Skip to content

When is a Discussion a Discussion?

by on July 13, 2013

The posts made by New Hartford Plus on their Facebook Page (from which we are blocked for commenting) about “missed opportunities” seem very strange.

Maria’s statement at Thursday night’s Town Meeting (paraphrasing here), that if we only just go through their rules one at a time and discussed them, surely we’d agree they were best for the Town, hid their true agenda.

What do I suspect was their real motive? If they could just make that meeting last long enough, the people with jobs and families would have to leave and those 50 people could get their way.   It was extremely warm in the room.  The discussions, as Brant Keller notes on the page in his comment, went on over the course of years and their group was involved.   There was no need to waste anybody’s time with a rule by rule discussion. A rational person on their side would not expect a good outcome with the composition of that crowd.  A delay was their only hope.   I’m sure I wasn’t the only person in that room who remembers the Budgets passed at Annual Budget Meetings that were voted on by less than 20 people by the time they finished “discussing” the items, sometimes after midnight.

The discussions that developed the new Recreation Commission Rules happened at several meetings when this group found it frustrating when they couldn’t call the police to kick football practice out of the park.    They then tried to reinstate the 1987 rules, irregardless of the fact that one of those rules they themselves broke regularly, and excluding non-residents was now illegal.    There were no “discussions” asked for when they were writing these rules all by themselves which is, by the way, the only time discussion is appropriate.

She was not willing to call the Town Meeting to make the new Recreation Commission’s Rules enforceable, because under those rules they couldn’t call the police to kick the kids out of the park, and under those rules the neighbors of the park didn’t have more rights than the rest of the taxpayers in town.

I will note here that if there is illegal activity happening in the park, such as under-age drinking, the police are indeed capable of enforcing the law.  I suspect the presence of football curtails some of that activity for a few kids at least for part of the year.

Hopefully this resounding denial somehow filters through so the kids can practice this year without harassment. Hopefully the next group of kids who need the space for practice are also able to play without harassment.

Thank you for coming out New Hartford!

  1. I believe you absolutely correct as to the true motive.

  2. I thought the same thing. If we had to spend hours discussing each item many people would have been gone by the time the vote was presented. That could have taken 5 or 6 hours is my guess.

  3. Laura White permalink

    The answer is within your commentary. “a rational person.”

Leave a Reply to Alesia Kennerson Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: