This week marked the beginning of the township elected and appointed agenda with the mayor giving his state of the township address and the council nominating and seconding the open positions.
While the mayor gave his address I sat at home watching channel 77 and I was struck by the fact that despite his positive report on the state of the township he really gave no hard facts or data that a critical thinker who may be listening might take in to consideration.
For instance, the mayor spoke of the state of the township's fiscal integrity, but he gave no figures with which you or me could rely upon to come to our own conclusions as to how things were doing and maybe more importantly how we might vote on fiscal matters should they ever make the ballot here?
Nor did the mayor speak to the state of the township post-Sandy, a time when many of us saw downed power lines and extended periods of electrical outages that many blame the power companies for when more closer to home, I think that the township is most to affix responsibility to in the exceedingly lax enforcement of encroachment remediation by trees on the shared resource of power lines.
As the camera turned to the council agenda, with the same personalities elected or appointed time and again over the years and decade, predictably appointing the same sort of insiders to the second tier of the township's board and commissions, thus assuring that there would be no change in the status quo here, and I have to believe that's exactly just the way some want things.
And that's when it hit me, in the construct of the dog and pony show, the spectacle did not afford the minority opinion. There was/is no place for anyone who might dare to offer up a different view of the state of the township.
Some one who just might question the mayor and council's view through the rose-tinted crystal spectacles, and crack the lens, that they see things through?
Some one who might advocate for term limits here, or non-partisan elections, or even put up for the people to vote for the assignment of commissions and boards, a balanced budget, or an honest discussion regarding the perception about the political cronyism, patronage, and tyranny of the majority that assures that that's the way things have always been done hereabouts, will be the way things are done here now, and will be done on in to the future.
And as the courtly mutual admirational society politely smiled at one another accepting and affirming each other’s nominations and seconds, the lack of an opposing point of view was deafening.