Live Blog: Revised Mobility Fee Moratorium

[tufsu1]

btw Strider you know who I think is the sell out of our trust Councilwoman Lori Boyer.

sorry but Lake is right...she's the best council person out there....and the only one I trust these days

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I tend to follow, yet stay out of, most of the political discussion on this board, but I have to input here based on what I've read.

Look.  There are many people here that have a legitimate chance to make a solid run for office.  Call it internet notoriety.  Call it hubris.  Call is grassroots at the n'th exponent.  Regardless of what you call it, there are a few here posting that actually could stand a chance at getting elected to the council.  Someone who has the opportunity to both make a name for themselves and speak up for the issues that, I'd like to think, the more intelligent, forward thinking community has to offer.

Instead of worrying about a city-wide overtake of the council.  Why not, as an MJ community, start strategizing by assisting those that need hellp into the districts that have the best opportunity of being taken in the next cycle?

Local campaign contributions make the news when they're in the 5.6 figures, but no one seems to recognize the importance of the 100s if not 1,000s of triple and double digit contributions, that if started now, could pay rent and utilities in a winnable district.

Would you rather fight a horse sized duck or 100 duck sized horses?  ;-D

All I'm saying is quit living under the guise of grandeur and take what you can sensibly get.  If that means moving 'the residence' of someone who can win a seat in a few years....   Then so be it.

[JeffreyS]

btw Strider you know who I think is the sell out of our trust Councilwoman Lori Boyer.

sorry but Lake is right...she's the best council person out there....and the only one I trust these days

That is why She is the only one I feel betrayed by because at least on this issue I trusted her.

[thelakelander]

I don't understand.  What else could she do? Without her, things would have ended up significantly worse. 

[JeffreyS]

I don't understand.  What else could she do? Without her, things would have ended up significantly worse. 

She could have lost 17-1.

Was her vote the lynch pin of the compromise?

Was she in the position that Doug was in terms of she somehow "signed off" on the compromise deal to avoid the full moratorium? I guess I could understand that.

[thelakelander]

I'm not inside of her head but perhaps she accepted the agreement that Doug, Mike and Steve agreed too?  Besides 17-1 means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

[coredumped]

Has she made any plans to run for mayor?

[JeffreyS]

I'm not inside of her head but perhaps she accepted the agreement that Doug, Mike and Steve agreed too?

That would make sense. I hope so.
 

Besides 17-1 means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You have preached long and hard about this being bad development policy, bad for the tax payer and bad for the city finances. Well officially she voted the burden on the tax payer, for bad development policy and for further straining the cities finances.

I have stated mitigating damage is not the same as causing damage and I can get on board with it if that is her position.  I will ask her.

But voting records should be a major measure of how a leader performed.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

But voting records should be a major measure of how a leader performed.

Disagree.

Voting record could be a way to distinguish yourself, but the flip side of that coin is alienation. 

If you know that you spearheaded the initiative one way, but you're going to be outvoted by a huge majority, what's the point in sticking to your guns when you have a 'compromise' in place? 

Keep your friends close.  Keep your enemies closer.

[JeffreyS]

First to be clear voting record should not be the only measure. I will stick with my contention that it is an important one and I hope she will explain this one.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

First to be clear voting record should not be the only measure. I will stick with my contention that it is an important one and I hope she will explain this one.

I guess that you could count me in the group that believes a voting record is not nearly as important as the voting distribution.

Boyer was championing against the moratorium.  How could she have served herself/her district by voting against the compromised (loosely) bill that passed, knowing how ALL of the others were going to vote on the matter.

It wasn't a case of making a difference.  Only a case of non-ostrichization.   (sic, but I like it!)

[JeffreyS]

You make great points. Wonder how many knew how they ALL were going to vote and just went along?

[Cheshire Cat]

You make great points. Wonder how many knew how they ALL were going to vote and just went along?

It's called go along to get along and it happens all the time in politics.  Very often the members of council have a good understanding in advance as to who is voting how.  Sometimes they tell each other outright (in spite of Sunshine law) what their vote will be or have someone tell let if out of the bag for them.  At other times it is easy to surmise the position of others they share the council with because of what they have said or done during previous discussions on the subject. 

Each person has a certain amount of political capital and they use it wisely.  Changing course to some degree in order to vote with the majority saves political capital especially when it comes to corp issues with business players as opposed to the will and concerns of average citizens.  Businesses can often support a re-election so one never alienates a business group if they can help it unless they never plan to run for another office.   It comes back to who has the money and pull in a community and who doesn't.

One of the biggest mistakes people can make when it comes to politicians is to romanticize them and think that they will never be disappointed by them, especially if they have felt as though the person they have faith in sees an issue completely the way they do.  Often that is not entirely the case in spite of how it seems. 

Then there are the fence sitters.  Those are the ones that will throw out test statements to see how they are received by fellow council members and citizens in an effort to decide which side of the fence to jump down on. We saw that last night in both the moratorium bill and the metropark bill. The entire council jumped to one side and we saw an across the board vote in favor of two controversial bills that were framed as a compromise which can often be a nice way to make everyone feel comfortable with the outcome and with their vote. 

[thelakelander]

^I believe she fulfilled that obligation.

[dougskiles]

I don't understand.  What else could she do? Without her, things would have ended up significantly worse. 

Was she in the position that Doug was in terms of she somehow "signed off" on the compromise deal to avoid the full moratorium? I guess I could understand that.

CM Boyer was NOT part of the "compromise" meetings.  The first time we discussed it was last Friday when CM Crescimbeni released his intended amendment.  Her expression was one of disappointment.  I believe that she truly wanted to see the bill defeated.  Unfortunately, she was the only one in City Council who felt that way.