Heh...
As the saying has gone, ever since Watergate, "it's not the crime, it's the coverup."
Today's revelation that the settlement reported in the paper last week was supposed to be a big secret...
Well, let me put it this way: When I read the article this morning, I nearly fell off my chair laughing!
Once I recovered, I found this to be the most interesting point:
"While nondisclosure requirements are commonplace in settlements between private individuals and businesses, the use of taxpayer money to silence criticism of public officials is troubling to Walter V. Robinson of the New England First Amendment Center at Northeastern University." (paragraph 10)
That it's troubling is putting it mildly...
Then, in counter-point, we get the flat out word from the City of Worcester regarding transparency:
“We’re not trying to hide the fact that we’re settling the case, but what we’re trying to avoid is the commentary over it.”
- City Solicitor David M Moore (paragraph 13)
I'll have much more commentary on this later on, when I don't have to leave for work in ten minutes...
Update(11am): I see that Clive's column today is focused on this, too, somehow managing to upgrade a broken wrist to a broken arm in the process... Heh... At least he began swinging the cudgel a bit more towards the City Dictator, when it comes to "transparency"... then copped out at the last minute with, "But it is quite clear now that the city manager has delegated that authority to the police chief."
All I can think of to say about that is: No, Clive, the buck stops at the City Dictator's desk.
0 comments:
Post a Comment