Sir
The acting municipal manager’s feverishly constructed semantic nightmare, submitted as a response to the contractors, is disingenuous at best, and woolly to the extreme.
If you cut through all the “revolutionary” fluff and Collins-assisted grammar he knitted together, there is nothing there. “Alternative responsiveness arrangements…?” what does that even mean..?
His definition of local, as involved in municipal procurement processes, is fanciful at best, and all this article pertains to, is a semantic maze of epic proportions that tries to drown the reader in wool, and draw attention away from the real issues at hand. Please cut to the chase, get to the point, and tell us what you were really trying to say. The fact still remains that processes were not followed, despite what you may think, sir.
And while you refer to your website, sir, is it up to date….?
According to your website the Council did not meet in the last three years….! At least, that’s what the minutes say. If that is the attention you give to your website (which should be updated…it’s the law) why would any contractor waste time to page through what is on there…? Are you surprised..?
You talk about “pro-active and constructive engagement with strategic partners within its jurisdiction…” When is the last time you attended a tourism meeting…?
There was a time when this town ate on tourism, sir. When are we going to see some form of application of the by-laws, sir..?? Where are the by-laws, by the way…?
There would be no “inherently detrimental anger” if you get this primordially inept and toxic municipality and its council together and at least try to update your website once a year, and spare us the woolly bubble you are trying to dish up to tired and gatvol ratepayers.
We are not stupid, sir.
T I R
