Reductio Ad Absurdum

I've been thinking about the appointment for the vacant Ward 3 seat, the appointment process ordinance, and Mayor Nick Guccione's stand on both. It's been two months since the election and only last week, did our "people's" Mayor name his appointment. Obviously, things aren't going the way he'd hoped for but the question is; what the hell did he expect.

"It's my appointment! It's my appointment!! It's my appointment!!!" OK, enough already, this is all that has been heard from "the People's Mayor," Guccione since taking office. It's his appointment, I get it, the Board of Aldermen get it, everybody gets it, so what's being done? The Mayor's hard-line stand on naming his hand-picked replacement is being met by the Alderman with a process that is supportive of open and transparent government—"for the people, of the people, and by the people," yet Guccione, "the people's Mayor" is thumbing his nose at it.

My problem is this: Here is a man with no practical experience in managing people, has a head scratching and frightening lack of knowledge about government and how it works, yet for some reason (known only to him) he believes himself to be above the people. This man has taken his less than 50 percent of the vote as some sort of mandate that the people of Wentzville have given him carte blanche to rewrite not only the policies and procedures of Wentzville but the constitution of the United States.

"The People's Mayor" should embrace the people who want to apply for the open seat rather than say "I don't care how many names you put in front of me, I won't accept them. It's my appointment and I'll place who I want." There is a name for this reductio ad abserdum and it doesn't conform to any sort of representative republic / democratic government I've ever known. "The People's Mayor" needs to apologize to the city for having an agenda which does not consider the citizens who would like to serve. You cannot claim to be the people's voice and on the other side of your mouth tell them to go to hell; "it's my way or the highway."

Another subject that has been a burr under my saddle is the discussions had by the Aldermen at the retreat regarding the new city hall project. I asked and asked that the meeting be video taped to be seen by all citizens and was assured that it would be. This year's retreat work session was off-site and as usual, it always seems that the new city hall project is one of those subjects that is talked about at an off-site location. At any rate, the retreat was held Friday May 18th and Saturday May 19th and I had full intention of attending the meeting of the 18th just to hear the discussion about the new city hall. When I learned that it would be video taped, I decided not to go and catch the discussion at a more convienient time. Low and behold, the meeting of the 19th was taped but the meeting of the 18th was not. What pisses me off most about this is that I had the word of the City Clerk, the IT Department, the President of the Board, and two other Aldermen who guaranteed me that it would happen. I should have known better!

Subsequently, I was told that I could read the minutes of the meeting but any one who reads minutes of meetings who attended a meeting knows that minutes are not verbatim and on numerous occasions I've found them lacking in content. It's been almost two weeks since the retreat and I've been told that the minutes will be posted after the Board approves them at the next regular meeting. Wonderful, we only have to wait three more weeks to see the abridged version of the meeting of May 18th. The City has no business taking discussions of such an important nature off-site to a remote location, it needs to be discussed in our City Hall chambers!