This isn’t the column I thought I’d be writing.
It isn’t a column I wanted to write. And it’s not the one I wrote immediately after the Norristown council meeting Tuesday night.
I thought I’d be writing about the reappointment of Frank “Hank Cisco” Ciaccio as Norristown ambassador, a position essentially created for him decades ago.
I thought I’d be writing about how Norristown council members heard the voices of their constituents, listened to the concerns and complaints, and righted a wrong and did the right thing for the right reason. I thought the column would be uplifting -- shed a terrific light on Norristown council.
That’s the column I really, really wanted to write.
But my initial thoughts after the meeting were indeed influenced by frustration, anger and disappointment. As usually happens, though, emotions quiet down with time.
A side note: I will always defend this newspaper and the integrity and professionalism of our writers. I am of the belief most criticism stems from ignorance of the standards and criteria journalists live by. In other words, we just don’t make stuff up.
Leading up the meeting, and even walking into council chambers, I thought I’d be writing a happy ending to what was initially a disappointing situation.
A couple of weeks ago Norristown council failed to reappoint Cisco to the position of Norristown ambassador. The item was tabled by council President Sonya Sanders, without a real explanation.
“We tabled that item. We didn’t put it on the agenda,” Sanders told Katie Kohler after the Jan. 2 meeting. “The word table would be the correct term to use. However, that’s not to say he is not the ambassador or we are looking for someone else to be the ambassador.”
That cloaked statement resulted in residents and supporters creating a social media firestorm – questioning why the appointment of Cisco was tabled and pretty much demanding that council do “the right thing” by reappointing this lifelong servant of the town.
It was that firestorm, those loud and consistent voices of Cisco supporters, that prompted council Vice President Derrick Perry to address the situation – and not very diplomatically.
Perry delivered at Tuesday’s meeting what seemed like a civics lesson, firing questions at Solicitor Sean Kilkenny about the inner workings of a council meeting, what is required of a presiding president, how executive sessions work, what is expected of council members and what are their limitations. There were also accusations leveled at unnamed council member or members that the information to table the appointment was “leaked” to the press and to residents.
After the third or fourth time the word “leaked” was used during comments by Sanders and Perry, I started questioning why this would have been a secret in the first place. Why would certain council members, if they stood behind their decision to table the reappointment and were confident it was the right decision, hide it from their fellow council members and the residents?
The worst thing that came out of Tuesday’s meeting, as far as I can see, is that it created even more divisiveness. Those in attendance were angry and frustrated that the situation evolved as it did – all because they believed council members handled the situation badly from the start, and that they didn’t foresee their inaction would cause such backlash.
Certainly there were more diplomatic ways to handle this situation. If council indeed wants a new face to represent Norristown, then how about appointing Hank ambassador for life, or ambassador emeritus, and creating a secondary position? It’s an unpaid post, with no financial strings attached.
I was mulling over all these thoughts during the days that followed the meeting, and I realized the issue wasn’t really the handling of the ambassadorship. It was much bigger than that.
The Cisco situation prompted council member Valerie Scott-Cooper, as well as Perry, to question why residents were not as vocal and passionate and more involved in the daily workings of the town, and why it took the shunning of Cisco to get people to react.
Those are excellent points, but I wish they had led with them in a more positive way and put the focus on community involvement. This was an opportunity to bring people together, rather than create a greater chasm. I am confident Perry, Sanders, and everyone else on council have one agenda ― to make Norristown a better place and a stronger community. What else could be their motivation for serving the community?
To me, the takeaway from this meeting has to be this ― an elected few are indeed calling the shots for Norristown, but they need to make sure those decisions are informed, well-meaning, educated and encouraging to residents. Instead of pushing residents away with comments and autonomous decisions, why not encourage engagement and open lines of communication? Because whatever is going on now, well, I don’t think it’s working.
I’ve said this before, and I will repeat it ― no one is more critical of Norristown than Norristown residents, and at times I fall into that category. So maybe we need to stop being so critical. Maybe, just maybe, if we all decide to be diplomatic, compassionate and understanding, life in Norristown will indeed improve.
And maybe it’s time council members, residents and officials recognize that if we erase those lines in the sand, and find a way to promote our diversity, embrace our different cultures and actually stand united, maybe we’ll see a difference in our community -- maybe even a shift in the sands.
Cheryl Kehoe Rodgers is a content editor at The Times Herald. She can be reached at crodgers@timesherald.com.
