Why They Fight?
On Thursday, the mayor posted her argument for the ORT behavior in recent meetings. I take exception to many of her points.
Point#1
The Queen says "Everyday we fight to restore value to your TAX DOLLARS by restoring the community services…"
No, you fight to restore your warped sense of the citizens priorities. Please poll the entire electorate and see if they prefer a fully-staffed police force or their trash bill paid by the city. I am sure an overwhelming majority would say the former.
Point#2
The Queen says "We are fighting to restore fiscal discipline to your local government…"
How does creating a Purchasing Agent position fall under fiscal discipline? How does paying unauthorized consultants to work on secret projects meet the definition? Don't even get me started on the $25,000 for a "pool study" that could possibly be provided for free from the various contractors who would bid on such a job.
Point#3
The queen either doesn't know math or she is a liar. Her trash restoration budget only allotted a bit over $600,000 for trash service. Yet, the last time the city paid for trash it was around $1.2 million. So, either she is not restoring service at the level you have come to expect or she is getting some sweetheart of a deal from the trash companies.
She goes on to explain more about why the ORT fights and tries to assume the motives behind the council majority. Examples of the latter include a secret conspiracy to RAISE YOUR TAXES!
How about a little less fighting and little more spirit of compromise or communication?
How about not fighting civil rights and allowing citizens their right to speak and address their representatives instead of putting down your foot on an issue where you are so apparently wrong?
Am I the only one who finds it a bit ironic when the ORT propaganda machine harkens back to the Why We Fight World-War-II-era propaganda series?
Point#1
The Queen says "Everyday we fight to restore value to your TAX DOLLARS by restoring the community services…"
No, you fight to restore your warped sense of the citizens priorities. Please poll the entire electorate and see if they prefer a fully-staffed police force or their trash bill paid by the city. I am sure an overwhelming majority would say the former.
Point#2
The Queen says "We are fighting to restore fiscal discipline to your local government…"
How does creating a Purchasing Agent position fall under fiscal discipline? How does paying unauthorized consultants to work on secret projects meet the definition? Don't even get me started on the $25,000 for a "pool study" that could possibly be provided for free from the various contractors who would bid on such a job.
Point#3
The queen either doesn't know math or she is a liar. Her trash restoration budget only allotted a bit over $600,000 for trash service. Yet, the last time the city paid for trash it was around $1.2 million. So, either she is not restoring service at the level you have come to expect or she is getting some sweetheart of a deal from the trash companies.
She goes on to explain more about why the ORT fights and tries to assume the motives behind the council majority. Examples of the latter include a secret conspiracy to RAISE YOUR TAXES!
How about a little less fighting and little more spirit of compromise or communication?
How about not fighting civil rights and allowing citizens their right to speak and address their representatives instead of putting down your foot on an issue where you are so apparently wrong?
Am I the only one who finds it a bit ironic when the ORT propaganda machine harkens back to the Why We Fight World-War-II-era propaganda series?
posted by suzyjax at 1:43 PM
5 Comments:
The Queen guarantees that if the third ward vacancy was filled by one of her "yes-men", then all of her dreams could come true. Yet, she is using some warped version of new math if she thinks 3 + 1 = 5 people needed to pass an ordinance.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Truth or Cons,
This is the exact reason I brought up that subject of 3 + 1 = 5. I think this is exactly what the mayor will try to pull. Will we be prepared to rebut her argument?
However, city ordinance reads as follows:
1) The extra one person isn't truly "elected" but appointed and approved
2) The mayor is not an elected member of the city council. She is the mayor and gave up her council seat to become mayor. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.
SECTION 110.260: ORDINANCES -- BILL REQUIRED -- VOTE REQUIRED
No ordinance shall be passed except by bill, and no bill shall become an ordinance unless on its final passage a majority of the members elected to the City Council shall vote for it, and the "ayes" and "nays" be entered on the journal. (Code 1961 §2-29; CC 1976 §2-121)
Purzner keeps pushing this "fair and full representation" for the ward 3 citizens. She could give two chits about the ward 3 citizens. She just wants her yes man in that vacant seat, so she can continue with her dirty deeds. I wonder if anybody falls for her bull-chit on her website?
Grrrrrr..Purzner and her 3 goons are just so effing ingnorant!!!!!
If one has a bulk mail permit, do they get postal services more economically?
The USPS must charge for a BM permit, otherwise TS might have gotten one of his own.
Not having to pay for his own license, and saving on the cost of stamps....gee whiz.
This makes the public wonder. Does abusing or misusing a BM constitute mail fraud?
Constitutes stupidity at least.
BTW.....curious article in the Journal.
Post a Comment
<< Home