Zealots always blame the process when they dislike the conclusion

Opinion

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

I'm compelled to respond to Christine Vernon's letter to the editor published in the Oct. 12 edition of Wednesday Journal [Downtown superblock riddled with conflicts]. Ms. Vernon is as characteristically critical of the Sub-Area Steering Committee process as she was of the Crandall-Arambula process. This in spite of the fact that each process was different and unique in its conceptualization and implementation. Each drew from vastly different constituencies. Each offered completely open access to any citizen who wanted to express opinions or propose plans. Each was influenced by citizen input via personal testimony, letters to the editor, e-mails, surveys, phone calls, and occasionally accosting public officials, committee members and other citizens after public meetings were adjourned.

Notwithstanding all of this input and unrestricted access for citizens who truly desired to use their voice, the conclusions of these two very differently designed processes are strikingly similar in their overall directions and recommendations?#34;outcomes Ms. Vernon doesn't like. So she blames the process.

Zealots by definition are simply incapable of believing that everyone else doesn't believe as they do, and that awful discovery allows for only one conclusion?#34;everyone else must be wrong.

Jim Kelly
Oak Park

Reader Comments

No Comments - Add Your Comment

Comment Policy