Thanks to the library's newly powerful Wi-Fi signal, I was able to post live from the council chambers last night. It was slapdash, but I'm not much of a typist.
In contrast to so many previous spectacles, the meeting was professional and business-like to the point to befuddlement. It was like watching a European art house flick as opposed to an American car chase epic.
It should be noted that council president Dan Coffey appeared to have been sedated. He sat expressionless through colleague John Gonder's brilliant, dispassionate public explication of Coffey's January 15 meltdown. Coffey similarly endured my later questions about public speaking rights and Bluegill's subsequent request that the council publicly rebuke the president so as to establish a principle that remains so elusive in New Albany: There are consequences for bad behavior.
Both Gonder and NAC's co-editor correctly stated that Coffey had lied to the police about his behavior at Studio's, and Coffey did not deny it, which I plainly consider an admission of guilt, if implicit. There were witnesses, and yet the council president chose to provide the police with pure fiction.
If one lies in such a manner to the police, is this not an example of hindering a police investigation?
Isn't this fact alone grounds for the council to officially and publicly ensure its loose cannon of a president?
The point is this: Coffey obviously has been taken to school since the previous meeting, and last night, he did not contest any of the statements made in his presence. Yes, he took his medicine like an adult, and that's admirable in a limited sense.
But he did not apologize for his behavior.
He should. If he doesn't, the council should take action to police itself.
What do you think?
I was very pleased to read about last night’s meeting. I hope Coffey continues his good behavior.
ReplyDeleteFor me, however, the most important point is not who called who a name, or lied to the police, etc. Coffey is a bully. He intentionally intimidates constituents and follow elected officials. We all know that.
But, through the work of many during the preceding two weeks, last nights meeting showed that Coffey is not omnipotent. He too must obey certain rules. He may be able to out yell any individual, but he cannot out yet a group. I hope last night served as an example to both elected officials and other citizens that the reasonable concerns of attentive, hard working citizens can make headway against Coffey’s obstructionism. We can make this a better city.
He is a Tempest in a Teapot...give it time and he will blow his top again. In his mind, providing false statements is a way of life, no matter if it is New Albany's finest or the citizens he represents.
ReplyDeleteI do not feel that Coffey "represents" any one in this city but himself.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Coffey perfectly represents whats WRONG with this city.
Put a fresh coat of happy colored paint on rotting wood, and it is still rotten underneath, and only a matter of time before the rot comes back out again.
I understand that politics consists of much wheelin' and dealin'. Compromises. Back scratching, etc. However, there still exists the "right thing to do". John Gonder understands this. So does Bob Caesar. Even an attorney recognizes it--Stan Robison.
ReplyDeleteThose three gentlemen have all approached me with regrets about the way a citizen was treated at a Council meeting. They know the right thing to do, regardless of consequences. Bob called my home yet that evening after the meeting. Stan apologized yet that evening. John's statement at last night's meeting went even further. My thanks to them.
However, I am disappointed with the flaccid response by the remaining members, including Mr. Coffey. When the Council was asked by Roger, last night, whether they believed that a citizen should have the right to speak, the response was underwhelming to say the least. Ms Benedetti was the only one I observed who finally said yes. How do the rest of the members feel about what happened and what should happen in the future?
Yes, Mr. Coffey took his medicine as an adult. I share in Roger's limited admiration for that. Mr. Coffey also brought up moving the non agenda portion closer to the beginning of the meeting. He also said that he did want to place a "hard" time limit on speakers. I agree totally with Mr. Coffey on these two ideas. When will he admit that he was wrong in dealing with the citizens of New Albany? When will he tell the truth about the incident with Jeff? Until these questions are answered, how can the public have any respect for Mr. Coffey and the Council?
Well said Christopher D, well said.
ReplyDeleteA real test for a real man is if he can admit his mistakes and apologize when they hurt others.
After all some really great men find ways to apologize to the hurting people for the idiots that can't or will not.
It is tests like these that bring out the true colors of man.
Will the real Mr. Coffey please stand.....
Is there anyone in the 1st district that has the ability to beat him in the next election? It's never too early to start planning...
ReplyDeleteBayernfan,
ReplyDeleteThe answer to your question is probably so, but how do we entice them to try?
The last election was close enough that had it been a State or Federal office, there would most assuredly been a second look taken.
However, due to the "party" leadership's (and I use the term chokingly) position that local elections are "hands off" territory, that never happened.
At the time, as I recall, the loosing candidate was informed that if she could come up with the cash out of pocket to pay for the process, a recount would be attempted.
Otherwise, "Too bad---you lost!"
To be clear, some of that leadership is no longer with us and some in the new regime have indicated a new day is coming.
We're waiting with anticipation.
That being said my position is that second only to persisting in our participation in the daily process of keeping them on their toes, our key contribution to change is to find, persuade, and support good forward thinking people to put on the ballot for the next election.
Easy to say--hard to do, but imperative nonetheless.
To know who might run, we have to know how the district lines will be drawn.
ReplyDelete