It's enough to make you swear, but "swear-in?"

Ragsdale's announcement that he will hold a swearing-in ceremony on Aug. 18 for winners in the commission races who will replace appointees is one of his most nakedly political maneuvers to date. You don't have to agree with the views of Davis, DeFreese or Daniels to perceive that - if nothing else - they have lately provided a much-needed counterweight to the pro-Ragsdale commission majority. It's no coincidence that the mayor plans to get the new faces on board one week before the August commission meeting and 18 days after he's due to respond to the hospitality fund audit, a response that will not be presented to the current cadre if he gets his way. 

Those who choose to take the oath before Sep. 1 may dig themselves a public relations hole they'll never crawl out of.   

Earlier today I polled the candidates by e-mail. Steve Drevik's response tops the list. This is his reply:

"Unless the law director tells me I absolutely must take the oath immediately, I wouldn't.The current opinion is that it's optional, and I think it's in the best interest of everyone to follow tradition to wait until September."

Drevik points out that taking the office in mid-August would interrupt the normal cycle of setting the agenda and committee hearings as preparation for the normal end of month meeting. He says a two week delay would allow more transition time with the appointees and allow some critical issues to be properly dealt with.   

"We could have issues of ordinances coming up for a vote with the sponsor no longer sitting on Commission.  We have a traditional transition period for good reason, and I'm here to extinguish the flames of distrust, not to fan them."

Great answer, Mr. Drevik. Indeed, the only correct answer.

Comments

[PeterBiggs]

The poop shall soon hit the fan.

[PeterBiggs]

The poop shall soon hit the fan.