Open Letter to Marco Island City Council (again)
Last night I watched a group of 5 politicians retreat from their responsibilities. I witnessed the utter breakdown of a local government. This exhibition of unwillingness to lead and participate in our government compromised your stewardship. We deserve better than that. I am embarrassed for you.
Citizens clapping after a citizen speaks is not disrespectful to the Council. Citizens clapping after a Councilman presents a motion is not disrespectful to the Council. Citizens reacting with catcalls when 5 out of 7 members unreasonably refuse a motion that is reconciliatory is predictable.
The majority of citizens being impacted by the STRP feel they were blind sided. There is a reason for that and now we know what it is. The prior Council avoided public participation or discussion. It has been reported that the prior Council knowingly made policy and business decisions out of the sunshine. It is the responsibility of this Council to make that right. You had a responsibility to join with Mr. Kiester's motion to discuss the continuation of the STRP. You decided it was more importan t to save face. To follow your egos. To not consider that wrongdoing may have occurred. You decided that you have no inherent responsibility for the actions of your predecessors.
What would you expect of your citizens? That they timidly sit back and accept your lack of interest and contempt? You ask for respect and decorum without giving the same to those you serve. You have never sought out public input, you never commissioned a public survey to determine what we wa nt or need. You never sought public consensus on any issue. You and your predecessors invented reasons to build something you believed we required and spent our treasure unnecessarily. Only two of you had the courage or willingness to discuss an issue that has torn our community apart for almost two years now. We deserve answers.
Councilman Tucker unnecessarily asked to adjourn the meeting. His motion to adjourn implied he was unwilling to accept responsibility for his vote. It only exhibited further contempt for the process and democracy in general. I and the majority of citizens in that room found his actions reprehensible. Why most of you agreed to follow his lead escapes me. What could possibly be of more importance than resolving the issues of our City? What purpose did the adjournment serve? Do you believe these issues will resolve themselves by the next meeting? You will only have to address an even larger assembly and these issues will still be awaiting for your attention.
Mr. Batte asked you to stand up and take your jobs seriously, he asked someone to lead. To turn over a new leaf and govern our city. It is now obvious that either you have no desire to do so or many of you have no experience in that area. If you are not willing work for and with us, than you should resign. Taking your toys and going home when things do not go your way is not what is expected of you. Your work remains to be done, running away from it serves no purpose.
Byron Erickson
1 Comments:
since the majority of the city council (all but 2) are unable or unwilling to honestly address the issues, and thereby fix the mistakes they have entreated us to, then by cancelling the meeting AND DOING NOTHING is the best thing that could have happened.
since for the most part they are incapable of governing (read: representing all of their constituents), good, let them cancel every city council meeting until they are all out of there.
is this the only place where a representative form of government does not allow for dissention?
By Mario R. Sanchez, Ph.D., at Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:44:00 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home