RE: Two published resources
- Archived: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:14:00 -0400 (EDT)
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
- From: Verena Owen <Baumling@aol.com>
- Subject: RE: Two published resources
- X-topic: Outreach
Caron makes some interesting points.
I think, however, that issueing permits inspite of very vocal public opposition does not neccessarily hurt agencies personnel's careers, it advances them. Doing exactly what their superior considers their job, permitting at all cost, cannot reflect badly on them. We often hear that the agency has to issue a permit because after 180 days it will be considered issued even if no action was taken on it. The agency has the power to lengthen that period somehow but the public is not privy as to how and when and who decides to do that.
The "when" in the sentence about the citizens finding someone willing to help should be an "if". (Yes, I am bitter.)
What would you like to see included in a job description of someone charged to ensure meaningful public participation?
If the public and the agency needs to figure out a way to work together, maybe the agency should not refer to the companies as "their clients" as the IEPA has done repeatedly. What does that make the public who pays their salary? A cooperative effort can only be successful if there is some trust between the parties involved. Do you have any suggestion how a trusting and truthful relationship could be established?
|
|
Date
|