Kempen- It Ain't Over Till it's Over
A continuation of the saga of the former Town Admin. Kempen's secret agreement with the town leading to his department plods forth slowly & painfully. Courtesty of Projo's Meaghan Wims. She does seem to have had fun with this article.
Last night Councilor Sylvia wanted to voted on making Kempen's agreement public. This was shot down by a motion to allow Kempen to do this providing he pay back the town's monies to him & release all his personnel records. The motion held with yea's from Rodrigues, Mello, Santos, and Barrows. Oddly enough (or perhaps not), Barrows moved from opening the entire agreement with no stipulations to one filled with ands, ifs, and buts. Too bad they didn't take this tack a long time ago when this all came up. Duh.
The Prez had a lot to say to the effect of poor, poor, pitiful me. I don't get it. Where is the vendetta aimed at him? How is this about him at all? He certainly has a bully pulpit to speak from. so why deny it to others?
"Rodrigues said the council reached a separation deal with Kempen to “protect the town” and save it from “embarrassment.” This then begs the question of how it protected the town & what embarrassment is being referring to??? Heck, I'm not embarrassed. Protecting me from what- a lawsuit? What could the town have been sued FOR? And how much did it actually cost the town with this agreement & what did we save?
"Kempen said he never told the council that he intended on suing the town and he never asked his lawyer to relate that." Councilor Mello says otherwise. I don't really care. What did the Council expect to be sued for? A settlement implies that you know that you're going to lose or the fight will cost you more than you could settle for. So, which is it, why, and how much was saved and how much was spent?
BTW, all Councilors were present. To bad that not even a quorum happened Fri. when there was a public hearing on proposed changes to the town's Charter. Tick, tick, tick. The deadline for ballot issues quickly approaches.
The end? Ah, different Councils could come to different decisions. The rumor mill will continue to pour out its comments. Let the imagination run wild. I'd expect to see this on the agenda again 0fficially or not. Heck, the fat lady hasn't sung yet. Nor "the man."
For all the righteous indignation & speechifying, the question still remains. Why did the Town Admin. feel it necessary to leave, who did he refer to when he said that "town officials" were interring with him, and what did it cost us? The old political mantra still holds true- the best antiseptic is sunshine. No secret agreements! The threat that all this would have been fought out in open court strikes me as- so what? That's why it's called "open court" and this is rightly termed a "secret agreement." We're not talking about security here. Or perhaps we are? Raises a lot of questions, doesn't it?
There's an old Irish story & saying about "having the skin [animal] & the price of it." In others words, despite the Prez's assertion that you can't have your cake & eat it, too- you can. Just takes a touch of cleverness. Ah, those Irish!
Last night Councilor Sylvia wanted to voted on making Kempen's agreement public. This was shot down by a motion to allow Kempen to do this providing he pay back the town's monies to him & release all his personnel records. The motion held with yea's from Rodrigues, Mello, Santos, and Barrows. Oddly enough (or perhaps not), Barrows moved from opening the entire agreement with no stipulations to one filled with ands, ifs, and buts. Too bad they didn't take this tack a long time ago when this all came up. Duh.
The Prez had a lot to say to the effect of poor, poor, pitiful me. I don't get it. Where is the vendetta aimed at him? How is this about him at all? He certainly has a bully pulpit to speak from. so why deny it to others?
"Rodrigues said the council reached a separation deal with Kempen to “protect the town” and save it from “embarrassment.” This then begs the question of how it protected the town & what embarrassment is being referring to??? Heck, I'm not embarrassed. Protecting me from what- a lawsuit? What could the town have been sued FOR? And how much did it actually cost the town with this agreement & what did we save?
"Kempen said he never told the council that he intended on suing the town and he never asked his lawyer to relate that." Councilor Mello says otherwise. I don't really care. What did the Council expect to be sued for? A settlement implies that you know that you're going to lose or the fight will cost you more than you could settle for. So, which is it, why, and how much was saved and how much was spent?
BTW, all Councilors were present. To bad that not even a quorum happened Fri. when there was a public hearing on proposed changes to the town's Charter. Tick, tick, tick. The deadline for ballot issues quickly approaches.
The end? Ah, different Councils could come to different decisions. The rumor mill will continue to pour out its comments. Let the imagination run wild. I'd expect to see this on the agenda again 0fficially or not. Heck, the fat lady hasn't sung yet. Nor "the man."
For all the righteous indignation & speechifying, the question still remains. Why did the Town Admin. feel it necessary to leave, who did he refer to when he said that "town officials" were interring with him, and what did it cost us? The old political mantra still holds true- the best antiseptic is sunshine. No secret agreements! The threat that all this would have been fought out in open court strikes me as- so what? That's why it's called "open court" and this is rightly termed a "secret agreement." We're not talking about security here. Or perhaps we are? Raises a lot of questions, doesn't it?
There's an old Irish story & saying about "having the skin [animal] & the price of it." In others words, despite the Prez's assertion that you can't have your cake & eat it, too- you can. Just takes a touch of cleverness. Ah, those Irish!
No comments:
Post a Comment