Response from John Hrubos

(my comments are in blue)

Alan,

in my opinion you have not made your case for having the support of the majority of the village voters. not even close. as your special meeting showed quite clearly, this is an important and emotional issue for all sides. since that meeting you have not added significantly to the number of signatures on your petition. you did not muster enough support at election time to get elected to the village board- which to me says that you do not have the support you claim or need to move this thing forward. you seem to be of the "squeaky wheel"method of persuasion. and this whole thing about answering you on your time frame and with what you consider the right answer so that you can post it to your blog smacks of bully tactics. as I stated for the record at the last board meeting- do the work, make your case for support with signatures on the petition.

I've already addressed the points that you make here. You are not responding to to this,

John Hrubos responded to my question about what it would take to get you to change your minds. He said, basically, that I would have to present a petition with the signatures of over half of the registered voters in the Village. This is progress - two way communication presents an opportunity to clear up misunderstandings.

The Tompkins County Legislature passed our resolution with a much smaller percentage of residents having signed their petition, than the percentage that we have collected in Trumansburg. Requiring over 50% on a petition, ignores the reality of collecting signatures. It is essentially impossible to find an opportunity to speak with every potential signatory. It is a clever way of avoiding one's responsibilities as an elected representative. Not since ancient Greece, have we required direct participation of this kind.
We elect representatives, and hope that they will make the right decisions on our behalf. This is the essence of our form of government. I proposed that a reasonable course of action if he feels that those who oppose passage of the resolution haven't been given enough of an opportunity to make their case to the board, would be to allow them a period of time, to collect signatures on a counter petition. John said "this is your argument to make" I think I have made the argument.

And you are not responding to this,

There are many reasons why I was defeated. It is ridiculous to conclude from my defeat, that support for the resolution is not a majority position.

Can't we discuss this rationally instead of throwing cliches like "bully tactics" about. It seems to me that you are in a better position to bully than me. The reason that I hesitate to try to get enough additional signatures, is not that I doubt that my position is the majority. It is the difficulty of finding people at home, willing to talk, and unafraid. Also, I have no guarantee, that if I were to find 400 more signatures (a miracle) that you and Chris would not find some new reason to vote against the resolution. I'm not sure I've ever heard the real reason for his vote, and your lack of voting.

You would be justified in calling me a "squeaky wheel" if I was constantly pestering you about some relatively trivial issue, like the fire whistle. Instead, I am trying to make you realize that our Constitution is being undermined, our soldiers are dying in a unnecessary, illegal war, our tax dollars are being spent to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, and our economy is being damaged so severely, that we may not see it recover in our lifetimes, and that there is something you could do about it.