Last week’s editorial about public access to public documents got a conversation going.

We heard from several readers who congratulated us on the opinion piece, which — in response to a conversation at council — pointed out there is really no acceptable reason to make public documents difficult to access.

On the other hand, some weren’t happy that in making our argument, we took a critical stance on Coun. Erwin Wiens’ reasoning for voting against making the site plans for Parliament Oak public.

Essentially, we asked if he thinks the public is too daft to deserve access to those public documents.

Perhaps we were a little harsher than needed.

To some, that’s what his language on council suggested when he argued that site plans shouldn’t be given out freely because people will misinterpret them and spread misinformation.

We argued that isn’t a good enough reason to not give the public access to documents that, by all rights, belong to the public.

What we may have missed is that Wiens isn’t completely wrong — although there was an implied understanding that not everybody does understand complex documents like site plans.

Of course Wiens doesn’t think everybody is stupid. What he understands is that not everybody is a planning expert and that few people who read site plans will fully understand them.

Just look at the photos provided. it’s complex stuff.

But we feel the point may have been missed by some readers who saw the critical side and ignored the argument.

What the editorial really meant to say — and did say — is that whether a resident is a planning expert or not is no good reason to not post documents online for all to see.

As Wiens himself said, he agrees those documents should be public and has no issue with doing so as long as it’s not selective and it’s just policy that all documents get put online.

So, this week we’ll eat some humble pie, apologize for such a critical tone and embrace Wiens if he is to act on that and ask staff to make all site plans, etc easily accessible online.

In a conversation with Wiens, he agreed that perhaps in 2024 the process of having to go to the town to view documents could be brought into this century.

He agreed, after hearing us out, that access from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays isn’t open access, and makes things especially difficult for people with accessibility needs. Or parents with small children, or people who work during those hours. The list goes on.

But that’s why conversation is so important. Conversations can make things happen.

And it’s worth nothing this paper has no beef with Wiens. We criticize ideas, philosophies and language used in public forums. But never the human.

Wiens always takes a call, always is open to a conversation, and is open-minded to ideas he hasn’t considered.

He’s got plenty of ideas we do agree strongly with, such as not always chasing windmills on the public dime when there’s no hope for victory.

So, let’s keep the conversation going about getting better access to public documents. That’s what a good newspaper, and good editorial, is meant to do.

And that’s what a good council does for its residents, especially in a town where people care so much.

editor@niagaranow.com