Elissa Yount sent the following letter to her fellow City Council members, as well as the media, on Tuesday:
For months I have requested that the auditor come before the City Council to address and answer questions on the 2004 audit, as has been the practice of the city. This request has been resisted. There now is a proposal that I meet apart from the council with the auditor and a representative from the Local Government Commission, which is a part of the state treasurer’s office, to have questions addressed. This is unacceptable, and I have asked that this be put on the agenda for Monday. While we know the demands on the City Council are heavy and likely to increase, we also must admit that the issues facing Henderson are larger and more demanding than the financial problems presented in the audit.
The real concern, the pivotal issue, the pinnacle, has to do with whether our city government follows policies and law. The significant and serious aspect of addressing this issue is surely worth our concentration and time. Why? Because not following policy and law endangers the very governing of our city and endangers democracy.
Predigested opinions and predetermined conclusions take away this council’s independence and judgment. If in our governing of Henderson we base actions on expediency rather than on our policies and laws, then we are doing wrong. When there are those who try to tell you what to think and what to believe, and when there are those who do things in your name without consulting anyone, you need to ask yourself, “What example of fairness and democracy are they setting?”
I do not think the people on the council who disagree with me are evil, malicious or disloyal. But I do believe we all can be wrong at times. I also believe I should say what I think is right. If you label me uncooperative and uninformed, so be it; but you need to know that I am just doing the best I know how for the people of Henderson when I say what I see. It is up to the voters to decide who is wrong.
Things are tough in Henderson. We have serious budget concerns, we have blighted neighborhoods, we have unhappy city workers, we have aging infrastructure, and we have crime. We can’t use the Embassy project as the catchall of all our troubles. But certainly mistakes have been made there as well as other places. We must face these and other mistakes, and only then can we correct them.
How do we go about this? We need to start with a full disclosure and continue with a fuller exchange of information and ideas. The resulting information will give both the council and the citizens something of a mutual advantage. The people of Henderson have the right to know what is done in their name. They have the right to judge what is done in their name. They have the right to determine if we retreat from policies or laws.
Representative government should mean the same thing in all circles of Henderson, and if representative government is to survive, the citizens have to have the facts, and with these facts, they will decide Henderson’s future. The Henderson City Council must see to it that the facts and situations are explained as fairly as possible so citizens can weigh and judge for themselves. We can’t just tell “our version” of the story. The degree to which the voters of Henderson analyze the significance of this council’s actions, in the light of all known facts, will empower them in the running of their government, and we must never forget it is their government.
I can only give my opinions about what I perceive. I have faith that the people in Henderson are quite capable of drawing their own conclusions. They are not ill-informed, and they know there are no easy, ready-made answers to our problems. They also know we cannot return to business as usual. There is a residue of mistrust that has fallen on city government, and if we are not spurred to solutions, then this residue will stifle and eventually suffocate us.
This City Council has no time to consider personal pride, power, profit or prestige. We have no time to be indecisive. We can’t say we’re going to take a serious view of our problems or speak a language of confidence while really hoping that the people in Henderson will snooze or forget.
Folks in Henderson are not snoozing, and they are not forgetting. They want a full accounting of what is done in their name. They realize that without a new way of doing business, the anxious fears concerning the future of Henderson will not be removed. It is this council’s job to remove that fear.
I am not so naïve as to think we are going to achieve complete unity or unfailing cooperation or unquestioning enthusiasm for a new way to do business. But I do know there are two reasons for doing a thing: one that sounds good, and the real one. If the real reason for doing business in a new way is to protect the independence, judgment and reliability of the policies and laws of Henderson, then we are all the better for it, and democracy will win.
If our City Council wants to see good accomplished, if we want to be useful and helpful to all the people of Henderson, and I believe we all do, and if we want to show strength enough to overcome the difficulties facing our good town, then we have got to: first, face what has happened; then, disclose it fully; and, finally, take corrective action and work until all our difficulties are overcome.
It may individually affect our credibility, our election prospects and our job satisfaction as council members. That would be a small price to pay to regain the people’s confidence in Henderson’s government. The future of Henderson, not the past, is at stake.