WHY SO SERIOUS, MARCUS AURELIUS?
Board members are constantly told to show little to no emotion and to be, in essence, "punching bags" to an increasingly hostile society. But there's a way around that, and the solution is centuries old.
Neighborhood Councils are all about civic engagement, getting the ordinary citizen involved in grassroots government to help better their community. In short, getting people to care.
And in today’s knee-jerk, hypersonic attention span society where the term “thorough inspection of the facts” is only used when your high-end luxo-barge SUV continues emitting an annoying rattle even after there dealer visits, it seems very few have neither the time nor the inclination to sit through a three+ hour NC Board meeting chok full of rules, regulations, City bureaucrats with their Powerpoint presentations, and Board members who, if painted gray (and if you squint your eyes), could resemble the Moai statues of Easter Island.
Let’s be honest with ourselves here — many NC Board meetings make the snooze-fest film Morbius look like a WWE title match.
Yet, there’s the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment (D.O.N.E., a.k.a., empowerLA in their catchy City re-branding guise), instructing Neighborhood Council Board members to refrain from expression or emotion, to be non-reactive and non-engaging. To be, in essence, a robot.
Below is the Neighborhood Council Oath of Office one must cite at the time they are sworn into office:
I pledge to represent (insert NC name here) with dignity, integrity, and pride.
I will encourage other points of view, even when they differ from my own. I will respect, value, and consider everyone's opinion.
I will find the good in my neighborhood, and praise it and promote it.
To my neighbors and to neighborhoods throughout the City of Los Angeles, I pledge to do this to the best of my ability.
Nope, nothing there suggesting that being a “human” is disallowed. However, the “to the best of my ability” conclusion may be a nod from the City that NC Board members are, in fact, regular citizens volunteering their time for civic duty sans neither adequate training nor staff..
The City Code of Conduct training (via the Cornerstone training portal all City officials and employees utilize) is little more than a video one watches, then acknowledges the viewing with a signature. As for the work-in-progress NC-specific Code of Conduct as presented by D.O.N.E…. well, that thing’s been in purgatory since 2016. And, with our new City Attorney being previously a Neighborhood Council Vice President (she chose to not run for another term in 2021 so that she may pursue the City Attorney position), the prospect of this NC-specific, dangerously vague set of rules governed by a department which cannot govern (Article 9 of the City Charter) seems not nearly a “done” a deal as once believed.
So, from what set of rules is all of this “show no emotion” guidance emanating? Or, as a certain legal mind I know prefers to mutter, “What’s the citation?”
Enter Marcus Aurelius, and his oft-quoted statement: “This you must always bear in mind, what is the nature of the whole, and what is my nature, and how this is related to that, and what kind of a part it is of what kind of a whole; and that there is no one who hinders you from always doing and saying the things that conform to the nature of which you are a part.”
Or, as a pop cultural reference, Hannibal Lecter’s version of it from The Silence of the Lambs: “Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?”
The “what” , in the opinion of this writer, is the City, as represented by empowerLA (D.O.N.E.). Inherent within any postmodern meso or micro governmental structure are those expressing what is sometimes called “recreational outrage” (I’ll credit Joe Rogan for the term, but I’m not 100% sure). In simplistic terms, individuals who attend meetings solely for the sake of raging, as some attend yoga classes specifically for the social aspects of said yoga class. It’s not about the motions, nor the vinyasa — it’s about “sport”. It’s Church for some on a Sunday morning. It’s not about the Scripture, it’s about the Gossip afterwards via neighborhood know-it-all Karen (“OMG! Did you HEAR about Sarah and her little ‘problem’?”). With NC meetings, there will be those looking to antagonize for the expressed purpose of antagonizing, as a form of recreational outrage.
As with many bureaucracies, the desired savior fare is maximum pay for minimum work. Be busy, not productive, and don’t call negative attention to yourself. It’s an art form, actually. Look like you’re doing something to justify your very existence…. but don’t do anything that may call your existence into question. So the problem — how any NC Board should handle so-called gadflies — is answered with a non-answer, for an actual answer places the department within the cross-hairs of scrutiny. Even answering with, “Well, we know you’re human, and under-prepped for such an undertaking, so we understand if, from time to time, some emotion or expression creeps into the proceedings of a meeting… just do your best to keep it at a minimum to mitigate the fuel for the fire the gadflies are attempting to stoke”, might prompt the City Attorney to dust off the spanking stool for being a naughty little bureaucrat.
Doubling back to the Oath of Office, Board member “emotion” and “expression” shouldn’t inhibit stakeholders from their own expression or emotion. But what if a Board member is exasperated with a discussion, and in turn vents their frustration? Might the outburst be considered some manner of violation? If a Board member finds themselves on the receiving end of harsh criticism that extends beyond the scope of their duties, and they find the need to respond to defend their good name, is THAT a violation? Or, in other words, can the Board member pull a Monica Rodriguez “Personal Point of Order”?
Ultimately, and unfortunately, much of this falls to the Board itself. More specifically, the Chair of the Board, who must maintain a semblance of order whist allowing an interaction with the community not too restrictive. I say unfortunately for two reason: Firstly, guidance from the City is woefully lacking. Secondly, many Chairs are unprepared in how to mitigate such a situation. Furthermore, if in-fighting exists within the Council, and that particular stakeholder is in alignment with the Chair against the Board member, then there is no initiative for the Chair to maintain order since the partnership benefits them.
And yet, from personal experience I can confidently state that, unless you’re pointedly attacking a stakeholder with words (which might mean defaming, demeaning, insulting, or insinuating something that is overtly not accurate), then emitting some emotion, some expression, some humanity is perfectly reasonable. Always keep in mind the recreational outrager and an inherent fear within them that their form of terrorism isn’t working. In other words, take what you perceive as “garbage talk” with the proverbial grain of salt and shrug it off. Maybe with a grin, perhaps with an actual shrug of the shoulders.
It’s the NATURE of that individual. And it should be your nature, in return, to understand the folly of their words.
