By DAN VALENTI

PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, WEEKEND EDITION, SEPT. 26-28, 2014) — On the road and taking care of business, but THE PLANET posts this interesting question to start things off for the weekend: What happened to the sign-up sheet at Tuesday’s city council meeting? That was the meeting where TES would be discussing 100gate with our Right Honorable Good Friends on the city council minus Barry Clairmont, who was on a Rocky Mountain high in Colorado.

We have now heard from a number of people, independently, each making the same claim: When they went to sign up to speak against 100gate — the mayor’s inside-job Done Deal to move 40% of city hall to his buddy’s commercial building [the old First Aggie] at 100 North — there was no sign up sheet at the podium. Odd, isn’t it? THE PLANET has put the question to council president Melissa Mazzeo, wanting an explanation.

Until we hear from Madame President, a number of possibilities come to mind:

* The Empty Suit, mistaking the sign-up sheet for Dorothy’s red slippers, sent his legions of flying monkeys in to swoop it away.

* The sign-up sheet somehow fell through a rip in time and space. It hyperlinked its butt into an alternate universe to get away from Pittsfield.

* The sign-up sheet was not only printed with invisible ink. It was also printed on invisible paper. Rumor has it that TES has a special supply.

* The dog ate it.

Gosh, you don’t think the mayor had one of his flying monkeys steal the sheet prior to the meeting beginning? Surely, our mayor wouldn’t stoop that low, would he?

THE PLANET would be interested in hearing from anyone who can shed light on this mystery — including those who showed up to speak but couldn’t because of what might have been the latest dirty trick coming from Your Local Government.

——– 000 ——–

Mazzeo: ‘Plenty of People Could Have Been Approached’ if Sheet Was Not There

Just before noon on Friday, THE PLANET heard from council president Mazzeo. She pointed out that the city clerk is responsible for putting the sign-up sheet on the podium. Mazzeo said city clerk Linda Tyer was on vacation and that assistant clerk Malia Windrow-Carlotto subbed for her on Tuesday night. Mazzeo said that Windrow-Carlotto “put five sheets on the podium at 1:30 that afternoon, which is hours before Linda normally does.”

Mazzeo said he typically gets to the council chambers at 6:30 p.m. and waits until 6:59 p.m. to take the sheet back. She tells THE PLANET, “No one indicated they were looking for the sheet, and there were plenty of people in the room that could have been approached if in fact no sheet was put up. So I’m not sure this was the case. I think people came late and the meeting had started.”

In other words, Mazzeo cannot say that a sign-up sheet was there. She doesn’t know. If the assistant clerk put the sheet there at 1:30 p.m., that would have left five hours prior to Mazzeo’s arrival for someone to remove it. If that occurred, you have to ask: “Who would benefit the most?” The answer would be TES.

Whatever the cause, a number of citizens tell us they were there before the meeting, looked for a sign-up sheet, and it wasn’t there. Each one was against the move to 100 North St. THE PLANET does agree that if that was the case, they should have asked for one … and yet …

The other side of that, of course, is that attending a public meeting is tough enough for many people, not only because of busy schedules but because if you wish to speak out against the Administration or a Suit-Approved policy, you risk being printed, filed, indexed, and noted — and not in a good way. The courage not just to attend a meeting but to actually speak from the podium requires even more resolution, especially if you wish to register a note the mayor might find discordant. That’s likely why so many people hold back. Our guess is that they will do their speaking in 2015.

Did THE PLANET Uncover ‘the Smoking Cue Cards?’

To add yet another step to the gauntlet, which would be the case if your had to “bother” one of your “busy” public servants to ask why there wasn’t a sign-up sheet available, would only make it less likely and not more that the city would received a well-rounded representation from the public. As it is, city employees — basement dwellers, apparently — spoke “the right things” by the mayor. From what we hear, they had their bullet points well digested and rehearsed.

On that latter point, THE PLANET received a communication from a worker at city hall, who says he or she “saw a list of points the mayor wanted [speakers] to make.” This source called them “cue cards,” referring to a piece of paper that had a series of bullet points on them. Our source, who would have reason to know, says that piece of paper was sitting on one of the speaker’s desks, in plain view, earlier that day, in the afternoon. If true, this would prove that the employee-speakers in favor of the mayor’s 100gate scheme were ringers. It would strongly suggest that they had been asked or ordered to speak in favor of 100gate. If true, the testimony therefore was nothing more than a set of clumsily stage-managed theatrics from a mayor who refuses to be questioned openly and in an unscripted manner.

Such behavior from The Man Who Would Be King doesn’t call to mind Profiles in Courage, does it? We’re more apt to think of a title like “The Coward’s Guide to Conflict.”

——————————————————————————————–

“What are kings? / Are they history’s play things? Who knows? Can you tell by the clothes? / Are they tall? Are they short? / Must they have a court? Are they near? Are they far? Oh, who can tell me what kings are?” — Huntington P. Hollingsworth, “What are Kings?”, (1970).

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.