Mueller Lake Park Outdoor Amphitheater
Supports Open Government, Not 'Page Two'
RECEIVED Tue., April 11, 2006
Dear Editor,
I just read Louis Black's anti-SOS, anti-Prop. 2 rant twice, desperately searching for meaning [“Page Two,” April 7]. First Black tells us that Prop. 2 will result in a process that is "only 'open' on one side.” That's OK, Louis, the government is inherently more powerful than any private entity it might be negotiating with; I'd prefer that my government deal openly and fairly with everyone. Next he informs us that this will cripple the city's ability to negotiate without explaining how or why; apparently the government can't function without secrets and backroom deals! Next he tells us that "it is no longer important what you say.” No, Louis, what you say is important, and I'd like my government to both do what they say and say what they do, which is why I support open government. Next Black goes off on a long anti-SOS rant, referring to them as "monomaniacal" and having an attitude which "contains the contaminated seeds of an anti-democratic fascism.” Then he decries name-calling, character assassination, and casting aspersions. Hmmm, OK. Along the way he implies that realpolitik is more important than integrity and that paving over the aquifer "serve[s] the whole community" at the expense of one special interest group. The latter is news to me, and no, Louis, maintaining one's integrity is considerably more important than being able to cut a deal. Since I want my government to act with integrity at all times, I support open government. Finally Black again warns us that Prop. 2 will "fatally cripple" the city's ability to function with nary a hint as to why this would be. Black's diatribe is so vehement and yet so devoid of content, one must wonder if this editorial is some kind of payback for the special treatment SXSW, which is a great thing but still Black's private business, got from the city this year. I guess we'll never know because we don't (yet) have open government!
I just read Louis Black's anti-SOS, anti-Prop. 2 rant twice, desperately searching for meaning [“Page Two,” April 7]. First Black tells us that Prop. 2 will result in a process that is "only 'open' on one side.” That's OK, Louis, the government is inherently more powerful than any private entity it might be negotiating with; I'd prefer that my government deal openly and fairly with everyone. Next he informs us that this will cripple the city's ability to negotiate without explaining how or why; apparently the government can't function without secrets and backroom deals! Next he tells us that "it is no longer important what you say.” No, Louis, what you say is important, and I'd like my government to both do what they say and say what they do, which is why I support open government. Next Black goes off on a long anti-SOS rant, referring to them as "monomaniacal" and having an attitude which "contains the contaminated seeds of an anti-democratic fascism.” Then he decries name-calling, character assassination, and casting aspersions. Hmmm, OK. Along the way he implies that realpolitik is more important than integrity and that paving over the aquifer "serve[s] the whole community" at the expense of one special interest group. The latter is news to me, and no, Louis, maintaining one's integrity is considerably more important than being able to cut a deal. Since I want my government to act with integrity at all times, I support open government. Finally Black again warns us that Prop. 2 will "fatally cripple" the city's ability to function with nary a hint as to why this would be. Black's diatribe is so vehement and yet so devoid of content, one must wonder if this editorial is some kind of payback for the special treatment SXSW, which is a great thing but still Black's private business, got from the city this year. I guess we'll never know because we don't (yet) have open government!
Patrick Goetz
[Louis Black responds: If I disagree with SOS, then of course I must be operating from corrupt motives. Great call, Patrick, you are certainly not slinging mud there! But rest assured, at least once and possibly twice the Austin American-Statesman filed open-record requests with the city for all transactions with SXSW. Because there is nothing to find there, they found nothing. Maybe, just maybe, I think that is a badly written, unclear proposition that will do more harm than good. Nah, you're right, I'm being paid off. But I'm open for higher bids.]
