My rebuttal to your editorial consists of 5 points. I hope you will give them some consideration. They are as follows:
- The people elected Mayor Green for his message of financial responsibility and change, yet you seem to want him to just become a simple traffic cop of the council meetings. Why? If the Mayor is not permitted to drive the agenda against an obviously hostile group on council, how can this community ever hope to move forward in the next 3 years?
- Why did you rub the former Mayor's central campaign slogan: "...through cooperation and working together" in Mayor Green's face? Rick Green was elected. Kurt Alberts wasn't. Questionable ethics here? Or did you miss the message?
- Why aren't your editorials EVER equally chastising of what the "gang of four" is doing? Can you not see it? Aren't their sabotaging efforts worthy of an editorial? Or is your view clouded because of affiliations?
- Some are quick to say that the political and municipal advertising has nothing to do with the editorial comment. Should we believe this?
- Are you doing this simply to "sell" more controversy/papers? Shame on you if you are because all you are really doing is feeding the dysfunctionality. But then again you have had 9 years of pablum fed to you so maybe you are just doing this to shake things up a bit. Too bad the new Mayor is your scape goat. I could have easily thought of others on council.
Are you paying attention, Editor Groeneveld?...