It appears Meyer isn’t the only person able to ruffle feathers before an apparent welcome departure from the council. Winborn has riled up the masses one last time in an effort to push Davenport Promise to the voters. (I was going to ask someone to check Hamerlinck’s pulse since he has stopped the whistling kettle behavior after the election, formerly spewing steam at Howard and the Mayor. Now he’s back to the predictable whistling, in addition to getting condescending with people. I think he owes the Menard’s representative an apology after talking to him much like I talk to my dog during the first consideration on zoning. “Good boy!”)
That being said, on the surface Hamerlinck is likely right, as the council may not be overly educated on this, and Winborn could be partially culpable. One of the comments in the Times relates to where the committee is on this, since we haven’t heard from them publicly, or even know the make-up of the committee either. I think it is premature to push this to voters now, especially when the council isn’t even up to speed on the ins and outs of the plan.
But, it turns out, after a conversation with a reliable source, that this is not the case after all and this is a BS smokescreen. Anyone on the council that has not been educated on this has not gone to the committee meetings to which they were invited, or done their homework. Apparently, they have all gotten packets of information on numbers, organization and forecasts from the plan. None of that seems to be public that I can find, or at least nobody has published it. I haven’t seen this information, but I don’t doubt the fact that it has been distributed to the council. On top of that, it was stated by Ms. Cartee that the aldermen have been invited to numerous meetings and apparently they are just not attending. So in the end this may not be Winborn’s fault after all, but lies in the hands of the aldermen, namely Hamerlinck and Howard, who are leery about this, but haven’t made any effort to look at it. I find Hamerlinck’s comments about this just being a Winborn legacy move a little slanted. I think this is something that Hamerlinck sees as something that is going to be a good thing, and he wants a little more shine directed toward himself. To me, Hamerlinck is trying to make Winborn look like a lame duck, nothing more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Nice slanted view!
I want the next council to vote on this. Winborn is sorta big time stupid for pushing it now. It is not going to pass with this crew. The next council will do it because it is filled with Good Old Boys like Meeker Frink Justin Boom etc. Meeker and Frink said during the campaign they would not support the 1% tax being used for this. So we will see if they go back on this - what do you wanna bet they will? Justin is a dear in the head lights. Dumb and dumber. Have you heard him speak? AHHHH DUUHHHHH.
The only tthey're going to vote on is whether it goes before the voters for approval. The council does not have the power to reallocate this tax for the Promise program, only the people can do that. And upon what do you base your assertion that Boom is a good old boy? The fact that he beat Meyer? When I think of the stereotypical good old boy, I have a hard time imagining that such a group would be very tolerant of an openly gay man.
Your information is correct; any council member who was uninformed simply had not done their homework. There was sufficient information and opportunity.
The decision to table Promise at committee was probably the right choice. Even if the Aldermen were well informed, I don’t think there has been sufficient public discussion for a referendum to be successful.
I support the concept, but I have reservations with regard to the projections for funding based on population growth. If the committee were to present a solid alternative funding plan in the event that the population and tax revenue growth did not hit the projections, I believe the success of a referendum would be more likely.
In any event, the new council needs to be involved in the process.
I was watching the cable channel and saw that the city is running the West HS Promise seminar to the public. I wonder if the city would run an anti-Promise seminar as well on the cable channel?
The City Council has not done their homework on this because they are hoping it goes away. They don't want to have to face the music.
There will be some short-term pain with the Promise, but some very big long-term gain. If it passes, some tough choices will have to be made with the budget in the short-term. The aldermen don't want to be known as the one who voted to raise taxes or cut a service to make ends meet. And I'm talking both sides of the council here.
Sure, some of them publicly say they support it, they just don't want to be stuck with the tough decision. Someone should have clued them in that being an aldermen is not an easy job.
If the Promise folks want this to pass, I'm afraid at some point they are going to have to force the issue with a formal petition (i.e. that would have the precise wording and everything that would appear on a ballot). The petitions circulating previously were just for show of support.
Post a Comment