A Q & A session at the Tuesday night fights better known as the BOA Meeting!
Well folks we have here a short report on what transpired when former Alderman Steve Nieder asked the City Administrator a couple of questions reference the Civil Service Rules, and the Memorandum of Understanding between the Firefighters and the City. About that time the City Attorney Mr. Rob Golterman advised Mr. Eckrich that he didn't have to answer that, he (Golterman) would. Mr. Golterman ( who seemed to be uncomfortable) discussed it until Mr. Nieder calmly asked a couple of pointed questions about the contract. It was at that point that Mr. Golterman said "I can't recall." Mr. Nieder continued to press for answers only to have Mr. Golterman "not recall" a few times. May we assume Mr. Golterman "won't recall?" I think so.
Now I have not heard that defense since Hillary Clinton told it to the grand jury in the 90's. May we assume that our City Attorney (of Lewis, Rice and Fingerish) in fact knew Mrs. Clinton and was "baking cookies" when all this was going on? We already know that Mr. Golterman's firm wrote the memorandum of understanding, and not Mr. Golterman (and why not,) but what we don't know is who told Mr. Kurt Becker (of the Fire Fighters Union) that the Civil Service Rules would be amended at the BOA meeting? (they weren't.)
There seems to be a lot of "selective" memory loss when it comes to those two little items, and I am beginning to believe a F.O.I.A. form will be in order so we, the great un-washed can have a chance to understand this. I also wonder why a man making nearly $100,000.00 per year, plus perks is not allowed to answer a citizen's questions? Is there some concern as to the way this deal was done, and it became obvious to all that "the mouth piece" needed to step in to save the day? In this case it certainly looks very suspicious, no?
Now you may be wondering what the Avatar of Sgt. Schultz is doing next to Mr. Goltermans Avatar? Fair question and it's because "His Honor" (in this case Sgt. Schultz sound alike) chimed in almost immediately with the "I had nothing to do with it, it wasn't me" routine. Now this reminded me of Sgt. Schultz of "Hogans Hero's" who always said "I know nothing, I see nothing" so what better illustration of "His Honor" showing us his "bail out mode" than that? May we say, to paraphrase the Bard, "Me thinks "His Honor" doth protest too much?" I think so, no?
Tom Ford
NO. 795
posted by Crestwood Independent at 16:58
5 Comments:
I think both the city administrator and the city attorney should have just abstained from answering his questions. After all we don't seem to mind when aldermen do it.
That abstention really got to you, didn't it? Too bad. It's the only way to stop the mayor's tyrannical use of tie-breaking.
I have always wanted to know; why do we enter into a MOU with the Fire Department?? The city is under no obligation to recognize them as anything other than city employees. They can't strike, work slow-down, recieve better pay or benefits. Do they get Union protection from city actions - NO. If it is such a great deal, why don't we do the same with the police department? It looks like and smells like BS!!
9:10 Great question!
Problem, who at City Hall do you ask?
What roll does this union play in the running of our city? Our city firemen are employees, our Charter calls the shots, our officials make the decisions, preferably based on stable information. The City Attorney and the City Administrator are city employees and charged with the responsibility of providing correct and apolitical information. When all these lines get blurred, it is time to get out the magnifying glass. Ignorance of the fact and playing politics is not something this city can afford and certainly does not want. Playing ball in the Firefighters court is totally out of line. Time to make some noise and find out who is boss and how thin they want the managing sliced.
Post a Comment
<< Home