![]() |
Jim Harbison |
I recently had an opportunity to have a long conversation with one of our City Councilors. I would encourage everyone to try to meet with a locally elected City or County representative. Sit down and enjoy a cup of coffee and learn what motivates them and what their vision is for your community. You may be surprised, dismayed, puzzled, or reassured. In order to preserve his/her identity I will use the unisex name of “Dana” to refer to this Councilor. We began our discussions talking about our backgrounds and where we had similar or seemingly conflicting beliefs. The conversation was friendly and we agreed to disagree without any hostility, threats, or personal attacks. This made for a very open, free, and enjoyable discussion that seemed to have no limits.
![]()
As we spoke we both realized a mutual our love for our community and genuine concerns about making it a more wonderful place to live. Our differences included what the future City should look like. We moved here because of the warm welcoming attitude of everyone we encountered on our first visit and it’s a beautiful City. It offered just about everything we could want including affordable housing, amazing weather, friendly people, historic culture, sports, arts, music, theater and unbelievable scenic panoramas.
As retirees who lived in cities around the world we found the city had its own unique character. Never did it occur to me to move here and try to recreate any of the communities of my past. I do not understand why the incoming migrant retirees want to redesign the city. I asked why the Councilors were determined to increasingly manage the activities of the residents (cell phones, red lights, lighting, flags, zoning, etc) to change the character of the city.
![]()
Are they are dissatisfied or embarrassed with the city’s cultural heritage? If it needs so much change why did they move here? Councilor “Dana” commented that growth requires change. The real question is what is the purpose of the change? I asked what changes were necessary but no response was forthcoming. I expressed my beliefs that less government is better government and that I failed to understand why the Council felt it necessary to regulate nearly everything. I wanted to know the purpose of the City code restricting business advertising flags. Was it a safety issue as the mayor claims? If so, why does the City allow flags if the owner purchases a permit. Obviously, it’s not about safety but revenue. Allowing the business to prosper and generate increased gross receipts tax would produce greater economic prosperity, good will and revenue for the city than the fees collected from the permits. Requiring people to appear in court rather than allowing them to pay redlight tickets by mail without court costs is not about safety but about revenue generation. Reluctantly, “Dana” agreed.
![]()
We discussed “affordable housing” and both agreed that creating blocks of “affordable housing” was less desirable than integrating families into regular apartments and housing units. Creating rental agreements with owners of apartment or condo complexes and issuing vouchers to the families would remove the stigma of living in public housing areas. We agreed it would integrate them into communities of various socio-economic levels and enhance their self-esteem.
After several hours of discussions “Dana” and I acknowledged that our values were not that much different and that both of us genuinely were concerned about our fellow citizens and our city. We don’t need to create a different city we just need common solutions to maintain the rich cultural heritage and traditions.

Harbison: What Does Your Elected Official Want?