Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Partisan Elections to Stay in Middletown

For the second time the Council has decided to ignore a Charter Review Commission. On a 4-2 vote tonight both 4 yr. terms & non-partisan elections with term limits rec'd a thumbs down. Nay- Rodrigues, Mello, Barrows, & Santos. Yes- DiPalma & Silveira.

The other changes mostly minor, all passed. It's odd. The "Newport Daily News" has constantly promoted non-partisan elections but this time- the silence was defeaning. No, I'm quite sure that the guest editorial promoting partisan elections & 2 yr. terms from Dem. Chair Dave Lavine (NDN owner's Indian Ave. neighbor) was purely coincidental.

Mind you, the Council vote was only to place these items on the ballot, not necessarily agreement thereof.

So here is how it went down: Rodrigues- might have supported it two years ago. Now considers it "un-American" after receiving a few phone calls. Hmmm, wonder how they feel about this in Tiv. & Newport. How about our own non-partisan school committee?

Mello- previously promoted all these changes. But had a few phone calls & changed her mind. So much for consistency. It's vastly over-rated. Odd remark- "You spend a whole year learning and then spend a year politicking for the next Election." Gee, I guess actual policy-making plays no part. And- "if there were non-partisan elections, people from any Party could run." I can't argue with that!

Barrows- favors term limits but not this. Also rec'd phone calls against 4 yr. terms. Without partisan elections she doesn't believe that people would have the impetus to vote or run. Yep, that's the problem in Newport & Tiverton all right. No running & no voting.

So you didn't call? You thought voting was the accepted process for this? Silly you. Isn't it odd that they only rec'd phone calls against?

DiPalma was against non-partisan, but still voted to put the whole thing on the ballot.

Silveira wondered why everyone was throwing in their own private opinion. He thought that it was the voters' opinion that counted & he wanted everyone to weigh in- "[give] voters the right to choose". Evidently he thinks that the voters can actually, what's the word--think! Kind of like when they voted for Councilors.

Now I'll be honest. I would have voted against non-partisan elections & likely 4 yr. terms. But it sure would have been nice to have been asked. Not to mention participate in public debate. I'm not afraid of the public electorate, but evidently some are.

Un-American? What does that say about those who do not belong to either Party? Somebody call those people up & set them straight! Oooh, and don't mention buses... or fish.

Look, I swear I did not make any of this stuff (or quotes) up- my imagination isn't that wild. If the rest of you out there were not so bloody ignorant, some of us could have voted on this.

From Matt Sheley at the "Daily News" (he's not allowed to have as much fun as myself; on the other hand- he actually gets paid) quoting Councilor Sylvia who could not attend the meeting:
The suggestions submitted from this commission, unless they are in obvious conflict with state and federal laws, should be submitted in tact to the citizens of our town for their consideration,” he said. “We, as a body of seven, should not determine what suggestions should or should not be submitted. For us to arbitrarily select and determine what is to be presented to our citizens is wrong.

But, but, didn't you get any phone calls? Doesn't anyone know these 3 guys' numbers?
Post a Comment