Community involvement is the hallmark of those who want to make a positive difference. This action is manifested through action, skill, knowledge, values, and motivation.
Another hallmark of those who support these efforts is witnessed when people with opposite opinions get together for a good faith conversation. During those discussions, it is critical to respect and acknowledge the other person’s point of view, even if we entirely disagree with it.
In the last few months, people in our community have pleaded for unity. However, in order for people to attain this level of enlightenment, all parties must agree on the ground rules for these discussions.
Honestly, therein lies the problem.
Attendees at the June 13 school board meeting were treated to a fantastic performance by a middle school jazz band. Family members sat on lawn chairs scattered on the lawn outside of the district office. A few of the school board members came out to show their support for the band as well.
However, once the school board meeting started, the joyful ambience we felt from the concert quickly dissipated.
The meeting room was crowded. Included among the attendees were four of the five newly-elected board members who will be sworn in at the July 11 meeting.
As the board worked its way through the agenda, we finally made it to the point where people who signed up were allowed to make a public comment. Chair Dave Brown announced that eight people signed up to provide a statement.
The first person to speak was Jose Ramirez Reyes. Jose represented Basic Rights Oregon. Encouraging the board to reflect on their work, Jose reminded them that their actions excluded many of the students in the district.
What you don’t hear in the recording on YouTube is the vitriol that erupted from audience members when Jose shared his pronouns. Throughout his 2-minute statement, many audience members ridiculed and harassed the guest speaker. There are no microphones near the audience, and yet, if you turn up the volume on your listening device, you can hear several outbursts. They clearly sent a message of intolerance, harassment, and ridicule.
From my vantage point of sitting in the meeting, I heard jeers, heckling, and rude comments.
Jose’s statement was hijacked by several audience members, and derailed Jose’s thoughts and his sense of safety.
Do the actions of these people reflect a characteristic of collaboration, respect, or the intent to find peaceful ways to find unity?
During this outburst from the audience, a woman in front of me leaned over to the man next to her, encouraging him to “not let his emotions show.”
The rest of the public comments were riddled with promises of prayer, and declarations that the outgoing board members were chosen for this ‘specific time in our city.’ They were thanked for being dynamic, inclusive, and caring for each student. A few of the commenters recited verses from the Bible to prove their points.
Applause was given by most of the audience for each of the remaining seven speakers.
Does anyone else find this situation ironic?
The heckling towards one man who shared his opinion came from the very same people who promised ‘prayers’ and used the holy scriptures to validate their opinion.
When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
When actions speak louder than words, pay attention.
With more agenda items to discuss, half the audience left the meeting when the public comments were concluded.
Three men huddled together in the back of the room. Then one of them moved to the front row of the audience section, just a few seats away from Jose.
This man was on his phone. I paid attention.
At the end of the meeting, I suggested to my friend that we walk Jose out to his car. As we left the building, I noticed two of the three men standing outside on the sidewalk.
A group of us walked with Jose, making sure he made it into his car. We remained as one of the men drove his car slowly past our group.
Here’s the thing. If our community wants unity, it comes from people coming together to agree on basic principles for conversations. People who are sincere about compromise and unity do not encourage the hateful behavior of others towards people they disagree with.
We will only find unity when people come together in good faith to discuss issues and concerns without fear of being retaliated against.
Instead of declarations of prayers and scripture, perhaps those in the audience would benefit from civility training where characteristics like courtesy, politeness, consideration of others, and respect might flourish.
Newberg Neighbors for a Better Community 