Improving the Level of Public Debate Around Elections

Susan Iuliano is retiring from SPS committee, as she stated in yesterday's r. While I have not always agreed with her policies, no one can argue with her dedication and desire to do what is best for our schools.

In her letter, Susan had some good comments about:

"personal disparagement (of volunteers and employees) often has eclipsed productive critique, especially with the few who comment anonymously on the press websites."

I could not agree more, as personal attacks have no place whether online or in person, etc. At some point, Patch and Crier, or for that matter all local online media, will need to figure out a more sophisticated manner to evaluate, promote, and feature comments. Anonymous discourse is important to a democracy, and Susan is correct that the personal disparagement helps create a toxic environment, that needs to stop.

But missing from her letter is the role that public officials also play in creating this toxic environment. As a candidate for L-S School Committee, I was subject to over the top emails signed and sent by members of various town committees.  Apparently, according to these emails, I was a right wing Republican who couldn't be trusted with sensitive information brought before the school committees and I would leak confidential information about special education students. And these emails were not anonymous letters posted on some comment board. They were from sitting town officials.

This year is not much different, although this year’s target is Dan DePompei and the sender is the familiar Town Democratic Party Member, Carl O. In this year's email, sent out to various town distribution lists including the Historical Society, Carl claims there is “a small but destructive and highly organized group in town has taken it upon themselves to set Sudbury straight.” He goes on to say that this group and Mr. DePompei are set to cut school funding .

This is similar to the thread in 2010 Carl sent out, which was unfortunately forwarded by a sitting selectman.  In 2010, there was a “right-wing slate ... a group posing as tough-minded business managers who assert that town spending (and they're pretty clear that this means school spending) has gotten out of hand, and they know how to fix it.” 

Once again, the theme of “right wingers” cutting school spending. No facts, no issues. Just fear mongering. Reminds me of Clinton’s vast right wing conspiracy or Bush’s fear of the “liberal media elite”.

The problem with these types of attacks is they alienate voters and divide the town.  No one group in town has enough votes to get overrides passed. Whether Dan or Larry wins the selectman race, both will require the support of the others voters to get anything done.

Susan is right, the tenor of political discourse in town needs to improve. Both in the  online commentary and other electronic communication used during elections. Sudbury does not need to mirror the highly partisan national political landscape. We can start this today. If you get Carl’s email, send it back to him. Tell him to focus on the issues, and not political hackery.