Monday's Council Meeting

Having just downloaded the Agenda for Monday's Council meeting, I was poised to write a lengthily commentary. However, I then checked to see if Plaintalker had posted the crux of this meeting, and to our pleasure she had plus a report on a pending PMUA appointment.

Since it would be ridiculous for me to try to duplicate that which has been duly reported in detail, I shall limit myself to a few brief comments:

The assignment of city owned vehicles to various officials is legitimate if used only for work related purposes. Unless the IRS rules had changed, I could not deduct the cost of operating my car from home to office to start work. It follows that the 40 miles between residence and city limits is a personal matter and should not be at the taxpayer's expense. I also wonder if any city official needs an expensive to operate vehicle. City related business should be definitively stated.

The request to discuss the so called Ral Blanco rules of order for the Council is worrisome. The plan for only one set of meetings a month and rotating sites seems to be a priority for this Council. When it was originally thrown out as a feeler , I voiced strong objections because it is not in the public's interests. Whereas it is true that some members more than others of the Council have on paper a heavy committee and liaison load, that should go with the territory. The interaction between Council and public should not be compromised.

I have not been able to read "The Civil Responsibility Act Ordinance 2005-07" but it would seem that it may have been disregarded over the past few years.

About the PMUA, how much with perks does a commissioner receive annually?. since this is a Municipal Authority is the compensation of its officers and directors open to public review?

I think this agenda session will be most interesting.