I plan on E-mailing these comments/questions on Friday-- if there's something you would like to add, or correct, I would appreciate your contribution.
At the last council meeting it was suggested that I "send his [my] answers in, as well as the questions" ... the implication of the remark was that my comments/questions were above or beyond... or outside the realm of your comprehension. As a courtesy to you, I've attempted to keep my questions and comments as brief and concise as possible, and I have also provided them in advance of the meeting date. Clearly that courtesy, has only earned me the reciprocation of unresponsive answers and now cheap ridicule... and let's not forget the "whispered" rhetoric dismissing and attacking my constitutionally guaranteed "American" civil liberties.
The reasons why a rational person might find this an unacceptable circumstance may be included among the things you can't comprehend... if so, then perhaps there's no choice but for this conflict between us to escalate until all reasonableness is laid to waste. As I understand the law, and legal precedent on the subject, I am legally entitled to take no less than five minutes of the council's attention during a public comment portion of a meeting-- unless the council has good cause to limit all persons present to some announced period of speaking time. It is not by my desire, or my preference, that I exploit that legal right to make more of a point or spectacle than I think is required ... but if you provide no rational alternative, then so-be-it.
At the last council meeting, I made what I thought would be a last effort to secure from the council some reasonable excuse for referring to the land deal/agreement associated with the construction of a merged library as a "donation". I was hoping I could make my point, and solicit a relevant response, without having to explain to the council why it is desirable to preserve the integrity of the English-language by obliging words to actually mean something. In all honesty, I think the council probably does appreciate the need to keep language free of doublespeak ...I just think the council's appreciation for that ideal evaporates when the principal threatens their own convenient propaganda.
Clearly the council supports the construction of a new library... but it is equally clear that the council wishes to avoid any elaborate cost-to-benefit analysis, or any substantial public scrutiny regarding the potential implications of this multimillion-dollar investment in, rapidly degrading towards archaic, social infrastructure. The wisdom of this investment is without a doubt far short of obviously apparent and I think that provokes cause to both doubt and question the council's confidence... the fact that the council appears willing to play very deceptive word games to disguise the truth that "the land donation agreement" is in fact a contract detailing substantial (profitable) reimbursement for the land procured just ices the cake of reasonable suspicion.
Moving on to a related technology/information-age issue. Relevant to the council's consideration of a replacement for the Mendham messenger... I make the following suggestion.
Some effort should be made to reduce expenses by taking rational advantage of more efficient methods of communication. i.e. the town's website, and cable access channel. I don't think it would be an inordinate imposition to expect people, who need or desire to have a copy of the newsletter mailed to them monthly to simply make that request. ( to maximize the convenience of making the request the town could set up a special voicemail message box and provide the phone number and extension in a once a year newsletter mailing to all resident addresses)
In conclusion, I ask the council if they have any information regarding if there will be any change in the town's proportional tax burden, relevant to county and regional school obligations as a result of the revaluation? |
