Trending
To the editor:
Here come the men in black, City Council Galaxy Defenders. The latest use of the neutralizer of the Cape Coral City Council and the City Attorney hit the City Charter, Petition to council and the semantics of the word "pertinent."
The Petition to Council has always been No. 8 on the Council Agenda for years. I had recently discussed my new petition to council with the City Clerk. Suddenly we have no petitions to council.
The mayor has consistently refused council petitions. He refused mine two years ago and others since then. I have the documentation. The city attorney, being the "fall guy" for the Council, makes interpretations in Council's favor. The city attorney was also the fall guy for the mayor in taking away the Citizens Input Visual Smart Screen. We could place our visual aides in our presentations to council. The mayor and council did not like our visuals is more like the reason for the removal of this A/V aide. Enter stage right, the city attorney. He takes the blame and says, "you don't need it" i.e. the visual smart board.
The City Charter is our constitution. You do not change it on a whim of the mayor or council because the mayor got tired of refusing petitions to council such as mine. It, the petition to council, was seldom used as brought out by the editor of The Breeze. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
What are the semantics of the word "pertinent?" Everything I have heard from the Citizens Input time is pertinent. That includes Mr. Kempe and his successful $100,000 lawsuit. The mayor will wear out his gavel banging it for impertinence. The mayor needs a neutralizer instead of gavel. He can flash it out at Citizens Input time. We will forget our grievances and wonder why we are standing in line to speak.
Here come the men in black, City Council Galaxy Defenders.
Lou Navarra
Cape Coral