Finalists, schmienalists.

The Rockdale Reporter published a fine editorial in Thursday's edition slamming the Texas Association of School Boards for doing an end-run around Texas' open government laws.

TASB is helping the Rockdale School Board find a new school superintendent. RISD has 49 applicants. Of that number, they've decided to talk to six and expect to offer the job to one of those six on Dec. 10. Despite the fact that state law requires that a list of finalists be released to the public, Rockdale voters will know the name of only the person RISD trustees select.

Aren't the six people trustees will interview "finalists?" No, they are "candidates." Only one "finalist" will be announced. This follows the letter -- if not the spirit -- of state law. Go look it up -- Section 552.126 of the Texas Government Code.

Down in Karnes County, the Runge school board is doing the same thing. In fact, it's getting harder and harder to find information about the people who are applying for many top government management jobs.

Again, in Karnes County, county commissioners retired to executive session to interview interim candidates for the brand spanking new position of county road administrator, despite the fact that the county never advertised for the position as required by state law. I'll leave it to your imagination to figure out the relationship between those four applicants and the commissioners.

According to the Karnes Countywide, even the Karnes County Attorney, Robert Busselman, said the closed door meeting was unlawful. That's significant because, according to state law, it is the county attorney who prosecutes local violations of open government statutes.

No word on whether Busselman will indict the commissioners for the illegal meeting but he should. That's how this kind of thing is stopped. Most local elected officials have nothing but contempt for laws that require documents and meetings be open to the public.

Ah, well ... according the The Countywide, at least, reading between the lines, this isn't the only misstep Karnes County commissioners have committed implementing the new county road system. One hopes The Countywide will keep a bright light shining on these guys. They'll deserve what they get.

What Karnes commissioners did was unlawful. What Runge and Rockdale trustees did (or, more accurately, will do) isn't.

For the last several sessions, open government advocates and local newspaper editors and publishers have been trying to convince the Texas Legislature to address the issue of finalists for top school and college administration position, but to no avail.

Groups like TASB, the Texas Association of Counties, the Texas Municipal League and the Texas Association of District and County Attorneys -- to name only four of many -- carry a lot of weight in Austin. They carry a lot of weight because they represent local elected officials and most of the people in Austin were local elected officials before they became Legislators.

The fact is, these groups are beneficial, for the most part. This is good because they represent your tax dollars at work (local governments pay dues to these organizations; they get the money to pay those dues from you). However, they also spend an inordinate amount of time picking apart open government laws looking for loopholes and exceptions so our local governments can avoid having the great unwashed juggle their collective elbows.

One thing is certain, especially in the more rural parts of Texas: the folks you elect to office would just as soon you stay away from meetings and leave 'em in peace so they can get on with the important business of spending your money.

The Culture Wars aren't over

It seems that even in these days of supposed post-partisan, post-racial, post-everything harmony, we still can't get past the culture wars.

I know this because the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday about a Utah town that refused to allow one sort of religious monument on city property while staunchly defending another.

From the NYT editorial 11/12/08:

Pleasant Grove City, Utah, has a city park, known as Pioneer Park, that includes various unattended displays. These include historical artifacts from the town, a Sept. 11 memorial, and a Ten Commandments monument that was given to the city by the Fraternal Order of Eagles, a national civic group.

A religious organization called Summum, which was founded in 1975 and is based in Salt Lake City, applied to install its own monument in the park. The monument it proposed would include the group’s Seven Principles of Creation (also called the Seven Aphorisms), which it believes were inscribed on tablets handed down from God to Moses on Mount Sinai.

So, here we are again ... obstinate local governments deciding that neither the Establishment Clause nor the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment apply to them. So, now, they're in a fight over a religious monument planted in a city park in the mid-1950s by a civic group given money to promote a movie.

Okay —quick disclaimer, here. One of the more enticing stories I've read (or heard or been told) over the years is that, in advance of the movie, "The Ten Commandments," Cecil B. DeMille helped finance the Fraternal Order of Eagles' efforts to place monuments featuring the Ten Commandments in as many public spaces as possible. This may be simply an urban myth but it rings true and if true, it could be said that the battles the Culture Warriors have fought on this topic are less about Christian values and more about capitalistic values.

... but, I digress.

The SCOTUSblog has a wonderful analysis of the arguments set forth Tuesday. The blog's author called it the "Tyranny of Lables," which is apt. However, the legal arguments do little to disguise the fact that the leaders in this community have little or no respect for or understanding of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

It would be so easy for most local governments to have their cake and eat it, too because no interpretation of the Establishment Clause I've ever read forbids religious displays on government property. The Establishment Clause simply says the government may not promote one religion over another — it may not allow one sort of religious display in the public's space while forbidding another. The primary reason most dissenters object to Christian iconography on government property is because they are not allowed to display their own religious iconography.

Local governments could have Nativity scenes, post the Ten Commandments* and, really, do whatever their pinched little hearts desired if they also allowed other religious displays in the public's space. All they'd have to do is pass a resolution declaring public spaces open for religious displays on High Holy Days (whatever that religion's High Holy Day happens to be). Let the local Christian churches build their Nativity scenes or whatever then just sit back.

In most communities, there would few takers because, in most communities in this country, the only religion practiced is the various forms of Christianity. It seems like a simple solution, to me — maybe too simple — and I'm not sure why more local governments don't try that.

Are they so unsure in their faith that they absolutely cannot allow competition from the occasional Wiccan or Buddhist shrine? I dunno ...

Now, this would not solve the problems we have at our schools ... public prayer, proselytizing at required student events, etc ... but few SCOTUS rulings speak to all the issues and the Prayer in School crisis bids fair to continue the culture wars for a bit longer.

(*I've always wondered why we chose to fight over the Ten Commandments. That's so Old Testament. Aren't Christians supposed to pay more attention to the New Testament? If so, we ought to be posting Christ's version of the Jewish law: The Beatitudes.)