Tags

,

The October RTM has come and gone. However, I wanted to present some interesting facts about speakers and topics from that meeting. Specifically, the “reports” by Erf Porter and the Labor Contracts Committee. Why again were these necessary?

The Labor Contracts Committee presented three “reports’ which occupied 23% (three reports of 13, 7, & 8 minutes each) of the approximately two hour meeting. To what end? The Labor Contracts Committee is supposed to bring the sentiment of the RTM to the contract negotiation team. Has the Labor Contracts Committee EVER asked the RTM as a whole for those sentiments? No. The current chairman of the Labor Contracts Committee, David Detjen, had promised a much more open and transparent committee. He indicated he would attempt to provide reports (when legally able to do so) to the RTM prior to the meetings. Seen those have you? I thought not.

Since the Labor Contracts Committee has no authority, doesn’t ask the RTM for input and doesn’t provide any written report on these complex and expensive labor contracts, what purpose does it serve? Certainly not enlightening the RTM. How can any member make an informed decision on these contracts based on verbal reports given on the night of the vote? Abolish it … it no longer serves any purpose.

Mr. Porter gave the RTM a twelve minute “report” …. and no one is sure what he was reporting on. If it was for the “lease committee” then why? The lease sub-committee of the Finance Committee was formed under questionable pretenses and pursued a resolution to alter the RTM rules to give the RTM more  control over the process for the leasing of Town properties and facilities. That resolution failed on a vote of 74 to 102. So does the committee still exist and if so, what is their current charter? Why again did the RTM waste twelve minutes of meeting time?

With membership of the RTM being problematic and in decline, why again are the members subjected to wasted time?