Mayor’s Budget Leak Continues

1. You comment, “$240,000 more to keep the Mayor on TV.” The email seems to state the opposite: “- Reduction of programming costs by eliminating the monthly Mayor’s Report as a regularly scheduled program.”
   Could you square these two statements?
   Thanks.

2. Sure, the press is reporting he wants to “raise community services spending by $200,000” for community services, even tho is it a restoration of $135k. Here, his office is talking about “The addition of $240,000 of general fund support” for city channel 12. He’s adding general support for both. Tho, I don’t think he realizes in the first case, its only $65K, because $135K wasn’t included in his base. Or maybe he does.

   Anyways, what does city channel cover? Things the mayor does like council meetings, board of estimates meetings, press conferences, his state of the City address to the Downtown Rotary, and, well, kind of whatever he tells them to do. Mayor’s report is just a small fraction of the rest of the coverage and I’m not sure what value it adds. I think people are more inclined to watch the other things I mentioned. And those things cover mayor dave. You disagree?

   How much is that monthly show worth? Peanuts, compared to the rest.

3. As a member of several commissions that were covered by city Channel – the Transit and Parking Commission and the Pedestrian/Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Commission, I know that City Cable polls its viewers about which committees and events they want to see covered.

   One of the reasons those two are covered – and they rarely see the Mayor or mayoral staff – is that they are important to people that have a hard time coming downtown in person – people with disabilities, transit dependent populations, and people with travel restrictions.

   Obviously Council meetings are going to be covered. Board of Estimates is pretty important because of the financial decisions they make. Note that ALRC was recently added at the request, not of the Mayor, but the Committee itself.

   I have a great deal of respect for City Channel, and think they do their best to cover committee meetings – either individually or as a policy – that are of interest to the general public or special population groups. They have often decided to cover a meeting because of the topic being covered that night, and those decisions are often made because of citizen requests.

   Most of what is on City Channel is not mayoral stuff. It’s stuff involved citizens want to see.

4. Mayor election defense team in full swing.

   Ok, if the mayor didn’t put $240,000 into the budget, would there be a channel left for him to be on? If so, what would it look like? It would cover the bare minimum, like the things I mentioned above.

   Yes, this isn’t just about the mayor . . . and yes, City Channel does A WHOLE LOT more . . . does the mayor really care about any of that? I don’t think he put $240,000 in the budget because he wants more public access, his other actions make it clear, that is not his priority.

   You can disagree with me, but that is the Mayor I grew to know in the last nearly 8 years. He has different priorities and goals.

5. Now I’m part of the “mayor election defense team” Are you freakin’ serious?

   Look, Brenda, you explicitly stated that there was money in the budget “to keep the Mayor on TV.” The budget explicitly cancels the Mayor’s own show. And your explanation is … that he only saved MCC “for him to be on”? So … you would have preferred that he NOT fund MCC because it covers meetings that he chairs? THAT would have made you happy? And do you have any proof of your allegation that MCC does “whatever he tells them to do”? No, I didn’t think so.

   First, the nonsense about the bicycle fundraiser. Now this. And you wonder why people think you’re obsessive and irrational?

6. Stuart please don’t tell me what I think. I think MCC should get the full $347K. And then they Mayor should fund the $750K for community services, plus 3% – I’ve made that pretty clear in this and other posts. And while I’m at it, I think WYOU should get the $70K the Mayor stole from them last year – for “tough love”.

   I made a comparison about funding MCC and Community Services and what that says about the Mayor’s priorities. That was my point. Consistent with the points I have made over the years. Community television and Government television should both be funded. As should community services. I fully support funding for MCC because it is vital to our democracy, but I’d also like to see Andrew’s report (also good for democracy) and I would have like that report to have been made available to the committee (also good for democracy) to consider and I would have liked the council to consider the report (also good for democracy)) they have before them tonight before this decision was made. What council member is even going to consider discussing the report, now that the Mayor made this announcement and its in the budget? The decision has been made and I don’t think the council will stand up to the mayor on that decision.

7. Brenda, I agree with everything you just said. But we weren’t talking about the relative importance of MCC and Community Services, or the need for full funding for them both, and, yes, for WYOU. Of course, I agree with all that. The only aspect of your post I was challenging was your comment about the mayor doing this only to keep himself on tv. Given that he’s canceling the mayor’s report, I found comment inaccurate, insulting, and in keeping with your penchant for ascribing bad motives to everything the mayor does that you disagree with (which is pretty much everything the mayor does). I’m also sorry you didn’t respond to my request for evidence that MCC “does whatever he (mayor) tells them to do.” That’s an allegation that really should have some proof with it — do you have any? Because in my experience, I’m not aware of that ever happening. Like, what are you talking about? Do you think mayor TOLD MCC to cover his speech at Rotary? Are you serious? And what about all those Rotary lunches that MCC covered that mayor didn’t speak at? I really hope you can address these two points, or acknowledge that your comments had more snark than support. Thanks.

8. Stuart, I said alot that I care about, you’re talking about a minor point, and the major point is getting lost. I WAS talking about the relative importance of MCC and Community Services. And where the Mayor’s priorities are, that was my entire point.

   What I care about is where the Mayor’s priorities are – MCC is getting a huge percentage of their budget paid for, community services is getting less dollars and a much smaller percentage of their budget increased.

   This is what I said. “$240,000 more to keep the Mayor on TV, $200,000 more for community services. Says something about priorities, doesn’t it. ” The mayor will stay on TV, he attends meetings that are covered. If the money wasn’t put in the budget, I’m not sure what would have been left of the station. His mayor report show is a very tiny portion of their budget and a minor point. He will stay on tv, is there anything inaccurate about that?

   And yes, the staff do follow the mayor’s direction. He is the boss. He signs their contracts and their paychecks. Do you doubt that? I’m sure his opinion influences their daily work and their decisions.

   BUT THAT ISN’T THE POINT! My point was, where are his priorities. You’re twisting everything and assigning motives to me. Read what I wrote. I stand behind what I said. The mayor will stay on TV, the station will continue to run. Community services are being eviscerated by his actions over time. What are his priorities? This is a city that has money to fund those services and do what the community needs, if the mayor wants to – if he has the political will. He had the political will to save MCC. I’d like to see more than a press conference for community services. Again, where are his priorities?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.