Monday, March 12, 2007

A better question, Jack: Does anyone have a "plan of where he wants to take this community?"

More excellent publicity for the city of New Albany today, courtesy of a city council whose dysfunction rivals that of Somalia:

Tension rising in in New Albany; 'Fact sheet' divides mayor, City Council, by Dick Kaukas (short shelf life for Courier-Journal links).

In fact, Kaukas’s article is one of the clearer expositions to date of the numerous, ahem, “communication” issues plaguing the council (and, in fairness, the mayor’s office) for the past three years.

Here’s a good one:

Council member Bill Schmidt also didn't attend but said he saw news accounts of what happened.

"I have been on the City Council for 16 years and I have never seen such unacceptable behavior at a public meeting," Schmidt said.


Of course, it is famously difficult to judge such matters when not actually present, although perhaps the Bicknell's private videotaping concern provided excerpted highlights, but at least CM Schmidt’s recollections are accurate in the sense that he and his shadow councilwoman do the bulk of their plotting and scheming decorously, away from the council table itself.

This one’s even better:

"That fact sheet was nothing more than dirty politics," said council member Dan Coffey, "and it's unfortunate that some members of the council have stooped to that level."

Any council member engaged in stooping will be looking CM Coffey right in the eyes.

What do the council’s consistent displays of unprofessional behavior over the course of three years say to the people who are considering investing in New Albany? What do these say to the community members who are spearheading the effort to attract these investments?

3rd district councilman Steve Price, one of the more predictable impediments to any semblance of progress in the city, apparently takes considerable pride in this these achievements. He tells the reporter Kaukas:

"Some people think all we do is fight. That's not true. But we are definitely not a rubber-stamp council."

Pray tell, "not a rubber stamp"? Looks like the cat is out of grandma’s cigar box, Steve.

----

Don’t forget NAC's reprise series:

Part 1: NA Confidential examines Councilman Steve Price's interview responses.
Part 2: NA Confidential examines Councilman Steve Price's interview responses.
Part 3: NA Confidential examines Councilman Steve Price's interview responses.

5 comments:

Christopher D said...

Regardless of the reasoning behind all of the posturing on both sides, Mayoral, and council, the publicly displayed broadening of the rifts by way of temper tantrums and verbal agression shows a level of disrespect to the city and its citizens.
If our leaders can not conduct themselves in a professional, dignified manner, how can we reasonably expect for any parts or portions of our city to progress with dignity to a respectable level?
I do not know enough information to form an educated opinion regarding who is right and who is wrong, if the motives behind the report were motivated by a personal political agenda, or if 3 1/2 years of friction has simply started a fire in the tender box. Regardless of the who, why, when, where's the fact remains that while both sides are positioning and posturing, it is the citizens of the city who are going with out full ambulance coverage, and the longer this drags out, the longer it will be before any other issues are tackled.
If people are not careful, they may wake up to find one spring May morning that the constituency has decided to replace them all.

G Coyle said...

Oh...to dream - "wake up to find one spring May morning that the constituency has decided to replace them all." wrote csd619. I laughed out loud when I read Price's comment about the council not being a rubber stamp! 30 years of blindly rubberstamping tax abatements?! The people who run this town have been an embarassment for so many years. Padgett's op-ed piece in the Tribune said it all. We must VOTE EVERYONE OUT.

Jeff Gillenwater said...

The election year idea thus far seems to be to disgust as many voters as possible, hoping the resulting low voter turnout will help incumbents.

It seems almost as solid a strategy as showing displeasure with the lack of a plan by supporting someone else who's yet to express one.

mattspoppy said...

there also has to be a way to show the incumbents that the people want changes in code enforcement and the startup of a Rental Inspection Program. I have read on some blogs that people have copies of the RIP of other towns..Could some sort of meeting be set up and have it facilitated by someone neutral and these programs be shown to all interested citizens who in turn can put pressure on the people that have to be pressured into thinking along the lines of RIP and better code enforcement. I don't think that we can wait until after the primary vote to do this..we need to know how the "new blood" feel about these issues now.

ceece said...

I believe the "new blood" has posted their feelings and thoughts on this issue.

I don't think it's fair to expect them to have any more or newer information then some of our citizens who have been fighting and calling every day, people such as Gina and CSD. We're all asking the same questions and getting the same(lame) answers, this is why it's so important to get people in there who have displayed the intelligence to comprehend what's going on, and the self-control to handle themselves civilly in a meeting, and the commitment to meet with their constituents on a regular basis.

Look at the candidates, so many of them are successful business owners. Those are the people i want "controlling the purse strings" of downtown. Not some yay-hoo, who doesn't know a thing about running a business.