Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election
The despicable Trump mailer? A cheap-shot. Brought on by the “Hardball” mailer? Going lower is the trademark of Trump, and where has it got us? And Mr Grubb’s mailer asked important questions.
So what of the actual issues, questions asked?
Mr Reynolds did not answer the question of appropriateness of accepting MONEY from developers. (He said he is supported.) This is NEVER ok. This is THE problem of money in politics and quid pro quos. He voted favorably on behalf of developers rather than recuse himself. This is the hallmark of politicians, not leaders.
And by the way, 10 or 11 years ago is not before thoughts and plans of redeveloping the Martin Tower Property. As well, the MTP is far from the only development game in town, then and in the future. Come on, that’s insulting.
But, if Mr Reynolds raised no money – respectably, from citizens and citizen organizations, for four or five years, then that speaks to his failure at it. Acknowledging that would be more leader-like.
Mr Grubb OPENLY discussed the physical altercation that Mr Reynolds is attempting to exploit. Mr G has no record of any such pattern but had a solid argument regarding supporting witnesses.
Mr Reynolds has not publicly acknowledged or discussed his unwillingness to move for council discussion of the public demand for reconsideration of the police budget. That was his shared responsibility to represent ALL citizens.
“No one wanted to talk about it” he said. [Insert shaking my head meme here.] Missed opportunity to lead there.
The Community Engagement Initiative: a potentially really good thing. Where does it stand? It is the responsibility of leadership to make known the status of “progress.” To “advocate,” to have an “open Bethlehem” as Mr Reynolds claims.
One meeting only? And what of the Lehigh U expert in policing and budgeting, Dr Ochs and scientifically supported understanding? And then Mayor Donchez’s private undocumented “meetings” with (some) stakeholders, rather than held by a transparent third party? (Another conflict of interest.)
I can’t trust this – and I’m of the privileged persuasion.
A new Police Chief? (A good choice it seems.) But well beyond due. And reward to leadership for doing their jobs – now? Un-uh. And what about those demands to reconsider the police budget? “Those” 20%+ of residents deserve a better voice.
More and more, I am worried by Mr Reynolds’ Willie-ness(?) to do whatever it takes to get his way. And to NOT acknowledge his mistakes and failures; to ignore part of the public for whom he says he will “advocate” and to whom he will be “accountable” and for whom he will insist on a “responsive” and “equitable” government.
Actions and words here are at odds. “A lie,” as Mr R has claimed about Mr G?
Mr R has been asked to address these issues over and again, but he has avoided them.
I can not vote for that, so I must vote against it.
Thanks to all the candidates for giving to this city. Thanks to Ms Negron for her service, particularly.
Hopefully, we’ll have new courage on council next year to replace Ms Negron in her representation of ALL, with the addition of Ms Rachel Leon.