My Side of the Fence

The danger isn't going too far. It's that we don't go far enough.

Page 17 of 403

A different direction

I haven't written a lot this year.  There are many reasons for this.  Some good and admirable, some not.  Some of it is laziness, some not.  However, what is true is that I've started missing it.  I started out writing a newspaper column way back before I was in elected office.  Couldn't believe my hometown paper would be interested in anything I might have to say.  The pay was horrible (I think I donated most of it to their Christmas fund) but I loved it.  Still have my first column framed on the wall:  "When it comes to Old Towns future: Plan now, Argue later".  It's at least a little disturbing that I could've written that title ten years or ten days ago.  Indeed, we need vision and planning for our City. brokenegg

When I landed in elected office I had to give up the newspaper column so I decided to start a blog.  Moving from a newspaper column to a blog was pretty cool and I like to think that somewhere along the way it helped our city – even if by simply communicating what the Council was up to….that certainly isn't happening now.  In the interim we lost our "Manassas" newspaper and are now covered by an amalgam of online papers and, when things go horribly wrong, the WaPo.

It distresses me that nobody is shining much light on what's going on in City Hall.  I don't know that I have the juice, time or talent to start another newspaper and I'm unsure it would be a good idea in any event.  That medium seems tobe dying or at least transforming and I want nothing to do with being an actual reporter.  So that seems dead.   

So, what I have decided to do is write somewhat about local / state issues and try to bring some visibility to them.  Write about them and post it here.  Nobody else is talking about this stuff.  We lost our newspaper and we are losing our sense of place and it has to stop.  So what I'm going to do is pick up my column again and put it here.  Just like before, some will be great and some will suck.  That's the breaks.  I suppose the biggest difference between this approach and the previous ten years of blog posts will be that I'm going to be free with my opinion on things.  

Many times when writing blog posts whilst still in office I tried very hard to write those posts straight down the middle – reporter style.  I'll still do that where it's applicable but this is an opinion piece from here on out!  Might have to break a few eggs along the way!

Hope someone enjoys it.  Look for the first column in a day or so.

A little local politiccccccs

Hey, so, I haven't written much lately.  I'm pretty wound up in my business and a few other boards that I'm involved with.  I am, for right now, the Vice-Chair of the local GOP and that's enough politics for me.  It keeps me a little involved in but not too much.  Kind of like when Grandpa hands that darling grandbaby back when it starts yelling.  ðŸ™‚  In that role, a couple of things have come accross my desk and, as we have no paper, I thought that these items warranted a few words.

The first is the notion of giving the Mayor a vote.  Currently, the Mayor may break ties on all votes except those involving the expenditure of public funds.  This expanded "vote" could take the form of a a full-blown vote on everything or just an expanded vote to allow for breaking ties on "money votes."  Either would require a change in the City's charter.  This requires a vote of the General Assembly.  This issue has been around for a long time but has never made it past the discussion stage.  For my part, I think that the Mayor has a pretty powerful office to begin with so I'm not sure he also needs a vote.  A very useful byproduct of the Mayor not having a vote is that it does keep him out of the "weeds" during Council's public deliberations.  It leaves him free to guide the process.  Having been on the inside for 8 years I can tell you in no uncertain terms that the Mayor doesn't need a vote to get things done.  If we're looking to head off a budget stalemate by giving the Mayor a vote, we're solving the wrong problem.  Short-term thinking like that is why we are where we are.  Currently this idea is on the back burner but it'll come back at some point.

The other issue that I hear in the background from time to time is moving the election for local office to odd-numbered years.  I honestly have less patience for this one than I do the Mayor's Vote issue.  Background: recall that a couple of years ago there was a ballot referendum on moving the election of local officials from May to November.  The idea behind this was that there would be more people involved and the election results would more accurately reflect the will of the people.  This referendum was succesful and so the election of local officials was moved to November in the same year that Federal elections are held.

Before I left Council I heard this bounced around a few times and it was sugested by some that the City Council could simply vote to move the election to odd-numbered years so that they wouldn't be mixed in with Federal elections.  I was not really a fan of moving the election to begin with: I feel as though many local issues are simply lost in the hullabaloo of a Presidential election.  Face it, local issues like lousy maintenance of our public works can't compete with Trump closing borders, constructing walls and building databases.  Moving the elections a year would reduce this "competition for attention" somewhat.  In that I agree.  However, as this was a referendum, I feel as though another referendum is required to move the election again.  There is little more sacred in a democracy than the voice of the voter.  Having the elected body move the election by fiat violates that principle.  It just doesn't pass the smell test.

Just my .02

« Older posts Newer posts »