Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

* Press release…

The Illinois Municipal League (IML) announced a Civility Pledge at its Spring Board of Directors meeting. The pledge seeks to restore civility in local governments, encourage productive dialogue and build public trust in all of Illinois’ 1,295 cities, villages and towns.

A growing need for civility has become more relevant and significant at all levels of government, but especially at the local level. Residents and elected officials are often faced with challenging and complex issues that can spark strong emotions and create conflict. Adopting the pledge and putting civility at the forefront provides a foundation for effective community conversations.

The pledge reads, “In the interest of civility, I pledge to promote civility by listening, being respectful of others, acknowledging that we are all striving to support and improve our community and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective.”

“Even in these times of political disagreement, we believe in finding common ground and engaging in civil discussions about community issues that are important to everyone,” said IML President, Village President Catherine M. Adduci, Village of River Forest. “The Civility Pledge is a reminder for all municipal officials and constituents to work together in the pursuit of understanding the points of view of others.”

This assumes, of course, that all the folks elected are actually interested in improving their communities.

* The Question: Worthwhile endeavor or not? Explain.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:13 pm

Comments

IMO, Worthwhile and needed.

Civil Discourse at every level of government has broken down. We have too many people in office that are entertainers first, and public servants second. They live to throw verbal bombs and make statements they think will get them social or mainstream media coverage.

Time for the adults to teach the children how to debate and discuss like adults.

Comment by Give Me A Break Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:17 pm
why not, it will only get worse if we don’t try. obligation of public officials to take ethics tests, FOIA obligations if I recall correctly, required even for those in non paying appointed positions on boards and commissions. require that this kind of pledge be read and acknowledged by e signature.

Comment by Amalia Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:21 pm
Not particularly worthwhile. It is far more often that the various employees and elected officials of local government are on the receiving end of incivility. I’m not really sure what implying local government officials are at fault for not listening enough to people baselessly accusing them of corruption accomplishes.

Comment by Nuke The Whales Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:28 pm
To the QOTD, specific to this;

=== “In the interest of civility, I pledge to promote civility by listening, being respectful of others, acknowledging that we are all striving to support and improve our community and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective.”===

Is it worthwhile, of course.

Here’s the rub, for me

This lil thing…

“…understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective.”

That. Right there.

Facts are facts. We all have different ideas to solve issues, everyone has an idea. It’s facts that are the “wild card” now.

If all sides agree to the facts of the discussion, I’d be the first to congratulate and tout.

If this is some sort of phony way to allow “alternative fact” in the attempts to honest policy discussion because one “opinion” is that “libraries are bad” or whatever municipal law or ordinance is now up for some curbing because of the cover of a “different opinion”… yeah, I may look at this innocuous pledge a bit differently.

I don’t want to look at it differently, but let’s see it in context as a tool for “discussion”

I want to be for it. I hope it works that way.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:28 pm
I think it is a nice idea, but not worthwhile as the folks that it is targeting will dismiss the concept of “civility” as some woke nonsense like “equity”.

Comment by Henry Francis Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:33 pm
IML does good work. Their memos/reports often clarify opaque regulation/legislation. For example, their memo on what the newest SEI report really requires is a lifesaver for elected officials. I say good for them coming up with the Civility Pledge.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:36 pm
== we are all striving to support and improve our community and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective. ==

The problem is when people disagree on what that objective looks like. For example my idea of improving my community does not involve demonizing minorities or the LGBTQ+ communities. An improved community should allow all people to safely live their own lives without being harassed by those who wish them harm. Some other people’s ideas of how to improve the community is that those same minorities just cease to exist.

Not sure how to be civil with that second group without implicitly giving legitimacy to their objective.

Comment by Homebody Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:42 pm
Gee, that’s nice.

The penalties for violating said pledge?

If we have to start taking a pledge in order to treat one another with civility, we are doomed.

Comment by Flyin'Elvis'-Utah Chapter Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:43 pm
Noble intention? Yes. Worthwhile? Probably not. The one thing I’ve learned from many years of attending many different villages’ board meetings is this: The people who show up are rarely there to talk about what a good job their electeds are doing. They’re there to complain, and often, to scrub through public documents in an effort to play “gotcha” and never in a non-adversarial, constructive manner. Most municipalities have the regulars who show up at every meeting just for that purpose. The fact that most only make themselves heard in public and aren’t to be found when the real work needs to gets done shows that they’re more interested in grandstanding than civility and are not going to be restrained by any pledge. But I hope that I’m wrong.

Comment by Southside Markie Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:47 pm
===…routinely makes fun of Republicans from East Central Illinois in the ILGA.===

Meh. They seek the spotlight. What the spotlight brings is on the Eastern Bloc.

They write and say things. It can’t be helped if it’s… unhelpful to their own chances to be taken seriously.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 1:56 pm
Can’t hurt. But I would have a cop give it to the people to sign.

Comment by DuPage Saint Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:03 pm
Acknowledging the problem is a good start. I’ve always said, the more local the race, the nastier it gets.

Comment by Chicago Voter Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:26 pm
Nice thought, give them an A for effort.

=This question from a guy who routinely makes fun of Republicans from East Central Illinois in the ILGA. Thats rich.=

Your genteelness and hypocrisy are showing. That maligned group of gentle souls you reference routinely call people groomers, have harangued anyone that disagrees with them, and their facebook is simply an opus of mental derangement.

Other than that they are swell.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:43 pm
Too many are running at the local level now based on issues that shouldn’t be in dispute… the rights of the LGBQT community, teaching of actual history, etc. There is no measure of civility to overcome extreme views being vocalized; that in and of itself fails the civility test.

Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:50 pm
No.

If you politely describe how you want to persecute a certain group of people, that’s hugely missing the point.

This is how calls of civility are often used to squash opposition. Residents will start getting kicked out of local meetings for simply disagreeing with the board, no mater how civil they are being. I’ve watched this happen with my own eyes. All it takes is the group in power to call the resident speaking as being uncivil and the conversation is over.

This is addressing a symptom, not the cause.

Comment by TheInvisibleMan Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:51 pm
Not. If people don’t know (much less follow) the Golden Rule by now, what’s the point of having them recite it?

It’s like reciting the pledge of allegiance…then bad mouthing red (or blue) states.

Comment by Jocko Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:54 pm
It’s worth trying, but only barely worth trying.

Comment by The Truth Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 2:55 pm
Any serious effort to promote civility is worth undertaking b/c there can be no enduring democratic society without some basic level of civility in government and our daily dealings with each other.

Two problems. The first, identified by Homebody @1:42, is that there are no longer any firm criteria for what civility is, what its basic elements are. What constitutes objectivity, data, and facts is under assault on several fronts, as is what constitutes legitimate authority.

The second is that civility in government is a reflection of civility in society. We bring to government what we have experienced and learned elsewhere. It’s an extension of learned expectations and behaviors, not a corrective to them.

It would be nice to think increased civility in government might serve as an example or model for civility elsewhere, and I’m all for that. But anger and vituperation have become so weaponized in our current affairs that I’m not very hopeful.

Comment by Flapdoodle Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 3:13 pm
No, not worthwhile and my honest response if asked to sign would be bite me.

Comment by Lurker Thursday, Apr 20, 23 @ 3:41 pm