News-Record.com

Greensboro attorney Robert Peters, one of seven members of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission, wrote a column for today's print-edition op-ed page. He criticizes outgoing Mayor Keith Holliday and the rest of the City Council for not at least approving a resolution calling for the council to "seriously consider" the commission's report on the Nov. 3, 1979, Klan-Nazi shootings here.

Note that he is not asking the council to approve any specific recommendation. Instead, he's asking, albeit very diplomatically: Why are you so afraid even to talk about this?

I've heard from John Young, a frequent commenter here on TRC-related matters, asking if I can post the column on my blog. (Our Editorial folks don't routinely post freelancers' work online because of legal/copyright concerns.) I've e-mailed Bob that question. He's under no obligation, of course, but if he approves, I'll post the column.

UPDATE: Here it is, and thanks to Bob for making it available.

Last July the City Council had a promising roundtable discussion about the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s work. In view of this, I was surprised that the majority of the City Council opposed a resolution to “seriously consider” the commission’s recommendations.

Why could not the council work cooperatively to amend the resolution in the hope of finding some common ground? The resolution was not asking the council to accept the commission’s recommendations; it was merely asking the council to “seriously consider” them.

What does the majority fear so much that it won’t even consider the recommendations?

True, the commission’s recommendations are based on a tragic shooting that happened more than a quarter of a century ago. Does it not appreciate that this tragedy of the past impacts the present? Does it not realize that “The past is not dead. In fact, it’s not even past,” as pointed out by William Faulkner?

In the words of Leonard Pitts, “the past is present.” We are all affected by the past. It defines us. We can’t change the past, but we can do a lot about the future, but only if we have open minds that are willing to consider the past. “And yes, those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it,” observed John Thorn.

I certainly do not expect the City Council to agree with all or most of the commission’s recommendations. No reasonable person would expect this of the council. I, as a member of the GTRC, don’t even agree with all of the recommendations as is apparent from my opinion that concurs in part with the majority. Handled properly, disagreement is not a bad thing — that is, if it does not result in any personal attacks, such as using degrading name-alling, blaming, violent language or actions or the like. Not only can disagreement challenge but more importantly it can enrich. Often what divide us are not so much our differences, but our unwillingness to talk about them. Obviously, much good often comes from different points of view, but only if we engage in meaningful dialogue about them.

I would hope that the council would at least seriously consider these recommendations and publicly state what it can and can not support and why, perhaps with the help of the city’s Human Relations Commission. A wholesale rejection seems shortsighted; especially when the Human Relations Commission could thoughtfully conduct an in-depth analysis of the recommendations for further consideration by the full council.

Fortunately, a number of institutions, both local and out-of-town and in foreign countries, have taken an entirely different approach than that of the majority of the council.

For example, our Central Public Library, a number of our churches, universities, colleges and public and private institutions have seriously considered the GTRC work (and continue to do so). Some local colleges and universities have even conducted courses and seminars on this work. I believe the majority of the council could learn a lot from these institutions.

I find the mayor’s statement implausible that “many in the community viewed [the TRC] process as biased.” I particularly question the appropriateness of the word “many” and am interested in the mayor’s evidence of this. I’m certain that some feel the way the mayor stated, and I believe that in some respects the report could have been more balanced. But the process involved many people of good will over a two-year period.

The process resulted in taking more than 200 statements from individuals with differing points of view who appeared credible, though often passionate. The process involved six days of well-attended public hearings and a review of hundreds of feet of documents and trial transcripts. To characterize this comprehensive process as “biased” is not helpful toward our goal of uniting disparate parts of our community to make it a better place for all.

Substantial evidence indicates that a community open to diverse people, opinions and culture flourishes in many important respects; including economic, artistic and intellectual. Highly sought-after industry, especially high-tech, often looks favorably upon such a community.

Robert Peters was co-chairman of Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the only attorney among the commissioners.

Let the conversation resume.