Stand Up and be Counted Ye Naysayers

Ken Bond had some thoughts which are answered below by Dave Richins:

The issue is less complicated than is noted in the responses. An analysis of any bureacracy illustrates the problem. When something is initially set in place to assist or protect citizens, soon that item becomes more important that the people it is designed to help.

In reading the responses to Mr. Bodines questions, they do not really answer the questions. It is truly a business unfriendly city. In the debate at LD 18 the other day, one of the candidates indicated that the problems of being a business unfriendly city were directly traceable to they. When asked who "they" were, he responded, the bureacracy of the city. It should always be kept in mind that any entity of government or other bureacracy has four objectives.

First, once created, they want to live forever. They become adicted to sustenance from the taxpayers.

Second, they desire to grow. In doing so, they do all they can to provide more and more services after which, when put into operation, they want to expand. They will say the public demands it.

Third, they desire more power. Fourth, they do all possible to avoid oversight or accountability. And as our friend, William Shakspeare noted, "Ah, there's the rub. I would suggest to the opponents of the tax, once again as said by William, S., This above all, to Thine ownself be true. And it follows as night the day, Thous cans't then not be false to any man. [to be politically correct, to any person.] Ken Bond
__________________
Dave's answer:

Cannot the same be said of political parties? This seems to be about political ideology and not about what is best for Mesa. The politicians were elected by us. We have the power to change the direction of the city. We have attempted to do so by the initiative process (for good and bad). We are accountable for how our government behaves, spends money, grows, shrinks, or otherwise exisits. Ken and those who agree with him take the easy road of blame and accusation instead of creatively solving problems. Their answer seems to be, "the government shouldn't do this, it is not their role..." Then why have the government at all? When the city has cut over $50 million dollars since 2001 and it is still accused of being bloated...please give me an argument of solutions, not accusations.

I may allocate resources differently than others. I may use tax dollars in ways that some people may not agree with. However, we put the people in office to make decisions because I don't always have the time to study every issue and do it through popular vote. I live in a representative republic and live with the decisions of those I put in office. For better or worse.

For once in my life, I would like to hear what the VBO and Ken Bond and District 18 republicans (of which I am one) give their alternative to the budget. Go out on a limb and tells us how you would do it and see if you can get four votes on the council or 50% plus one to agree. They are good at criticism, let's see how good their solutions really are. Put up a plan. Or stop armchair quarterbacking everybody else. It is so easy to 20/20 hindsight but I want to hear what they would do if they were in the chair and had the button. They have to play by the same rules, which means, the Arts Center stays, it was voted on by the people. Light Rail is up for grabs but contracts have been signed and it will cost a lot to get out of them. Let's hear it!

Dave