So it sounds like a majority of the members of the City Council support the school bond and levy, and were willing to state so publically.
And yet, as a body, the City Council was unwilling to even consider formally endorsing said school bond and levy.
The new sign outside City Hall.
Let me say all that again to see if it makes any more sense. A majority of Council members said they support the school bond and levy, and plan to vote for them. But they wouldn't even discuss the possibility of endorsing them as a governing body.
Nope. That still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
Sounds like most people speaking were also in favor of these things. We all know the school is in bad shape and then some. And now we all know where the City Council (collectively) stands on this. So why this little yes-no dance?
Half Hollow: Now with 50% more - or is it less? - hollow!
It surely couldn't be the fearsome threat posed by the few people who spoke against the bond and levy. Dick Pilling is a well-known kook who opposes everything, and offered up a "solution" that the City Council has no control over. Shelley Taylor is another well-known kook who opposes everything, and offered up the unsafe and out of date courthouse as an example of how the quality of a building doesn't matter to those using it. (Never mind, Shelley, that both the school and the courthouse are accidents - or shootings - waiting to happen. Oh, and never mind that, since 1914, there's been a lot of, you know - MONEY - poured into maintaining the courthouse.) These are the same know-nothing idiots who, as already stated, oppose everything.
So why this ridiculous posturing? Why this public twisting in the wind? I know this Council is bozo-heavy, and that their actions frequently make little sense. And I'm not even advocating for the ballot measures - but the Council members did. Sort of. Kinda. They took one step. Why so hesitant to take another? Are they just so afraid to show actual leadership on anything? What goes on here?