this is shortsighted, irresponsible and wrong. It would unnecessarily expose both the public and the volunteer officials to a serious health risk for little reason or gain.
As a citizen, former local official, and newspaper columnist I look forward to all meetings once again being held in person with people in the seats. I agree with the editorial when it says “This is important business, after all, the public’s business. It needs to be conducted in public.”
But in fact, it HAS been conducted in public throughout the pandemic. Boards and committees have conducted their meetings via Zoom and other internet-based applications, so people have been able to both watch and participate. In some ways this has allowed more participation and access than available before.
The public’s business has been conducted in public, and inferring it has not is again just wrong.
Yes, technology remains a challenge for many citizens, including the elderly. The need to have quality sound and video is crucial. Teaching folks the proper use of the mute button can be a challenge. And not everyone has access to a computer and the internet.
But it certainly is a valid and proper substitute for exposing people to a virus that continues to kill close to 1,000 Americans each day. An elderly individual struggling with the mute button is much preferable to an elderly individual struggling with a ventilator.
And using the excuse that “If it is safe to go shopping and dining, it is certainly safe for a committee to gather, especially in larger meeting rooms” doesn’t hold up either. Going to a store or a restaurant is generally a short trip. There is no sharing of microphones, no public speaking to many individuals. It is also much more of a necessity.
What do you gain with in-person meetings that makes it worth the risk of spreading the virus? If you have to limit the number of attendees, who decides who can attend and who has to leave? Other than the ability to look your officials in the eye — which I am not at all discounting — what is it about a live meeting during a pandemic that justifies this danger?
The editorial also praises the Brockton City Council, which has resumed in-person meetings, as a “champion of government transparency in the coronavirus era.” But it offers no reason why other bodies are somehow not deemed transparent.
Meetings are not being held on Zoom to avoid transparency. All the actions and votes of the public boards are still conducted in the open, with the public and the press watching. They are transparent, and any inference to the contrary is again just wrong.
Getting back to in-person meetings is important. We should do so — when the number of daily infections gets to a safe level. Let the government achieve that first, and then bring back the live audiences.
Meanwhile we can continue to celebrate that government — like newspapers — continues to encourage opposing viewpoints.
Bill Gouveia is a Sun Chronicle columnist and longtime local official. Reach him at billsinsidelook@gmail.com; follow him @Billinsidelook.
