Tuesday, May 1, 2012

BS #61: Leading the Charge

BlogSpasm #61
     A recent comment got the staff of the CCR thinking.  Referring to the individuals identified as recommended for election to the city council and school board by the CCR, the term “negative leadership” was draped on these candidates by an individual should they be elected.

     Somehow, “negative leadership” just didn’t seem to be an appropriate comment or assessment.  Leadership has many layers, so to discount individuals with such a dismissive comment just seemed inappropriate. 

     Without question, would a candidate really be considered as possessing “negative leadership” qualities if they wanted to:
  • Ensure that contractual agreements of the city or ISD were not financially abusive to those footing the bill...tax payers?
  • Ensure that the financial standing (bond rating or state evaluations) were not jeopardized by decisions that would favor special interest groups?
  • Ensure that agreements with consultants or developers were written to actually enhance the mission of the governmental body?
  • Ensure that the chief administrators of the governing bodies were aware of actual tax payers needs when making decisions by not favoring the advancement of personal agendas?

     While we totally agree that all individuals are entitled to their opinions, it really clouds the debate when generic terms are bantered about without benefit of explanation.  As noted above, staff of the CCR understands what “negative leadership” is not.  And we would have difficulty understanding how a public servant following the above prescribes might otherwise be considered ‘negative.’

     And to this end, staff of the CCR would still recommend Joe Putnam, Brad LaMargese, Tom Spink, Larry Stipes and Norma Gonzales.

    After all, shouldn’t the first goal of a public servant be to serve those who put them in office...not to those who would curry favor, fund campaigns or seek pecuniary benefit from the governmental body?  

     Sorry, that must be old fashioned thinking from someone who hasn’t drunk the Kool-Aid during the campaign hype of this election season.  Staff of the CCR apologizes for not being addicted.

    …………..Mark Holbrook