At-large councilmember Danny Thompson has responded to my email (and previous post – watch video) about why he appeared to support moving Speakers from the Floor during a WFMY interview, but did not do so at the council meeting. Thompson’s response is below,
“My personal preference is to allow the speakers to go first (for the reasons stated at the Council mtg). But, it is not my call to make and I respect that this is one of the few Mayor’s prerogatives. Out of respect for the position, I would not try and usurp or overrule the Mayor on something like this.
What I told WFMY (and I think you can see that they took portions of the entire discussion) was that it would not do away with or decrease the amount of time speakers would be allowed to speak. And we should give it a chance to see how it works (knowing we have done it this way in the past.)”
Here is part of my response to Thompson,
“Thanks Danny. I’ll share your response.
I can’t help but wonder why instead of saying, “It’s not going to cut anybody out. Let’s see how it goes. Let’s give it a shot.” to WFMY, you wouldn’t have said something like, “I’m concerned this will negatively impact a portion of our constituents and am not in favor of the move.”
I appreciate the response, but one thing Thompson said made another question come to mind.
“Out of respect for the position, I would not try and usurp or overrule the Mayor on something like this.”
One has to wonder how constituents will feel knowing that Thompson might oppose something in the future, but out of respect for the Mayor would not show opposition.
Is respect for the position or carrying out the wishes of the constituents, in which he referenced in his opposition speech, more important?
