Double dipping: Two SOLNA comments in a row by the same anonymous troglobyte.
---The Curmudgeon’s Dicionary
---
The only thing surprising about the embarrassing tantrum thrown by the Wizard of Westside at 8:37 p.m. last night was that it had taken him an hour and seven minutes to unveil his bi-monthly set piece of impassioned scenery chewing.
Perhaps frustrated by a dearth of grandstanding opportunities during recent council sessions, the Siamese Councilmen were back in mid-season Springeresque form on Monday night as they shamelessly parroted stormwater drainage board talking points handed them by Erik/Erika, with 1st District CM Dan Coffey resorting to frequent and intemperate screaming, and the 3rd District’s reigning Uncouncilman Steve Price getting down and homespun.
The trogs were completely agog as Li’l Stevie denounced bureaucracy, rate increases, and books without pictures, and when he began chanting “freeze, freeze,” I was transported back to a recent viewing of “March of the Penguins,” a fine documentary about birds who can’t fly, but retain a certain dignity just the same.
We’ll pick up here later this morning with council meeting media links and further thoughts.
Right now, I’m going to bed.
---
In Tuesday morning’s C-J, CM Coffey’s shrill theatrics are discretely (and mercifully) overlooked in a straightforward account of the Monday council meeting:
Council approves storm-water board; Two more votes needed for New Albany panel, by Ben Zion Hershberg, (Courier-Journal).
"We're trying to save people money," Price said as he questioned whether members of the new board should be paid … Price said that he and others would be willing to serve on such a board for free …
To get professionals to serve on the storm-water board and put in the hours and work required will require compensation, (Mayor James) Garner said.
In a nutshell, there it is.
In two and a half years of service, Uncouncilman Price’s already limited repertoire of leadership skills has continued to erode until nothing of substance remains save for the lowest common denominator of Wal-Mart’s cheapest deal every day, but just like the majority of Wal-Mart shoppers, the Uncouncilman is unwilling or unable to discuss the true cost of his preferred super-low Price.
But we can view these depths openly at each and every council meeting, as the Uncouncilman panders to the same venomous group of die-hard and purely congenital obstructionists, meandering monthly across the same frozen intellectual tundra with the same increasingly trite catch phrases, utterly bereft of vision for the future, and reduced to pawing the hand that turns the calendar forward while pathetically bleating, “we can’t afford to go forward.”
There’s never a thought as to the frightening cost of not going forward -- but that would appear to be the mayor's job, as such deliberations are a predictably easy target for politically calculated attacks.
Meanwhile, whatever the pitch of CM Coffey’s voice – and last evening, it was loud and confrontational, at least until fellow councilman Mark Seabrook and sewer board attorney Greg Fifer joined to call his typically hollow bluster-bluff – his script remains the same three-step shuffle: (1) There is a conspiracy to deprive Coffey of information, (2) blame must be assigned, and (3) repeat first step.
The delicious moment to be remembered last evening came when Fifer responded to one of CM Coffey’s outbursts of pompous bellowing with words that regular NA Confidential readers have previously ragarded: “You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts!”
Stunned and reddened, the Wizard of Westside screamed back, “what are the facts?” as CM Gahan pounded the gavel to restore order.
Well, here’s a fact: The behavior of the Siamese Councilmen is an ongoing embarrassment to the city.
Here’s another one: In just one year, there’ll be the opportunity to do something about it.
---
For a fine, detailed council meeting report, see NA Council talks new sewer panel, by Eric Scott Campbell (News-Tribune). It's been posted early on the web site, and we're appreciative of this diligence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Much heat and very little light is being shed in the bawling about the creation of a stormwater board.
I seem to recall that Mayor Garner was the only member of the Sewer Board who believed that body could accommodate the stormwater responsibilities, too. Utz, Solomon, Kochert, and Seabrook are the ones who argued forcefully that the Sewer Board had too much responsibility to also monitor groundwater and streams.
My instinct is that stormwater should have stayed under the sewer board. But I can't make a compelling case against a separate board. It's pretty easy to see how the two municipal functions could come into conflict, especially in a fight over resources.
And it's not as if we can simply ignore the mandate.
I believe the mayor was trying to avoid a political firefight and a duplication of paid offices, but yielded to the judgment of his peers on the Sewer Board.
Yet, some are casting this as a power/money grab by the mayor.
Under the ordinance, the stormwater board will have its own funding, and significant responsibilities. The Clean Water Act is here to stay, and anyone who wants to shortchange the compliance requirements must answer to the charge that they oppose the act and its goals.
The stormwater board should be paid the same stipend as the sewer board. Their responsibilities will be greater, even though their budget will be considerably smaller. Allocating the resources collected from user fees is the same job as that of the sewer board. The infrastructure, equipment, and personnel duties are the same.
Any attempt to make the stormwater board a lesser board in terms of pay is a mistake. Yes, the sewer board could have taken on this job, but they declined to do so.
The council has only two choices. Create a board that has pay parity with the sewer board, or tell the sewer board they must take on the job.
Anything less will be a red flag for federal enforcement officials, indicating that New Albany isn't serious about meeting its obligations.
Of course, they could cut the sewer board pay and divvy it up among six members on two boards. But the mayor makes a strong case that such would be irresponsible and that recruiting qualified people would be impossible without a reasonable stipend.
It will be interesting to see if they go for the Low Price solution
Shirley, I'd make the case that council members shouldn't serve on any boards, but should be designated to observe as ex-officio members.
I understand that Kochert and Seabrook are only ex-officio, but out of respect for the prerogatives of council, they are treated as full members, included and consulted and listened to.
I do believe there was discussion of whether to officially expand the board and pay the council members, but other council members objected to them being paid, since their appointment was because of their elected position and not for any special expertise. They are the "political" members of the board.
Personally, I would have kept stormwater under the sewer board, as Mayor Garner urged. But the board, including Kochert and Seabrook, decided there would be too many conflicts over priorities and resources.
Compliance with the Clean Water Act is not optional. Any attempt to create a "volunteer" board would raise a red flag with regulators that New Albany intends to be noncompliant. And anyone who opposes pay parity for the stormwater board is either underinformed, or actively opposing environmental sanity.
Which prospective mayoral candidate wants to campaign with that tag?
THE FOLLOWING IS A PAID POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT
____________________ for mayor. Repeal the Clean Water Act. And if we can't do that, resist, obstruct, and delay. Vote for _______________.
Post a Comment