Yesterday there was an Advisory Committee meeting, well attended by guests, though as usual there were members missing. Guess not important enough.
On the agenda was the amendment submitted by Olga and supported by many which was to return Term Limits to the Village as it always was. In addition, there was a section which stated that no officer of UCO was to hold two offices at the same time. The required signatures were there and more.
I must say that Marilyn Gorodetzer ran a good meeting as far as able as the voices rose, particularly amongst the members at the table, and she had to raise her voice. Still, credit due.
However, the quibbling that went on about nonsense, the repetitive statements as every member there felt obliged to chime in, was time wasteful. First we were told that the two items had to be separated into two amendment proposals. Fine, but the debate over whether to have to get new signatures for this was ridiculous. EVERYONE who signed knew exactly what they were signing and changing the submission into two or changing the wording would not have made a difference to them and their decision to sign. It would only have delayed the removal of Joy from one or the other of the positions she holds.
In any case, to make it short (er), the second proposal had to be reworded so as to make it clear that the purpose was to insure that NO officer of UCO hold a head position in ANY other Village organ, such as the paper, Channel 63, etc. The purpose very clearly was to insure that there be a separation of "church" and state here in the Village or should I say, in this case, press and state. Not only would this amendment serve to insure that a person's responsibilities would not be overwhelming and thus be able to be done properly, but also that there was true non partisanship, or at least an attempt to do so.
Again, end results have made it necessary to rewrite the amendment proposal and get the signatures again and resubmit to the process. It will be done; this is only a slight delay and to our benefit, or rather, the benefit of CV. It will insure fresh air into the Administration of UCO and everywhere else.
What was annoying, to say the least, was the fact that although the Chair ran a decent meeting, it was clear where her loyalties lay as every time it seemed that criticism might be laid directly at the feet of David Israel, the speaker was stopped - totally - or warned off, for no reason. Are these committees a place of free speech, particularly when nothing was actually said, or not? Is extreme sensitivity or perhaps the knowing where the blame lies just too much for these people?
In addition, I am thoroughly disappointed in Fausto. Here I thought he had something of an independent brain and boom! total disappointment. He had the gall to insinuate that nothing good, nothing positive, nothing new comes from the opposition. Really? First of all, how are they to propose officially when they are banned from all of UCO. Second of all, when they do propose a good idea, it is co-opted by UCO and David Israel and no credit is given but rather credit is taken. If it benefits the Village, so much the better, but at least do not lie about it. Fausto, it seems, has gulped at the Kool Aid. Too bad. I had hopes. Foolish me.
Yesterday was just representative of a barely functioning UCO, a UCO which is run according to the whims and twisted desires and needs of its ostensible head and not according to the needs of the Village. That Village rots, but the broadband initiative or stupidity, rather, is pushed. The waters reek, but the sign for Okeechobee is pushed. Who needs a sign when anyone coming in to the Village will not buy if the roads suck, the waters reek and the homeless are lining up for a unit. Will we soon have designated spots along the road medians at the four corner spots of the Village with the signs stating "G-d bless. I'm hungry or looking for work, or have six children, etc.?"
Don't get me wrong. I have full sympathies for the homeless and the hungry and have said so many a time - but not to be renting here in a subsidized manner, not for us to be known as the refuge of the homeless of south Florida. You want to talk of resale values? Well, here is a topic to be discussed in that context!
Let us get on with what is needed and have open debate about it and stop with the quibbles and quabbles. If we do not act, if we do not think carefully - where is the money coming from to fix our infrastructure - and without breaking the backs of the residents - well, we might as well close up shop. David Israel and buddies may just as well stay here and play on their computers while the rest of us get the hell out. Maybe David Israel will actually get out of his back room and take a walk, or ride, and see what he has done to the Village. But I and many others will not be here. He will have chased us out in the name of permanent dictatorship rights. What a pity.
No comments:
Post a Comment