January 15, 2010
Residents are ignored
To the Editor:
Many businessmen have got into politics to honestly represent the people who elected them to do so. There was honor in these men.
Unfortunately, we also get those businessmen who get into politics for other reasons.
Although this has been accepted to a certain point, it seems that some of the Ramsey City Council members have taken it to a new and disturbing level.
Over the years that I have been a resident here, it just seems to get worse with each election. Starting back when the council built the “Town Center” built in the most desolate part of Ramsey that existed at that time.
I do not remember anyone living in this area at the time that wanted it in the first place, but it was built anyway. Why? Because they can (the Ramsey City Council). No listening to the residents.
Fast forward to the present. Now it buys the same foreclosed property that we never wanted in the first place with taxpayer money, then decides to hold a meeting to ask us what we want to do with it.
Why, they do not listen to us residents anyway. That is well documented. They built a huge city hall with a multi-level parking ramp that is always empty, but I do not remember them asking me if that is how I want my tax money spent.
Why, because they can. Again, it is on the farthest end of Ramsey. The old city hall location was suitable and more centrally located to the people at that time.
There is no accountability to the residents from the Ramsey Council members who were sworn to represent us, but obviously choose not to.
Where is the honor in that? They will accept petitions from some residents and reject other residents’ petitions even though they are totally legal and are from the residents they said they would represent. Why? Because they can.
To date they have never publicly defended any of the complaints from the residents and choose to ignore the residents whose tax dollars pay their salaries, and then to have no public comment.
The only recourse we have against the Ramsey City Council is to take legal action at our own expense as one gentleman did, according to a recent article in the Anoka County Union, to fight for justice, while the Ramsey City Council uses our tax dollars to fight against us, who it is supposed to represent.
I even have an e-mail from a council member laughing at me for this same reason when I suggested this type of possible action in the past, when its decision making was in question. I still have the e-mail for documentation,
It is only one of the few times where the Ramsey Council actually responded back to me as a resident with any kind of answer in writing.
I would love to be one of their personal business employees when they would ask me to account for something I did on the job that I was working on and I could just ignore them without any repercussions, forcing them to have to take legal action at their own expense to get their questions answered, while I could use their company money to represent me.
I guess we have no one to blame but ourselves since we were foolish enough to put them into office in the first place.
Some day there may be honor again in being on the Ramsey City Council, but I would not expect it in the near future, after all when you can do what you want and spend as much as you want of other people’s money without justifying your actions, or asking for their approval, and use that same money to combat the taxpayers who try to make the council members accountable. What incentive is there to change?
Gary Greb
Ramsey
I do not believe that a candidate for office will have ABC Newspapers publish any letters to editor between the filing period and the election resolving their candidacy. I believe ABC does not draw the line at crony letters about a candidate. I would. Everyone has friends who like them and would say a good word in an LTE. I prefer LTE submissions on issues, not candidates. I am almost certain ABC has a policy against publishing any negative letters about candidates between filing and election day. If there's anyone knowing for sure what ABC policy is, a brief comment would be appreciated.
Again to be clear, Bob Sibilski is my primary-election choice among the five candidates. If Sibilski would not be a candidate, from what I know and have seen, I probably would vote for Greb. In my ideal world the general election choice after the primary vote would be between the two. Sibilski is strong on wetland protection and sound buffering. He is an engineer. Greb, as I understand things is retired after years of experience as an HR executive for Qwest.
I do not believe that this election cycle any candidate in the at-large field has large land holdings in the close or extended family, so that conflict of interest that way is a non-factor.