Mayor's Comments Heavy on Emotion, Light on Fact

On Friday, the Mayor had a press conference and made some pointed comments about us. Craig Fox, of the Finger Lakes Times, asked us to respond.
Well, most of the things we had to say have already appeared here on the blog. That's the point: We express our opinions openly and stand by those statements.

On Thursday, June 14th we posted about our latest radio appearance. We received a question from someone wanting to know our thoughts on the Democratic Committee's endorsements. We responded, but maybe people haven't gotten the hang of exploring all the comments yet, so here is what we wrote:

For the most part, our blog leaves party politics to the City Republican and Democratic Committees, but, since you ask, we'll say this: In our view, the underlying causes of the current disharmony are the Mayor's lack of leadership, the City Manager's "divide and conquer" approach to relations with Council, and the Council's own impatience with dialogue and lack of interest in exploring issues from a variety of perspectives in full view of the public.

We agree that this is troubling, but if the alternative to this "division" is to roll over and just "go along to get along," then the division must stand regardless of how uncomfortable it may be. Our approach is to continue exploring issues, provide information and a point of view to the public and try and generate solutions to the real problems of local government.

As for endorsements, the City's Democratic and Republican committees have always been an important component of local government. Committee members, whose positions are actually public offices and who are therefore accountable to voters in their parties, are dedicated volunteers who work to frame issues and recruit candidates.

We think it perfectly reasonable for those committees to evaluate the public performance of Council and take that into account when making endorsements. And it's a two-way street. Councilors can disagree with the committees to the point where they are compelled to go their separate ways. In the recent round of endorsements, or lack there of, Mayor Cass and Councilors Greco and Cosentino actively sought the endorsement of the Democratic Committee. They interviewed just like we, and the other candidates, did. They heard the committee express its commitment to open, honest, transparent city government just like we did. They understood the committee's desire for candidates who would do their homework on critical issues and engage in respectful dialogue.

Cass and Greco were ultimately not endorsed. The Finger Lakes Times reported Cass and Greco's anger, but not the Committee's reasons for the decision. Cosentino was endorsed, but handed his endorsement back to the Committee. Again, the Times tried to portray his actions as a noble gesture of solidarity with Greco and Cass, but his letter to the editor states that he made a political calculation that it was against his "own best interest" to accept the endorsement. He's entitled to do that, too.

The Republican party has an equal responsibility to establish criteria and select candidates. So far we haven't heard what criteria they are interested in. Weeks ago, Mr. Beckley stated he considers himself the best person for the job of Mayor. That must mean that he believes he can manage Council better than Mayor Cass. But his past public comments and his numerous opinion pieces, as well as those of some of his running mates (including Councilor D'Amico) have wholeheartedly supported the current administration's operations. The Republicans will likely focus on the symptoms of the problem ('the division on council') rather than the root cause (a lack of leadership and good faith dealing on the part of the administration). With that, they probably hope to stay below the radar and not really take a position on anything of consequence.

Bottom line, our system leaves it up to the parties to field candidates that they believe will work together for the good of the city. Then its up to the registered voters of the City of Geneva to meet, question, and evaluate those candidates and cast their vote for the ones they want working for them.