"... the City ran the risk of blacklisting from future grants if we cancelled the plan completely."This is a clear statement that we are driven by an ambition to spend other people's money--by way of grants. We at The Other Dunwoody will not entertain the claptrap about how we pay the taxes that fund these grants, or "getting our share", or how if we don't get the grant someone else will. We will simply suggest you research "The Tragedy of the Commons" and start taking some ownership of America and not just your back yard.
This selfishness also blinds us to the key point underpinning this repavement project. Somehow we got backed into a corner and are now presented only with a Hobson's choice.
Now if this situation was created by, at the request of and with the approval of Council 1.0 in an open and transparent manner, then all is well and good and the time for carping and complaining is over. It is now time to act on the plan. If Council 1.0 instituted the plan, began execution and passed the baton to Council 2.0, it is incumbent upon the current Council to take that baton and run with it, not throw it down and whine.
But the carping and complaining remains ceaseless, even on Council, making one question whether Council 1.0 was very involved in the actions that precipitated the "future grant poison pill". If not, then who did this?
The obvious place to look, if you are not the Police Department, would be at those closest to the action: the bureaucrats down at City Hall. Did someone at City Hall take the steps constituting an irrevocable commitment? If so, who did this? Did they have standing authorization to make million dollar commitments on behalf of City taxpayers? If so, this should be fixed immediately.
If this was some deal based on bureaucratic "initiative", as many suspect with Project Renaissance, then Council needs to act, first to terminate the offending bureaucrats and then to amend the process to prevent future disasters.
Posts
