It started relatively innocently enough. Councilman Curry penned his OPINION on why City Hall should be placed on the OCTA site instead of the Park/Library site. Reading through it again, it seems relatively harmless and while most of the comments from anonymous/non-anonymous readers were...well...colorful, there didn't really seem a sense of malicious intent behind Councilman Curry's comments. While I called him out for supporting something (A New City Hall) which defies to principles of being a Conservative thinker (smaller government, less debt), I applauded him (and Mayor Rosansky) for having the huevos to go out on the limb and state an opinion, since barbs will always be thrown at them for anything and everything they say. I mean really, if Mayor Rosansky said the sky was blue (in the Press), then there would be tons of comments saying that there was a City conspiracy to keep the sky from being green, or he had a financial interest in the sky being blue, or that him and Councilman Webb shared a brain...you get my picture. The barbs that have been thrown at me have been hilarious, and I just write this stupid little blog.
Then Mayor Rosansky penned his response. And while Mayor Rosansky states his opinion, he's a bit...more...critical. He states his reasoning why the City Hall should go on the Parkland, but concentrates primarily on going after Councilman Curry's OPINION. "I read in dismay," or "To say the editorial is replete with distortions, misrepresentations and unsupportable facts is being generous," or even criticizing Councilman Curry's right to an opinion stating that "I do not believe he possesses any of these qualifications (those of a geologist, civil engineer, traffic engineer and an architect)." Then again, Karen Tringali, in a letter to the editor, put it perfectly saying, "City Council, DMJM consultants and the majority of the voting public are not certified geologists, civil engineers, traffic engineers or architects." Yet we may all get vote on the project and we all certainly can have an opinion.
So then Councilman Curry has a choice. He's just been attacked in the press by a Council colleague. He can either:
A. Take the higher road, be the bigger man and not fire back and let this Press fueled animosity back off a bit. Then they can work this through with the current Curry-included 4-3 council majority on this issue.
B. Take the high road and pen a civil, informed, smart, and OBJECTIVE response, or
C. Aim low and pen an equally vicious attack back.
Councilman Curry chose C. He suggest that Mayor Rosansky's actions are why one-third of the citizens have deep anger and distrust towards City Government. Although I would dispute that 1/3 of the total citizens number since probably only about 1/3 of the entire City residents actually pay attention to City Government and out of that 1/3 (who are not City lobbyists), maybe about 42% of them don't trust City Government, and that's probably being generous (+/- 83,000 residents x 1/3 = 27,390 and 27,390 x 1/2 = 13,695). If you figure that every vote that Dolores Otting received (11,479) in her 2006 election against Councilman Curry was one who distrusts City Government, the percent of residents who don't trust City Government would be around 42% of the 1/3 of City Residents who pay attention to City Government (sorry about that tangent). Anyway, Councilman Curry says, "Rosansky trips over his own rhetoric," "After reading Steve Rosansky's rant on Aug. 6, I have a better understanding of the frustrations of our citizens (regarding distrust)," and "...but the tone of Rosansky's letter diminishes the council and demonstrates a failure of leadership and consensus building. The residents deserve better," to name a few.
Councilman Curry essentially says that Mayor Rosansky is doing a crappy job as Mayor.
While Councilman Curry felt that he had to defend his honor and reputation, he just perpetuated the war of the words in the Press. Now Mayor Rosansky will be compelled to respond in an equally strong, if not stronger, manner. Two wrongs don't make a right, and Newport's dirty laundry will get further aired. And parents thought that MTV was going to ruin Newport's reputation.
All this over where to put a White Elephant.
A while back, I mentioned that building new City Halls have ALWAYS been the Albatross around the necks of City Councils. Whether its the cost or the location or the actual need, new City Halls bury City Councilmembers. This one will be no different.
No comments:
Post a Comment