Newhouse: Mortonite involvement better than editors think

Disregarded? In one ear and out the other? The editors of this newspaper recently chided Mortonites for lack of attention/interest/response to the mayor’s annual state-of-the-village presentation. As I read it, the editorial contended that the mayors annual speeches are packed with facts and useful information about village business, but are disregarded except for “hot button” items that some folks oppose or favor.  

“Residents need to break out of their sedentary shells,” the writers contended, “and become more active in this community.”

I agree with the former — the mayor’s presentations are typically full of information — but, I am not so sure I accept the basic premise. My take is that Mortonites pay closer attention than the editors think, even if they are not so vocal or activist.

 It is true that community involvement and input to government are generally good things. But I’ve been involved in village government for nearly 30 years, first on the plan commission and more recently as a trustee. I also serve on the Morton Economic Development Council. Those positions provide a different vantage point than the editors, and I would argue that the process of involvement and feedback is more comprehensive than the editorial writers perceive, subtle as it may be. The “silent majority” is perhaps not so silent, and there’s less “in one ear and out the other” than is evident.

Yes, interest groups respond to issues they see as critical, and often they represent the views of a passionate few. The broader community also makes its voice heard — those who turned out for the comprehensive plan committees and citizen discussion nights at the high school, phone calls, e-mails and letters to trustees. addresses to the village board, comments at the grocery store, the barber or beauty shop, at church, at the bank, service clubs and at the various coffee gatherings around town.

The process is not formal or organized, and perhaps not as activist as the editors would like, but it is there — somewhat like one continuous town hall meeting. The tradition for such input goes back to the founding of this country, and it is not a bad adjunct to government. In fact, I am constantly surprised — and always pleased — at the number of people who watch village government on the cable channel. Not many days go by without a comment from someone regarding a village board meeting or cases before the plan commission or zoning board of appeals. People listen, assess and express their views.

Morton has benefited, as far back as I can determine, from public officials whose priorities were what they perceived as serving the needs of Morton. They may or may not have always made the right decisions, but I’ve never heard of a Morton official who put personal gain ahead of the community. No one with whom I have ever served has behaved differently, whether appointed or elected. One reason, perhaps, is the high degree of cohesion between the broader community and those in government — shared values and goals. The majority may be silent, but it is heard in Morton.

And finally, back to that point about becoming more active in the community. I’ve not seen any hard data on the subject, but the evidence suggests that communities with a high degree of citizen engagement reap rewards. In that respect, the editors have likely made their case.