Submitted by Carole Borges on Fri, 2007/06/01 - 7:21am.
I was fascinated to read Beardon had a beer board. What do they do? Sit around sipping and tasting different labels to see which have the most gusto?--haha!
Submitted by StaceyDiamond on Fri, 2007/06/01 - 3:38pm.
According to reports in the Sentinel and the South Times some participants think some of the group faciliators are pushing the metro issue,I've not attended any. I've been to enough "visioning" meetings. It amazes me that people think metro will cure the cronyism problem. Employing entire families in a metro government is the same as doing it in the county and just who would be in charge of drawing up the plans, some of the same group that gave us this commission.
Concern about nepotism and interest in metro government have both come out of Knox County-One Question meetings, but I haven't seen any accounts saying that the two ideas are linked in the way you suggest. A nepotism policy is one thing, and metro government is another -- you could have one or the other or both or neither. Though I certainly hope that we at least get a nepotism policy out of this.
I attended one of the One Question forums and saw no evidence of facilitators pushing metro or any other idea. In my small group, the idea didn't come up until the end of our brainstorming session, and was advocated by someone who struck me as one of the more conservative/pro-business members of the bunch. However, when our group voted to select our top three ideas, metro was not among them.
Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Sat, 2007/06/02 - 4:47am.
Well OK I didn't read them all but my favorite comment might be the easiest to implement:
"Change election law to: "None of the above" or "Anybody but" (Add these two choices to ballot)"
___________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
I was fascinated to read Beardon had a beer board. What do they do? Sit around sipping and tasting different labels to see which have the most gusto?--haha!
According to reports in the Sentinel and the South Times some participants think some of the group faciliators are pushing the metro issue,I've not attended any. I've been to enough "visioning" meetings. It amazes me that people think metro will cure the cronyism problem. Employing entire families in a metro government is the same as doing it in the county and just who would be in charge of drawing up the plans, some of the same group that gave us this commission.
Concern about nepotism and interest in metro government have both come out of Knox County-One Question meetings, but I haven't seen any accounts saying that the two ideas are linked in the way you suggest. A nepotism policy is one thing, and metro government is another -- you could have one or the other or both or neither. Though I certainly hope that we at least get a nepotism policy out of this.
I attended one of the One Question forums and saw no evidence of facilitators pushing metro or any other idea. In my small group, the idea didn't come up until the end of our brainstorming session, and was advocated by someone who struck me as one of the more conservative/pro-business members of the bunch. However, when our group voted to select our top three ideas, metro was not among them.
I've been to enough "visioning" meetings
Amen
Well OK I didn't read them all but my favorite comment might be the easiest to implement:
"Change election law to: "None of the above" or "Anybody but" (Add these two choices to ballot)"
___________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
Post new comment