6 March 2003

Buffalo Report home page

Scoundrels and liars at the Buffalo Common Council

The day after the Buffalo Common Council voted to table without discussion a peace resolution submitted by Council President James Pitts and Councilmember Antoine Thompson (see "Buffalo Goons"), Buffalo resident James Holston wrote Councilmembers Richard Fontana and Marc Coppola, both of whom had voted to prevent consideration of the petition, about the tabling.
"I understand that there may be local niceties of interpretation that people want to iron out," Holstun wrote. "I also understand that, in this particular case, the people of Iraq, the people of the United States, and the people of Buffalo do not have time to wait: a war launched will have devastating consequences, and one of the few ways in which Americans can help stop this war is to declare strongly against it now. The specifics of the language are not important; the antiwar vote, soon, is what's crucial. So I urge you to do all you can to untable the motion, and pass it immediately. In this case, peace deferred is peace denied."
Holstun also wrote to Councilmember Joe Golombek about facetious remarks Golombek made to the Buffalo News after the tabling vote.
Here are the responses Holstun received from Fontana, Coppola and Golombek:

From: Councilmember Fontana
To: 'James Holstun'
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:54:27 -0500
James, thanks for the email,,,
...on the war issue I knew that the resolution contain half truths so I didn't want to speak to a resolution that was being put fourth by Mr.Pitts in an attempt to embarrass me and others. I do and will support Mr. Franczyk's resolution regarding the war and it also calls for peace and more funding for Cities. Mr. Pitts objected to that resolution and we were unable to discuss the item, yet he criticized us for not speaking to his resolution. Look, I support peace. I would be happy to speak to you on the phone so that I don't miss any of your points and we can talk. We did have an anti-war resolution but Pitts killed it and I can tell you we had more than 7 votes to pass it and pass it on to the President. I don't mean to imply politics but politics played into the situation yesterday. Sincerely, Rich Fontana

From: Councilmember Coppola
To: 'James Holstun'
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:52:53 -0500

Dear James,

...on the war resolution I have to disagree somewhat. I do think that the specifics of the language are important. I do not, as I'm sure you don't sign my name to something I am not comfortable with, especially if it will be interpreted as my opinion. In this case there was an alternative resolution filed by Mr. Franczyk that I did support. Unfortunately through council procedures the council president objected to it and we could not vote on it.

Thanks
Marc Coppola

From :   Councilmember Golombek
To :   'James Holstun'
Date :   Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:56:56 -0500
Jim,

Thank you for taking the time to email me. Enclosed is a copy of the resolution I was prepared to support because it dealt directly with cities. Unfortunately Council President Pitts objected to it as a late file and it was removed and there was no allowance for debate. Thank you for judging my three years of service on the City Council with a vote concerning an item that was tabled.
Joe

What is remarkable about all three responses to Holstun is that all three council members defend their vote to table the peace resolution on the basis of something that did not happen. They say that Council President Pitts refused to allow consideration of David Franczyk's amendment, where in fact Pitts had said both before and during the Council session that he wanted to make it part of the original resolution. When, during the Council meeting, Councilmember Joe Golombek told me that Pitts wouldn't allow the amendment, I told him he was wrong and I pointed to Antoine Thompson who was at that moment working on a combined document.
Do they all know what they are saying is untrue and think that the best way to deal with the public is by holding fast to a lie? Are they still so full of rage and resentment toward Pitts after their successful campaign to destroy his job last year that they simply cannot or will not listen to anything he says? Did they simply not understand that when Pitts kept saying there was an amendment he wanted to let in that there was an amendment he wanted to let in? Have they gotten so used to scapegoating Jim Pitts that they just can't stop?
All of this was recorded on sound disk and videotape. It's not like we're relying on memory here. How can you believe somebody who denies what's on sound disk and videotape?
Maybe it's like Humpty Dumpty after Alice told him that the way he used a word had absolutely nothing to do with the real meaning of that word: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
Humpty Dumpty sat on an imaginary wall and had silly-talk with a fictional girl in Through the Looking Glass. He could get away with that loopy looney logic of language. I never voted for Humpty Dumpty for Common Council. Did you? How come that's what we now have?
Then, again, maybe it's not a bunch of Humpty Dumpties making all this mischief. Maybe that's more literary than they deserve. Maybe they're just scoundrels and liars.
Yeah, that's what I think: scoundrels and liars.

N.B.: This was originally posted to Buffalo Report with the title "Humpty Dumpty rules at the Buffalo Common Council." The present title seemed more accurate, so I changed it. B.J. 8 March 2003

"Buffalo Goons," which describes what happened at the March 4 Common Council meeting

The text of the resolution proposed by Council President Pitts and Councilman Thompson.

The text of the David Franczyk amendment, which David Franczyk never tried to submit but which James Pitts, Betty Jean Grant and Antoine Thompson did try to submit.

"What I would have said to the Buffalo Common Council about the peace resolution before them on March 4 if I'd been allowed to speak which I wasn't because nobody at all got to speak about the resolution because eight members on the Council wouldn't let anybody talk about it."

—B.J.
Buffalo Report home page

Copyright 2003 by Buffalo Report, Inc.