OK, I'm harping. There's a recurring problem, and I want to understand it. My question was this: given that Commissioners say they are responsive to their constituents, but noting that some in particular ignore those voices, or don't even want to hear them, is there some pattern, some way to anticipate, when Commissioners will listen to their constituents, and when they won't? Could we predict when Commissioners, or those Commissioners most prone to the lapse, couldn't care less what Park residents think and want?
The context includes this: last month, our Mayor said he wanted the Commission's blessing to enter into special exploration with CNM about the water, because one family allegedly complained to him. But when a petition signed by over 100 Park residents was presented to the Commission, neither the Mayor nor any other Commissioner bothered even to comment on it. And in the past two months, there was the presentation of an Ordinance to solicit the voice of the residents via a referendum, but the Mayor, and Commissioner Dr Cooper, voted against it. They voted against learning what the residents of Biscayne Park want.
Tonight, the Mayor, that's the one who ignored the petition and voted against the referendum, commented that the "squeaky wheel gets the grease." But he doesn't want to hear the wheel squeak. And when Commissioner Anderson raised the subject of soliciting the opinions of Village residents about which public school they would like their children to attend, he spoke against that, too. He said he didn't want to know opinions, if the Commission might be unable to effect the hypothetically desired action. Not that the Commission would be unable. Just that they might, in theory.
Furthermore, our Mayor ran in part on a platform of openness and precision, explicitly about the minutes. In the interest of accuracy and greater completeness of those minutes, he took a leading role in charging the Village Clerk to change the way she composes the minutes, to reflect "salient points," whatever anyone thinks those are. It has taken her many hours to try to distinguish whatever "salient points" she guesses Commissioners meant with their comments. But when Commissioner Ross introduced a list of amendments to prior minutes, His Honor was the only one to vote against admitting those corrections. If those of us down wind of His Honor's caprices and neglect are supposed to feel better, in that he pulls the same nonsense on his colleagues, I don't think it's working.
Similarly, Commissioner Dr Cooper at one point asked, in a challenging way, if Commissioner Ross would be receptive to public input about something. He's not. He's one of the two who voted not even to have to hear it. And regarding the survey about the schools, he argued against such a survey, by asking the possibly rhetorical question as to whether Commissioner Anderson intended frequently to solicit such opinions. I mean really, Commissioner Anderson, are you intending to make a habit of trying to find out what your constituents want? Commissioner Dr Cooper is mostly uninterested in anyone's opinion, though he seems to have inordinate fondness for his own. He regularly carries on foolish debates and arguments with his colleagues, the Village Manager, the Village Attorney, the Finance Director, and others, based on his firm commitment to his quirky and frequently not reality-based opinions.
So not having received an answer to my opening question, I asked again at the end of the meeting. Ross, Anderson, and Watts were dutiful in spouting the usual reassurances that residents' voices were important to these Commissioners. Commissioner Dr Cooper decided to decline an opportunity to respond. His Honor launched into some kind of discourse, but most of us couldn't figure out what he was saying. The closest we could come was to realize he didn't answer the question.
No comments:
Post a Comment