It’s pretty clear that David completely missed the point. The comment about building a stadium—just like the tongue-in-cheek suggestion of suing Newtowners for “being stupid”—was obviously satire. If Dave took the stadium idea literally, maybe the “stupid” comments struck a little closer to home than he’s willing to admit. Sometimes satire isn’t meant to be taken at face value—but then again, if you have to explain the joke, maybe that’s part of the problem.
If, as Mr. Gaston states, the property between Main Street sidewalks and the road belongs to the private property owners, then let me ask this: Would I, as a property owner, be within my rights to post “No Trespassing” signs and have any protesting group arrested for trespassing on that strip of land?
If the answer is yes, then these protests are occurring on private property without permission, and the conversation shifts from free speech to property rights enforcement. If the answer is no, then there’s clearly some form of public right-of-way or easement that permits public use, which contradicts the argument that this land is entirely private. Either way, this issue seems far less clear-cut than Mr. Gaston suggests.
Bruce Walczak’s promise of RESPONSIVENESS sounds great on paper, but my own experience tells a different story. After his July 25th announcement, I congratulated him and asked a sincere question about the ongoing traffic disruptions on Main Street caused by frequent rallies at the flagpole—a concern shared by many residents and businesses.
I never received an answer. No acknowledgment, no follow-up, nothing.
If a candidate pledging openness and “no evasive answers or silence” can’t even respond during the campaign, how can voters expect better once in office? Responsiveness is proven by action, not slogans. Newtown needs better!
Hi Bruce, I am not sure what meeting you attended but there was no extensive discussion. It was pretty much a popularity contest with over 200 protestors in attendance. In my estimation, no one on the LC even did any research on the subject, and those who voted NOT TO EVEN CONSIDER the benefits of an ordinance was a blatant act of conflict of interest and dereliction of duty. I for one presented 4 quantifiable benefits. If you are not able to think critically, then you really shouldn't be chiming in on the subject.
Let's ask an imaginary third grader shall we Wendy?
Is it a good idea or a bad idea to protect Newtown businesses from being impeded because of a protest? Third grader; "GOOD IDEA". Is it a good idea or a bad idea to make Newtown traffic safe during a protest? Third Grader "GOOD IDEA". Is it a good idea or bad idea to pay have Newtown taxpayers pay $15k in police OT EVERY PROTEST that could be avoided with ample notice? Third grader; "BAD IDEA. VERY BAD IDEA!!". Is a good idea or a bad idea to protect Newtown from any legal risk because they were negligent in providing any preparation in the event anyone was killed, injured, or property damaged? Third grader; "Good Idea. Anything else is just stupid!" Now third grader, we shouldn't use that word. Do you know what does the word "Stupid" even means? Third grader: "Yes, According to the Merrian Webster dictionary, it means tending to make bad decisions."
If Newtown wants to re-elect me to always keep their best interests at heart, they will re-elect me. It they want officials sitting on the LC that are more sympathetic to protestors then they are acting in the best interests of Newtown, so be it.. One more thing Wendy, Kerrville, TX; the legislative body there had the opportunity to vote for a Flash Flood siren warning system. They voted "no". Now over 200 people are dead. Family's are destroyed. Was that a good idea or a bad idea? Don't answer that; let me answer that for you. Derek Pisani: IT WAS STUPID! I intentionally wanted to offend those who need to be offended and if you are one of them, you tell me where that imaginary third grader was wrong in answering those questions. I'll wait.
