August 18, 2008 05:38 pm
—
Reader: Let New Albany Council know your opinion
I recently attended the New Albany City Council meeting concerning the smoking ban and I realized that we have the worst City Council ever!
Even though there were pages of businesses that closed through the United States and Canada due to smoking bans in those cities, our City Council isn’t concerned that a smoking ban could put hard-working, taxpaying businesses out of business.
Now that I see the way the City Council acts on public health issues, I walk the streets of New Albany delivering The Tribune. I don’t own a car. So as a taxpayer, my question is — we live in the Ohio Valley, the most polluted area in the country. You can see the smog hanging in the air every morning. The Council should ban automobiles, lawn mowers, taxis, buses, factories and anything that create a public health issue. Look at the old buildings in our town. Most of them have lead paint in them. Even some of our so-called city leaders have businesses in these buildings. Did they take the proper steps to protect the public when they enter their business?
So, once again, the City Council ignores the real issues and goes about dealing with the things that won’t create any hard work for them.
So, here’s the facts! A lot of long-time businesses will be gone and jobs will be lost. The economy is in bad enough shape without our elected City Council making it worse. The people and businesses this smoking ban will affect and close down, our city leaders and elected officials would never go to.
I’m glad to know that the City Council knows how to govern our city. They don’t worry about our $2.5 million deficit or the take-home cars or cell phone abuse.
So, let’s voice our disappointment to the city leaders. I urge everyone who can to write letters to the editor in order to show our pride in how the City Council overlooks the really big problems.
— Joe Tanksley, New Albany
Kessens clarifies his thoughts on consensus
Since The Tribune article headlined “Four schools start year on academic probation” appeared in the paper (August 12, 2008), my phone has not stopped ringing.
I did not say, as Bill Briscoe reported to you, in my opening day speech, nor have I ever said that I “hope to return to the consensus model in the collective bargaining process.”
What I said was, “If we truly returned to the consensus process, quality decisions would get made instead of each new issue being approached like a battle.”
I also said, “We deal with statements from various sources that are half-truths.”
Some important points the Association has made many times and makes again:
1. The administration proposed to abolish consensus last October in bargaining. Their proposal would leave every decision completely up to the superintendent.
2. In our Joint Guide to Consensus, adopted by the School Board and the Association in 2001, consensus is defined as “At a minimum, consensus is a decision that no stakeholder finds unacceptable and that all stakeholders will support.”
3. Consensus requires trust to be successful.
I also said, “If this administration would return to what consensus truly means, I know we could solve” our problems.
We mean what we say. If we returned to true consensus, we could solve our problems. We need trust. We don’t have it. We need shared decision-making; not a sham that results in the superintendent making all decisions. We need consensus used throughout the school corporation, not just when it’s convenient for the administration.
I wish Mr. Briscoe had quoted from my speech, “We could put aside the egos and the attorneys and the power struggles and rejoice in one another’s successes,” but that didn’t make the article.
We welcome the community’s knowledge of what we’re all about. It just needs to be accurate.
— Mark Kessans, President, New Albany-Floyd County Education Association, New Albany
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.