Editorial
Observing or participating in moments of human conflict is not exactly a foreign operating theater for your average news reporter, however, it is refreshing to see civil discourse done right. While opinions will no doubt vary regarding the issue, the way Aspermont Mayor Steven Ellis and city manager Lorenzo Calamaco conducted themselves during a debate over city policy earlier this week should be required viewing for all elected officials.
With a preceding public hearing and a lengthy regular agenda, the Aspermont City Council was nearing an hour and a half into the evening’s business before Mayor Steven Ellis presented a policy revision for the council’s consideration, specifically the allowing of city field workers to take home city vehicles.
While I’m not going getting into my opinion of the issue — as I can aggressively argue both sides of this equation and have seen it work, and fail, implemented both ways — what I am more inclined to share is my opinion of is how the debate when down.
Mayor Ellis — who currently is employed with TxDOT — said he understood the current policy allowed for city workers to take a city vehicle home overnight, something he disagreed with and requested the council to amend.
It was a sticking point between the mayor and city administration as Aspermont City Manager Lorenzo Calamaco was on the opposite side of the fence. Calamaco presented sound reasoning and equally logical arguments for continuing the policy with improved enforcement of certain elements within it.
During any given month, either virtually or in person, I attend about a dozen public meetings. Most of them are plain vanilla. I've written that public meetings are often like watching a six-month NASCAR race. Everyone is going around in circles and from time to time there’s a crash.
In recent months, covered in the pages of this publication, debates amongst officials in several local entities have been anywhere from unnecessarily snarky to embarrassingly unprofessional. More crashes than races. Like going to a public hearing and a hockey game breaking out.
I like to think I have a decent poker face, but I have attended several meetings lately where I found myself unconsciously trying to jam on an imaginary brake pedal before shouting, “I swear if you don’t calm down and get along, I’m going to pull this car over and beat every single one of you.”
And unfortunately, as local political pressure cookers have built — over years in some cases — there have been more than a few that resembled the backstory of what would later be a raucous Jerry Springer Show segment: Petty Politicians and the Voters That Love Them.
“The chair, senator... hit him with the chair!” Ellis and Calamaco could have stood in opposite corners, flinging poo at each other, using rhetoric and personal attacks to drive their arguments like government officials from our town to DC. But they didn’t.
Instead, at an hour and twenty-two minutes into the meeting, the topic of consideration was presented, and ding-ding, the two guys took the following 20 minutes to beat the crap out of each other like gentlemen. They landed verbal punches, blocked swings, dodged others, and used fancy footwork to make their respective cases.
While it was clear Ellis and Calamaco were on opposite sides of the argument, each allowed for the other to not only be heard, but listened to what they were saying, the information provided, and perspectives shared, and their rebuttals were reflective of this truth.
It was my man, Mark Twain, that said, “If the Lord wanted us to speak more than listen, he would have given two mouths and only one ear.”
Council members also listened attentively, asked clarifying questions, and took the time to weigh the merits of each side of the argument before calling for a deciding vote, as it was ultimately their decision to make as the city’s legislative governing body. The council ultimately voted to keep the policy as written but agreed there should be better accountability, as workers were not being fully compliant.
Two well-thought-out perspectives of opposing viewpoints, passionately but respectfully delivered, considered by a body of elected representatives that compromised to meet the best interest of the whole. Government working.
Seems like the old system our forefathers experimented with all those years ago actually does work. If nothing else, Ellis and Calamaco might have a future in YouTube courses on how to get things done in government without being a political jerk.