And it isn't how you say it. It's what you don't say.
Case in point: not too long ago a city councilman was quoted in the Blue Bag Rag as saying "there is a lot of demand for services," without any evidence to back that up. How are the "demands" issued? To whom? Exactly who gets these? Name. Position. Who? Where can we get a copy of these demands? Where is the process for issuing demands documented? Is it publicly available? What is the definition of "a lot?" In the absence of clear, on point answers to these and other questions we're left to conclude we've just been treated to another politician spouting political bullshit in support of something that is out of touch with the public. But of course, nothing was said about this.
The same Rag has the City Manager confessing that staff are looking into any and every way they can possibly jack up the millage ceiling, with a rate hike to immediately follow. A favored approach is for the city management (bureaucrats) to bypass a referendum and unilaterally change the charter, eliminating the ceiling. There is also some blather about avoiding a decrease in city services. OK, what isn't said is how many of these "services" are the result of profligate spending of one-time COVID funds. Of course not. That would suggest that these "services" should go away, so let's not bring that up.
This "we don't need no stinkin' referendum" scheme was discussed on social media (surprise, surprise). The mayor chimed in and at no point clearly and definitively stated that there would be no rate hike, no ceiling lifted without a referendum, as was promised when the city was being sold to the voters. Instead, the mayor was crying poor-mouth because the founders of this city committed, then and for the future, that this city would be limited and spending would stay under control. The political blather sank into a claim that the State Farm complex would have been apartments were it not for the city, and yet, because of the city they're building apartment towers at State Farm. Can any politician put together two sentences without a contradiction? And nothing was said about keeping commitments made to the voters. There was something said about "solving this" (whatever that means) before leaving office, but that assumes there won't be a recall vote. If citizens must demand that their voices be heard at the ballot box do not be surprised if they rise up and do so.
Posts
