Tags

, , , , , ,

Much has been made of the fact that 65 percent of Walton County voters believe that the Confederate flag should stay in place at the county courthouse. And it is true that, in the 2018 non-binding referendum on the flag, 9,033 people voted to keep it, while 4,189 voted to take it down.

Those who believe the flag should stay are quick to point to the “will of the people” as an immovable force that the government shouldn’t override. Commissioner Danny Glidewell is one of them.

“Sixty-five percent of the people asked for that flag to stay,” he said. “To so cavalierly dismiss the will of the people for political expediency — just so we can go along with the crowd — is wrong.”

But should the government always enact the “will of the people?”

Founding father James Madison believed it was dangerous to blindly protect the will of the majority at the expense of the minority, warning against “the tyranny of the majority.” In short, when one group has the benefit of greater numbers, it’s much easier for that group to disrespect other groups.

Think of it as two wolves and a sheep trying to decide what to have for dinner.

When the people represented by a governing body fall on opposing sides of an issue, should the government always vote according to the louder voices?

Consider, for example, the customary use issue that Walton County finds itself debating. On one side of the debate, a large group of people believes that the beaches should be open to the public based upon the fact that the beaches have always been open to the public. On the other side, more than 4,000 property owners and representatives from 1,100 properties believe that beach owners have a legal right to exclude “unwanted visitors.”

So if an influential majority of stakeholders believes that the beaches should be closed to the public, should our representatives vote accordingly simply because the majority group supports it? Or is it possible that this group is using its power and influence to disrespect and disregard the minority group?

And if that’s true, does the government have an ethical responsibility to consider the needs of both groups, or only the majority group?

Consider the following facts:

  1. The Florida statute that addresses public officers says that the primary concern of these “agents of the people” who “hold their positions for the benefit of the public” should be “maintaining the respect of the people in their government.”

Such officers and employees are bound to observe, in their official acts, the highest standards of ethics consistent with this code and the advisory opinions rendered with respect hereto regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that promoting the public interest and maintaining the respect of the people in their government must be of foremost concern. (Emphasis is ours.)

  1. The Walton County Personnel and Policy Manual, addresses behaviors that will not be tolerated by or toward its employees, and it includes the following definition:

The following list of behaviors, while not all-inclusive, provides examples of conduct that is prohibited:…  Aggressive or hostile behavior that creates a reasonable fear of injury to another person or subjects another individual to emotional distress…  (Again, emphasis is ours.)

Commissioner Tony Anderson, who voted to remove the flag, recognizes the flag’s impact on members of the local community.

“It’s not how you or I see it as an affront, it’s how African Americans see it,” he said. “And this is an affront to their dignity.”

He also acknowledges the fact that his vote to remove the flag will probably cost him something and he understands his responsibility to make decisions regardless of personal considerations.

“I’ve got people that are probably texting me right now telling me to shut the hell up, but this is an issue that’s not going to go away and we’re going to have to confront it sooner or later.”

(Commissioner Bill Chapman recognizes that change has come, and he voted to remove the flag as well.)

And, as this community considers all sides of the issue, it’s worth considering that the DeFuniak Springs City Council moved its meetings to the Walton County Courthouse last year, meaning that the members of that council — including two African-American council members — serve in that building, under that flag, twice a month.

The commissioners will not be able to please everyone with this decision, but Commissioner Anderson had it right when he acknowledged that there are multiple perspectives to consider. The BCC must make responsible, ethical decisions, and its members must be willing to recognize perspectives that may not match their own. This isn’t about “being military” (Melanie Nipper’s words) or “rewriting history” (Trey Nick’s words).

Perhaps the most important words are found in Chapter 760 of the Florida Statute:

The general purposes of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 are to secure for all individuals within the state freedom from discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy, national origin, age, handicap, or marital status and thereby to protect their interest in personal dignity…

If the commission won’t find a way to follow its own governing documents, both state and local, this will become an entirely different conversation.