Sunday, September 05, 2010

most recent council actions and political courage

Our most recent Council work session included some good movement on some issues I would like to resolve before my term ends. However, it also included a bit of disappointment which I'd like to discuss first. When I was Mayor, I started a policy of inviting a variety of religous leaders to conduct our opening prayer. While I am a Christian and consider myself a religous person, I am also very supportive of the concept of separation of church and state. However, I have no problem with the idea of an opening prayer for a legislative body. I did, however try to represent the varied and diverse religous traditions represented on the mountain. We had leaders from all the local churches and several off the mountain, including a rabbi. Since I am friends with at least one Moslem family up here (and I'm sure there are more), I had always wanted to invite a Moslem cleric to lead a prayer, but just never got to it. When Bill Lusk took over as mayor, he asked our fire chaplain, Stacy Seals to conduct our prayers. That was a fine idea that I supported and Mr. Seals has done a wonderful job. However, I have recently been very concerned about the anti-Islamic mood in the country and particularly some of the protests against the building of mosques, including the recent vandalism and arson in Murphreesboro. Perhaps I am particularly sensitized by my recent visit to the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, but I have always been deeply concerned about any persecution of minorities based on religion, color, national origin, etc. I thought that having a Moslem cleric do our opening prayer on one occasion would send a positive message of tolerance from the Signal Mountain community. I offered to make all the arrangements and I was very pleased when the council agreed. I talked with Chaplain Seals and he was supportive. Therefore, I was quite disheartened when I got home a few hours later and received an email from Bill Lusk stating he had reconsidered and didn't think we should do this. Almost immediately I received emails from Allen and Robertson agreeing with him. I know that frequently when Mayor Lusk and Vice-Mayor Robertson take their cigarette breaks during meetings, the other Council members stand outside and talk and I saw them talking after our meeting. I have to assume that they got together afterwards and had second thoughts on my proposal. Either this or they just didn't want to disagree in an open, public meeting. Frankly, I think this is a failure of political courage on their part. As English philosopher Edmund Burke said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." They suggested I write an "OpEd" since I feel strongly on this, but obviously a public display of tolerance by the entire Council would have much more meaning than the personal expression of an individual. I certainly regret this change of heart, but nonetheless I do want to express my own personal plea for religous tolerance. This was one of the founding principles of this country and one I feel very strongly about.

On a more mundane note, we are finalizing a revision of our "vicious dog" ordinance. Our previous ordinance defined "vicious" by specific breeds which I feel is inappropriate and we are working on a definition based on behavior. We also are revising our noise ordinance to define inappropriate noise based on objective decibel levels rather than the current vague definition of "annoying". As our chief said, "some people are more easily annoyed than others"! As I wrap up my term on the Council, I am trying to be sure we finalize as much as possible. I know from previous experience how hard it is to walk into the middle of something so I hope to minimize this for the next Council.

One other issue I'm trying to resolve has to do with benefits for Councilmembers. Early in our terms, one of the other councilmembers brought up the idea of allowing councilmembers to sign up on the town health insurance policy. Since the plan was for the councilmember to pay their own premium, this seemed like an ok idea, so I supported it. However, it later occurred to me that this could also affect our rates if a councilmember was high risk (realistically, councilmembers are likely to be older than most town employees). This was confirmed by Honna Rogers who told me that Blue Cross had serious concerns about this and would probably not continue to allow it. I suggested we repeal this option for future councilmembers. This is probably a moot point since Blue Cross is apparently not going to let us do this in the future anyway, but I thought it was better we get this off the books and it will be repealed.

I mentioned previously a "Chaper two"... I hope in the next few weeks to review the last four years and, more importantly to discuss the issues I see confronting the next Council. As you know, there will be Town Council elections on Nov. 2. Three seats are up for election and two incumbents, Hershel Dick and myself are not running for re-election. There are currently 6 candidates for those three seats. There will be at least two public forums for the candidates and possibly a third. So, stay tuned!

No comments: