In response to Tony Messenger's 'From the mayor, with love':
I suppose perception is everything. In my opinion Burlison didn't vote against the very people who got him elected, meaning the Police and Firefighters (and I didn't realize they had endorsed Burlison, I DO know that Cynthia Rushefsky got a standing ovation from the Police and Firefighters and Burlison did not).
Had you, Tony, been there or had you had an opportunity to watch it on T.V. prior to your blog entry, you would know that Burlison was concerned that if the City tacked onto St. Louis' enabling bill, affording them the opportunity to take a 1 percent sales tax to the voters, they would stop seriously looking at other solutions to the shortfall issue pertaining to Police and Firefighter pensions.
While I certainly wouldn't try to speak FOR Burlison, I believe Burlison would have preferred that new Council members had more of an opportunity to look at other solutions before seeking enabling legislation.
Yes, I understand that the Council wanted to seize the opportunity to tack onto St. Louis' legislation which they felt would speed up the process, but if, as the Council said, they want to raise taxes to fund the shortfall as a last resort, what's the hurry? Maybe Burlison felt they should spend a little more time in exausting other possible solutions BEFORE seeking authorization to take it to a vote. Both positions seem reasonable enough to me, at least for a person willing to consider both sides of the issue rather than simply picking a side and polarizing the issue.
I happen to have interviewed Burlison myself and KNOW that he is very supportive of the Police and Firefighters and wants to see this issue resolved. It is a matter of the best way to solve it.
I do wish that *some* people in this community would spend less time looking for a way to snipe at people they disagree with and more time seriously considering varying opinions and entertaining the option of compromise. It might well be that the polarized pundits might EACH have something to offer in solving problems in our community if we were willing to have an open mind.
Could it be that the budget might offer some options? Burlison noted last night that the new Council members had not yet had the opportunity to look at the budget. Yet, they were required to rush to vote on this enabling legislation prospect. I have to wonder if our City's leaders don't sometimes get in too much of a rush.
In Messenger's rush to 'mend fences' with the Mayor I hope he hasn't alienated other Council members who might happen to think that raising taxes isn't the answer to every problem that our community faces. He might just want to interview a Libertarian 'looneylibby' someday.