Thursday, October 18, 2012

Bile and acrimony on tap as city parks secession bid appears on city council agenda.

Suddeath's piece is uncommonly long for the newspaper (1,400 words), and that's good, because this issue isn't simple.

Speaking only for myself, this entire parks issue, from alleged highland/lowland togetherness to serial city/county funding disparities, and not excluding the park board's secretive 007 Agent Clere legislative taxation mission to Burma (or Indianapolis), testifies to the insanity of two decades of the Heavrin/McAllister Power Trip Show, when the budgetary marrow must be gnawed lest any county politician ever be compelled to speak honestly about the necessity of increased revenue.

Thus we come to the Shirley Baird school of governance (yikes): Reluctantly concede the extent of county government’s abject and cynical failure to equally fund parks within the city limits, but conclude that all should be smilingly forgiven in a joyous circle jerk of doubtful future unity; we need only “trust” the same conniving entities who have pulled away the football countless times before, relax, kick back, and enjoy the anticipation of the next time (and there’ll be a next time), when we must laboriously formulate a whole new convoluted Band-Aid of a fiscal plan to celebrate county government’s fresh new resolve to do what it was supposed to do all along, but did not, because it never was held accountable for the previous time.

The devil's in the details, so ...

Vote to split parks slated for tonight in New Albany; Parks board decries Gahan’s choice, says community will suffer from divide, by Daniel Suddeath (News and Tribune)

NEW ALBANY — Since 1994, New Albany and Floyd County have been partners in parks and recreation service. But that could all change after tonight.

A special New Albany City Council meeting has been slated for 7:15 this evening so that two measures can be considered. The first is a resolution calling for the re-establishment of the New Albany Parks Department, and the legislation will require only one vote by the council.

The second measure is an ordinance calling for the abolishment of the current New Albany-Floyd County Parks Department agreement, and it will require three readings by the council.

No comments: