Transparency is not ‘nitpicking’ (Pikeville) Appalachian News-Express

Article originally posted to the (Pikeville) Appalachian News-Express on July 20, 2012 http://news-expressky.com/

By Monica Kern

Transparency is not ‘nitpicking’

Pike County has witnessed two political controversies in the past couple of weeks: The spat between County Judge-Executive Wayne Rutherford and the ANE over

Rutherford’s efforts to establish a natural gas filling station using coal severance tax funds, and the decision of the Pike County Fiscal Court to refrain from voting on a proposal to support an application for $1 million in severance tax funds to attract commercial air service to Pike County Airport

Examination of these controversies reveals common themes that are illuminating. First, Rutherford is neck-deep in both of the controversies. That’s not necessarily roblematic, as he rightly should be involved in the county’s decisionmaking regarding fiscal priorities given his position as judge-executive. What is less admirable, However, is that both controversies demonstrate a noticeable unwillingness on the part of Rutherford and other Pike officials to engage in transparent decision-making.

This lack of transparency is particularly evident in the case of the natural gas filling station, where Rutherford at first seemed to suggest that a company led by his cousin, T. Edwin Coleman, would be a partner in the effort but later appeared to deny such a connection. But there’s a similar lack of clarity with respect to the airport case, as it’s not at all clear whyattracting commercial air service would be deemed an important priority four years ago but not worthy of consideration today.

What both controversies make painfully apparent is that Pike County deserves a more open and objective process for deciding how to use coal severance tax funds. To

the ordinary citizen, the current system comes across as far too arbitrary, far too secretive, and far too driven by secondary aims such as rewarding friends and relatives of those in power rather than advancing the public interest.

It’s possible that I’m wrong about that. It could be that the coal severance tax funds are being allocated in the best possible manner for the county. The problem is that the people of Pike County simply don’t know if that’s the case because we’re not given the data that would allow such a determination.

In an ideal world, an open call for proposals for severance tax funds would be issued, and a summary describing the proposals along with a detailed specification of robable

economic impact, who would benefit, and the number of new jobs created would be circulated. The public could then judge for themselves the merit of the funding decisions actually made.

This doesn’t happen, obviously. Too often the relevant decisions are made behind the scenes, and elected officials are subsequently not willing to answer questions about

how these decisions were made, as we saw last week when Rutherford refused to answer a reporter’s queries about the natural gas filling station project and instead accused the ANE of “nitpicking.”

With all due respect, asking to be informed about how and why millions of dollars — funds that are supposed to be allocated for improving the economic stability of Pike

County — are distributed in a particular manner is not “nitpicking.” It’s political accountability, and it’s a basic right of any democracy.