Last Wednesday night I attended a meeting of the Queen Anne Community Council to listen to concerns about the closure of the community center gym and game room. (I am Queen Anne resident and chaired the Community Council in the late 1980s.)
When I was explaining how the Council would wrestle with the many hard budget choices we face, I made a statement about how the reduction in community center hours, the loss of the gym and game room and closure of programs in other centers would negatively impact certain neighborhoods. Then I made a mistake. I commented that the centers impacted by the Mayor’s recommendations were mostly in the north end of the city and then suggested the Mayor was “daring the Council to restore the funding for these centers”. I regret those words.
I know that my statement may easily be read as doing exactly what I was criticizing the Mayor for doing—artificially dividing our city. After reflecting upon my remarks Wednesday night, I’ve come to realize my quick and unthoughtful statement represents what I dislike about so much of our public discourse today. I assigned ulterior motives to the Mayor and I apologize for that.
It is far better to engage in a dialogue that focuses on facts, shared goals and the common good. I try to hold myself to this higher standard. Yes, the City faces difficult choices and we will have spirited debates over policy. That is a very good thing. But this episode has reminded me again that our words and how we frame these debates matters a lot.