I missed this last week… As it relates to the negotiates sales tax agreement bringing the city an extra $500K (story here):
City 1st Ward Supervisor Vito “Butch” Greco, who did not attend Tuesday’s meeting, is one city supervisor who may not approve the agreement if it is brought up for a vote next week.
Greco said Wednesday that he doesn’t think the city should use its water to its benefit at the expense of the towns.
“Don’t hold it over our heads. Let’s work together to utilize the water, and the city should get paid fairly. Don’t use it because you’re financially crippled,” Greco said.
Maybe I’m missing something but why would a city supervisor –ostensibly representing the city– vote against a better agreement for the city?
I don’t get why the city should not share in the growth of the towns given the vital role of its infrastructure toward contributing to that growth. I also don’t understand why the city should not negotiate to its best advantage. I’m not saying that the deal is structured to only benefit the city; any sustainable deal needs to be mutually beneficial to all parties while still promoting your objectives and needs– that’s what negotiating is about.