Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Lord Save Us From Passive Agressive Politicians

[Updated March 19, 2012, with corrections]

We’re sorry, but we just had to get this off our chests. 

On February 15th, a piece of city council legislation was passed that was one of the worst pieces of legislation we've ever seen.  A councilman (a politician) authored (or was it council president's idea) a piece of legislation under the guise of accountability that looked to be essentially passive aggressive at its core.

The legislation appeared to be targeted at  1 present, and 2 former council members (politicians) who missed the last public council meeting of 2011, … one member who was stuck in traffic or whatever, the others who had given prior notice that they were not going to be at that council meeting because of an important Democratic function. 

There was one other council member missing; however, we think the 3 were the main targets, though we've been told there are some who aren't fond of the other missing council person (and we really don't know if he had said previously that he would not be there).

Anyway, there was no addendum for the meeting,  there were no committee reports, and  of the 7 department reports, 2 of the department reports were to wish everyone a nice holiday;  while most of the other department reports were not an emergency, and didn't need the presence of the missing council members. 

[Big Hint] The 3 people, by the way, had been endorsed by the Democratic Party (in last year’s election) while the others (except for two at the local level) weren’t.

At that last 2011 meeting,  one of the pieces of legislation the council president, and several others wanted  to vote on, was a union contract (collective bargaining agreement) where we noted (in a previous post) … allowed police union members to continue to pay only $20 individual / $40 family a month for their health insurance (that included dental and vision).    Anyway, council needed a quorum to pass the minutes;  and also, due to a lack of a quorum, several pieces of legislation (mainly involving police collective bargaining agreements) were not read or passed. 

This city has 1  or possibly two African American police officers/patrolmen out of about 40,  in a city of about 70% African Americans.

The council president (a politician) at that last 2011 meeting, publicly scolded those 3 people, and the other (in grandstanding style) for not showing up (as if it had never been done before, though one of those she scolded, had only missed [we believe] that one meeting her entire 2 yr term), and the mayor (a politician) in council caucus, etc went on and on about them being sore losers, etc (because two of those same people did not win in last year’s elections).  We think some other words that came out of the mayor’s mouth were  get over it” (you lost).

That last 2011 public council meeting …  well, … seems members of council (politicians) met later on and passed the damn thing (and most of the other things they wanted to vote on) anyway. 

Now get this … what this piece of legislation (at the Feb 15th public council meeting) boiled down to was … if you don’t let us ( council president, or  council secretary) know you are going to miss a council meeting, we’re going to fine you.  [However, … if you get sick, or a relative dies, or for a myriad of other acceptable, arbitrary reasons, you don’t show up without prior notice, … you won’t get fined.]

Didn’t the mayor (last year) do an almost last minute endorsement of a person (a politician) who had been very ill, and could very well have missed many meetings in 2012?  [Oh, … and that mayor endorsed, elected individual, … well, (and this is not funny, or meant to be a “dig”) he died about a month after the November 2011 election, causing all kinds of problems for his district's residents.]   So give us a break.

These members of council (politicians) apparently go to a bunch of closed door meetings all year long.   Suggestion:  Inform and open up all meetings to the public, and have 1 official public council meeting a month (since they all pretty much know how the other is going to vote anyway, and you could save on electricity.)

Instead of all that passive aggressive bullshit legislation, the councilman could have said (one of a number of possible scenarios), "Look, ... I'm pissed off because the Democratic Party endorsed them and not me ... And damn it, we needed a bunch of council members at our last public council meeting in December, so I and a bunch of other politicians (who may or may not have read the union contract) could have "kissed ass" and voted yes, on that collective bargaining agreement, etc. ... and not mess up our Christmas holidays".

Three things we’re tired of, … passive aggressive politicians, passive aggressive (worthless) legislation, and (although we love our unions) police unions who may have bullied their employers with contracts that could potentially cause financial burden on a city (current or further down the road).  The police unions know their members will be the last to be laid off. 

If there is one group of public employees that shouldn’t have a union … it’s the police.  Their leadership can put anything they want into a union contract, … and, who in their right mind would vote “no” on most of the important things (to the union) in that contract … knowing the police could show up at your or your relative’s door, or put you six feet under, or plant false evidence, or throw you in jail, or give you a ticket … and, you’d be almost powerless to do anything about it.   

What's comical ...  even though Republicans hate unions, a lot of union  members lean toward the Republican Pary ... certainly the FOP is conservative leaning (to their credit, they give to good causes).  We'll let you figure out why Republicans tolerate police unions.

Though most police are just doing their job, don’t tell us you have no fear of the police … Don’t tell us you don’t think about abuse of police power.  A big humongous suggestion:  Make sure your city has a civilian review board.

And … while we give a pat on the back to most public employees, ... we’re still watching all you politicians, and a host of other potentially dangerous public employees, ... and most, if not all, large corporations.

[To be further edited, with possible corrections if necessary]

No comments: