PV-TV TONIGHT! LIVE AND IN PERSON! … CALL OUT THE PHILOSOPHERS, COUNCILORS
By DAN VALENTI
PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary
(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, THURSDAY, DEC. 11 [ONLY A LITTLER LATER THAN NORMAL], 2014) — Yes, there will be PV-TV tonight. Tune in at 7 p.m., won’t you, as THE PLANET parades before four hot TV cameras, live, without a duke of an idea of what he will be “performing.” That’s the fun of the show for us. Call it the intellectual challenge, and trust us, there are fewer things more stimulating to the endocrine, neural, and nervous systems than having to fill an hour of life air time (TV is twice as hard as radio in that respect). It will be, if nothing else, interesting and we hope entertaining, informative, challenging, head scratching, and fun. Won’t you join us? That’ PV-TV, Channel 16 on the Time Warner dial, tonight.
——– 000 ——–
COUNCIL BROUHAHA BREWING
There is a whale of a philosophical debate surrounding item 20 from last Tuesday’s city council meeting. Item 20 dealt with an Administrative Order (AO) from Mayor Dan Bianchi to restructure the DPW. To put it in layman’s terms, basically the mayor wants to undo the “Barrett Reform” of the department and return to a structure similar to what it was prior to der Wunderbarrett ‚ the inimitable John Barrett, doing his “consulting thang” for Mayor Jimmy Ruberto.
With several years of operation, it is generally agreed that the Barrett Reform did its job of streamlining operations, improving efficiencies, raising productivity while helping to restrain costs. This being political, and this being Pittsfield, you would get an argument on that — and a reasonable one at that.
Anyway, the council defeated the mayor’s proposal spelled out in Item 20.
End of story?
No, wait!
It seems that under the new charter (Article 6, from memory), an AO has to be legislated (the council’s job) within 60 days. Well, when the measure first came up, it was referred to Ordinance and Rules without being debated. In O&R it languished, mainly because two of its meetings were cancelled, and — Voila! — the 60 days passed.
Was the council asleep? Was this a simple but innocent screw-up on the council’s part? Or was this intentional? Did political forces realize in advance that the mayor’s proposal wouldn’t pass, and the only way to get it done would be to trigger the 60-day rule?
It’s an intriguing question, one with nitroglycerian (if THE PLANET may be so bold to coin a word) implications given the current political splits that divide the council within itself and the council “rebels” from the Administration, all with an election looming next year — which begins in less than three weeks.
THE PLANET is on this story, we are talking to sources, and we are even trying to set up a live debate to hash it out. More on that to come, but let us ask you, because we genuinely care about your viewpoints and honestly seek your input: Do you want to see such a debate, moderated by Yours Truly? That being said, kudos to councilor Chris Connell. He was the first in, not only accepting but eager to accept this opportunity to debate the issue. That’s the sign of a man who isn’t afraid of a challenge and has nothing or little to hide.
Thanks to CC.
———————————————————————————–
“But I can’t help thinking about the time, you were a good wife of mine. Knew how to please me. Knew black-eyed peas me, drinking elderberry wine.” — Elton John, “Elderberry Wine,” from his album, Don’t Shoot Me, I’m Only the Piano Player, (1974).
“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”
LOVE TO ALL.
None Of The Above!
None of the… for what? No “what”? You don’t want a debate? Or do you mean something else.
With all the transparency that was promised, certainly doesn’t show much if any respect for the newly created city charter does it ?
Debate, yes Dan…..Not voting for any incumbent or Mayor!
You might as well have debates, all we’ve seen lately have been arguments.
Sure. But do you think Bianchi will let his team members (the ones who are supposed to work for the people) debate anything without his oversight? There are at least four council members who look like they would be terrified to show up against his will. think Cotton, Amuso, Tully.
Dusty,
You should watch the last council meeting and you may change your mind about a mayoral team. Councilor Amuso initiated a petition for the City to hire a 6 Sigma consultant to look at ways of cutting operational costs. I work in the private sector and we implemented 6 Sigma type tools years ago. To this day, we continue to reduce our costs and improve our efficiencies. Something the city has never done. It’s too bad that the City Council had to initiate this idea, rather than the administration. Kudos to Councilors Amuso, Cotton, Tully, Krol, Caccamo, Lothrup and Mazzeo for approving this petition.
On the surface that sounds cool. I know Bianchi likes consultants though so I wonder if he put Amuso up to it because he has been getting flak for hiring all these expensive advisers. Sometimes you can get a consultant to tell the people whatever you want them to hear.
I watched the December 9th Council Meeting today on-line. I was really impressed with Mr. Gaetani’s presentation to the council. Then out of nowhere the illustrious Dr. Wang showed up and dazzled the body politic! I must be wearing orthopedic shoes because I stand corrected!
You need to see an optimist and get your eyes checked, LENNY. If that doesn’t work, try an octopus. The weather kept Dr. Wang and Mr. G from their appointed round that night.
LOL
Wait, I’m confused. So did the mayor get his wish due to a technicality from a previous…bringing forward of this measure? I mean, did the 60 day clock start some time ago? If that’s the case, and the clock had already expired, why way the item on the agenda to begin with? Lol…or am I missing something?
Don’t know the answers, MrG. Perhaps one of the councilors can explain this you, us, and the rest of raeder/viewership.
The 60 day clock starting ticking on September 2nd. On that date, the Council referred it to ordinance and rules. They took it up at their October meeting and tabled it because the Solicitor said she made numerous mistakes with ordinances that accompanied the Order. Ordinance and rules didn’t take it back up until November 17th; 15 days past the deadline. It didn’t come back to council until November 25th, 23 days past the deadline.
Barry
Thank you Councilor Clairmont. You don’t know how much we appreciate your particupation in this forum represented by the Planet.
And so, if the clock runs out the Administrative Order is automatically enacted? OK, I get that, but as soon as the Solicitor admitted substantive mistakes, should the clock not have stopped?
Yes that sounds right. The solicitor goofed. Clock must stop or else every single measure that has a time frame attached to it could be dealt with this way. Remember the Four Corner Offense? I’m suspicious ofthis whole thing.
The clock is broken.
City government is broken
The clock at City Government is broken.