Homepage | Archives | Calendar of Events | Exploring Akron | Lawn & Garden | Death Notices | People & Places | Faith & Worship | Get email news alerts | About Us
Opinion

Norton committee member explains actions

2/28/2013 - West Side Leader
      permalink bookmark

By Letter to the Editor

To the editor:

I would like to reply to some of the statements made by Kathy Cunningham in the letter to the editor “Norton resident disagrees with meeting broadcast,” West Side Leader, Feb. 21-27, 2013.

I agree with her that we cannot afford the broadcasting of the meetings; however, it was voted on and now let’s do it in an orderly manner, and in my opinion, the way the voters asked for. First of all, I submit this letter in all due respect to Ms. Kathy Cunningham’s opinion, even though I do not agree with all she has stated. I guess the way to start this letter is where Ms. Cunningham started. If she did not vote “for” the amendment, did she vote against it? I was asked to chair the committee, and, yes, I understood that our “job” was not to “decide” how to implement the voters’ desired action of broadcasting the meetings. I understood our job was to give [Norton City] Council options to “consider.” I feel we did this as well as could be expected. I, for one, as I have stated before, tried to recommend an action to Council that would satisfy the “vote” taken by the “majority” of citizens in the November election.

Now, as some people fail to realize, Council nor the committee appointed by Council initiated the amendment to broadcast the meetings. The “majority” of the citizens of Norton did. We were merely trying to do as instructed by the “people”! Unless I miss my guess, the ones who voted for this would not have been agreeable if Council would have decided to do as requested by Kathy Cunningham — meaning not complying with the charter. So, I guess, as stated in Kathy Cunningham’s letter, you cannot make everyone happy in Norton, so legally it is necessary to comply with the majority!

I feel Council was doing what they felt was financially responsible. However, I feel that Council did not fully understand what was voted on and desired by the people. But that does not make them wrong in trying to do the job as they see it! I also was doing and stating what I felt the people of Norton voted for. Now, if that was not suitable to all, then so be it.

This year has started out as a normal year in Norton, with the sewers and TV questions being discussed. One day, with the continuing actions we have taken as a city, maybe our children and grandchildren will have a nicer place to live. We can only try.

In closing, I would like to thank the Norton City Council for trying to do a good job; it is not easy to make all happy, and as we can see, they have not.

James (Jack) Gainer, Norton

      permalink bookmark