Salem News Drops the Ball

The Snooze has two editorials on the 120 Washington St lease agreement (or disagreement) and last week's council meeting today.

First, this either really late, or you're beating a dead horse. (I know, who am I to talk?)

Second, you're still dropping the ball here. Was Usovic correct in stating that the mayor always has the right to address city council, as I covered here? The News published the Usovic quote, yet has never addressed whether or not he was correct. What does section 19 of the charter mean? It's definitely in question. You'll notice that in the comments on my previous post that Mr. Blatty and I disagree. (I still think, I'm right, but I'm sure he still thinks he is, as well.)

I think the Salemweb poster WillowsJim makes an excellent point regarding what Steven Pinto is doing to himself with his stand on this issue. Read it here. (currently second from the top) I've seen numerous examples of people who take little interest in Salem politics who have become aware of this issue and immediately take issue with it, especially the wasting of an extra $42,000 a year on rent for an office that we aren't leaving in the next several years. Taking a stand stating that we should pay more rent doesn't make for a good soundbite, and we very much live in a short-attention soundbite world. Good luck with that. Even if he were right (I don't believe he is), it's easy in politics to win a battle that helps you lose the war.

He could easily have given the mayor 5 minutes, not looked like a dink, and still voted to spend extra on rent, as he did.