Friday, March 11, 2011

Councilor Puta ... err Pinto

UPDATE: Salem Patch has a video montage of some of the high (low?) points from last night's debacle. I think editor Aubry Bracco shot this video herself.

____________

I've seen it all now.

I was watching the Salem City Council meeting last night (usually like watching paint dry) when the subject of the lease agreement for the City Hall Annex came up again. The mayor wanted to sign a five year lease on 120 Washington Street, that would save the city $42,000 a year, or $210,000 over the five year term. Council rejected the lease, then passed it, modifying a clause that the landlord didn't agree to modify. This was a third attempt at passing a variation of the lease agreement.

The mayor came to the council meeting last night, hoping to address their concerns and explain the importance of the savings, as well as the upgrades to the offices included in the lease. For the mayor to speak at the council meeting requires a suspension of the rules to allow a non-councilor to speak. The suspension can't be granted if one councilor objects. That is exactly what klasshole councilor Pinto did. It was one of the most disgraceful, disrespectful things I've ever seen. Several of the other councilors pointed out that as the mayor, she should be allowed to speak. Dean of the council, councilor O'Keefe (hey, I disagree with him too, sometimes) stated that he'd served under four different mayors and that he had never seen anyone refuse the mayor an audience. The mayor herself pointed out that she'd never refused to speak to any of the council. Councilors Pelletier (he stepped out ill before the vote on the lease) Lovely and Furey all urged him to retract his objection. Pinto's act was, in a word, shameful. City council appears to be going further and further off the reservation, and Pinto is playing a major part in that.

During his intial run for a council seat, Pinto told Wicked Local, "What gave me the incentive to run was that I felt betrayed, because taxes have doubled in the last seven years, and yet we’re still $3.5 million dollars in debt." Well councilor, let me tell you, I certainly feel betrayed. But by you. My property taxes have gone up over $100 a year every year you've been in office. What have you done about it? Yesterday you helped flush the entire property tax bills of 10 plus Salem households down the toilet on extra rent we didn't have to pay. As they like to say in Wisconsin right now, "SHAME!" I hope you at least wiped your ass with it first.

Pinto wasn't done. Later in the meeting, he demanded a hearing with the director of the board of health for an "update" on the hiring of a permanent Health Agent. This is a position that the council has no role in filling, and doesn't even come to the council for confirmation, unlike the purchasing agent who Pinto refused to confirm after months of bickering, voting present with no explanation. Several councilors correctly made the point that they had no business in this, and that it seemed like a fishing expedition. Pinto claimed he had received a few phone calls asking questions about it. Remember, there are 40,000 people in Salem. If a few people report to him that he should resign, will he do it? I intend to email him a link to this entry, and let me be clear, you should resign!

What is Pinto about? It seems that he's about himself. Later in the meeting he again brought up his foolhardy motion that council change an ordinance that bars them from being employed by the city for one year after leaving office. There are great reasons for such a law. For example, councilor Pinto could say to one of the department heads, "hey, I'll fund a raise for you, and give your department more money, if you hire me to work there." A councilor could quite literally end up receiving the very funds that they approved a month ago. It's a bad idea, but he's fighting for it tooth and nail, talking about how councilors shouldn't have to miss out on opportunities. He refuses to state whether he has a vested interest in getting this waived, but it's hard to believe he's sitting around thinking about it for no reason. This idea should have died in November, but he's bringing it up again. One must certainly question his insistence here.

Steven Pinto, you are an embarrassment to us all. Congrats on the most disgusting display in the history of the Salem City Council.

12 comments:

  1. I just found your blog and read your take on Councillor Steve Pinto. You would think he murdered someone by the tone of your rhetoric. I happen to like Steve. I don't always agree with him, but I know him to be a decent, caring person. As for your comment that you hope he "wiped his ass" with his copy of the lease agreement at 120 Washington, I fail to see how your comment falls under keeping things klassy on your blog. Do you think your comment was worthy of someone like yourself who is trying to involve more people in the day to day process of understanding city government? How would you feel if one of his kids happened to read that remark?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Silly, I hope he wiped his ass with the $42,000 of our money that he flushed down the toilet, not the lease. Hypocrisy makes my blood boil, and that's what that decision is, when you ran for office "because your tax bill kept going up," as he stated.

    As for his kids, I'm sure they already know. It's hard to hide the kind of idiocy that he's displayed recently.

    I don't know him, but I know he's making extremely suspect decisions, and keeps refusing to discuss the reasons behind them. (see purchasing agent, trying to gain the ability to get a city job, this lease agreement, dragging the health director to a meaningless meeting) If he has valid reasons I'm all ears, but he consistently refuses to explain his "thinking."

    As for his treatment of the mayor, those weren't the actions of a "decent, caring person." Did you watch the video clip? The other councilors were clearly embarrassed by his lack of respect and decorum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd say that Steve's kids should also ask him why he is using the lease agreement as Charmin. Not sure what klassy would say, but it wouldn't be quite as polite.

    The council seems to be getting led off the reservation by Councilor Pinto badly on this issue (and more than a few others), and if we're lucky next year will get the city council changed enough that we won't waste $42k per year because a councilor wants to rent a different spot that isn't in the cards.

    There are other locations that long-term may work just fine. But they won't be available for a while to come, and even if they are it'll take years to prepare and execute a move. If the councilors want to waste the lease savings, maybe they should voluntarily give up their pay to make up the difference for now. Anybody?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Councilor O'Keefe is mistaken. The council has not allowed Mayor Driscoll to address them on at least one other occasion as the mayor cannot have forgotten. Maybe he was nodding off.
    As I have said elsewhere, what goes around comes around. The mayor has herself used procedural rules which she could easily have overlooked to prevent Salem citizens who disagreed with her (myself included) from voicing our concerns at Salem School Committee meetings. Who is she, then, to express outrage when a city councilor, citing official rules of the council, says that enough is enough?
    I can appreciate the time and effort you put into maintaining this website, G, and more often than not agree with you. In this case, I have to agree with Dave B. and say that you grossly overstate Councilor Pinto's supposed sin. I admire him for sticking to his guns despite the Mayor's shrill insistence that she be allowed to argue her points a third time.
    Regards,
    Mike Blatty (not anonymous)

    ReplyDelete
  5. There is a rule, rule 6a in the City Council hand book that states that " any matter which has come before the City Council and has been voted on up or down shall not come before the City Council in the same calender year." This was the third time this matter (LEASE) came before the Council.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Councilor O'Keefe is mistaken. The council has not allowed Mayor Driscoll to address them on at least one other occasion as the mayor cannot have forgotten. Maybe he was nodding off.
    As I have said elsewhere, what goes around comes around. The mayor has herself used procedural rules which she could easily have overlooked to prevent Salem citizens who disagreed with her (myself included) from voicing our concerns at Salem School Committee meetings. Who is she, then, to express outrage when a city councilor, citing official rules of the council, says that enough is enough?
    I can appreciate the time and effort you put into maintaining this website, G, and more often than not agree with you. In this case, I have to agree with Dave B. and say that you grossly overstate Councilor Pinto's supposed sin. I admire him for sticking to his guns despite the Mayor's shrill insistence that she be allowed to argue her points a third time.
    Regards,
    Mike Blatty (not anonymous)

    ReplyDelete
  7. MB,

    The mayor had never spoken at council about this issue. I don't understand why Pinto couldn't show proper respect to the office, allow her to speak, and still vote the way he was going to. Where was the harm?

    I fear that the Salem News is correct, for once, and we are headed the way of Peabody, with complete dysfunction on city council, and between city council and the mayor. Pinto didn't help that situation last week.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dear G:
    Thanks for posting my comment (twice, no less!)
    You say that Pinto didn't show "proper respect" to her office. On the contrary, if you watch the video you will see that Mr. Pinto addresses the issue (and Mayor Driscoll) in a respectful manner, while the Mayor herself shouts and in effect demands that she be heard, despite the council's clear rules. Looks to me like SHE is disrespectful of the council, its rules, and those in attendance in the council chambers.

    I like your site, even when I don't agree. Thanks for keeping it up and open for public comment!
    Regards,
    Mike Blatty (not anonymous)

    ReplyDelete
  9. This issue should not be a litmus test of the character of Mayor Driscoll or Councillor Steve Pinto. Reasonable people can disagree. Some people forget that when Kim was a council member she took her job very seriously, much like Steve does. I was present during a particular budget hearing when then School Chief Herb Levine came into the chamber full of bluster and attempted to lecture councillors regarding their concerns over his budget. I recall Kim making it very clear to Levine that this is the council chamber, not some bull session with his underlings or a School Committee session, and to behave in a manner that showed he understood that the council makes the rules in this room. Levine as many of you may recall never was fond of being anything other than the big cheese, but Kim Driscoll reminded him where he was. It was Kim at her best.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Exactly what Councillor Pinto did the other day, Dave. Good points.

    Mike Blatty

    ReplyDelete
  11. But Did Driscoll stop Levine from speaking? Also, was he the chief executive of the city?

    ReplyDelete
  12. No to both questions, anonymous (why the secrecy?). I was referring specifically to Dave's comment,
    "I recall Kim making it very clear that this is the council chamber...and to behave in a manner that showed he understood that the council makes the rules in this room."
    Shouting that she works long hours for the city and therefore deserved to have the council's rules bent was not likely to win her much sympathy at that point.

    Mike Blatty

    ReplyDelete

Don't forget, keep it klassy!