That was quick. Gluba makes a decision and the good ole boys club conspiracy begins in the Times comments. An article in the Times points out that Gluba selected Barnhill as Mayor-Pro-Tem.
If this is an example of the decisions that Gluba is going to be making in the future, I am glad he got elected. Lets look at what he had to choose from. First off, eliminate all of the new guys. Left-over you have Barnhill, Ambrose, Frink, Hamerlinck, and Lynn. Lets think this out for a second.
Ambrose. Um, no. This guy couldn’t make a decent decision if he was allowed a cabinet of highly qualified decision makers.
Frink. Well, if you want to leave the illusion that it really is the boys club, this is the one to pick. He is accused of being the council D1 rep more than most. I will say, initially I thought Frink would be a D1 puppet when he first ran, coming to my door pretty early in the campaign process, all sweaty and handing me my free pad of Frink Post-it’s. He has not done bad, though he does have a definite should have had a V8 lean toward D1 initiatives, he seems to be more level-headed than I thought. But, in the end, compared to Barnhill I don’t think he’s much like Gluba personality-wise.
Hamerlinck. Well, you know how I feel about this guy. If I were mayor, I wouldn’t put him in my club. I don’t think Hamerlinck has decided what club he belongs to. With his decisiveness, if he comes to my door selling cookies I wouldn’t be all that shocked. With new team-mates, I don’t think Gluba, or anyone for that matter, can count on which uniform he’ll be wearing.
Lynn. Here is a cascade of bad decisions that makes Niagra Falls look like lock and dam 14. Nice thing is, with this council I doubt he will get any bone-head things accomplished that allow him to harbor fugitives in his rentals. Overall, he is bordering on making it look like McGivern never had an agenda of his own.
So Barnhill is it. It seems after all of the above you have someone that is not a D1 puppet and when the accusations of the boys club in the last few years has surfaced, you rarely see Barnhill being negatively accused of playing along with Team Howard, Frink and Brooke. He has been on the council multiple terms and honestly, when the bickering hits Defcon 4, he truly keeps his cool and manages to make sense. Barnhill doesn’t seem to me to be a D1 puppet and I haven’t gotten that from Gluba yet either. I think Gluba made a good call here and picked the guy that, at least on the surface, seems to be most like him. I could be wrong, but we’ll see how it plays out.
Times article:
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/12/05/news/local/doc4756e7ee8d793660559963.txt
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Gluba picked a mayor pro-tem that he feels reflects his views, but is it a view of patronage that comes from a party mind-set that says if you are a good soldier you will get an appointment? Obviously he sees in Barnhill qualities that he believes will serve the position well. And, that is his prerogative, his appointment to make. I do think Barnhill has been effective on the council & will do a good job.
As for the tag that Frink is a D1 puppet, I find nothing to support the label. He is as free a thinker as there is on the current council. Supporting development is a common goal of a number of Davenport stakeholder, including D!. That doesn't make any of the stakeholders puppets of anyone. I agree with the remaining assessments of the current council.
I don't like your assertation that D1 has "puppets" to begin with, and further, you assume that if they did their decision making would be somehow a terrible thing. You're quick to laugh at the conspiracy theorists on the Times blogs (rightfully so), but the idea that D1 is some bad organzation out to get you is equally absurd.
I agree with the accessment of Dec. 13th. I don't see any of the elected officials as puppets. Perhaps with the exception of Bill Lynn.
Some see the sense in working with the business community as well as neighborhoods and non-profits, and others are strictly self-serving, negative people who will vote against anything or anyone they see as working with D1. Fortunatly most of those short-sited people are gone and the remaining three only have two years left. Hammerlink needs to grow up if he wants a political career. Ambrose ins't smart enough to move this city forward, and Lynn only cares about his landlord supporters.
I'm still waiting for your (Paine) reponse to why you seem to have an angry tone regarding D1, and how you justify annointing people as "puppets." For your proclaimed love of sources and examples, you've yet to give a good reason for this.
Well, I don't think that I called anyone a puppet...
"Frink. Well, if you want to leave the illusion that it really is the boys club, this is the one to pick. He is accused of being the council D1 rep more than most. I will say, initially I thought Frink would be a D1 puppet when he first ran, coming to my door pretty early in the campaign process, all sweaty and handing me my free pad of Frink Post-it’s. He has not done bad, though he does have a definite should have had a V8 lean toward D1 initiatives, he seems to be more level-headed than I thought."
I said that I thought Frink would be a D1 puppet, and that has not occured.
Is D1 a bad thing? No, I don't think so. Has D1 been remarkably ineffective for the amount of money they pay people and have they gone after some initiatives that haven't generated growth, I think the answer is, most likely. That is what sparked the letter a year or two ago that threatened D1 and other commerce groups to reorganize and show progress or risk losing major funding sources. D1 could generate it's own thread as to whether it's good or bad. There are a lot of people that think the organization really hasn't done anything, which I also find to be untrue. Feelings about D1 are truly a matter of opinion in most cases. They haven't really disappointed me, other than the fact that I think they could do a better job of attracting business.
http://www.rcreader.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11327&Itemid=42
Well, to put the "puppets" thing to rest - I think even implying it exists is a stretch, and I think such a obviously negative term should be avoided out of fairness.
You sound reasonable on your opinion of what's been done by D1, but I would suggest that you consider several things before you lean towards the notion that not enough is being done with the funding.
First and formost in the past year, New Ventures (which is part of D1) has been responsible for bringing in or retaining several large businesses in the perviously vacant I-80 industrial plot. When the City was soely responsible for this, it went absolutely nowhere.
In the brief time that it was turned over to New Ventures, it has exploded with activity (i.e. Evolution Rage, metal working company whose name escapes me, approval for rail-line build-outs etc.) Also, Standard Bike just expanded with the help of N.V.
Second, the Downtown has continued towards a positive trend of development and growth. Say what you want about particular projects you may or may not like, but you can not make the argument that we're going backwards downtown. The last 8 years have seen incredible amounts of development from the retaining of Lee, to the amenities, and the significant renovations like Bechtel Park and the Lady of Germania gateways, which were onced AWFUL looking. All of this is a direct result of D1's willingness to partner and work with a lot of different groups over the years to achieve this.
Attracting business is a tricky and long process, which as I've noted above, has been happening whether a lot of people notcied or not. Currently the Arsenal has been working with D1, and the rest of the community leaders through their trip to the Redstone Arsenal in Hunstville. That looks like working towards brining more jobs to me.
I appreciate your civil and level-headed opinion of D1, but I think a lot of people just don't give that organzation any credit and just abuse them as a scapegoat when things don't go right.
Also, the Reader is a joke if you're using it to make a point here. Their "journalism" is about 90% angry at the world opinon, and 10% poorly researched "facts".
Post a Comment