Nuisance Parties or Nuisance Councilors?

They say time flies when you’re having fun, and time certainly flies when we’re on air with Ted Baker. This month’s interview began with a topic that we ran out of time for during our last appearance—the nuisance party ordinance. Augustine explained why she had been labeled the ‘party pooper’ councilor and clarified some details of the ordinance that had led some people to object to it at the last regular Council meeting.

Baker then turned our attention to the recent post on the ‘proffer agreement’ between the former city manager and the NYS Attorney General. He wanted details and we explained that we don’t have the details—that’s the point! This agreement was made when we were both on council yet, as Capraro stated, we were unaware that it existed. It’s not for a failure to ask questions (we think it’s safe to say that we always ask the tough questions) but instead indicates a climate on Council that prevented answers from being given. With some new faces in city government now, we are optimistic that we won’t see a similar situation occur, but our point in raising the issue is to ensure that the systems are in place to make City Council accountable to the city residents, in exercising its oversight of financial and personnel matters.

When asking questions is seen as a bigger nuisance than public urination, we know things are topsy turvy! But we hope the City’s on course to turn itself around. For more on this interview, or to listen to our past appearances, visit the NoStringsGeneva Radio Archive.