In my letter last week, I stated the focus of the recent public airport expansion meeting "should have been about developing a regional airport facility where all who will benefit, will also pay a share of monetary support.
I allege by their doing, elected and appointed officials are positioning Greensburg's taxpayers to wrongfully bear a financial burden for others." This letter is to address how it is that public officials have failed to use due diligence in applying their fiduciary duty on behalf of the people.
Let's begin by affixing a meaning for due diligence. It is the process of evaluating a prospective business decision, as a buyer spends time going through the financial situation of a prospective acquired business, its legal obligations, customer records, and other documents. The buyer wants to validate his or her opinion to see if it is truly a good decision.
Next, let's apply a meaning for "fiduciary duty." The fiduciary is one that another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. The fiduciary accepts an obligation to act for the other's benefit. The duties of a fiduciary include loyalty and reasonable care of assets within custody. All of the fiduciary's actions are performed for the advantage of the beneficiary.
In that a big deal was made by pro-expansion proponents of the airport's environmental assessment, it is but an indicator as to whether the project can be accomplished and we can be good guardians of God's green Earth. The unfinished task was an economic assessment to indicate whether to proceed with expansion in accordance of ability to provide financial support.
The pro-expansion set speaks a language of "jobs, jobs, jobs" and economic prosperity, without validity. It acts as though certain things can remain unmentioned, and its just too bad for the public.
That game is called "stump the chump" and shame on these officials for playing it. Even more shame upon them for forcing things to the point that their duty must be spelled in simplistic terms. "Due diligence in applying fiduciary duty" is the inherent promise one makes when running for public office and is also inherent when any are appointed to a public position. It is expected in social contract by the people on Election Day.
One might wonder what are the fiduciary options. Consider that two types of decisions stand at odds. The first is outcome-based and the second is process-based. City government officials have employed the former in that they have set a goal (airport expansion) and all that is encompassed in the project is aimed at goal attainment (outcome).
In short, the object is to hammer away until we "git 'er done." Outcome-base decision making is flawed because it sets project completion as the goal, without giving environmental and economic considerations their full weight.
Process-based decision making is what opponents of airport expansion have advocated. It asks that a valid process be followed to arrive at a decision that best serves the public interest. It is the better option because it sets the public's best interest as the goal. In applying due diligence in the environmental assessment, the concern is whether alterations made to the Earth are excessively invasive. Due diligence in an economic assessment asks whether the project is cost effective in terms of the supposed benefits that are to be derived.
Fiduciary duty in process-based decision making means the outcome is contingent on the answers to the questions. For example, if alterations to the Earth are excessive, then the decision to proceed on environmental grounds is nullified and the decision is "just" because it serves in the public's best interest. The same reasoning applies when considering if the project isn't cost effective in terms of the supposed benefits that are to be derived. The project could as well be environmentally "just" but economically "unjust," or vice-versa.
What if the project is both environmentally and economically "just?" Process-based decision making doesn't discriminate. The project proceeds with a stamp of approval because it too, serves in the public's best interest.
Having determined what are fiduciary options, then what enabled the path that public officials took?
Have you ever heard of the Abileen paradox?
Its the kind of thing that happens in politically correct situations where outcome-based decision making is used. Everyone just goes along, to
To make a long story short, four people agree to eat dinner in another town on a hot Texas afternoon. The trip consumes four hours. The food wasn't good and they return, hot and exhausted.
Then to their discovery, they admit it was a trip that nobody wanted but that all had agreed because each thought it was good for the group, and nobody wanted to offend. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably, but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon. The Abileen
paradox is a form of groupthink explained by social psychology theories of conformity which suggest that human beings are often very averse to acting contrary to the trend of the group.
Jeff Martin, Whiteland
- Letters to the Editor
- Can we really love again? Can we really love again? Dear Editor: This is something I have been thinking about a lot lately. Whether it's right or wrong, I can't get it out of my head. Could I fall in love again? My wife will always be my one true love, but this time it would
- Parks Department doing a great job Dear Editor: I'm writing a few lines to let people in Greensburg and Decatur County know what a wonderful person we have over our Parks and Recreation Department: Bob Barker. He has done so many wonderful things to make out parks better and more beau
- Kids should be kids, not criminals Dear Editor: The weather was lovely this weekend and our neighbors were all out to play. Well, except for some people from or outside of our neighborhood that broke in and vandalized several cars during the night. They stole change, pocket knives, ru
- letter to the editor A polite invitation to proper language usage Dear Editor: Am I the only person to notice that the splendid word "invitation" is rapidly disappearing from our English language? One now receives an "invite" to this or that function, but no longer an in
- We must move past grief Dear Editor: I would like to kind of bare my soul. When we have loved ones, friends and young ones who pass away before their time, we believe they are going to a better place, but the place they are leaving is in our hearts and minds. This is very
- Many country drivers speed, ignore stop signs Dear Editor: It was no April Fool's Joke when the front page of the Tues., April 1, Rushville Republican revealed the sad fact that yet another teen age driver had come to grief on a country road. Fortunately the young female driver was not seriously
- Many of my submitted questions remain unanswered Dear Editor: It is usually pointless to "respond to a response," but I feel compelled to do so in this instance. The critique of my letter "Why an assault rifle in the home?," by Mr. Ronald Hassler, is so poorly written as to be not worthy of note, b
- The crime is more important than the weapon Dear Editor: I felt it necessary to respond to Norm Voiles's letter regarding the accidental firearm killing of a Greensburg youth and the subsequent points raised by the writer. Mr. Voiles quickly turns his attention from the incident itself to the
- Good dancers float across the floor Good dancers float across the floor Here I am, drinking that cup of coffee again and remembering my wife Peggy. I loved to dance and when we danced, we blended together. My daughter and I have some of that, but Annie is a different generation. I reme
- Why an assault rifle in the home? Why an assault rifle in the home? Dear Editor: I was pleased to learn that the owner of the M4 assault rifle used in the recent accidental killing of a Greensburg youth has been charged with two felonies. Regardless of the outcome of this deeply dis
- More Letters to the Editor Headlines