Reply to a comment

What consequences? There is a balancing act when cities review the cost impact of improvements. But when it relates to safety issue, the consequences are interpreted with fear.

And having been raised in a family involved with municipal safety issues, let me present the latest consequence which does not typically reach the ears of citizens, be it in another town.

When a Deputy Chief is presented with 10 engine company accidents in traffic of which 4 are the result of one driver, the Deputy Chief requests removing that individual from these responsibilities. The official response, the city cannot due to union rules of employment, so the driver remains in the same position.

How is that for an example of consequences, that cannot be addressed to improve the safety of safety personnel as well as citizens. See this is the stuff that most cities face, but citizens are duped into believing that we are getting the best out of safety management and rank and file. I have seen it all and believe me, this is just one of many examples and discussions that grace our kitchen table.

In this city, it appears to be empire building and Mr. Murphy will use whatever means at his disposal to expand, regardless of the financial constraints, as officially expressed by our city manager. In the end, if we expand one department, than given limited funding, another department suffers.

This is a example of city directors competing for funds and using leverage schemes or sheer political and municipal cunning to move his agenda forward.

It is simple, if it is not a NEED, then forgo the request regardless of county leverage schemes. Remember, in my example, Council cannot change union rules for employment that impact safety, but they surely can control spending. So please Council, I ask for financial prudence. At least 5 of you demonstrated that in your vote.

On the eve of a major shift in citizen perception of government/reform that will usher in new members at all levels of government, I would like to believe that Marco Island governance would take heed of the message resonating throughout the land- NO MORE SPENDING.