Friday, April 17, 2009

Mosque Tequila!

Last Nights Forum


Did you know Muslims don't drink? For some reason, I didn't, but evidently Sheryl Miller did (of all people)! I was giggly with anticipation through out her opening remarks, just waiting for that glorious moment when she would militantly blurt out "IT'S MILLER TIME" and throw the microphone to the ground, but....then....when the moment finally came....nothing. How anti-climactic. Perhaps if her name where Sheryl O'Douls my theatrical thirst could've been quenched. Oh well.

Miller was not the only one working the whole Muslim demographic, Justice, Stewart and Murph also 'spiced up' their responses to suit the venue.

To me, these were the highlights:

Schnurr and Davis' call to action for the incumbents - Everybody's promising open government and we have 6 people sitting in our midst who can actually deliver just that right now.

Bache-Wiig's unabashed declaration of faith - When asked how he begins his day, Tom answered that he wakes up and reads the Bible for an hour. He said it helps him become centered and grounded. I also admired how he then went on to set an inclusive tone by stating that just as most of the audience members were 'people of faith' so was he and thanking God for all of his blessings and opportunities was the way he started every new day.

The final question, and by final, I mean third - While to some it may have seemed like fluff, I thought this question was refreshing! Enough about open government for a minute, "What do you like about your opponent?"
General Consensus:
Bob likes Bill's wife
Bill likes nothing about Bob
Everybody likes Jennifer's fresh ideas and youthful views
Jimmy's municipal experience
Thomas' IT nerdiness
Mark's gov't experience
Sheryl's "persistence"
Chris' Character and EYES!
John's commitment to the city and HAIR
Bache-Wiig's friendly campaigning
Gary's service
Diane's long history of community service
Bob's dedication and desire to serve
Pris' willingness to go to every zoning meeting...which is why the council's doing great just as it is! (Umm, ok, Bob)
Amir's barber
Dennis' service to the city

Then they had us all join hands and sing a verse of 'Koom Bi Ya.'

Ok, that last part didn't really happen, but I believe the rest is pretty accurate....I knew I should of taken notes!

6 comments:

  1. Maybe Schnurr should have acknowledged the transparency steps Richardson has already taken. Did you hear one candidate point out that Richardson has been making improvements in transparency all along? Another said that televising council meetings was looked at but rejected due to cost. And a third said that no one was beating down the doors to speed up their efforts until this election campaign started. There's an issue here, but it hardly rises to the level some partisans would have us believe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If televising is too $$$, perhaps they could podcast the audio. 16mHz, 8 bit audio requires little bandwidth and is suitable for voice.*

    If they balk at the minimal bandwidth, then release it as torrents and let the citizens share the bandwidth requirements.

    I don't think they will podcast as it is dead-simple and will not allow them to entangle it up in the proprietary file formats so much loved on the COR website. Ever try to watch streaming video from COR on a non-Windoze box?

    * I think someone that attends these meetings should bring along a digital voice recorder and start guerilla podcasting the proceedings. Might shame the city into podcasting it on their own.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bloggermouse,

    I like the way you think. There is nothing more radical than bootlegging city council meetings. That'll show The Man. I'm in!

    ReplyDelete
  4. About the budget for televising City Council meetings...

    I seem to recall the Council considering a staff report that estimated the project costing around $400,000. (Going from memory. Anyone have the old City Council agenda with the correct number?) It seemed like staff recommended a "gold plated" approach that included a lot of money for updating studios and equipment. Does anybody know if a lower budget approach was considered at the time?

    I don't care about seeing a CNN-quality telecast... mediocre quality in the video is OK by me. I just want to see the meetings on TV.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't mean to defend the lack of video streaming, but the cost isn't so much in the technology anymore as in the labor. If you want good quality, with close-ups of speakers, well lit, good sound, etc., then the cost of technology and labor both go up. Personally, I support the expenditure, but then I'm not usually one complaining about how high my property taxes are and how much fraud and waste there is in government.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I actually heard the figure was closer to $480,000.

    And are close-ups really necessary? These features all sound like add on's to me. Why not start off bare bones and then upgrade when the city can afford it?

    ReplyDelete