Thursday, October 8, 2015


In the interim between Council meetings I had planned to blog on national issues of social programs, fiscal policy, as well as foreign policy. However those subjects are complex and past experience has shown too little interest by blog readers in one man’s opinions.

Instead there has been a domination of interest in local doings which is natural given the weirdness of elected leadership in Oz.

Oz’s three main sources for governance and money management, Administration, Council and the BOE, are each dominated by a singular faction.

These three groups are nominally at odds with each other but seemingly in the discombobulation resulting from their non-transparency there seems to often be an unexplained merging of interests.

These three bodies not only control large sums of money including its allocations and but also the jobs that go with their function. Action by any one of the three in the past few years frequently does not seem to be kosher and might not bare scrutiny for collusion legality and obviously the blatant exercise of “Quid pro Quo”.

One may wonder if the recent defeat of the South Ave. PILOT project could be tied into the plan to outsource the Planning Division. Sounds improbable on the surface but also consider complaints against the Planning Division by some developers some who seem to have close ties with influential officials.

Add to the fact that Watson, the recipient of a questionable golden parachute after being severely criticized for years by not only the public but strongly by the present mayor when a Councilman, has become a Department head in this Administration. Williamson after years as the Corporation Counsel spokesperson for Robinson-Briggs was awarded the CEO ship of the PMUA a position not in his expertise; has been given a questionable HR role by the BOE.

The Councilors never explain their voting against or abstaining from a proposed Resolution or Ordinance, implanting an impression that the sole purpose behind their vote was political. Legitimate questions or expressions for action against dubious dealings are not followed up but buried in “never never land”. Posturing is the goal for many of the Councilors.

Smiley and Watson continue to answer questions about Administrations desires or actions with unsupportable “vaguities”. There can be only two explanations; they are unprepared or they wish to bamboozle the public and Council.


  1. Doc, is it possible to have term limits for our elected officials? With the present system of recycling individuals from one public position to another the residents will continue to suffer.

    1. Yes but that would require a Change in the City Code which would have to be done by Ordinance. fat chance. The other method would be by a public requested referendum at a general election.

    2. To 12:08pm - I understand, and agree, with your premise. But we already have term limits, and it's called the vote. Unfortunately, too many people make lame excuses for not voting, and this is what we get. If they would get off their lazy duffs, and spend one quarter of their time asking questions, and paying attention to the city issues, as they do watching American Idol, we would be much better off. And, we would have term limits.