Van Fletcher: Towny not fit |

Van Fletcher: Towny not fit

Van Fletcher

— Is it really possible for a City Council member to write a “Guest Commentary” (Dec. 6, Steamboat Today) that is derogatory toward and accusatory of past and present City Councils, County Commissioners and city employees and still believe he is representing the best interests of the citizens?

Keep in mind that Towny Anderson is a City Council member. He wanted the community center to be located in the old junior high building. He expressed his personal interest, in past newspaper articles, to make the old school buildings a historical preservation project. He is an advocate for historical preservation. He voted against having the community center at the Stock Bridge site and has attempted to undermine that decision as evidenced by this personal editorial.

In case you missed the article, Mr. Anderson states, “I believe (the decision to select the Stockbridge site) was an expedient, ill-conceived decision.” He implies that the city misled him about the building size proposed many years ago at the transit center site. He said, “This is a game : often played by municipalities, etc.” He complains about the prior City Council’s promise made to the citizens to “have a new facility before the old one is torn down.” He accuses the “city” of conducting an “odd public process” and confusing “planning for a community recreation center.” (Remember, as a member of City Council, he participated in the process.)

After council voted for the Stock Bridge site, he attempted as a member of council to limit the expenditure for the community center. Council member Kevin Kaminski moved to “build a decent building” and fund the building at $3 million. Mr. Anderson voted against that motion. He was in the minority. He complained about the County Commissioners’ letter to the City Council supporting the Stock Bridge location. He accuses the “city and county officials” of “persuad(ing) state officials : (to) redirect : grant money” (an argument made by Mr. Anderson not to vote for the Stock Bridge site was a loss of grant funds). And finally, he advocates to change the agreement with the library; put seniors and all community center activities in a “temporary home”; and combine the library with a community/recreation center.

It seems Mr. Anderson is willing to accuse almost anyone who disagrees with him of being incompetent, manipulating, misinforming others or playing “games.” He proposes to alter plans that took years to accomplish. His “commentary” has definitely made himself appear to be hurt and revengeful for being in the voting minority on City Council. I am not sure Mr. Anderson understands the function of voting and being an elected official in a democracy. After reading his editorial, I believe he is not a proper representative for us taxpayers and citizens.

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.