The mayor’s battle against an informed public continues

A frustrating part of the newspaper business is that nobody seems to understand how journalism really works. There’s an unwritten rule — presumably taught in journalism school — that all newspapers are bound by a collection of ethics and principals that are universal.
Sadly, that is not the case, though many continue to give this myth life. It’s not our job to be impartial, and if you think it is you probably learned how newspapers work by reading Superman comics (not that there’s anything wrong with that.) The media is bias incarnate, and you can read it in our every motion, from where we place stories, how we choose photos, what information we choose to include and exclude, etc.
Our readership does not expect us to take sides, yet turns to us constantly to correct social ills. Trying to live my life between those extremes of ideals will probably rob me of my sanity, but it will be a heck of a ride.
Which brings me to this week’s subject — Pageland Town Council. Long-time readers can probably figure out where this is headed, but don’t quit on me now. Apathy is the lifeblood of cynicism, and cynicism is poison to a community.
Tuesday, Feb. 5, at 7 p.m., Pageland Town Council will meet to discuss one of the most useless ordinances ever put to paper. Quietly labeled “Ordinance 302,” it is identified in the public agenda as a policy amendment to “Meetings of Town Council.”
But the text of the proposed ordinance is not limited to town council meetings. Tacked to the end of the document is a proposal to reverse last year’s decision to change Pageland’s election method from plurality to majority. In short, town council voted to require all elected officials to win their elections by a majority vote of 51 percent. If nobody in an election captures the majority vote, a run-off election is held for the top two candidates. That way the winning candidate has a clear mandate.
In previous years, though, candidates did not need to win a majority of the vote to win office. If the leading candidate had 33 percent of the vote, they would be sworn into office. No run off would be held.
The town submitted a request to the U.S. Justice Department last year to change the election method from plurality to majority. Now, less than a year later, Mayor Carroll Faile wants to submit a request to change it back. Why? Faile doesn’t like to lose. He was against this the change to begin with, just as he has opposed every suggestion made by people who occasionally disagree with him.

Also part of this ordinance is a reversal of another reform approved 4-3 last year. Currently, town council members receive the agenda for public meetings four days prior to the Tuesday meeting. Ordinance 302 would revert this system back to making the agenda available to the general public, as well as town council members, a mere 24 hours prior to the meeting. By the time your elected officials get a chance to read the agenda it is already too late to make corrections.
Returning councilman Shane Hancock will be the swing vote on this ordinance. He’s going to be under a lot of pressure from all sides, not the least of which is this newspaper, to make the right decision. I asked Hancock and former councilman Tommy Rivers about meeting reforms prior to last year’s election. The question was about the changes that allowed individual council members the right to add items to the agenda. He was agreeable to the change and had a firm grasp on the subject. He also added this:

“If it’s affecting a certain part of the town, it’s affecting the whole town.”

Faile defends this move by saying in the ordinance that 24 hours is “required” by the Freedom of Information Act. The law requires 24 hours for public notice, which is the least our elected officials are required to do; the town is not legally bound to withhold this information until the last minute. This change not only limits the ability of your individual council members to make decisions, it limits your ability to find out what your government is doing. Our mayor likes to make his decisions behind closed doors. If you doubt that Faile prefers an ignorant populace, then explain this: why is an effort to change the town’s election policy buried in an ordinance labeled “Meetings of Town Council?”

— Wallace McBride,
editor